Marion 2021

J PROD INNOV MANAG 2021;38(1):192–215
© 2020 Product Development & Management Association

DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12547
The Transformation of the Innovation Process: How Digital Tools

are Changing Work, Collaboration, and Organizations in New
Product Development*
Tucker J. Marion , and Sebastian K. Fixson
Over the past several decades, digitization has invaded all areas of human activity, including innovation. The result of
digitization of existing tools for design and collaboration, and the introduction of entirely new digital tools, is a far
more substantive change of innovation than previous generations of tools enabled. It affects not only the quality of
the output and speed of its generation, but it affects the innovation work itself, changes work content, collaboration
patterns, decision authority, organizational set-ups, governance structures, firm boundaries, and ultimately entire
ecosystems.
In this paper, the digitization of New Product Development (NPD), a subset of innovation, is studied to pursue
two research questions: (1) How has the digital tool landscape in NPD changed over the past 15 years, and (2) how
have these changes affected how firms innovate?
This research uses a longitudinal multi-method, qualitative approach to deep dive into actual use cases of digital
design tools such as computer-aided design CAD and new tools such as collaborative information technology (CIT).
The changes in these tools and observations into how these tools are transforming the very nature of how things are
designed is the research focus of this study.
These tools have become increasingly more sophisticated while being easier to use and are integrated earlier in the
design process. As a result, digital tools have a far broader reaching impact than previous generation of tools. Not
only do they affect output and process efficiency, but they also increase depth and breadth of the work of individual
innovators, they lead to rearrangement of the entire innovation processes, enable new configurations of people, teams,
and firms, and rewrite the rules on how knowledge management acts as a critical competitive capability. The progres-
sion of digitization is laying the groundwork for changes to what firms are and do and points to different ways of
organizing, specializing, and training for NPD professionals.
Practitioner Points importance is accelerating as tools gain in intelli-

gence and capabilities.
• Digital design and collaboration tools are essen- • New tools are changing approaches to design tasks,
tial to all facets of the innovation process, and that organizational design, and the skills required of in-
novation professionals.
• Firms should consider giving teams autonomy to
Address correspondence to: Tucker J. Marion, Entrepreneurship & decide on the tools they use, but be conscious of is-
Innovation Group, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Ave., 209
Hayden Hall, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. E-mail: t.marion@ sues such as churn due to tool switching costs, over
neu.edu iteration, and data management.
*We thank PTC Corporation for their assistance and efforts in data
collection. We also thank the Industrial Designers Society of America • Central digital groups, a migration to a more
(IDSA) for their assistance in the Phase 1 exploratory survey. Prior systems thinking approach to design, and roles
versions of this work and research were presented at the International
Conference on Engineering Design (ICED) 2019, the International moving from solution generators to solution se-
Product Development Management Conference in 2018, The Product lectors will become more significant as intelligent
Development Management Association Research Forum 2019, PTC’s
LiveWorx 2019, and the Academy of Management 2019 annual
tools play a bigger role in new product develop-
meeting. ment tasks.
THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE INNOVATION PROCESS J PROD INNOV MANAG 193
2021;38(1):192–215
Introduction performance is creating entirely new ways to design

and model systems by dramatically accelerating iter-
O
ver the last 15 years, the NPD process has ation and experimentation concomitantly with reduc-
become increasingly digitized. Collaborative tions in time and cost.
Information Technology (CIT) tools such The digitization of communication and collabora-
as Basecamp, #Slack, Asana, and Teamwork.com tion has augmented design tools such as CAD, anal-
have seen enormous growth in popularity (Marion, ysis software, product lifecycle management (PLM)
Reid, Hultink, and Barczak, 2016; Song, Berends, systems, project management software, and desktop
Van der Bij, and Weggemen, 2007), while digital de- software such as spreadsheets (i.e., Microsoft Excel).
sign tools such as computer-aided design (CAD) CIT has gained in popularity among development
(e.g., Solidworks, CREO, Onshape, etc.) and analysis teams, especially those that are distributed or vir-
packages (e.g., COMOS, ANSYS, etc.) have become tual (Duranti and de Almeida, 2012). Unfortunately,
increasingly capable and accessible. From the perspec- few studies have investigated the project-level influ-
tive of a knowledge-based view (KBV) of the firm, ence these new tools, when combined, have on the
these tools can foster the creation of knowledge via new product development (NPD) process. Gilson,
faster problem-solving through the rapid dissemina- Maynard, Young, Vartiainen, and Hakonen (2014)
tion of ideas, comments, and revisions to design. With concluded that a majority of studies of IT still focus
the addition of new technology such as real-time, on traditional tools such as e-mail but ignore social
cloud-based analysis tools, some design functions media and new cloud-based solutions. While some
are seeing the speed of solving problems increase by research has found no relationship between IT tools
thousands of percent during the design and analysis and NPD outcomes, others have shown the variety
revision cycle (Brown, 2018). This dramatic change in and social aspect of these news tools can have a sig-
nificant impact on NPD (Durmusoglu, Calantone,
and Sambamurthy, 2006; Markham and Lee, 2012;
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
Marion, Meyer, and Barczak, 2015b; Roberts and
Dr. Tucker J. Marion is an associate professor in Northeastern’s
Candi, 2012). Since nearly all facets of the NPD pro-
D’Amore-McKim School of Business, Entrepreneurship &
Innovation Group, Faculty Director of Innovation Masters process are impacted by the tools used by NPD teams
grams, and the Samuel Altschuler Research Professor. Dr. Marion’s (Marion, Barczak, and Hultink, 2012), understanding
interdisciplinary research is concentrated on product development, their influence on the process and outcomes is an im-
innovation, and entrepreneurship. Specifically, he looks at how in-
novation efforts can be made more efficient and effective through portant area of investigation.
the use of collaborative IT, digital design, rapid prototyping, out- This research bridges the theoretical and practical
sourcing, and product architecture. His work has appeared in books by trying to understand how these tools have evolved
and journals including Journal of Product Innovation Management,
Journal of Business Venturing, R&D Management, IEEE Transactions
and how this evolution affects real-life projects. This
on Engineering Management, MIT Sloan Management Review, research seeks to make sense of how these design and
Research-Technology Management, Design Studies, International communication tools have matured and developed
Journal of Production Research, and others.
over time, how they are being used by project teams
Dr. Sebastian K. Fixson is Associate Dean of Graduate Programs today, what factors enhance or inhibit their use, and
and Innovation at the F.W. Olin Graduate School of Business, and
how they contribute to changes in design activities
Professor of Innovation & Design, at Babson College. He holds the
degree of Diplom Ingenieur (M.Sc.) in mechanical engineering from during the NPD process. To accomplish this goal, a
the University of Karlsruhe, Germany, and a Ph.D. in Technology, longitudinal, qualitative study of digital design and
Management, and Policy from MIT. Dr. Fixson concentrates his CIT tools use among real-world designers and proj-
work on helping people and organizations build innovation capabil-
ities. In his research, he investigates how factors such as structure ect teams was undertaken. Additionally, this study
and governance of innovation processes, practices like design think- systematically collected data on design and CIT tool
ing, and the use of digital design tools affect the nature and outcome introduction and propagation over the last decade to
of innovation work. His work has appeared in books and journals
including the Journal of Product Innovation Management, Journal
inform the research.
of Operations Management, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Understanding how design and collaborative IT
Management, MIT Sloan Management Review, Research-Technology can influence the process by which new knowledge
Management, Creativity and Innovation Management, International
is created and communicated to inform design and
Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Research Policy,
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, and others. NPD is relevant, as the tools have become an increas-
ingly valuable resource affecting knowledge-based
194 J PROD INNOV MANAG T. J. MARION AND S. K. FIXSON
2021;38(1):192–215
competence of the firm. In this research, several con- through the KBV lens, the goal of new design and
tributions to further our understanding of digital CIT tools is to increase knowledge generation and
tools and NPD are made. First, this study develops sharing among team members directly. The KBV of-
and adds context to understand how these tools have fers a useful framework to examine issues of innova-
changed over time and how these new capabilities in- tion, technology, and organization in firms (Alavi and
turn affect how NPD activities, at the individual and Leidner, 2001; Gopalakrishnan, Bierly, and Kessler,
team-level, are performed. Next, it is shown that the 1999). These tools are aimed to speed design creation
corresponding behavioral changes are leading to dif- and foster virtual team communication, coordination,
ferent organizational approaches and also signals the and collaboration (Duranti and de Almeida, 2012).
importance of different types of skills required of However, most studies of IT have focused on tradi-
NPD professionals. Lastly, the managerial challenges tional services and product offerings such as e-mail
and opportunities these new approaches to the activi- (Gilson et al., 2014). Design, analysis, and CIT tools
ties of NPD will present to firms in areas ranging from bridge traditional approaches to design activities with
training to IT implementation is explored. In the next new forms of technology, such as social networking.
section, relevant literature for both tools, knowledge, An example is the new cloud-based CAD platform
and skills is discussed. A section on research design Onshape, which allows real-time distributed iteration,
follows. Then, research results and their implications team communication, and new plug-in functional ap-
are reviewed. The paper concludes with thoughts on plications similar to the Apple App Store. A knowl-
some limitations and future research opportunities. edge-based theory of the firm provides a fundamental
theoretical basis as to why the use of various IT tools
Theoretical Background in the NPD process may increase performance, as these
tools can improve the efficiency of knowledge creation
New product development, or innovation in gen- and transfer among the stakeholders in the organiza-
eral, has historically been defined as the introduction tion (Marion, Fixson, and Meyer, 2014, p. 20).
of a new product, service, or method (Nonaka and There are different outcome measures for NPD,
Takeuchi, 1995; Schumpeter, 1934). There are two as- such as the efficiency of the process and overall inno-
pects to consider, one being the outcome of the NPD vation capabilities of the firm. Innovation capabilities
effort, and the other being the process with which the are a set of abilities and skills in an organization that
innovation is developed. The process perspective al- allow firms to adopt new processes and technologies
lows researchers to investigate the activities and inter- in their design efforts (Ju, Zhou, Gao, and Lu, 2013;
actions that are required for the successful generation Zahra and Nielsen, 2002). These innovation capa-
and introduction of an innovation (Greve and Taylor, bilities are linked to the design of superior products
2000; Griffin, 1997; Krishnan and Ulrich, 2001). and services (Moorman and Slotegraaf, 1999; Song,
Knowledge creation is often at the center of this view- Droge, Hanvanich, and Calantone, 2005; Zhou and
point, with a focus on organizational attributes that Wu, 2010). To understand how innovation capabilities
can influence this process (Nonaka and Takeuchi, that can serve as a competitive advantage are formed
1995; Tsai, 2001). In the NPD process, knowledge is in the first place, this research builds on the knowl-
created at all phases, from ideation to commercial- edge transfer framework that includes three catego-
ization (Eppinger and Ulrich, 2015; Machlup, 1980). ries of knowledge reservoirs: member, task, and tool
The KBV argues that knowledge creation, exchange, (Argote and Ingram, 2000; Argote and Fahrenkopf,
and recombination are essential to innovation efforts 2016). In the context of NPD, members are the in-
(Galunic and Rodan, 1998; Henderson and Clark, dividuals working on various aspects of the product
1990; Quintane, Mitch Casselman, Sebastian Reiche, or project. Research has identified people-related fac-
and Nylund, 2011). tors such as team communication, team composition
According to the KBV, knowledge is an organiza- and organization, and senior management support as
tional resource, and the ability of a firm to generate important factors affecting product development per-
and deploy this knowledge in the NPD process can formance (Brown and Eisenhardt, 1995). Fostering
improve firm performance (Grant, 1996; Kogut and and integrating communication and collaboration
Zander, 1992; Nonaka, 1994; Spender, 1996). Viewed amongst team members of different skill sets and
2021;38(1):192–215
functional areas has been shown to lead to better- designed, and tested are tied to the tools used by in-
performing NPD processes and resulting in new dividuals and the team (Marion et al., 2012). As with
products (Cooper, 2001; Kahn, 1996; Marion et al., most knowledge work, the tools for NPD have be-
2014). Critical to this human side of NPD is collabo- come increasingly digitized (Gartner, 2019). A digi-
ration and sharing of design and project information tized NPD process is characterized by the increasing
among team members, what Argote and Fahrenkopf use of digital tools and platforms for design, analysis,
(2016) call the member-member networks. 3D prototyping, and collaborative communication,
The second knowledge reservoir, task, can be all of which increasingly replace traditional forms of
mapped on the process in NPD (Hopp, Iravani, design and communication such as hand sketching,
and Liu, 2009; Roemer and Ahmadi, 2004). When handmade prototypes, telephone communication,
two or more individuals work together on a project, and project management tools such manual task lists.
develop a mutual understanding, achieve collective In fact, over the past decade, the digitization of R&D
goals, and share resources—this collaboration and activities has accelerated, and specifically, the digiti-
the tasks and associated efforts to manage it is the zation of collaboration has received renewed interest
development process (Appley and Winder, 1977; (Orellana, 2017). Not only does the digitization of in-
Kahn, 1996; Marion et al., 2014; Schrage, 1990). The teraction matter, but also the intensity with which the
development process includes numerous tasks whose digital tools are used (Kroh, Luetjen, Globocnik, and
sequencing and interdependencies need to be man- Schultz, 2018).
aged. For example, the operations management lit- Next to offshoring and contingent work, new tech-
erature has developed insights into how to structure nology has been identified as one of the significant
the NPD process to minimize rework (Browning and drivers for changes in work (Barley, Bechky, and
Ramaseh, 2007). Typically segmented into phases, Miliken, 2017). Nambisan, Lyytinen, Majchrzak, and
the NPD process includes the up-front discovery of Song (2017) argue that digitization of the innovation
user needs and market opportunity, detailed design process will make the innovation less bounded, the in-
and development, and commercialization (Cooper, novation agency less pre-defined, and the distinction
2001; Ulrich and Eppginer, 2016). Specifically, the between the innovation process and the outcome less
design and development phase includes conceptual clear. They propose four logics to explain digital in-
design via design sketches, design concepts, detailed novation: dynamic problem-solution pairing, socio-
engineering design, comprehensive virtual and phys- cognitive sensemaking, technology affordances and
ical prototypes, design analysis, and prototype test- constraints, and orchestration. These logics point to
ing (Marion et al., 2014; Perks, Cooper, and Jones, profound changes in how the activities of innovation
2005). During the design and development phase, are performed and managed. Given the rapid digital
numerous decisions need to be made about issues transformation of NPD over the last 15 years in each
such as the design parameters, specifications, de- of these categories or logics, one needs to understand
tailed design and engineering, and the prototype and make sense of this evolving landscape of the tools
plan (Krishnan and Ulrich, 2001; Marion et al., and how they impact design activities. Sensemaking
2014). In the commercialization phase, virtual and is an organizational framing tool to label, categorize,
physical prototypes are further refined and tested, and stabilize meanings from situations (Mills and
tools and manufacturing processes are designed and Ungson, 2003; Taylor and Van Every, 2000; Weick,
sourced, and supply chains are finalized. These deci- Sutcliffe, and Obstfeld, 2005). As a first step in the
sions require input from functional areas across the process of understanding this changing landscape and
organization and often contain many interdepen- how it affects NPD, one needs to first grasp how these
dencies (Marion et al., 2014). tools have changed and how these tools are integrated
The third knowledge reservoir in Argote and into the NPD process. What capabilities and features
Fahrenkopf’s (2016) framework is the tools that are have been added? What types of tools and CIT have
used to design and facilitate interaction and com- been developed that cover different NPD activities?
munication of those design activities. A key element Are there industry trends in the types of tools and the
for successful integration of skills, knowledge, and companies that commercialize them? In other words,
efforts from different people are the tools they work how has the knowledge reservoir tool dynamically
with. How products are conceptualized, prototyped, changed over time?
2021;38(1):192–215
Research Question 1: How have digital tools that In the next section, our research methodology and
support design activities changed over time, and sample characteristics is reviewed.
can this changing landscape be synthesized to make
sense of it?
Research Methods and Data
It is easy to imagine that digital tools affect work. Research Frame and Setting
But what are the precise effects of a changing tool
landscape on a firm’s knowledge as a competitive ad- To explore, understand, and make sense of the changes
vantage? Empirical research has shown that the use of the tools and how the digitization of the design
of IT tools tends to be associated with the degree of process is influencing NPD, one needs to appreciate
collaboration (Peng, Heim, and Mallick, 2014), which the evolution of the landscape of the digital tools
in itself is correlated directly with knowledge creation themselves and the details of their use in concrete
and dissemination. Analogous to the interdependence work projects. Sensemaking helps to understand, de-
of work, the interdependence of technologies (in a velop meaning and context for individuals and orga-
workflow) requires some form of coordination, and nizations in an emerging situation in a comprehensive
digitally mediated work processes, especially struc- manner through the use of observed data and helps
tured ones, have been shown to alter the relationship create order and interpret what has occurred from the
between collaborators (Claggett and Karahanna, environment (Berger and Luckman, 1967; Maitlis,
2018). Research on work with technology shows that 2005; Weick, 1993, 1995; Weick et al., 2005). To ac-
engineers traverse these gaps between technologies, complish this task, this project was tackled through a
sometimes manually (navigate) and sometimes via multi-method approach that includes detailed quali-
automating (bridging) the process (Bailey, Leonardi, tative research that allows an in-depth understanding
and Chong, 2010). In case of a narrow gap, engineers of behavior (Bunduchi, 2017; Woodside and Wilson,
simply use mechanisms created earlier to traverse the 2003) as well as longitudinal data sets.
gap (crossing). Bailey et al. (2010) find that these gap This research is following a call from a recent review
traversing strategies can also serve other functions on knowledge management research (Barley, Treem,
beyond efficiency, for example, quality inspection, oc- and Kuhn, 2018) for a renewed focus on knowledge
cupational training, and knowledge preservation. For creation. Since this paper is focused on knowledge cre-
these reasons, these strategies can also differ between ation in the NPD process, associated activities, and the
occupations. The increasingly technology-mediated tools used to execute design work, it is important to in-
work environment, both concerning work content vestigate the connections between technology (digital
as well as communication, is increasingly requiring tools) and work processes (activities) (Raghuram, Hill,
what Makarius and Larson call “virtual intelligence” Gibbs, & Maruping, 2019). To accomplish this task
(Makarius and Larson, 2017). requires studying details that only project-level anal-
What these works suggest is that there are several ysis can provide. A project-level study is a preferred
interactions between the three knowledge reservoirs method in determining the impact of IT tools since
member, tasks, and tools. Thus, our second step in sen- most of this tool use occurs at the project-level by the
semaking of the impact of digital tools on NPD is to designers, engineers, and project managers (Barczak,
strive for a deeper understanding of how the changes Hultink, and Sultan, 2008; Devaraj and Kohli, 2003;
in tools have affected the way individuals and organi- Marion et al., 2012; McGrath and Iansiti, 1998).
zations use the tools—what Argote and Fahrenkopf This study focused on the design and development of
(2016) call the knowledge networks between member, multi-part physical products of varying complexity.
task, and tools—and how this, in turn, impacts the These types of products and projects require engineer-
work itself, and ultimately the organization’s knowl- ing, analysis, prototyping, testing, and manufacturing
edge base as a competitive advantage. Formally, our development. The resources and tasks used in these
second research question is as follows: phases are driven and augmented by digital design and
CIT tools. As such, individuals’ development work
Research Question 2: How have these evolving dig- and the tools that support that work was studied.
ital tools influenced changes in NPD activities for This research also follows the call for conducting
individuals, teams, and performance outcomes? more longitudinal, multi-method investigations of the
2021;38(1):192–215
role of digital design and CIT and its impact on work in the process (CAD software, types of prototypes,
(Forman, King, and Lyytinen, 2014). Consequently, etc.), and the total percentage of billed project hours
our investigations occurred in multiple research related to CAD engineering (see Appendix A). The
phases that spanned a decade. Research has shown final survey sample consisted of 44 firms, which rep-
that protracted engagement is being used in studies resented a response rate of 68%. Next, multiple inter-
where there are efforts to move beyond conventional, views were conducted with engineers and engineering
short-term case observation and into a more in-depth managers at five firms, including defense, robotic, and
investigation into phenomena (Given, 2008). multiple design and engineering firms. The interviews
were held face-to-face and were semi-structured.
Research Design An interview guide was developed and used during
the interviews. Interviews were recorded with note-
This research was approached from a grounded the- taking in real-time and later revisited during analysis
ory, constructivist perspective using a multi-method to identify textual and conceptual themes and narra-
approach in multiple phases. Grounded theory has tives (e.g., qualitative memoing). This approach is in
been used extensively within qualitative research fo- accordance with grounded theory and qualitative re-
cused on entrepreneurship and innovation (Grodal, search method design (Given, 2008; Taylor, Bogdan,
2018; Khavul, Chavez, and Bruton, 2013; Lee, 1999; and DeVault, 2015).
Marion, Eddleston, Friar, and Deeds, 2015a). In con- Phase 2 of this research project focused on two sim-
trast to naturalistic case methods, the constructivist ilar projects developed in two different periods by the
approach has a robust deductive element, which al- same firm. The company and projects were selected
lows a comparative understanding of empirical find- based on their similarity of complexity and function
ings between cases and different aspects of research (multi-part consumer products/tools), their use of a
(George and Bennett, 2005; Given, 2008; Marion broad spectrum of NPD processes including industrial
et al., 2015a). In each research phase, multiple cases design, prototyping, testing and manufacturing, and
and interviews were undertaken. A multi-method case the open access to the development team and associ-
research approach is important to exploratory re- ated data. This in-depth case comparison was ethno-
search as it affords the researcher the ability to trian- graphic and used participant observation and review
gulate observations through multiple viewpoints and of historical project data to inform the investigation.
data sets (Collier and Elman, 2008; Creswell, 2003). An embedded, ethnographic approach was used, given
For each of the cases, both qualitative and quanti- its ability to understand human behavior within a nat-
tative data were collected, combining ethnographic ural setting (Jackson, 2000). Lengthened research en-
participant observation, semi-structured interviews, gagement is increasingly being used in studies where
review of archival material, and investigation of a deeper, richer investigation can uncover unexpected
measures that digital tools and CIT use itself creates. insights into individuals and organizations (Given,
A graphic of the overall research study is shown in 2008; Marion et al., 2015a). Participant observation
Table 1. Table 1 notes the research phase, data col- and interviews were used to collect qualitative, ethno-
lected, and key characteristics of the data. graphic data on the firm and development projects.
The first phase of the research project began with Ethnography involves long-term, immersive, and ex-
an exploratory investigation into the use of digital de- periential participation by a researcher in a specific
sign (CAD) tools. The goal of this phase was to gain context to describe the meanings of experiences and
a baseline understanding of how pervasive the usage also uncover unexpected moments (Fernandez, 1986;
of digital tools was in NPD, and how influential these Geertz, 1973; Jackson, 2000; Marion et al., 2015a;
tools were on the project and overall process. To ac- Wacquant, 2003). By comparing information from
complish this, a 30-question exploratory electronic different sources, these meanings are interpreted by
survey on NPD tool use, including digital design, was the research team with the intent of identifying themes
sent to design and engineering firms via the Industrial in the data (Marion et al., 2015a; Ware, Tugenberg,
Designers Society of America contact list. Project- Dickey, and McHorney, 1999). The goal of this re-
specific questions included when and how frequently search was to build on the first phase and develop
tools such as CAD and 3D printed prototypes were a detailed understanding of how digital tools have
used during NPD, types of tools and methods used changed approaches to NPD and ultimate outcomes.
2021;38(1):192–215
Table 1. Research Study Map

