Knowledge sharing in collaborative new product development: a study of grey box supplier involvement configuration

Kleber, Matheus; Ayala, Néstor Fabián; Le Dain, Marie-Anne; Marcon, Érico; Frank, Alejandro Germán

doi:10.1590/0103-6513.20180070

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Research Article • Prod. 29 • 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20180070 copy

Knowledge sharing in collaborative new product development: a study of grey box supplier involvement configuration

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Paper aims

To shed light on how knowledge is shared between companies during a collaborative new product development (NPD) process.

Originality

It is the first study of different knowledge sharing levels for each stage of the NPD process in an inter-organizational context.

Research method

A research framework was created based on the literature. Guided by this framework, an in-depth case study was performed in a multinational company analyzing the knowledge sharing with the company’s supplier during a collaborative NPD process.

Main findings

Different levels of knowledge sharing were found at each stage of the NPD process.

Implications for theory and practice

The results complement previous works demonstrating that this phenomenon should not be considered as a binary state. By clearly presenting how knowledge sharing occurs at each phase of the NPD process, managers can be prepared and correctly implement tools to support NPD teams from both buyer and supplier companies.

Keywords
New product development; Knowledge management; Knowledge sharing; Supplier involvement; Grey box

Intensity levels of knowledge sharing
Absent: No evidence of knowledge sharing with supplier was found in the case studied for this subject. No interaction.
Low interaction: Happens when the object of study is ongoing and the main decisions that affect the business of both companies have been already taken. There is just the need to follow the activities at an operational level to guarantee that they are being developed as initially planned. The contact between the companies can be frequent, however the knowledge exchanged is restricted to simple information exchange with low impact on the project’s conduction.
Medium interaction: level of detailing, complexity and information accuracy for the object of study goes beyond a simple follow up of the progress of the activities, however, the decisions about the object of study that can affect the companies’ business were already made between the companies. The progress demands, in this case a review of the information provided regarding the increased maturity of the project.
High interaction: Occurs when there is a necessity to build a solution from scratch for a given object of study. Despite the need for a low level of detailing, there is a high company-supplier interaction, in order to break the inertia between the teams of supplier’s company client, as a means to present a plausible solution for both companies.
Very high interaction: This is the highest level of company-supplier interaction since it is reserved for contract signings or agreements that affect the continuity or the feasibility of the project or the business of one of the companies. This level also represents the final versions of the objects of study that demand a high level of commitment between both companies or, finally, the review/ development of prototypes, physical or virtual that demand great collaboration between companies.

Intensity level of knowledge sharing	Classification	Graphical representation
No interaction	0	○
Low interaction	1	◔
Medium interaction	2	◑
High interaction	3	◕
Very high interaction	4	●

