The success of a new product is more probable in a concurrent engineering context for product development. Concurrent engineering creates a dynamic environment based on four interconnected dimensions: the organization of managers and employees involved in product development; their means of communicating; their unwavering focus on the requirements of all clients within the product life cycle, from concept through disposal; and the integration of the development process. This article analyzes impacts of some organizational practices of these dimensions in product success in Brazilian small and medium enterprises from the medical device industry. The data were collected from a survey in a sample of Brazilian small and medium enterprises and from four case studies. The results highlight the importance for these small and medium enterprises of practices such as cross-functional integration, the role of top management in projects, and the social capital of the project leader. The results will assist companies in adopting an evidence-based approach for improving their new product success.
AbdallaHS (1999) Concurrent engineering for global manufacturing. International Journal of Production Economics60: 251–260.
2.
ABIMO (Brazilian Association for Medical, Dental and Hospital Device Industry) (2012) Available at: http://www.abimo.org.br (accessed 3 May 2012).
3.
AinscoughMYazdaniB (2000) Concurrent engineering within British industry. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications8: 2–9.
4.
AlloccaMAKesslerEH (2006) Innovation speed in small and medium-sized enterprises. Creativity and Innovation Management15: 279–295.
5.
AntakiMSchiffauerovaAThomsonV (2010) The performance of technical information transfer in new product development. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications18(4): 291–301.
6.
BarczakGGriffinAKahnKB (2009) Perspective: trends and drivers of success in NPD practices: results of the 2003 PDMA best practices study. Journal of Product Innovation Management26: 3–23.
7.
BlanksonCMotwantiJGLevenburgNM (2006) Understanding the patterns of market orientation among small businesses. Marketing Intelligence and Planning24: 572–590.
8.
BrownSLEisenhardtKM (1995) Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions. Academy of Management Review20(2): 343–378.
9.
CarterDEBakerBS (1992) Concurrent Engineering: The Product Development Environment for the 1990s. New York: Addison-Wesley.
10.
ChenLLiS (2000) Modeling concurrent product design: a multifunctional team approach. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications8: 183–198.
11.
CooperRGKleinschmidtEJ (1995) Benchmarking the firm’s critical success factors in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management12: 374–391.
12.
CooperRGEdgettSJKleinschmidtEJ (2004) Benchmarking best NPD practices. I. Research Technology Management47: 31–43.
13.
DuhovinikJStarbekMDwivediSN. (2001) Development of new products in small companies. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications9: 191–210.
14.
DuhovinikJZargiUKusarJ. (2009) Project-driven concurrent product development. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications17: 225–236.
15.
ErnstH (2002) Success factors of new product development: a review of the empirical literature. International Journal of Management Review4: 1–40.
16.
HairJFAndersonRETathamRL. (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
HauptmanOHirjiKK (1999) Managing integration and coordination in cross-functional teams: an international study of concurrent engineering product development. R & D Management29(2): 179–191.
18.
KahnKBBarczakGMossR (2006) Perspective: establishing an NPD best practices framework. Journal of Product Innovation Management23: 106–116.
19.
KahnKBBarczakGNicholasJ. (2012) An examination of new product development best practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management29(2): 180–192.
20.
KimYByungwookMJongseokC (1999) The roles of R&D team leaders in Korea: a contingent approach. R & D Management29(2): 153–165.
21.
KoufterosXVonderembseMDollW (2001) Concurrent engineering and its consequences. Journal of Operations Management19(1): 97–115.
22.
LedwithAO’DwyerM (2009) Market orientation, NPD performance, and organizational performance in small firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management26: 652–661.
23.
LeeJLeeJSouderWE (2000) Differences of organizational characteristics in new product development: cross-cultural comparison of Korea and the U.S. Technovation20: 497–508.
24.
MaYChenGThimmG (2008) Paradigm shift: unified and associative feature-based concurrent engineering and collaborative engineering. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing19(6): 625–641.
25.
March-ChordaIGunasekaranABegoñaL (2002) Product development process in Spanish SMEs: an empirical research. Technovation22(5): 301–312.
26.
MoseyS (2005) Understanding new-to-market product development in SMEs. International Journal of Operations & Production Management25(2): 114–130.
27.
OlsonEMWalkerOCRuekertRW. (2001) Patterns of cooperation during new product development among marketing, operations and R&D: implications for project performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management18(4): 258–271.
28.
PawarKSRiedelJCKH (1994) Achieving integration through managing concurrent engineering. International Journal of Production Economics34(3): 329–345.
29.
PrasadB (1997) Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals: Integrated Products and Process Organization, vol. 2. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30.
PrasadBMorencRSRanganRM (1993) Information management for concurrent engineering: research issues. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications1: 3–20.
31.
RiharLKusarJDuhovinikJ. (2010) Teamwork as a precondition for simultaneous product realization. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications18: 261–273.
32.
SarinSMcDermottC (2003) The effect of team leader characteristics on learning, knowledge application, and performance of cross-functional new product development teams. Decision Sciences34: 707–739.
33.
SchweigerDMAtamerTCaloriR (2003) Transactional project teams and networks: making the multinational organization more effective. Journal of World Business139: 1–14.
34.
ShermanJDBerkowitzDSouderWE (2005) New product development performance and the interaction of cross-functional integration and knowledge management. Journal of Product Innovation, Management22: 399–411.
35.
SkalakSCKemserPHMinassianNT (2007) Defining a product development methodology with concurrent engineering for small manufacturing companies. Journal of Engineering Design8(4): 305–328.
36.
SongMSwinkM (2009) Marketing–manufacturing integration across stages of new product development: effects on the success of high- and low-innovativeness products. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management56: 31–44.
37.
SongXMNohJ (2006) Best new product development and management practices in the Korean high-tech industry. Industrial Marketing Management35: 262–278.
38.
SongXMSouderWDyerB (1997) A causal model for studying the impact of skills, synergy, and design sensitivity on new product performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management14(2): 88–101.
39.
StarbekMGrumJ (2002) Concurrent engineering in small companies. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture42: 417–426.
40.
ThiemeRJSongXMShinGC (2003) Project management characteristics and new product survival. Journal of Product Innovation Management20: 104–119.
41.
ValleSVázquez-BusteloD (2009) Concurrent engineering performance: incremental versus radical innovation. International Journal of Production Economics119(1): 136–148.
42.
VerheesFJHMMeulenbergMTG (2004) Innovativeness, produce innovation and performance in small firms. Journal of Small Business Management42(2): 134–154.
43.
ZhangHCZhangD (1995) Concurrent engineering: an overview from manufacturing engineering perspectives. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications3(3): 221–236.
