Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Contribution of Innovation Strategy Development and Implementation in Active Facilitation of Pharmaceutical Front End Innovation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Front end innovation (FEI) represents the first building blocks of product development, but is often regarded as a weak link in innovation literature. Various theorists emphasize that a firm’s innovation can benefit substantially by improving the front end of innovation process (Reinertsen, Res Technol Manag 42:23–31, 1999; Stevens and Burly, Res Technol Manag 46(2):16–25, 2003; Verworn et al., R&D Manag 38(1):1–19, 2008) and that innovation strategies play a central role in optimization of innovation (Clark and Wheelwright, Leading product development, Free Press, New York, 1995; Cottam et al., Eur J Innov Manag 4:88–94, 2001; Morgan and Berthon, J Manag Stud 45(8):1329–1353, 2008). Innovation strategies are suggested in literature (e.g. Page, J Prod Innov Manag 10:273–287, 1993; Oke, J Change Manag 2(3):272–281, 2002; Adams et al., Int J Manag Rev 8(1):21–47, 2006; Igartua et al., Res Technol Manag May–June:41–52, 2010) as a facilitator of innovation and may therefore also be targeted at FEI support. The pharmaceutical industry has experienced a worldwide decline in the number of applications for new molecular entities to regulatory agencies since 1997. Therefore high pressures are put on pharmaceutical research and FEI to produce more valid candidates and faster for drug development. This paper explores how pharmaceutical FEI can be actively supported through the development and implementation of an innovation strategy. The empirical field and applied methodology is an action oriented longitudinal case study of a Danish pharmaceutical company. The findings and key learnings from the study are presented as propositions of how innovation strategies can be applied to actively facilitate FEI and with measurable results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Action research and the action oriented approach applied in this study will be referred to as AR throughout the article.

  2. The AR researcher resembles the author of this paper.

References

  • Adams R, Bessant J, Phelps R (2006) Innovation management measurement: a review. Int J Manag Rev 8(1):21–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander K, Kaya S, Nelson M (2003) Learning partnerships in facilities management: a new action learning approach. In: Proceedings of the building education and research (BEAR) conference, Salford

  • Altrichter H, Kemmis S, McTaggart R, Zuber-Skerritt O (2002) The concept of action research. Learn Organ 9(3):125–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alves J, Marques MJ, Saur I, Marques P (2005) Building creative ideas for successful new product development. In: ECCI 9—the 9th European conference on creativity and innovation: ‘Transformations’, Lodz, Poland

  • Amabile TM (1998) How to kill creativity. Harvard Bus Rev 76(5):76–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile TM et al (1996) Assessing the work environment for creativity. Acad Manag J 39(5):1154–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima K (1995) An exploratory analysis of the impact of market orientation on new product performance: a contingency approach. J Prod Innov Manag 12(4):275–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backman M, Börjesson S, Setterberg S (2007) Working with concepts in the fuzzy front end: exploring the context for innovation for different types of concepts at Volvo Cars. R&D Manag 37(1):17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boeddrich HJ (2004) Ideas in the workplace: a new approach towards organizing the fuzzy front end of the innovation process. Creat Innov Manag 13(4):274–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booz, Allen, and Hamilton (1982) New product management for the 1980s. Booz, Allen, and Hamilton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan A, Dooley L (2005) Networked creativity: a structured management framework for stimulating innovation. Technovation 25:1388–1399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark K, Wheelwright CS (1995) Leading product development. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan D, Brannick T (2001) Doing action research in your own organisation. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper RG (1988) Predevelopment activities determine new product success. Ind Mark Manag 17(3):237–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper RG (1999) From experience: the invisible success factors in product innovation. J Prod Innov Manag 16:115–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper RG, Kleinschmidt EJ (1994) Screening new products for potential winners. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 22(4):24–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper RG, Kleinschmidt EL (1996) Winning businesses in product development: the critical success factors. Res Technol Manag July–August:18–29

  • Cottam A, Ensor J, Band C (2001) A benchmark study of strategic commitment to innovation. Eur J Innov Manag 4:88–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding M, Eliashberg J (2002) Structuring the new product development pipeline. Manag Sci 48(3):343–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duyck J (2003) Attrition and translation. Science 302(Oct 24):603–605. ISSN 0036-8075

  • Dwyer L, Mellor R (1991) Organisational environment, new product process activities, and project outcomes. J Prod Innov Manag 8(1):39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyck WV, Allen PM (2006) Pharmaceutical discovery as a complex system of decisions: the case of front-loaded experimentation. E:CO 8(3):40–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Englund RL, Graham RJ (1999) From experience: linking projects to strategy. J Prod Innov Manag 16(1):52–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gobeli DH, Brown DJ (1987) Analyzing product innovations. Res Manag 30(4):25–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood D, Levin M (1998) Introduction to action research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart E (1996) Action research as a professionalising strategy: issues and dilemmas. J Adv Nurs 23:454–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He ZL, Wong PK (2004) Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ Sci 15(4):481–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herson J (2005) Innovation in pharmaceuticals: speeding up the development of new cures. Futurist Jan–Feb:25–29