2021;38(1):192–215
Phase 3 of the research began in 2011 with an in- 2011 to 2017. Thousands of emails and communica-
depth engagement with a growing technology com- tions were accessed and viewed during the participant
pany that designs and commercializes sensors and observation period. Field notes on the project were
systems used in consumer, automotive, and aerospace taken throughout this period. In cases were timing
applications. This company was selected due to the and frequency of communication were of interest,
high complexity of the project and comprehensive email and postings were tabulated using spreadsheets.
approach to the NPD process (the product is an elec- A multi-method approach of this type to synthesize
tronic sensor module with embedded software), and quantitative data with detailed qualitative cases or ex-
as with Phase 2, the ability to have open access to all amples has been advocated by Gibson and Birkinshaw
parts of the development project due to the academic (2004). This method has been found to provide a rich
interest in the research from company executives. As a understanding of organizational issues in business re-
follow-on to Phase 2, this phase was also an in-depth, search (Cardinal, Turner, Fern, and Burton, 2011). To
ethnographic case comparison. The goal of this phase compare these current projects with historical data,
was to broaden the research to understand the impact the Phase 3 sample together with the two projects de-
of CIT tools on the NPD process, in addition to developed in 2001 and 2009 (Phase 2) was analyzed. A
sign tools. Phase 3 of the study involved several stages. summary of firm and project characteristics for Phase
The first stage was an in-depth investigation into the 2 and 3 are shown in Table 2.
firm’s NPD process, including the use and type of IT During Phase 3, an in-depth investigation into the
tools used during development. The next stage in- features and commercialization history of both digital
volved participant observation on two development design and CIT tools over time using publicly avail-
projects at the firm, which began in 2014 and ended able information was begun. Two graduate research
in 2017. assistants collected data from the internet and elec-
For both Phase 2 and 3, this study followed the tronic library systems that included press releases,
multi-case methodology recommendations of Yin company and tool history, and news articles. This
(1994, 2003) to diminish further sources of bias within information was collected, sorted, and analyzed. The
the investigation and data collection effort. These tech- authors held regular research meetings with gradu-
niques included: randomization of times, places and ate research assistants to evaluate the research and
sampling methods, attention to marginal persons and progress, which allowed a comprehensive picture of
details, regular debriefing by informed colleagues, and the features and capabilities of the tools to be catego-
the use of note-taking to remind the participant-ob- rized over time. This research was started in 2017 and
server to detail events observed or experienced during ended in 2018. The final phase (Phase 4) of the study
the research engagement (Arnould and Wallendorf, included a continuation of the tool history investiga-
1994; Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Marion et al., 2015a). tion (with the same research assistants) and multiple,
Also, data were collected on e-mail and wiki com- semi-structured interviews with representatives at
munication over time for both projects (Snider, Škec, multiple firms. An interview guide was developed and
Gopsill, and Hicks, 2017). Open access to project used in face-to-face meetings. As with Phase 1, field
emails and project wikis was given by company man- notes were taken during the interviews and reviewed
agement through email and internet accounts from during the memoing and analysis process. These firms
Table 2. Research Firm Characteristics

Research Phase 2 Research Phase 3
Project A Project B Project A Project B
Start date 2001 2009 2014 2015

Commercialization date 2002 2010 2017 2018
Application Consumer R&D Consumer R&D Industrial R&D Industrial R&D
Project type Hand tool Hand tool Gas flow system Gas flow system
Project manager Yes Yes Yes Yes
# of team members 4 3 8 6
Primary locations U.S. U.S. U.S., China U.S., China
NPD management Loosely Defined, 3 Phases Loosely Defined, 3 Phases Defined, 3 Gates Defined, 3 Gates
2021;38(1):192–215
included electronics, aerospace, consumer products, research that has organized various IT tools into four
and engineering firms. Each firm was selected due to categories of activities (Mauerhoefer, Strese, and
the complex nature of its products and the associated Brettel, 2017; Peng et al., 2014), the study condensed
use of digital tools. This phase of the research aimed and considered four categories for the remainder of
to gain a better understanding of the current “state- the discussion: (1) communication IT tools (email
of-the-art” and also get expert opinions on how tools group-ware, video conferencing), (2) product design
will influence NPD in the near future. IT tools (CAD, simulation modeling and analysis),
(3) project management IT tools (project management
software), and (4) product data and knowledge man-
Results agement IT tools (shared parts databases). Examples
Changes in the Digital Tool Landscape of these tools by category are shown in Table 3 (this
table is current as of 2020). As shown in Table 3, tools
Broader process integration. To gain insight into from multiple vendors populate each category, which
Research Question 1, the study investigated digital covers nearly all aspects of the activities of NPD,
tools, used for both design and collaboration. In Phase from conceptualization to project management. In
1, which dates from 2008, one can see the importance of each category, both established vendors and new mar-
digital tools on NPD as a baseline for the investigation. ket entrants are active.
In this sample of design and engineering firms, the
study found that for a majority of respondents (51%), Higher performance. On the design tool side, over
the hours designing in CAD (both initial design and time, it was found that these tools are increasingly
design iterations) was a significant contributor to capable and are now including innate intelligence
overall project cost, accounting for between 40-80% of to automate the design process further. The speed
billed project hours. Nearly half of respondents (49%) of design modifications and analysis now occurs
went right to CAD after initial product sketches, and in near real-time. Cloud-based vendors such as
almost all firms used 3D printed prototypes to inform Onshape offer fully capable CAD on mobile devices,
the development process. It was apparent from this which allow distributed team members the ability to
limited exploratory study that digital design tools modify designs, collaboratively, in real-time. Future
were becoming essential to NPD and could influence trends indicate that real-time analyses and artificial
overall NPD efficiency and effectiveness. intelligence (AI) will have a substantial impact on
Today, a decade later, digital tools are used for every the act of engineering design (Gordon, 2017). In
aspect of the NPD process. Illustration packages for looking at the major CAD platforms and their feature
industrial design, CAD for engineering design, finite enhancements over time, all platforms are making
element analysis (FEA) simulations for strength test- efforts to improve ease-of-use while increasing the
ing, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) packages ability to perform analyses, integration of 3D printing
for fluid and gas flow, cloud-based solutions for proj- features, and embracing emerging technologies like
ect management, video communication platforms for augmented reality and virtual reality.
team interaction, and file storage platforms to store Similarly, the history of analysis tools shows an
phase gate documents are some of the tools and func- increasing degree of integration of hitherto separate
tions that comprise this ecosystem of digital design functionalities (e.g., starting with finite element anal-
and collaboration. To frame these research results, ysis (FEA), then adding computational fluid dynam-
tools were segmented into categories. Following prior ics analysis (CFD), then adding electronics analysis,
Table 3. IT Tool Categories and Software and Platform Examples

IT Tool Category
Product Data And Knowledge

Communication Tools Product Design And Analysis Project Management Management
Microsoft Outlook, Google Dassualt Systemes Solidworks, Microsoft Project, PTC ThingWorx, Daussalt
Gmail, #slack, Yammer, Zoom Onshape, PTC Creo, Teamwork.com, Systems Solidworks PLM,
ANSYS, COSMOS Basecamp Github, GrabCAD
2021;38(1):192–215
then simulation of composite components, etc.). This includes free CAD software such as TinkerCAD
Also, the increasing power of computing (Nordhaus, and freemium CAD platforms like Onshape. Individuals
2007), together with increasing sophistication and with no prior skills can learn and create designs, have
user-friendliness increasingly enables designers to them 3D printed or manufactured using services such
run real-time analyses and simulation within the de- as 3D Systems additive manufacturing services, and
sign process, instead of handing the design over to delivered in a matter of days. 3D printers themselves
an analysis specialist after some design decisions have seen dramatic cost reductions, with some models
had been made. Tables 4 and 5 show some historical selling for a few hundred dollars. This makes high-
data on how CAD and analysis tools have changed quality engineering tools available to almost anyone.
in recent decades. The progression of both of these This, in turn, has fostered the development of engaged
types of tools points to increased capability and tool communities such as GrabCAD and given employees
intelligence. This evolution of digital tools changes who are not in dedicated R&D roles a way to participate
how knowledge is created and used in the develop- in idea development. And because these tools have little
ment process. Since this knowledge is a strategic re- or no cost, trying new tools is easy with low risk.
source of the firm and can be used to competitive
advantage (Eisenhardt and Santos, 2002; Wasko and New types of tools for collaboration and workflow.
Faraj, 2005), firms that are best at using these tools In the late 2000s, collaborative cloud-based software
or creating their solutions may see improved innova- in the form of project wikis began to be increasingly
tion performance. adopted by project teams. This cloud-based centralized
form of collaboration differs fundamentally from email.
Lower barriers to entry. Barriers to access to These sites pull comments and interaction from members
powerful design tools and related services like 3D and the community, rather than selectively pushing
printing have been dramatically reduced in recent years. information to others (Marion and Schumacher, 2009).
Table 4. Summary of CAD Platform Historical Feature Changes (2010 to Present, Phase 3 Research)
CAD Platform
Year AutoCAD Solidworks CREO CATIA
2010 3D print feature, free form Improved user experience. Still Pro-Engineer New PLM capability
drawing Motion analysis added
2011 No major changes Improved design features for CREO 1.0 introduced Electronic and Mechanical
manufacturing CAD collaboration.
Improved functional
modeling
2012 Search function added Costing feature added. Beams Freestyle drawing added. No major changes
added to Linear Dynamic Sheet metal features
Studies improved
2013 Cloud connectivity Tools to improve design No major changes Improved composites simu-
(AutoDesk 360) sustainability lation. Improved render-
ing and sketching.
2014 Updated user interface. 3D Solar simulation added. More integrated suite of No major changes
scan capability added Improved drawing tools features
2015 Improvements to 3D printing cost estimates No major changes No major changes
ease-of-use
2016 New revision and drawing User interface redesigned Improved CREO Collaborative project collab-
tools Simulation. Improved oration. Improved systems
sketching. Direct con- engineering capabilities
nect to 3D printers
2017 Improved cloud function- No major changes No major changes No major changes
ality. Easier 3D print
tool
2018 No major changes No major changes Improved augmented Virtual reality features
reality features. New added. Improved sys-
simulation capabilities. tems engineering and
IoT tools integration
2021;38(1):192–215
Table 5. Summary of the History of Platform Features of ANSYS Simulation Software

