4.5 Article

Managing the fuzzy front-end: insights from process firms

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 252-+

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/14601061111124911

Keywords

Product development; Innovation; Fuzzy control; Materials management

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose - The aim of this paper is to inform researchers and practitioners about the fuzzy front-end (FFE) of the innovation process in process firms. Design/methodology/approach - A multiple case study of four process firms was conducted, with a total of 64 semi-structured interviews. Findings - The paper gives new insights into the FFE in non-assembled product and process development in process firms. The FFE of non-assembled product and process development is first conceptualized and key activities are identified. Further, how the strong relationship between product and process development can be managed in the FFE is discussed. Research limitations/implications - All four firms are from the mineral and metals industry, prompting caution when generalizing the results to other contexts. This research offers insights about the FFE in process firms. Theoretical implications are added to the existing literature on the FFE and general process development literature, and the paper increases our understanding of innovation management in general. Practical implications - From a practical point of view, the paper gives advice on how managers in process firms can increase speed and clarity in the FFE. The conceptualizations and the identified front-end key activities are suggested as checklists for improving the FFE stage. Originality/value - This study compares how the FFE within two different types of innovations is conceptualized and managed. Thus, the FFE in non-assembled product and process development is explored. The FFE of process development is an unexplored context.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available