  • Hüsig S, Kohn S (2003) Factors influencing the front end of innovation process: a comprehensive review of selected empirical NPD and explorative FFE studies. Proceedings of the 10th IPDMC

  • Igartua JI, Garrigós JA, Hervas-Oliver JL (2010) How innovation management techniques support an open innovation strategy. Res Technol Manag May–June:41–52

  • Johne AF, Snelson PA (1988) Success factors in product innovation: a selective review of the literature. J Prod Innov Manag 5:114–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khurana A, Rosenthal SR (1998) Towards holistic ‘Front Ends’ in new product development. J Prod Innov Manag 15:57–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim J, Wilemon D (2002) Focusing the fuzzy front end in new product development. R&D Manag 32(4):269–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinschmidt EJ, Cooper RG (1995) The relative importance of new product success determinants: perception versus reality. R&D Manag 25(3):281–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch T, Harrington A (1998) Reconceptualizing rigour: the case for reexivity. J Adv Nurs 28:882–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koen PA et al (2001) Providing clarity and a common language to the fuzzy front end. Res Technol Manag 44:46–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvale S, Brinkmann S (2008) InterViews—learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester DH (1998) Critical success factors for new product development. Res Technol Manag 41(1):36–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn GS, Akgun AE (1998) Innovation strategies under uncertainty: a contingency approach for new product development. Eng Manag J 10(30):11–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Maaløe E (2002) Case-studier af og om mennesker i organisationer, 2nd edn. Akademisk Forlag, København

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins EC, Terblanche F (2003) Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. Eur J Innov Manag 6(1):64–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan RE, Berthon P (2008) Market orientation, generative learning, innovation strategy and business performance inter-relationships in bioscience firms. J Manag Stud 45(8):1329–1353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss QZ, Alho J, Alexander K (2007) Performance measurement action research. J Facil Manag 5(4):290–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen KA, Svensson L (eds) (2006) Action and interactive research—beyond practice and theory. Shaker Publishing, Maastricht

    Google Scholar 

  • Nobelius D, Trygg L (2002) Stop chasing the front end process—management of the early phases in product development projects. Int J Proj Manag 20:331–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oke A (2002) Making it happen: how to improve innovative capability in a service company. J Change Manag 2(3):272–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacl H, Festel G, Wess G (2004) The future of Pharma R&D. Festel Capital, Huenenberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Page AL (1993) Assessing new product development practices and performance: establishing crucial norms. J Prod Innov Manag 10:273–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perttula MK (2004) Implications on cultural and formal processes of the front-end of new product development. In: Proceedings of 2nd world conference on production and operations management, Cancun, Mexico, 30 April–3 May

  • Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) (2007) Pharma futures—prescription for long-term value. SustainAbility Ltd, ISBN 978-1-903168-19-6, pp 1–40

  • Reason P (2001) Learning and change through action research. In: Henry J (ed) Creative management, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, London, pp 182–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid SE, Brentani U (2004) The fuzzy front end of new product development for discontinuous innovations: a theoretical model. J Prod Innov Manag 21:170–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinertsen DG (1999) Taking the fuzziness out of the fuzzy front end. Res Technol Manag 42:25–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice MP, Kelley D, Peters L, O’Connor GC (2001) Radical innovation: triggering initiation of opportunity recognition and evaluation. R&D Manag 31(4):409–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell R (1992) Successful industrial innovation: critical success factors for the 1990 s. R&D Manag 3:221–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid EF, Smith DA (2005) Managing innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. J Commer Biotechnol 12(1):50–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar AJ, Tishler A, Dvir D et al (2002) Refining the search for project success factors: a multivariate, typological approach. R&D Manag 32(2):111–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens GA, Burly J (2003) Piloting the rocket of radical innovation. Res Technol Manag 46(2):16–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatikonda MV, Rosenthal SR (2000) Successful execution of product development projects: balancing firmness and flexibility in the innovation process. J Oper Manag 18:401–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verganti R (1999) Planned flexibility: linking anticipation and reaction in product development projects. J Prod Innov Manag 16:363–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verworn B, Herstatt C, Nagahira A (2008) The fuzzy front end of Japanese new product development projects: impact on success and differences between incremental and radical projects. R&D Manag 38(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams MA, Kochbar AK, Tennant C (2007) An object-oriented reference model of the fuzzy front end of the new product introduction process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 34(7–8):826–841

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter R (2002) Truth of fiction: problems of validity and authenticity in narratives of action research. Educ Action Res 10(1):143–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (2003) Case study research: design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA

  • Zhang Q, Doll WJ (2001) The fuzzy front end and success of new product development: a causal model. Eur J Innov Manag 4(2):95–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zirger BJ (1997) The influence of development experience and product innovativeness on product outcome. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 9(3):287–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Strategy & Management, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Annabeth Aagaard

Authors
  1. Annabeth Aagaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annabeth Aagaard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aagaard, A. The Contribution of Innovation Strategy Development and Implementation in Active Facilitation of Pharmaceutical Front End Innovation. Syst Pract Action Res 25, 457–477 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9234-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9234-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation