Preliminary discussion of perspectives on Experimentation in product development
A Case Study of product development in the Retail Industry
##article.authors##
-
Ryuma UMEKI
Kobe University Graduate School of Business Administration
https://researchmap.jp/umekiryuma
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51094/jxiv.675Keywords:
experimentation, business experimentation, product innovation, product development, case study, retail techAbstract
In this paper, I analyze "experimentation" which has recently been the focus of much attention in product development, using a grounded theory approach. In previous studies of experimentation, there have been two perspectives. The first is a study to clarify the organizational climate required for experimentation. Second, there have been studies that have clarified how the tools used in experimentation enhance the effectiveness of experimentation. However, few studies have considered the effects of the tools used in experimentation on the organizational climate. Therefore, this study argues that it is necessary to discuss the effects of the tools used in experimentation on the organizational climate. This is because the tools used in experiments have an effect not only on the experimentation itself but also on the actors who conduct the experiments.
Two hypotheses were generated as a result of considering the effects of the tools of experimentation on organizational climate.
The first is that the tools of experimentation make the members of the organization more willing to conduct experiments by reducing the cost and time required to conduct one experimentation. The second is that the existence of the experimentation tool puts pressure on the organization to conduct the experimentation.
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure
No COI to discloseDownloads *Displays the aggregated results up to the previous day.
References
Engels, F., Wentland, A., & Pfotenhauer, S. M. (2019). Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance. Research Policy, 48(9), 103826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103826
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1996). Deta taiwa gata riron no hakken -Chosa kara ika ni riron wo umidasu ka- [The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research]. (T. Goto, H. Ode, & S. Mizuno, Trans.). Shinyo sha. (Original work published 1967)
Kohavi, R., & Thomke, S. H. (2017). The surprising power of online experiments. Harvard Business Review, 95(5), 74–82.https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-surprising-power-of-online-experiments
Lee, F., Edmondson, A. C., Thomke, S. H., & Worline, M. (2004). The mixed effects of inconsistency on experimentation in organizations. Organization Science, 15(3), 310–326. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0076
Miyao, M. (2020). Inobeshon jitsugen ni muketa jikken no manejimento [Managing experimentation toward breakthrough innovation]. Kokumin-Keizai Zasshi [Journal of economics & business administration], 222(4), 1-13 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.24546/E0042270
Nagata, H., & Oura, Y. (2022). Kachinokoru tame no riteru DX Toraiaru gurupu ga idomu shin ・ ryutsu kakumei [Retail DX for Winning : Trial Group's challenge for a new logistics revolution]. Daiyamondo sha (in Japanese).
Rahman, H., Weiss, T., & Karunakaran, A. (2023). The experimental hand: How platform-based experimentation reconfigures worker autonomy. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/mhvr9
Schmickl, C., & Kieser, A. (2008). How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations? Research Policy, 37(3), 473–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.001
Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. The Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160882
Thomke, S. H. (2001). Enlightened experimentation—The new imperative for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 79(2), 66–75. https://hbr.org/2001/02/enlightened-experimentation-the-new-imperative-for-innovation
Thomke, S. H. (2003). Experimentation matters: Unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Harvard Business Review Press.
Thomke, S. H. (2019). The magic that makes customer experiences STICK. Mit Sloan Management Review, 61(1), 56–63. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-magic-that-makes-customer-experiences-stick/
Downloads
Posted
Submitted: 2024-04-15 06:52:32 UTC
Published: 2024-04-17 04:07:32 UTC
License
Copyright (c) 2024
Ryuma UMEKI
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