Year Software Version ANSYS Software Features
1971 2 ANSYS’ first commercial version is released (boxes of punch cards; program ran overnight), focuses
on FEA
1979 3 DOS interface
1980 4 Provides graphical user interface
1993 5.0/5.1 Integration of fluid dynamics software; beginning integration with CAD systems
2001 6 Introduces large-scale modeling
2005 8 Introduces a multi-field solver, which allows users to simulate how multiple physics problems would
interact with
2009 12 The second version of Workbench; ANSYS also began increasingly consolidating features into the
Workbench
2014 15 New features for composites, bolted connections, and better mesh tools
2015 16 Introduces physics engine and Electronics Desktop, which is for semiconductor design
2016 17 Introduces a new user interface and performance improvement for computing fluid dynamics
problems
2017 18 It allows users to collect real-world data from products and then incorporate that data into future
simulations. The ANSYS Application Builder, which allows engineers to build, use, and sell custom
engineering tools, was also introduced with version 18.
These types of sites have added general social networking project manager and product line manager became
features to new product development. Research has the primary users of Project Libre (a project manage-
shown that during development, these new media tools ment tool) as project B progressed from Development
can increase collaboration and the number of concepts toward Commercialization. Ultimately this became a
generated (Marion et al., 2014). In the third phase of record-keeping tool, rather than a dynamic source of
our research, project wikis such as Basecamp became a team interaction.
significant form of communication. In project A, dating Of note is the introduction of new tools via start-
to 2014, the project wiki Basecamp was the primary form ups. Firms such as PBWorks, Skype, Solidworks,
of communication during design and development (see Basecamp, Teamwork.com, Project Libre, and
Table 6). Dropbox were all-new, entrepreneurial ventures when
Project management tools followed a similar pat- they introduced their tools. An interesting observation
tern, migrating from notebook-based task lists to from this research is that many of the new CIT ven-
Microsoft Excel spreadsheets to online wikis to dedi- tures also created specific tools for a task, rather than
cated cloud-based software (e.g., Teamwork.com and a multifunctional platform. However, some evolve into
Project Libre). As shown in Figure 1, the propagation a platform with broader capability, as a company like
of new project management tools has seen a substan- Dropbox is currently (circa 2020) doing. Overall, the
tial rise over the last 10 years. This is a dynamic space, study witnessed a period of substantial development
with many entrants trying different approaches. These and resources being funneled into new software to as-
include some that are focused on brainstorming (e.g., sist NPD. Significant growth and propagation of CIT
Whiteboard) to those dedicated to software (e.g., tools used for NPD and general corporate manage-
GitHub). In our case analysis, frustration with switch- ment introduced over the last 15 years was observed.
ing between these project management tools was seen, Below in Figure 1, new CIT introduced by categories,
with teams moving from one platform to another, and from project management to knowledge management
in the case of the two recent projects (Phase 3, projects by year, are highlighted.
A and B), switching project management tools several In addition to the new tools that are commercial-
times during the development of a single project. This ized via entrepreneurial new ventures, large, estab-
can cause churn, loss of data, and general frustration lished firms continue to play a dominant role. These
with the team. In the case studies, it was noticed that include those firms providing digital design software
each time a new tool was chosen, the team enthusiasm (e.g., PTC and Dassault Systemes), general software,
to move to and learn the new features and use the tool, and desktop tools (e.g., Microsoft Office 365 and
declined. In the case of Phase 3 Project B, only the Google) and other multifunctional platforms. The
2021;38(1):192–215
Figure 1. History of CIT Tool Introduction by Functional Type. This diagram represents a cumulative summary of tools introduced
primarily in the United States in the five specific categories [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Table 6. Phase 2 and 3 Comparisons of Tools Used

Research Phase 2 Research Phase 3
2001 2009 2014 2015
Primary communication Email, Phone, Fax Phone, email, dedicated Basecamp, email, Email, Skype, Microsoft
tools during development project wiki (PBWorks) Skype SharePoint
Main product design tools Paper-based Adobe Illustrator, Solidworks, Matlab, Solidworks, ANSYS,
sketches, 2D Solidworks LabVIEW Python, LabVIEW
Drawings,
SolidEdge CAD
Project management tools Microsoft Excel PBWorks Basecamp, Teamwork. Teamwork.com, Project
com, Google Libre, Microsoft
sites, Microsoft SharePoint
SharePoint
study observed that often, the entrepreneurial ven- and lowered the barriers of entry for their use. On the
tures focus on tools with a specific scope or use. For communication and collaboration side, there are now
example, initially, Yammer (now owned by Microsoft) more tools to use that have added new ways of man-
was a focused communication application for users aging knowledge workflow to complement traditional
very similar to Twitter. Similarly, Zoom.us is a new means of communication, and the industry itself has
tool focused on providing better videoconference been one of dynamic change for both new ventures
experiences. This is opposed to Microsoft that has and established industry vendors. Table 6 summarizes
cloud-based platforms and applications covering a the changes in applied tool use in four projects over
wide array of functions and activities such as docu- 15 years.
ment creation and sharing (SharePoint, Office 365 and In the next section, the study is focused on the
Teams), video (integration of Skype technology with changes these tools have brought upon the individual,
Teams), project management (Microsoft Project), etc. project teams, and the organization itself.
In Phase 2 and 3, the study explored the changes in
tools used by the product teams. Effects of Changes in Digital Tools
The propagation into the process of CIT, platforms,
and analysis tools is substantial by the mid-2010s. In Effect on the individual. For product design tools,
terms of our first research question, our sensemaking it was observed that a migration from traditional
of the digital tool landscape has shown that digital de- engineering methods (e.g., early hand sketching, scale
sign tools have become increasingly capable and mul- drawings, etc.) to proceed to design in a near-complete
tifaceted in their capabilities and performance, have digital fashion has taken place. This also applies to
propagated into every aspect of the NPD process, analysis and software development. CAD is now used
2021;38(1):192–215
earlier in the process as alluded to in our Phase 1 In January 2014, the project was officially approved
interviews. An engineer at a design and engineering to enter into development. At the firm, this is Gate
firm stated her preference for moving to digital design 1, which is the Discovery phase, in which market in-
early in the process: “For me, I like getting right to the vestigation, business planning, project scoping, and
CAD model. I like to fiddle around with the model right initial conceptual design are performed. During this
from the beginning. The applications I use most are time, the firm began to experience issues and delays
Solidworks, email, PowerPoint, and Excel.” This initial with Google sites. Hence, usage in Google Sites for
phase of the project highlighted the importance of NPD collaboration and information storage waned
digital tools in the NPD process, how these tools are with all team members. However, another factor
being used earlier in the process, and the rise of new that contributed to usage decline in Google Sites
communication tools to augment email and telephony. was that after the North American President left the
Our interviews reflected this pervasive and early use company in 2013, and his mandate for the use of
of digital design tools. “IT is extremely important to Google Sites was no longer enforced, the develop-
us…more and more we go right to CAD,” expressed ment team’s usage of the platform declined dramat-
one engineer at a robotics company. The same engi- ically. It was decided by the management team to
neer also expressed dissatisfaction with the complex- begin the migration from Google to Microsoft Office
ity of some tools and the ease-of-use, which can be 365. This transition was completed in mid-2014.
a benefit and liability to some surrounding the proj- In early 2014, the Phase 3 Project A was actively
ect. A design firm engineer noted: “A few years ago, a being developed. All information was migrated
conceptual design was done by hand. Now, we generally to Office 365, including all documentation for the
go right to CAD. This still takes a lot of convincing. phase-gate process. Project management tools such as
Many older employees still like hand sketching. There Microsoft Excel spreadsheet action plan documents
is a generational difference in approaches.” But, down- were posted, shared, and updated on SharePoint. In
sides were also stated: “CAD has been democratized. an interview, Project A’s project manager noted that
It’s now a lot easier to use and share. The downside is: he “didn’t see any significant impact in migrating from
everyone thinks they’re an engineer. CAD has a very one to the other.” During the development phase of
real feel to it even if the parts are seriously flawed.” the project, the acting product line manager mandated
that all project design communication be centralized
Effect on the team. In looking across the four to Basecamp, a widely used product development
projects that span nearly 15 years, several trends management tool. This combined the ability to post
are seen. In primary communication, one sees the files such as CAD, comment on design iterations, and
continued consistency of email being used. Also, it have limited project management capabilities with the
shows that the use of traditional telephony was nearly posting of tracked tasks.
eliminated as a primary communication method but The project manager noted that the use of Basecamp
being replaced by video calls in the recent projects. and other tools helped to maintain schedules and was
Project A was proposed and funded in January useful during the early phases of the project. However,
2014. During the prior Discovery Phase (2011 to an engineer on the team noted that Basecamp was
2014), the primary forms of communication be- “not organized, files were hard to find.” He did note
tween team members were Google Gmail for com- its positive effects on the up-front of the process,
munication and posting of materials on Google stating, “I find Basecamp effective during early phases
Sites. At this time, a new North American President where brainstorming and ideas are sharing are crucial.”
strongly advocated for all NPD activities to be man- Project A was 100% on-schedule during Discovery
aged using Google sites. This included all NPD and Development. In the later stages of the project
investigations for marketing, documentation for Teamwork.com, a cloud-based project management
the firm’s phase-gate process, as well as video com- tool was used to track milestones and project prog-
munication. The active participants in the project ress. The project manager noted management sup-
included an outside NPD consultant acting as a port helped encourage tool use and support for the
product line manager as well as a business unit Vice team. This supports the research on the importance
President. The project progressed as a market op- of IT champions during NPD (Barczak, Sultan, and
portunity, and product specifications were defined. Hultink, 2007). An engineer on the team noted that
2021;38(1):192–215
“managers support the use of new tools, provided it does maintaining a project management site. The chances
not take a long time trying to learn or navigate them.” of a missed email, some team members not being cop-
Phase 3 Project B was initiated in 2015, as a new ied on a reply, or not checking on updates in project
model companion to Project A. This new project did management systems creates a condition of gaps in
not use Basecamp, but instead relied mostly on email information and knowledge shared across team mem-
(Microsoft Outlook), SharePoint, Teamwork.com bers. This decreases efficiency and can lead to knowl-
and Project Libre for project management. The proj- edge loss and deficiencies during R&D (Meyer and
ect manager noted the benefit of SharePoint and edit- Marion, 2013).
ing files by multiple people concurrently. The project In comparing the two projects, as shown in
migrated from Teamwork.com to Project Libre during Figure 2, some interesting differences are noted.
the development and commercialization phases. This Project A during development committed to a single
was due to not having the capability to do resource platform, Basecamp, as the primary form of design
management. This project was continually behind iteration and project management during Discovery
schedule and was noted for a large number of design and Development (the project management mi-
changes. Primary design and CIT tools were changed grated to Teamwork.com during Commercialization).
mid-stream during the Development phase, which Project B used Teamwork.com during Development.
caused issues with usage among team members. The Basecamp use was very active, with all members con-
project manager stated that when dealing with design tributing to design iterations, comments, etc. Project
iteration and collaboration, these tools help “only A’s project manager noted this. In fact, in looking at
when everyone on the project uses the tool. It is not so the frequency of communication, the team working
effective when a few people are not using online tools.” on Project A was more concentrated and intense,
It should be noted that with ease of adoption, there particularly in the design phase. The teams used the
is also ease of transfer to other tools. In these cases, quick design iterations and communication of those
dynamics in migrating and switching tools is observed. changes using CIT to beneficial effect.
From Google sites to Office 365, from Teamwork. It should be noted that this project was 100%
com to Project Libre. However, once a software plat- on-schedule during the Discovery and Development
form is established and mature, as one sees with CAD phase. The project manager and one of the engi-
software such as Solidworks, consistent use by NPD neers on Project A emphasized the benefit of a
teams spans over time. single place for communication and iteration. The
From an overall project perspective, the project communication frequency is similar to what should
manager noted that lack of experience on the team be expected in a well-performing project per proj-
contributed to late design changes creating problems ect management literature (Meredith, Mantel, and
with the overall schedule and, in turn, more late design Shafer, 2017). CIT tools helped facilitate this in
changes. He stated that: “Too many iterations create this case example. Project B has substantially less
frustration within the development team and manage- interaction during development, and a higher post
ment team. I believe the causes of this are inexperience frequency in the later stages was due to increased
and also the constant change in product requirements.” design changes coinciding with late deliverables on
In response to a question of digital design and CIT essential milestones. Project B experienced severe
helping meet schedules, he stated: “Not really, as these delays and cost overruns and had a more disjointed
delays are caused by product design.” This sentiment approach to design tools and CIT, including switch-
supports our findings from Phase 1 of this research ing project management tools during the process.
stream, that process discipline stills matter in the This certainly had an impact on team tool usage.
world of digital design and CIT (Marion et al., 2012). Also, the use of a wide variety of platforms con-
Data management in the projects observed, during tributed to knowledge and information inefficiency
Discovery and Development, was another challenge. during the project. While providing lower-cost de-
Instead of one location for all filing, posting, and sign changes and prototyping costs, these tools can
communication, at any one time, three platforms were also be tempting a team to rush into detail design
used for communication and knowledge sharing. For or increase the number of design iterations with de-
example, one engineer relied solely on email com- creasing returns, both effects potentially leading to
munication, while others focused on updating and a phenomenon called back-loading, and as a result
2021;38(1):192–215
Figure 2. Frequency of Communication (Design and Project Management Posts) for Projects A (Left axis, Blue Thin Line) and B
(Right axis, Orange Thick Line) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
to an overall increase in development time and cost. phase of the NPD process. The cumulative introduc-
Back-loading can delay some design decisions com- tion of these tools over time gives the NPD team a
bined with excessive, late phase iteration (Fixson large variety of different tools and platforms from
and Marion, 2012). This was also noted by quotes which to choose. From design and simulation tools
from an engineer during research Phase 1 interviews. for specific engineering needs to project and knowl-
As one engineer noted: “An issue we have with this edge management tools designed to improve team
constant iteration is that management looks at the communication, the use of these tools influences
early designs and thinks it’s DONE. However, there is how engineers and designers approach and manage
a lot more engineering to be done on these early mod- the NPD process. This allows the organization to
els. You can keep design fluid for so long, constantly think about different ways of organizing workflow
tweaking and changing.” for its employees. The combination of tools and CIT
provides for temporary and fluid forms of work. As
Effect on the organization. In terms of the one senior engineer at a well-known electronics firm
organization, the rise and importance of these tools stated: “We have a central information systems (CIS)
as a central factor in how teams and organizations group, but we are allowed to do FEA ourselves. I am
are organized was observed. In one of our interviews now in Process Engineering, and I play the role of in-
from the last phase of research (Phase 4), the R&D ternal design consultant on projects. I tell designers
manager noted the importance of a new, central ‘there should be ridges for adhesive there, more wall
software and analysis group. These individuals are thickness here, etc.’ I come in early into the process
creating custom real-time analysis software that and advise.” Another individual at the same firm
helps the designers’ direct development. He stated: works from home and moves from project to proj-
“We have a new computational design group. These ect as a remote, virtual expert. The process engineer
guys developed the Grasshopper code (Grasshopper noted: “He’s just that good.” This engineer’s design
is a visual programming language). There are three tool skill drives his fit and interfaces with the or-
people now, but the group wants to grow. The future ganization and its associated projects. We also have
for us is the Grasshopper solver. This will include observed the increasing need for product developers
the physics code. This will be the driver of the entire to be skilled in a wide variety of tools, from coding
design process. The whole group is incubating 3D packages to suites of analysis tools.
design computation.” However, these tools also come with challenges.
In this investigation, it is clear that design and Design and CIT tools that are easy to adopt are also
CIT tools have propagated into every facet and easy to move away from and replace with competitors.
2021;38(1):192–215
Each new tool requires some investment, sometimes
involved in design activities, decentral-

izes some IT functions, some potential
financial, but indeed time to learn and become skilled.
Increased knowledge creation and speed
Allows some non R&D employees to be
creation and management. More data

in organization design (central digital
Increased knowledge generation, speed,
knowledge loss due to ease of switch-

in R&D. Continued need for process
mance products. Allows for changes
Reduction in total cost of knowledge

and development of higher perfor-
In the case of project management CIT tools, switch-
ing tools can have an impact on team usage and effec-
to review project performance

tiveness of the tool itself. Another issue is that there
ing, and switching costs

can be tool overload, just as we see in our personal
lives with smartphone applications and social media
platforms. In the cases examined, management man-
dated use of a tool, to beneficial effect, but the team
groups, etc.)
Organization
discipline
returned to default collaboration (email) when the ex-
ecutive mandate was lifted. This was the case in Phase
3 Project A with Basecamp and, to a lesser extent,
Google Sites during 2013.
A summary of the changes in tools juxtaposed with
tion. Allows for easier virtual team

Teams can explore a wider variety of
Changing team responsibilities, false
project, affecting knowledge man-
collect and share project informa-
members to be active users. More

Allows team to easily try new tools,
but also switch frequently during
iterations, but must consider the
their impact on individuals, project teams, and the
Increases the portfolio of ways to
management. Need to all team

organization is shown in Table 7. For the individual,
condition of back-loading
these tools allow designers and engineers to go right
sense of design maturity

to digital concept development, change how they ap-
platforms to manage
Table 7. Summary of Tool Changes and the Effect on Individuals, Project Teams, and the Organization
agement and flow

proach design and analysis workflow, try new tools
quickly, share these changes easily with other team
members. As tools now span every facet of NPD ac-
tivities, the individual needs a broader perspective of
Team
tool use and its effect on the process. For teams, these
easy design iterations can increase knowledge gener-
ation, but also challenge the team, not to over iterate
Allows individuals to better share,

create, and manage knowledge.
to shift the design and analysis
sign and engineering activities.

thinkers to best use and lever-
and give a false sense of design maturity. While lower
Lowers barriers of entry for de-
Allows individuals to try new

Allows designers and engineers
Allows designers and engineers

to go right to digital concept
workflow. Need for systems

barriers to entry allow new tools to be adopted, this
Allows more virtual work

tools with reduced conse-
can also cause churn and issues with knowledge flow
age tool capabilities
quences (cost, etc.)

and loss during NPD. And with more tools to use,
managing them properly can impact overall knowl-
development
edge management. For the organization, increased

Individual
knowledge generation and flow mean that process dis-

cipline is more important than ever. These tools allow
for the formation of new organizational groups and
changes to the expertise and access to that expertise
laboration and project manage-
ment tools, many developed by
within the organization. The tools also allow for a

Lower and no cost digital design
Digital tools used earlier and in
New cloud-based forms of col-

all parts of the development
Increasingly capable, high per-

formance digital design and
and CIT tools, and low-cot
decentralization of IT sourcing and control of what

types of tools are used during the process. This can be
a positive from a knowledge creation standpoint, but
a negative in terms of knowledge management (i.e.,
analysis tools
loss of information, drop off in use, training).

In the next section, theoretical and managerial im-
startups
services
process
plications is discussed.
Digital Tool Changes
Discussion
Lower barriers to
laboration and
Broader process
tools for col-

performance
Theoretical Implications
integration
New types of
workflow
entry
In this research, the pervasiveness of digital design

Higher
and CIT tools on NPD activities, impacting every

2021;38(1):192–215
facet of the process and associated knowledge flow, and collaboration tools have on project knowledge
is shown. Research has shown this knowledge flow is creation, sharing, and storage.
of great value and importance to innovation efforts Our findings also contribute to recent research that
(Marion et al., 2015; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995), shows that information technology intensity has a
and has become central to the associated activities positive impact on innovation program performance
and management of the process. However, knowledge and agility (Kroh, Luetjen, Globocnik, and Schultz,
management can be difficult during the NPD effort 2018; Lu and Ramamurthy, 2011). In this research, it
within large organizations with multiple departments was shown how multiple distributed projects were able
or function groups dispersed globally (Carlile, 2002; to be enhanced through the use of new tools, espe-
Eppinger and Chitkara, 2006; Marion et al., 2016). cially in the most recent case studies, where knowledge
Design and CIT tools have been specifically designed creation and iteration dramatically increased with the
to enhance this knowledge creation and the ease with use of new design and CIT tools. On the firm level,
which information is transferred and acted upon. this study supports research that has shown that IT
This influence on knowledge creation was observed and the knowledge it creates can mitigate diminish-
first hand in the increased frequency of design related ing returns to R&D, especially under conditions of
communication fostered by cloud-based wikis in our high geographic complexity and high technological
case examples (cf. Figure 2). complexity (Ravichandran, Han, and Mithas, 2017).
The number of tools available has increased dra- The research shows how enmeshed and influential
matically, while costs and barriers to use them these tools can be on the individual, associated NPD
during the process have substantially been reduced. tasks, and the network between these and the organi-
However, most studies on IT and NPD have not been zation itself. In our interviews with engineers at multi-
focused on project-level use of the tools themselves ple firms, it was clear that tool experts were extremely
and their influence on the process. This is particularly valuable to the organization, and some had their posi-
true in the case of the use of social media or cloud- tion designed to best leverage their individual talents
based tools (Gilson et al., 2014; Marion et al., 2015). across teams in the company.
In our case firms, it was shown just how pervasive Applying the framework of member, task, and
the use of the design and collaboration tools are for tool (Argote and Fahrenkopf, 2016; Argote and
managing distributed development. In this research, Ingram, 2000) as reservoirs for knowledge con-
it was found that the profound changes in capability cerning the tools, it was shown how the advance-
and scope of digital tools and CIT have significantly ment in the power and sophistication of the tools
impacted project-level NPD. Examples include tools has a direct effect on the knowledge of a firm and
used for project management, design and project its competitiveness by extension. For example, the
communication, file storage, computer simulation comparison of the features that CAD vendors added
analysis, and digital design used increasingly earlier to their software over time (cf. Table 4), illustrates
in the innovation process. This goes to the heart of how the improved tool can lead directly to better
the KBV of the firm, as the tools themselves have be- outcomes, both in product performance (or quality)
come an essential part of knowledge creation. Their and in-process performance (consuming less cost
increasing power leads to faster development and and time to develop a new product). This effect is
better solution outcomes. Their increasing coverage even more pronounced due to the increasing levels
of activities across the NPD process leads to increas- of competition that lead to a wide array of CIT
ing process integration of the work flow, in turn lead- tools on the market (cf. Figure 1), which in turn con-
ing to more integrated units on the organizational tributes to the decreasing costs of many CIT tools.
level. Collectively, the strong influence of digital Many platforms ranging from communication tools
design and CIT tools on the creation of knowledge, such as Slack to design software like Onshape offer
has turned them into a competitive advantaged when free usage (e.g., to a certain level of functionality) to
managed properly. This is illustrated by the acceler- users. Increased performance combined with lower
ated pace of the discovery and development phases barriers to entry together has led to an increase in
in one of the case companies that had a broad and the use of CIT tools, both in increasing use per user
intense of these new tools. This research furthers the as well as the total number of users. This has allowed
KBV by highlighting the contribution these design individuals, teams, and the organization to maximize
2021;38(1):192–215
the acquisition, reconfiguration, and use of new IT easy adoption of tools can come easy replacement,
resources within NPD (Lu and Ramamurthy, 2011; increasing churn within the project (e.g., the cost of
Sambamurthy and Zmud, 1997). In principle, this switching, a decline in the use of tool replacements,
has allowed individuals and teams to become their and lack of training on new tools). There is also the
own IT champions with increased autonomy for de- potential for excessive iteration during design activ-
ciding which tools to use and when (Barczak et al., ities (Fixson and Marion, 2012). This was observed
2007). While research has noted the importance of in two projects, where excessive iteration caused frus-
champions, our findings suggest that autonomy of tration within the team. Both churn and excessive it-
tool use and selection by the individual and project eration can have the possibility of decreased project
team may now play a significantly more prominent harmony if not appropriately managed.
role in IT usage and its effect on NPD performance
than previously understood (Barczak et al., 2007; Managerial Implications
Grover, 1993). In our case firms, the project manag-
ers predominantly made the decisions on the tools There are multiple implications for managers and their
and their usage. In one case this benefitted the team organizations. The increasing integration of features
with a focused, more stable adoption of tools and in the CIT tools (e.g., integration of FEA analysis into
collaborative platforms. Conversely, evidence of a a CAD software) has a direct effect on the individual
project manager that allowed too many changes to a and the approach to NPD tasks. New tool features
team’s IT tool suite during development, leading to now enable a single engineer, the individual, to do
inconsistent use and confusion within the team was the work that used to be contributed by two separate
observed. specialists. Over time, tools that once were used for
While the direct effect of increasing tool use and different tasks (e.g. drafting, mechanical engineering,
tool power on the knowledge position of a firm is and analysis) required unique tools most likely in a
relatively straight forward, there are additional in- specific sequence, but now a larger number of features
teraction effects that influence the individual, teams, inside of a single tool allows the reallocation of tasks
and the organization. With CIT tools covering an in- to a single tool, often the reversal or even total inte-
creasing number of steps of the NPD process, they gration of various tasks. An example of integration is
enhance the collaboration between those individuals the modeling of aircraft wing components with simul-
working in NPD. In other words, the tools’ advance- taneous analysis of areas of high mechanical stress
ments improve the member-member network as a during simulated flight conditions. Historically these
knowledge reservoir. These tools increase the power tasks were sequentially performed by different indi-
of individual and team knowledge creation and coor- viduals. Integration and reordering of design tasks
dination during the span of NPD efforts (Lyytinen, give the team and organization more flexibility in the
Yoo, and Boland, 2016). These tools also can be more process and associated use of human capital. In one
transparent in their communication of changes, itera- of the projects observed, these changes allowed a free-
tions, and project information. In essence, these new lance single designer to quickly move from conceptual
tools can improve the harmony within the organiza- CAD to complex models by being able to perform a
tion (Song and Theime, 2006). Research has shown variety of tasks from industrial design, to engineering,
that increased harmony and collaboration within to computational analysis by themselves, near simul-
the organization can lead to better NPD outcomes taneously, at home.
(Souder, 1977, 1987), and collaboration that goes The content of the design innovator’s work is chang-
beyond interaction and can be a significant factor in ing as well. Because more and more of the specific ex-
NPD success (Kahn, 1996). Research provides evi- pertise across multiple areas of discipline is provided
dence that increased cross-functional integration and by the digital tool, the innovators’ focus shifts from
collaboration can have a positive impact on new prod- narrow and deep, to broader in scope and more ori-
uct performance (Nakata and Im, 2010). In our study ented toward the performance of the entire system.
of projects, it was observed that the intense use of CIT These design engineers are moving to detailed design
during the early phases of discovery and development and engineering earlier, performing their own complex
can dramatically improve knowledge creation within analyses, and working with CIT tools for knowledge
the team. However, the investigation has shown with management and flow during the process. Also, the
2021;38(1):192–215
increasing role of software adds another layer to the research, digital design and CIT are the fundamental
complexity. Whereas 15 years ago, each of these disci- levers used for design and engineering and associated
plines required the say and contribution from various knowledge creation––those firms that use them the
specialists, today’s digital tools provide a sophisticated most effectively will gain the most benefit.
level of integration. For example, ANSYS’ newest ver- An example of how firms can leverage these new
sion of its simulation tool, Twin Builder, enables users capabilities is the global CAD director at a leading
to explore quickly, analyze, and iterate design ideas software vendor. He was specially trained and tasked
to optimize the balance between power, performance, to be an expert in all systems throughout the entire
thermal reliability, and structural integrity. design tool value chain. His absolute role was to show
The changing nature of individual design tasks internal employees and external customers the over-
signals that training in systems thinking and orches- all capability of every type of digital tool and how
tration will be increasingly important to firms. This re- they can work in concert for the benefit of NPD ef-
search indicates the increasing importance of this type ficiency and the development of transformative prod-
of higher-level thinking during the project (Karmi and uct features and service innovations. Digital tools and
Naaranoja, 2015). Our findings also show that digital solutions explored included the use of real-time anal-
tools and CIT have a direct implication on problem- ysis, generative design, digital twins, edge computing,
solving, technology affordances and constraints, and augmented reality, and others. His skills included
orchestration (Barley et al., 2017; Nambisan et al., software coding, electrical engineering, mechanical
2017). When combined with the need for a more stra- engineering, systems engineering, project manage-
tegic perspective on the project and associated tool ment, and making. As these tools progress and the
use, these skills of problem-solving and orchestration coordination of these digital knowledge generators
need to be learned, cultivated and practiced to be become increasingly important, the skills and training
effective (Bonn, 2005). Our research has shown that of NPD professionals such as those described above
online communities, such as GrabCAD, can foster a will also need to be revised accordingly. Increasing the
collaborative and instructive environment to practice virtual intelligence of engineers and project managers
and develop design skills. Software firms themselves needs to be addressed both in higher education and in
are investigating ways to better interact with users and corporate learning. For human capital planning, pos-
cultivate the next generation of users. As an example, sessing these skills will be an important consideration
in 2020, PTC made Onshape CAD platform avail- in staffing decisions.
able to high schoolers involved in the First Robotics Today’s teams can choose among all sorts of tools,
Robots to the Rescue competition (PTC, 2020). but there is a switching cost as a result of changing
These trends also have implications for knowledge to new tools and stopping the use of others during
management at the firm level. From a knowledge development that does affect the team and perfor-
management perspective, increasingly more capable mance. Management needs to consider weighing
tools change the role of the user from a solution gen- this switching cost versus the gains that design and
erator to a solution selector. The types of tools used, CIT tools may provide. The right balance between
how users are trained, and how teams who are using prescribing the use of specific tools (to minimize
the tools are organized form a direct link to the foun- confusion and product churn), and letting the team
dational knowledge of any NPD effort. Firms are explore new and better options needs to be a con-
moving toward centralized analysis and digital design sideration. In these cases, management dictated tool
groups, who are increasingly seen as an essential part use, which certainly had an impact on usage. The
of modern NPD efforts. However, it was also seen that question remains whether it is more impactful to
highly skilled individuals being used as mobile con- have the teams be empowered and have the auton-
sultants during projects, “dropping in” to solve issues omy to make their determination of worth. With
then moving to other challenges within the organiza- this empowerment and autonomy, tool usage can
tion. Research has shown that how these knowledge be transient based on the whims of the team, with
bases (individually and collectively) are key determi- some tools losing favor with development teams and
nants of competitive advantage and profitability for being replaced with other tools. It was also noticed
the organization (Deeds and Decarolis, 1999; Dröge, that given the number of tools, it is easy for teams to
Claycomb, and Germain, 2003). As shown in this adopt, but also to switch, which may have negative
2021;38(1):192–215
consequences for the project. The management of proliferation of design and communication tools will
tool choice and implementation has become an make the selection of who uses which tool a more dy-
increasingly important aspect of innovation man- namic process. Future research should explore how
agement, given the direct relation to project design best to balance cost and benefits through autonomy,
activities and cost. Our research has also shown choice, training, coordination, and resulting team per-
that many of these choices are in the hands of the formance and satisfaction.
engineer or project team, circumventing central- Finally, two major current developments will only
ized IT. This has ramifications for overall firm IT accelerate the changes described in this paper. First,
strategy, cost, and training. Who has responsibility the accelerating pace of digital tool development will
of choosing the tools, getting appropriate training, have significant implications for work and organiza-
and managing their use consistently during a proj- tions. For example, the emergence of artificial intel-
ect? This means that the engineer, project manager, ligence solutions and their integration into various
and the NPD professional needs to be an expert at tools and systems will have substantial implications of
the management of digital platforms and strategy. what innovators do and how they work. It will require
They, in effect, will be the coordinator of the tools, innovators to learn broader skill sets (Marion, Fixson,
platforms, and information flow. This higher level, and Brown, 2020), and organizations to experiment
systems level of thinking of tool strategy and use with new governance structures. This research oppor-
will only become more important over the coming tunity promises to connect multiple areas in the inno-
decade. vation management literature. Second, while working
on the final revision of this paper, the Covid-19 pan-
demic is racing around the world. Its force to shift
Conclusions and Future Research many work processes to a virtual and online format
will only accelerate the effects described in this paper.
This research adds to a body of literature focused on Future research can explore how this natural experi-
understanding how IT can affect and influence the ment forces adaptation of skills, work processes, and
innovation and NPD process (Barczak et al., 2008; organizational arrangements. Similarly, the explosion
Durmusoglu and Barczak, 2011; Marion et al., 2015b; of offerings by new and established digital tool ven-
Marion and Fixson, 2018). This research represents dors suggests a fertile ground for research on the role
an in-depth study of how these latest design and CIT of digital design tools reshaping competition and en-
tools shape the innovation process, and where project tire industries.
teams might benefit from their adoption. These tools
assist and shape the way knowledge is created and References
shared during NPD and needs to be managed care-
fully due to their importance on project-level activi- Alavi, M., and D. E. Leidner. 2001. Review: Knowledge management
and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and
ties (Eisenhardt and Santos, 2002). Recent software research issues. MIS Quarterly 25 (1): 107–36.
developments, such as generative design, where the Appley, D. G., and A. E. Winder. 1977. An evolving definition of col-
role of designer shifts from developing a small num- laboration and some implications for the world of work. Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science 13: 279–91.
ber of solution options to first specifying the problem
Argote, L., and E. Fahrenkopf. 2016. Knowledge transfer in organiza-
parameters and then selecting one or more solutions tions: The roles of members, tasks, tools, and networks. Organizational
out of the vast number the computer has generated, Behavior and Human Decision Processes 136: 146–59.
will only accelerate the need for continued research on Argote, L., and P. Ingram. 2000. Knowledge transfer: A basis for com-
petitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human
the ramifications of tool use. Decision Processes 82 (1): 150–69.
While this research represents a comprehensive Arnould, E. J., and M. Wallendorf. 1994. Market-oriented ethnogra-
study into digital design and communication tool phy: Interpretation building and marketing strategy formulation.
Journal of Marketing Research 31 (4): 484–504.
changes and how these tool changes have impacted
Bailey, D. E., P. M. Leonardi, and J. Chong. 2010. Minding the gaps:
work in multiple projects, one limitation is that al- Understanding technology interdependence and coordination in
though cases were selected carefully, they represent a knowledge work. Organization Science 21 (3): 713–30.
bias for electro-mechanical products. Future research Barczak, G., E. J. Hultink, and F. Sultan. 2008. Antecedents and con-
could include other industries such as biotechnology sequences of information technology usage in NPD: A compari-
son of Dutch and U.S. businesses. Journal of Product Innovation
or software development. Additionally, the increasing Management 25 (6): 620–31.
2021;38(1):192–215
Barczak, G., F. Sultan, and E. J. Hultink. 2007. Determinants of IT Durmusoglu, S. S., R. J. Calantone, and V. Sambamurthy. 2006. Is
usage and new product performance. Journal of Product Innovation more information technology better for new product development?
Management 24 (6): 600–13. Journal of Product & Brand Management 15 (7): 435–41.
Barley, S. R., B. A. Bechky, and F. J. Miliken. 2017. The changing na- Eisenhardt, K. M., and F. M. Santos. 2002. Knowledge-based view: A
ture of work: Careers, identities, and work lives in the 21st century. new theory of strategy. Handbook of Strategy and Management 1
Academy of Management Discoveries 3 (2): 111–5. (1): 139–164.
Barley, W. C., J. W. Treem, and T. Kuhn. 2018. Valuing multiple trajec- Eppinger, S. D., and A. R. Chitkara. 2006. The new practice of global
tories of knowledge: A critical review and agenda for knowledge product development. MIT Sloan Management Review 47 (4): 22.
management research. Academy of Management Annals 12 (1): Eppinger, S., and K. Ulrich. 2015. Product design and development.
278–317. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0041. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Berger, P. L., and T. Luckman. 1967. The social construction of reality. Fernandez, J. W. 1986. Persuasions and performances: The play of tropes
New York: Anchor Books. in culture (No. 374). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Bonn, I. 2005. Improving strategic thinking: A multilevel approach. Fixson, S. K., and T. J. Marion. 2012. Back-loading: A potential
Leadership and Organizational Development Journal 26: 336–54. side effect of employing digital design tools in new product de-
Brown, G. 2018. Internal capabilities presentation. Boston, MA: PTC. velopment. Journal of Product Innovation Management 29 (S1):
140–56.
Brown, S. L., and K. M. Eisenhardt. 1995. Product development:
Past research, present findings, and future directions. Academy of Forman, C., J. L. King, and K. Lyytinen. 2014. Information, tech-
Management Review 20 (2): 343–78. nology and the changing nature of work. Information Systems
Research 25 (4): 789–95.
Browning, T. R., and R. V. Ramasesh. 2007. A survey of activity net-
work-based process models for managing product development Galunic, D. C., and S. Rodan. 1998. Resource recombinations in the
projects. Production and Operations Management 16 (2): 217–40. firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian
innovation. Strategic Management Journal 19 (12): 1193–201.
Bunduchi, R. 2017. Legitimacy-seeking mechanisms in product in-
novation: A qualitative study. Journal of Product Innovation Geertz, C. 1973. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Management 34 (3): 315–42. George, A., and A. Bennett. 2005. Case study and theory development in
Cardinal, L. B., S. F. Turner, M. J. Fern, and R. M. Burton. 2011. the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Organizing for product development across technological environ- Gibson, C. B., and J. Birkinshaw. 2004. The antecedents, consequences,
ments: Performance trade-offs and priorities. Organization Science and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of
22 (4): 1000–25. Management Journal 47 (2): 209–28.
Carlile, P. R. 2002. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundar- Gilson, L., M. T. Maynard, N. Young, M. Vartiainen, and M. Hakonen.
ies: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization 2014. Virtual teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportu-
Science 13 (4): 442–55. nities. Journal of Management 41 (5): 1313–37.
Claggett, J. L., and E. Karahanna. 2018. Unpacking the structure Given, L. M. (ed.). 2008. The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research
of coordination mechanisms and the role of relational coordina- methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Vol. 2.
tion in an era of digitally mediated work processes. Academy of
Management Review 43 (4): 704–22. Gartner IT Glossary. Available at: https://www.gartn
er.com/it-gloss
ary/digitization/.
Collier, D., and C. Elman. 2008. Qualitative and multi-method re-
search: organizations, publication and reflections on integration. Gopalakrishnan, S., P. Bierly, and E. H. Kessler. 1999. A reexamina-
In Oxford handbook of political methodology, ed. J. M. Box- tion of product and process innovations using a knowledge-based
Steffensmeier, H. Brady and D. Collier, 780–3. Oxford: Oxford view. The Journal of High Technology Management Research 10 (1):
University Press. 147–66.
Cooper, R. G. 2001. Winning at new products: Accelerating the process Gordon, R. 2017. Reshaping computer-aided design. MIT News.
from idea to launch (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books. http://news.mit.edu/2017/reshaping-computer-aided-design-insta
ntcad-0724.
Creswell, J. W. 2003. Advanced mixed methods research designs. In
Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, ed. Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm.
A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, 209–40. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Strategic Management Journal 17 (S2): 109–22.
Publications. Greve, H. R., and A. Taylor. 2000. Innovations as catalysts for orga-
Deeds, D. L., and D. M. Decarolis. 1999. The impact of stocks and nizational change: Shifts in organizational cognition and search.
flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: An Administrative Science Quarterly 45 (1): 54–80.
empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Griffin, A. 1997. The effect of project and process characteristics on
Management Journal 20 (10): 953–68. product development cycle time. Journal of Marketing Research 34
Devaraj, S., and R. Kohli. 2003. Performance impacts of information (1): 24–35.
technology: Is actual usage the missing link? Management Science Grodal, S. 2018. Field expansion and contraction: How communi-
49 (3): 273–89. ties shape social and symbolic boundaries. Administrative Science
Dröge, C., C. Claycomb, and R. Germain. 2003. Does knowledge me- Quarterly 63 (4): 783–818.
diate the effect of context on performance? Some initial evidence. Henderson, R. M., and K. B. Clark. 1990. Architectural innovation:
Decision Sciences 34 (3): 541–68. The reconfiguration of existing. Administrative Science Quarterly
Duranti, C. M., and F. C. de Almeida. 2012. Is more technology bet- 35 (1): 9–30.
ter for communication in international virtual teams? International Hopp, W. J., S. M. R. Iravani, and F. Liu. 2009. Managing White-Collar
Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC) 8 (1): 36–52. work: An operations-oriented survey. Production and Operations
Management 18 (1): 1–32.
Durmusoglu, S. S., and G. Barczak. 2011. The use of information
technology tools in new product development phases: Analysis of Jackson, P. 2000. Ethnography. In The dictionary of human geography,
effects on new product innovativeness, quality, and market perfor- ed. R. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt, and M. Watts, 262–273.
mance. Industrial Marketing Management 40 (2): 321–30. Oxford: Blackwell.
2021;38(1):192–215
Ju, M., K. Z. Zhou, G. Y. Gao, and J. Lu. 2013. Technological capabil- Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 3, Design Organization and
ity growth and performance outcome: Foreign versus local firms in Management, Palo Alto, CA, 24–27 August 2009.
China. Journal of International Marketing 21 (2): 1–16. Markham, S., and H. Lee. Winning at NPD: Success drivers from
Kahn, K. B. 1996. Interdepartmental integration: A definition with the 2012 CPAS study. Presentation at the 2012 Product Innovation
implications for product development performance. Journal of Management Conference, Orlando, FL.
Product Innovation Management 13 (2): 137–51. Mauerhoefer, T., S. Strese, and M. Brettel. 2017. The impact of in-
Kazmi, S. A. Z., and M. Naaranoja. 2015. Fusion of strengths: T-style formation technology on new product development performance.
thinkers are the soul savers for organizational innovative drives Journal of Product Innovation Management 34 (6): 719–38.
and the allied change processes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral McGrath, M., and M. Iansiti. (1998). Envisioning IT-enabled innova-
Sciences 181: 276–85. tion. Insight Magazine, Fall/ Winter, 2–10.
Khavul, S., H. Chavez, and G. D. Bruton. 2013. When institutional Meredith, J. R., S. J. Mantel Jr., and S. M. Shafer. 2017. Project man-
change outruns the change agent: The contested terrain of entre- agement: A managerial approach. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
preneurial microfinance for those in poverty. Journal of Business
Venturing 28: 30–50. Meyer, M. H., and T. J. Marion. 2013. Preserving the integrity of
knowledge and information in R&D. Business Horizons 56 (1):
Kogut, B., and U. Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combina- 51–61.
tive capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization
Science 3 (3): 383–97. Mills, P. K., and G. R. Ungson. 2003. Reassessing the limits of struc-
tural empowerment: Organizational constitution and trust as con-
Krishnan, V., and K. Ulrich. 2001. Product development decisions: A trols. Academy of Management Review 28 (1): 143–53.
review of the literature. Management Science 47 (1): 1–21.
Moorman, C., and R. J. Slotegraaf. 1999. The contingency value of
Kroh, J., H. Luetjen, D. Globocnik, and C. Schultz. 2018. Use and complementary capabilities in product development. Journal of
efficacy of information technology in innovation processes: Marketing Research 36 (2): 239–57.
The specific role of servitization. Journal of Product Innovation
Management 35 (5): 720–41. Nakata, C., and S. Im. 2010. Spurring cross-functional integration for
higher new product performance: A group effectiveness perspec-
Lee, T. W. 1999. Using qualitative methods in organizational research. tive. Journal of Product Innovation Management 27: 554–71.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nambisan, S., K. Lyytinen, A. Majchrzak, and M. Song. 2017. Digital
Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly innovation management: Reinventing innovation management re-
Hills, CA: Sage Publications Inc. search in a digital world. MIS Quarterly 41 (1): 223–38.
Lu, Y., and K. (Ram) Ramamurthy. 2011. Understanding the link be- Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge cre-
tween information technology capability and organizational agil- ation. Organisation Science 5 (1): 14–37.
ity: An empirical examination. MIS Quarterly 35 (4): 931–54.
Nonaka, I., and H. Takeuchi. 1995. The knowledge-creating company:
Lyytinen, K., Y. Yoo, and R. J. Boland Jr. 2016. Digital product in- How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford,
novation within four classes of innovation networks. Information UK: Oxford University Press.
Systems Journal 26 (1): 47–75.
Nordhaus, W. D. 2007. Two centuries of productivity growth in com-
Machlup, F. 1980. Knowledge: Its creation. Distribution, and Economic puting. Journal of Economic History 67 (1): 128–59.
Significance 1: 3.
Orellana, S. 2017. Digitalizing collaboration. Research-Technology
Maitlis, S. 2005. The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Management 60 (5): 12–4.
Academy of Management Journal 48 (1): 21–49.
Peng, D. X., G. R. Heim, and D. N. Mallick. 2014. Collaborative prod-
Makarius, E. E., and B. Z. Larson. 2017. Changing the perspective of uct development: The effect of project complexity on the use of
virtual work: Building virtual intelligence at the individual level. information technology tools and new product development prac-
Academy of Management Perspectives 31 (2): 159–78. tices. Production and Operations Management 23 (8): 1421–38.
Marion, T. J., G. Barczak, and E. J. Hultink. 2014. Do social media Perks, H., R. Cooper, and C. Jones. 2005. Characterizing the role of
tools impact the development phase? An exploratory study. Journal design in new product development: An empirically derived taxon-
of Product Innovation Management 31: 18–29. omy. Journal of Product Innovation Management 22: 111–27.
Marion, T. J., K. A. Eddleston, J. H. Friar, and D. Deeds. 2015a. The PTC. 2020. Press release. Available at: https://www.ptc.com/en/
evolution of inter-organizational relationships in emerging ven- news/2020/ptc-onsha p e-suppo r t-first - robot i cs-to-the-rescu
tures: An ethnographic study within the new product development e-competition.
process. Journal of Business Venturing 30 (1): 167–84.
Quintane, E., R. Mitch Casselman, B. Sebastian Reiche, and P. A.
Marion, T. J., and S. K. Fixson. 2018. The innovation navigator— Nylund. 2011. Innovation as a knowledge-based outcome. Journal
Transforming your organization in the era of digital design and col- of Knowledge Management 15 (6): 928–47.
laborative culture. Toronto, CA: Rotman Toronto University Press.
Raghuram, S., Hill, N. S., Gibbs, J. L., and Maruping, L. M. (2019)
Marion, T. J., S. K. Fixson, and G. Brown. 2020. MIT Sloan Virtual work: Bridging research clusters. Academy of Management
Management Review. 61 (2) (Winter 2020): 1–7. Annals, 13 (1): 308–341.
Marion, T. J., S. K. Fixson, and M. H. Meyer. 2012. The problem with Ravichandran, T., S. Han, and S. Mithas. 2017. Mitigating diminishing
digital design. Sloan Management Review. Summer issue. returns to R&D: The role of information technology in innovation.
Marion, T. J., M. H. Meyer, and G. Barczak. 2015b. The influence of Information Systems Research 28 (4): 812–27.
digital design and IT on modular product architecture. Journal of Roberts, D., and M. Candi. 2012. Using social media as part of prod-
Product Innovation Management 32 (1): 98–110. uct launch. Proceedings of the 2012 PDMA Research Forum.
Marion, T. J., M. Reid, E. J. Hultink, and G. Barczak. 2016. The in- Orlando, FL.
fluence of collaborative IT tools on NPD. Research-Technology Roemer, T. A., and R. Ahmadi. 2004. Concurrent crashing and overlap-
Management 59 (2): 47. ping in product development. Operations Research 52 (4): 606–22.
Marion, T. J., and M. Schumacher. (2009). Moving new venture new Sambamurthy, V., and R. W. Zmud. 1997. At the heart of success:
product development from information push to pull using web Organization-wide management competencies. In Steps to the
2.0. In DS 58–3: Proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th International
2021;38(1):192–215
future: Fresh thinking on the management of IT-based organizational Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge transfer in intra-organizational networks:
transformation. ed. C. Sauer and P. Yetton, 14. San Francisco, CA: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on busi-
Jossey-Bass Publishers. ness unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management
Journal 44 (5): 996–1004.
Schrage, M. 1990. Shared minds: The new technologies of collaboration.
New York: Random House. Ulrich, K. T., and S. D. Eppinger. 2016. Product design and develop-
ment, 291–311. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Schumpeter, J. A. 1934. The theory of economic development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wacquant, L. 2003. Ethnografeast: A progress report on the practice
and promise of ethnography. Ethnography 4: 5–14.
Snider, C., S. Škec, J. A. Gopsill, and B. J. Hicks. 2017. The character-
ization of engineering activity through email communication and Ware, N. C., T. Tugenberg, B. Dickey, and C. A. McHorney. 1999. An
content dynamics, for support of engineering project management. ethnographic study of the meaning of continuity care in mental
Design Science 3 (22): 1–31. health services. Psychiatric Services 50 (3): 395–400.
Song, M. X., H. Berends, H. Van der Bij, and M. Weggemen. 2007. The Wasko, M. M., and S. Faraj. 2005. Why should I share? Examining
effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination. Journal social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks
of Product Innovation Management 24 (1): 52–68. of practice. MIS Quarterly 29 (1): 35–57.
Song, M., C. Droge, S. Hanvanich, and R. Calantone. 2005. Marketing Weick, K. E. 1993. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The
and technology resource complementarity: An analysis of Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly 38 (4): 628–52.
their interaction effect in two environmental contexts. Strategic Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Management Journal 26 (3): 259–76. (Vol. 3). Sage Publications, Inc. 248
Song, M., and R. J. Thieme. 2006. A cross-national investigation of Weick, K. E., K. M. Sutcliffe, and D. Obstfeld. 2005. Organizing and
the R&D-marketing interface in the product innovation process. the process of sensemaking. Organization Science 16 (4): 409–21.
Industrial Marketing Management 35 (3): 308–22.
Woodside, A. G., and E. J. Wilson. 2003. Case study research methods
Souder, W. E. 1977. Effectiveness of nominal and interacting group de- for theory building. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 18
cision processes for integrating R&D and marketing. Management (6/7): 493–508.
Science 23 (6): 595–605.
Yin, R. 1994. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand
Souder, W. E. 1987. Managing new product innovations. Lexington, Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
MA: Lexington Books.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative Research
Spender, J. C. 1996. Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory Methods, 359–386. London, UK: Sage Publications.
of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17 (S2): 45–62.
Zahra, S. A., and A. P. Nielsen. 2002. Sources of capabilities, integra-
Taylor, J. R., and E. Van Every. 2000. The emergent organization: tion and technology commercialization. Strategic Management
Communication as its site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Journal 23 (5): 377–98.
Taylor, S. J., R. Bogdan, and M. DeVault. 2015. Introduction to qual- Zhou, K. Z., and F. Wu. 2010. Technological capability, strategic flexibility,
itative research methods: A guidebook and resource. Hoboken, NJ: and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal 31 (5): 547–61.
John Wiley & Sons.
2021;38(1):192–215
Appendix A
Summary of Exploratory CAD Survey Conducted in 2008 14. What software do you use during product development?
Pick all that apply
Description Metric
SolidWorks 52%
Firm size (no. of employees) 12 ProEngineer 45%
Average experience of employee (no. of years) 7.5 Adobe Photoshop 71%
Use of a dedicated project manager (%) 81% Alias 26%
Average project duration (months) 18 Microsoft Excel or other spreadsheets 55%
Average project size ($) $ 500,000.00 Microsoft Project 29%
Use of a standard, structured NPD process (%) 9% MasterCAM 12%
N = 44 Other, please specify 81%
12. When does computer-aided-design (CAD) begin? 15. Typically for a project, what percentage of total billed
hours are CAD-related (both initial design and iterative
Immediately 23% modifications)?
After initial concept sketches 49%
After detailed concept sketches 21% 0–20% 15%
After some prototypes are 7% 20–40% 34%
constructed 40–60% 29%
After several prototypes are 0% 60–80% 22%
constructed 80–100% 0%
Total 100% Total 100%
13. How often are CAD-based prototypes (example: FDM

