Skip to main content

Managing the Development Portfolio

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Product Innovation Management

Abstract

Company’s competitiveness is closely linked to its ability to adapt its product offering to market and technological changes. A product portfolio’s complexity depends on various factors: type of industry, available resources and competitive strategy. Many companies have a portfolio focused on a core product line—the product around which the original business model was built; however, success and growth often depend on the progressive expansion of the offer and increase in product variety, aiming to capture more and more market segments.

Decisions on the development portfolio is a matter of central importance. It determines the evolution of the value proposition with which the company positions itself in the market and faces competitors.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Khurana and Rosenthal (1997, 1998)Koen et al. (2001).

  2. 2.

    The importance of project classification has been well highlighted by Wheelwright and Clark (1992a, b, c); the bin metaphor, which echoes the well-known strategic bucket concept of Cooper et al. (2001), was elaborated by Oosterwal (2010).

  3. 3.

    Cooper and Edgett (2010).

  4. 4.

    On the usefulness of structuring complex decision-making processes using mediating assessments, see Kahneman et al. (2019).

  5. 5.

    See Wheelwright and Clark (1992a, b, c); Ulrich et al. (2012).

  6. 6.

    Christensen et al. (2008); Cooper et al. (2001).

  7. 7.

    See Day (2007)

  8. 8.

    Day (2007); Terwiesch and Ulrich (2009).

  9. 9.

    An interesting scoring tool based on the dimensions of feasibility and attractiveness has been developed by Mitchell et al. (2014).

  10. 10.

    See Mitchell et al. (2014).

  11. 11.

    A project portfolio plan with a granularity of less than a quarter—e.g. monthly—is only appropriate for development projects with very short lead times (less than a year).

  12. 12.

    The concept of cadence (steady streams sequencing) was introduced in the seminal work of Wheelwright and Clark (1992a, b, c) and taken up many years later in the lean product development strand (Oosterwal, 2010; Ward & Sobek II 2014).

  13. 13.

    See Wheelwright and Clark (1992a, b, c).

  14. 14.

    See Ward and Sobek II (2014) and Oosterwal (2010).

  15. 15.

    Ward and Sobek II (2014).

  16. 16.

    For an in-depth look at the visualization of product development project outputs see Wheelwright and Sasser Jr (1989) (product development map) and Ulrich et al. (2020) (Product Segment Map).

  17. 17.

    For an in-depth discussion of technology roadmapping see Moehrle et al. (2013); Phaal et al. (2004a, b); Dissel et al. (2009).

References

  • Christensen, C. M., Kaufman, S. P., & Shih, W. C. (2008). Innovation killers. How financial tools destroy your capacity to do new things. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 98–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. J. (2010). Developing a product innovation and technology strategy for your business. Research-Technology Management, 53(3), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2001). Portfolio management for new products. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. S. (2007). Is it real? Can we win? Is it worth doing? Harvard Business Review, 85(12), 110–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dissel, M. C., Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J., & Probert, D. R. (2009). Value roadmapping. Research-Technology Management, 52(6), 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Lovallo, D., & Sibonya, O. (2019). A structured approach to strategic decisions. Reducing errors in judgment requires a disciplined process. MIT Sloan Management Review, 67–73. Spring.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1997). Integrating the fuzzy front end of new product development. Sloan Management Review, 38(2), 103–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1998). Towards holistic front ends in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(1), 57–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koen, P., Ajamian, G., Burkart, R., Clamen, A., Davidson, J., D’Amore, R., Elkins, C., Herald, K., Incorvia, M., Johnson, A., Karol, R., Seibert, R., Slavejkov, A., & Wagner, K. (2001). Providing clarity and a common language to the “fuzzy front end”. Research-Technology Management, 44(2), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R., Phaal, R., & Athanassopoulou, N. (2014). Scoring methods for prioritizing and selecting innovation projects. In Management of Engineering & Technology (PICMET), IEEE 2014 Portland International Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moehrle, M. G., Isenmann, R., & Phaal, R. (2013). Technology Roadmapping for strategy and innovation. Charting the route to success. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oosterwal, D. (2010). The lean machine: How Harley-Davidson drove top-line growth and profitability with revolutionary lean product development. AMACOM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J., & Probert, D. R. (2004a). A framework for supporting the management of technological knowledge. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J., & Probert, D. R. (2004b). Technology roadmapping—A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. T. (2009). Innovation tournaments: Creating and selecting exceptional opportunities. Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K. T., Eppinger, S. D., & Filippini, R. (2012). Progettazione e sviluppo prodotto. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K. T., Eppinger, S. D., & Yang, M. C. (2020). Product design and development (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, A. C., & Sobek, D. K., II. (2014). Lean product and process development. Lean Enterprise Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992a), Creating project plans to focus product development. Harvard Business Review, March–April, 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992b). Competing through development capability in a manufacturing-based organization. Business Horizons, 35(4), 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992c). Revolutionizing product development: Quantum leaps in speed, efficiency, and quality. Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C., & Sasser, W. E., Jr. (1989). The new product development map. Harvard Business Review, 67(3), 112–125.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Biazzo, S., Filippini, R. (2021). Managing the Development Portfolio. In: Product Innovation Management. Management for Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75011-4_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics