Openly accessible

An empirical and logical exploration of the strategic compatibility of best practice and product innovation : preliminary insights from Australian and New Zealand manufacturing industry

Hindle, Kevin 2000, An empirical and logical exploration of the strategic compatibility of best practice and product innovation : preliminary insights from Australian and New Zealand manufacturing industry, in AMS 2000 : Developments in marketing science, volume XXIII : proceedings of the annual conference of the Academy of Marketing Science, Montreal, May 24-27, 2000, The Academy, [Coral Gables, Fla,], pp. 1-16.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
hindle-empiricallogical-post-2000.pdf Author's post print application/pdf 160.81KB 80

Title An empirical and logical exploration of the strategic compatibility of best practice and product innovation : preliminary insights from Australian and New Zealand manufacturing industry
Author(s) Hindle, Kevin
Conference name Academy of Marketing Science. Conference (23th : 2000 : Montreal, Quebec)
Conference location Montreal, Canada
Conference dates 24-27 May 2000
Title of proceedings AMS 2000 : Developments in marketing science, volume XXIII : proceedings of the annual conference of the Academy of Marketing Science, Montreal, May 24-27, 2000
Editor(s) Spotts, Harlan E.
Meadow, H. Lee
Publication date 2000
Start page 1
End page 16
Publisher The Academy
Place of publication [Coral Gables, Fla,]
Summary In an attempt to enhance debate focused on an established academic controversy, this study re-investigated selected data from the 1994 AMC survey of Australian and New Zealand manufacturing practices to test the hypothesis that best practice and product innovation may be incompatible generic business strategies. A modification of Robert G. Cooper’s Stage-Gate product development model was used as a theoretical framework to create a measurable construct of ‘product innovation’ as a strategy and compare two groups: firms committed to a best practice strategy (BPs) and firms not utilising best practice (Non-BPs). Eight variables were scrutinised. After logical critique was added to statistical data analysis, four major insights emerged.

(1) Tests yielded several statistically significant but substantively inconclusive results because both studied groups had nearly identical profiles in rating innovation as the factor of lowest importance to commercial success and because the definitional framework which guided construction of the survey instrument treated innovation as a second-order issue. (2) Currently, best practice and product innovation are logically incompatible by definition. (3) Even if the definition of best practice were changed, it is likely that the additional key process of innovation would remain incompatible with the existing key process of benchmarking. (4) However, until the definition of best practice does make an attempt to include innovation as a key process rather than an outcome, testing any hypothesis of strategic compatibility between a best practice focus and an innovation focus will be both empirically difficult and logically unnecessary.
Notes
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupp@deakin.edu.au

ISBN 0931268222
Language eng
Field of Research 091005 Manufacturing Management
Socio Economic Objective 970115 Expanding Knowledge in Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services
HERDC Research category E1.1 Full written paper - refereed
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30029659

Document type: Conference Paper
Collections: School of Management and Marketing
Open Access Collection
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 329 Abstract Views, 80 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 16 Aug 2010, 09:46:02 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.