List of the boundary objects: Knowledge transfer			Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Develo- pment	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
1		After sales service first reports	○	○	○	○	○	●
2		After sales service plan	○	◕	●	◑	○	○
3		After sales services bill of material	○	◕	●	◔	◔	○
4		Contract with the supplier	◕	●	○	○	○	○
5		Control range optimization	No evidence found
6		Cosmetic mock-up	○	●	○	○	○	○
7		Cost analysis	◕	●	◔	◔	◔	◔
8		Critical Components Listing	○	○	●	◑	◑	○
9		Design brief	○	●	○	○	○	○
10		Drawing	○	○	●	◑	◑	○
11		First Article Inspection report	○	●	●	●	●	○
12		First tools report	No evidence found
13		Functional specifications	◕	●	◑	○	○	○
14		Geographic Exclusivity Agreement	No evidence found
15		Global project specifications	◕	●	◑	○	○	○
16		Homologation request	◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
17		Industrial property analysis	◕	◑	●	○	○	○
18		Industrial specifications	○	◕	●	○	○	○
19		Industrialization plan	◕	◑	○	○	○	○
20		List of components from 2nd tier suppliers	○	◕	●	○	○	○
21		Manufacturing capabilities	○	○	◕	●	○	○
22		Manufacturing Process Definition	○	◕	●	○	○	○
23		Manufacturing Process Implementation	○	○	●	◑	◑	○
24		Marketing test reports based on prototypes	○	○	◕	◔	◔	○
25		Mass Production Release	○	○	○	○	●	○
26		Mock-up	○	●	○	○	○	○
27		Non disclosure agreement	○	●	○	○	○	○
28		Packaging analysis	○	◕	●	○	○	○
29		Packaging Samples Approval	○	○	○	●	○	○
30	Patents		◕	◑	●	○	○	○
31	Pilot run report		○	○	○	●	○	○
32	Product Delivery Schedule		◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○
33	Product FMEA Report		◕	◔	●	○	○	○
34	Product technical specifications		◕	●	◑	○	○	○
35	Product Verification Report		◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
36	Project closing report		○	○	○	○	○	●
37	Project Data Availability		◕	●	○	○	○	○
38	Project financial commitment		◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○
39	Project planning		◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○
40	Project summary report		◕	●	○	○	○	○
41	Prototype needs (for quality, marketing…)		○	●	●	●	●	○
42	Prototype quality report		○	●	●	●	●	○
43	Quality Assurance Plan		○	●	◑	◑	◑	○
44	Quality specifications		○	●	○	○	○	○
45	Quality testing report		○	●	●	●	●	○
46	Report shared on actual costs		◕	●	◔	◔	◔	○
47	Request For Quotation		◕	◕	●	○	○	○
48	Requests for New Product Variants		◕	●	◑	○	○	○
49	Safety / Norms Approval		◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
50	Sales launch plan		◕	◑	◑	◑	◑	◑
51	Specific Process Identification		No evidence found
52	Standards testing report		◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
53	Styling requirements		○	●	○	○	○	○
54	Supplier control delegation		◕	●	○	○	○	○
55	Supplier quality report		○	●	◑	◑	◑	○
56	Tooling Study and Quotation		◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○
57	Unit Problem List		○	●	●	●	●	●
58	Validation of the Manufacturing Nomenclatures		No evidence found
59	Verification plan		◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
60	Verification report		◕	●	◔	◔	●	○

		Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Development	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
Knowledge transfer	Sum	78.0	162.0	108.0	64.0	72.0	11.0
Knowledge transfer	Average	1.4	2.9	2.0	1.2	1.3	0.3

	Knowledge translation – Situations to avoid sticky knowledge glitches during the NPD	Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Development	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
1	Contract content	◕	●	○	○	○	○
2	Product Functional & technical specifications	◕	●	◑	○	○	○
3	Quality requirements	○	●	○	○	○	○
4	Responsibilities in the project	◕	●	○	○	○	○
5	Verification of the prototype	○	●	●	●	●	○
6	Project planning (due dates)	◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○
7	First tool results	○	●	●	●	●	○
8	Logistic requirements integration	◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○

		Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Development	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
Knowledge translation	Sum	15.0	32.0	14.0	12.0	12.0	-
Knowledge translation	Average	1.9	4.0	1.8	1.5	1.5	-

Complex problem solving situations – Knowledge transformation		Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Development	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
1	Elaboration of business model	○	○	○	○	○	○
2	Acceptability and associated tests	◕	●	◔	◔	●	○
3	Integration of other department requirements	No evidence found
4	Choice of technical and process solutions	◕	●	◑	◑	◑	○

		Phase 1: Scoping	Phase 2: Build business case	Phase 3: Development	Phase 4: Testing and validation	Phase 5: Launch	Post-Launch Review
Knowledge transformation	Sum	6.0	8.0	3.0	3.0	6.0	-
Knowledge transformation	Average	2.0	2.7	1.0	1.0	2.0	-

Associação Brasileira de Engenharia de Produção Av. Prof. Almeida Prado, Travessa 2, 128 - 2º andar - Room 231, 05508-900 São Paulo - SP - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: production@editoracubo.com.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * frank@producao.ufrgs.br

Position of the interviewee in the company	Years of experience in the company
Project specialist 1	2
Project specialist 2	6
Project manager	6
Purchase analyst 1	19
Purchase analyst 2	4
Purchase manager	10
Product engineer 1	6
Product engineer 2	15
Product engineering supervisor	5