Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Jaworski Jaworski (1988)
Toward a theory of marketing control: environmental context, control types, and consequencesJ Marketing, 52
Jaworski Jaworski, Stathakopoulos Stathakopoulos, Krishnan Krishnan (1993)
Control combinations in marketing: conceptual framework and empirical evidenceJ Marketing, 57
Simons Simons (1994)
How new top managers use control systems as levers of strategic renewalStrategic Management J, 15
Anderson Anderson, Oliver Oliver (1987)
Perspectives on behavior‐based versus outcome‐based salesforce control systemsJ Marketing, 51
Challagalla Challagalla, Shervani Shervani (1996)
Dimensions and types of supervisory control: effects on salesperson performance and satisfactionJ Marketing, 60
House House (1971)
A path‐goal theory of leader effectivenessAdministrative Science Quarterly, 16
Manz Manz, Sims Sims (1987)
Leading workers to lead themselves: the external leadership of self‐managing work teamsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 32
Eisenhardt Eisenhardt (1985)
Control: organizational, and economic approachesManagement Science, 31
Dougherty Dougherty (1992)
Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firmsOrganization Science, 3
Ouchi Ouchi, Maguire Maguire (1975)
Organizational control: two functionsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 20
Churchill Churchill (1979)
A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructsJ Marketing Research, 16
Cravens Cravens, Ingram Ingram, , Young Young (1993)
Behavior‐based and outcome‐based salesforce control systemsJ Marketing, 57
Cooper Cooper, Kleinschmidt Kleinschmidt (1994)
Determinants of timeliness in product developmentJ Product Innovation Management, 11
Olson Olson, Walker Walker, Ruekert Ruekert (1995)
Organizing for effective new product development: the moderating role of product innovativenessJ Marketing, 59
Lawrence Lawrence, Lorsch Lorsch (1967)
Differentiation and integration in complex organizationsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 12
Brown Brown, Eisenhardt Eisenhardt (1995)
Product development: past research, present findings, and future directionsAcademy of Management Review, 20
Ouchi Ouchi (1979)
A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanismsManagement Science, 25
Cooper Cooper, Kleinschmidt Kleinschmidt (1987)
New products: what separates winners from losers?J Product Innovation Management, 4
Griffin Griffin (1997)
PDMA research on new product development practices: updating trends, and benchmarking best practicesJ Product Innovation Management, 14
Hauser Hauser, Clausing Clausing (1988)
The house of qualityHarvard Business Review, 66
Baron Baron, Kenny Kenny (1986)
The moderator‐mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic and statistical considerationsJ Personality and Social Psychology, 51
Gupta Gupta, Wilemon Wilemon (1990)
Accelerating the development of technology‐based new productCalifornia Management Review, 32
Jaworski Jaworski, Maclnnis Maclnnis (1989)
Marketing jobs and management controls: toward a frameworkJ Marketing Research, 26
Griffin Griffin (1997)
The effect of project and process characteristics on product development cycle timeJ Marketing Research, 34
Pearce Pearce, Ravlin Ravlin (1987)
The design and activation of self‐regulating work groupsHuman Relations, 40
Kohli Kohli, Shervani Shervani, Challagalla Challagalla (1998)
Learning and performance orientation of salespeople: the role of supervisorsJ Marketing Research, 35
Kessler Kessler, Chakrabarti Chakrabarti (1996)
Innovation speed: a conceptual model of context, antecedents, and outcomesAcademy of Management Review, 21
Ramaswami Ramaswami (1996)
Marketing controls and dysfunctional employee behaviors: a test of traditional and contingency theory postulatesJ Marketing, 60
Page Page (1993)
Assessing new product development practices and performances: establishing crucial normsJ Product Innovation Management, 10
Ayers Ayers, Dahlstrom Dahlstrom, Skinner Skinner (1997)
An exploratory investigation of organizational antecedents to new product successJ Marketing Research, 34
Brown Brown, Eisenhardt Eisenhardt (1997)
The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time‐paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizationsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 42
Zirger Zirger (1990)
A model of new product development: an empirical testManagement Science, 36
While some degree of freedom and flexibility is an essential ingredient to productive cross‐functional NPD teams, upper‐managers are faced with the challenge of instituting effective control mechanisms which head projects in the right strategic direction, monitor progress toward organizational and project goals, and allow for adjustments in the project if necessary. But too much or the wrong type of control may constrain the team's creativity, impede their progress, and injure their ultimate performance. Therefore, this study examines formal and interactive control mechanisms available to upper‐managers in controlling new product development (NPD) projects, and the relationship between these mechanisms and NPD project performance. Formal output and process controls are examined which consist of the setting and monitoring of outcomes, such as goals, schedule and budgets, and of processes and procedures, respectively. This study also looks at how the effectiveness of these control mechanisms may be contingent upon the degree of innovativeness in the project and the degree to which the project is part of a broad product program. In addition, the use of formal rewards for achieving team performance as opposed to rewards for individual achievement is investigated. Lastly, interactive controls are examined which consist of upper‐managers interacting directly with project members in the development of strategy and operational goals and procedures prior to the start of the project, and upper‐managers intervening in project decision‐making. Questionnaire data are collected on 95 projects across a variety of industries. The findings suggest that while NPD projects teams need some level of strategic direction concerning the objectives to be accomplished and the procedures to be followed, upper‐level managers can exert too much control. In particular, the findings showed a negative association between the use of upper manager‐imposed process controls and project performance. The findings also indicated that the degree to which upper‐managers intervened in project‐level decisions during the project was negatively related to project performance. However, the results showed support for the notion that early and interactive decision‐making on control mechanisms is important for effective projects. In particular, early team member and upper‐management involvement in the setting of operational controls, such as goals and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the project, was positively associated with project performance. This study provides additional insight into our understanding of upper‐management support in new product development. The study suggests that upper‐managers can over control with the wrong type of controls, and suggests effective ways of implementing participative and interactive control mechanisms.
The Journal of Product Innovation Management – Wiley
Published: May 1, 2002
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.