models and SLA models) used during development?
Never 2%
Rarely 14%
Sometimes 19%
Often 36%
Always 29%
Total 100%

Marion 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Marion 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Marion 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

J PROD INNOV MANAG 2021;38(1):192–215

© 2020 Product Development & Management Association

The Transformation of the Innovation Process: How Digital Tools

Practitioner Points importance is accelerating as tools gain in intelli-

Introduction performance is creating entirely new ways to design

Table 1. Research Study Map

Table 2. Research Firm Characteristics

Project A Project B Project A Project B

Start date 2001 2009 2014 2015

Table 3. IT Tool Categories and Software and Platform Examples

Product Data And Knowledge

Year AutoCAD Solidworks CREO CATIA

Table 5. Summary of the History of Platform Features of ANSYS Simulation Software

Table 6. Phase 2 and 3 Comparisons of Tools Used

2001 2009 2014 2015

Each new tool requires some investment, sometimes

involved in design activities, decentral-

Increased knowledge creation and speed

Allows some non R&D employees to be

creation and management. More data

knowledge loss due to ease of switch-

mance products. Allows for changes

Reduction in total cost of knowledge

to review project performance

ing, and switching costs

tion. Allows for easier virtual team

Changing team responsibilities, false

project, affecting knowledge man-

collect and share project informa-

members to be active users. More

Increases the portfolio of ways to

management. Need to all team

sense of design maturity

agement and flow

Allows individuals to better share,

sign and engineering activities.

Lowers barriers of entry for de-

Allows individuals to try new

Allows designers and engineers

workflow. Need for systems

Allows more virtual work

quences (cost, etc.)

edge management. For the organization, increased

knowledge generation and flow mean that process dis-

within the organization. The tools also allow for a

New cloud-based forms of col-

Increasingly capable, high per-

and CIT tools, and low-cot

decentralization of IT sourcing and control of what

loss of information, drop off in use, training).

tools for col-

In this research, the pervasiveness of digital design

and CIT tools on NPD activities, impacting every

13. How often are CAD-based prototypes (example: FDM

You might also like