The Relationship between NPD Process and NPD Strategy toward NPD Success in Malaysian Automotive Industry
Mohamed Suhaimi Yusof1*, Mohamed Najib Salleh1, Fadhilah Mohd Zahari1
1 School of Technology Management and Logistics, College of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]
Accepted: 1 Mar 2020 | Published: 31 Mar 2020
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: This paper aims to investigate the relationship between NPD process and NPD strategy toward NPD Success. This a qualitative research by nature. A questionnaire derived from previous studies and covered by 34 respondences. The samples will be selected from organizations registered in the Proton's directory, Toyota’s directory, Produa’s directory, Honda’s directory, directory of MATRADE and Malaysian Automotive Institute (MAI). The cronbach’s alpha show value from 0.899 to 0.947. The results shown NPD Process has a relationship with NPD Success but NPD Strategy not has a relationship with NPD Success and need further research.
Keywords: NPD Process, NPD Strategy, NPD Success
__________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
New product development (NPD) success is a very precarious for an industry especially in automotive sectors. But, developing of new products is an unsure process and high-risky because it may give unfavorable results. In order to lessen unsure and high-risks, industries must to first appraise their own new product initiatives carefully by using all available tools and make correct decisions. However the result of a new product evaluation decision can be affect by the environmental uncertainties like the economy, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and rival, that are beyond an industry’s control (Debruyne et al., 2002). Industries can successfully increase the precision of their new product evaluation decisions by closely monitoring the reception of their product development success (Debruyne et al., 2002).
Automotive Industry in Malaysia
As we all know, several challenges and precarious had contributed to major effect on the Malaysian economy in year 2015. The key ones were the go-slow in worldwide economy mostly China, fall in prices of commodities and crude oil, and the weakening of the Malaysian Ringgit (RM) versus major global currencies particularly in the US Dollar (Malaysian Automotive Association, 2015).
Based on the latest available statistic, the Total Industry Volume (TIV) achieved in 2015 was the sixth consecutive year in a row that the national automotive industry had exceeded the 600,000 mark. The first time the TIV hit the 600,000 mark was in 2010. The trend is illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Total Industry Volume 2015 Versus 2014
Market segment 2015 2014 Variance
Units %
Passenger vehicles 591,298 588,348 2,950 0.5
Commercial vehicles 75,376 78,139 (2,763) (3.5)
Total vehicles 666,674 666,487 187 0.03
Source: Malaysia Automotive Association (2015)
The total registration of new Passenger Vehicles in year 2015 increased steadily to 591,298 units from 588,348 units in year 2014. This was an arise of 2,950 units or only 0.5% growth.
However the total registration for Commercial Vehicles in year 2015 gradual fall to 75,376 units from 78,139 units in year 2014. This was declined of 2763 units or 3.5%.
On a year-on-year (y-o-y) basis, the automotive market was generally flat during the first two month of 2015 compared to similar period in 2014. The trend is illustrated in Figure 1 at the next page. This was because of the uncertainties around Good & Services Tax (GST) implementation.
Figure1: TIV Trend 2015 versus 2014, by Month Source: Malaysia Automotive Association (2015)
In March 2015, there was a big increase in TIV due to consumers buying forward for fear of price increase with the implementation of GST from 1st April 2015. The y-o-y Total Industry Volume (TIV) in March 2015 jumped 14% to reach 67,314 units.
However, the Total Industry Volume for the period of April to July in 2015 was consistently below than equally corresponding time in 2014. This could be attributed mainly to uncertainties among businesses due to unfavorable foreign exchange rates, cautions economic outlook and consumers adjusting to the post GST environment.
Following aggressive effort made by MAA members to overcome the downturn, the market started to turn around from August 2015. Based on y-o-y the TIV for August 2015 went to up 5% compared with August 2014. From then onwards, the monthly Total Industry Volume (TIV) was consistently higher in 2015.
On a quarterly basis in Figure 2 illustrated the Total Industry Volume (TIV) for the first quarter of 2015 was much higher than the first quarter of 2014. However the second quarter 2015 Total Industry Volume (TIV) declined because of subdued business optimism and
moderation in consumers’ was spending in view of economic unstable and increasing cost of living.
Figure 2: TIV 2015 versus 2014, by Quarters Source: Malaysia Automotive Association (2015)
The Total Industry Volume (TIV) during the third quarter on fourth quarter of 2015 rebounded by 6.1% and 11.1% respectively. The fourth quarter 2015 TIV was the highest quarterly TIV achieved with 181,286 units. This can be attributed to the strong performance in the month of December 2015 where the monthly TIV hit 69,401 units, driven mainly by very attractive offers, rebates and incentives given by car companies. The TIV for December 2015 was 23.7% or 13,309 units higher than November 2015. It was by far the higher monthly TIV achieved in the history of the industry. The 11th Malaysia plan (2016 – 2020), manufacturing targeted a growth rate of 5.1 per cent annual (Kasava, Yusof, Zameri, &
Saman, 2020, Cheong et al., 2019).
Problem Statement
NPD success is an interlinked sequence of information processing task where knowledge consumer needs are translated into a end product success (Meybodi, 2003). In order to raise the possibilities of a project to success, it is compulsory for the organization to have an understanding of what are the issues towards NPD success. These factors must be systematically and quantitatively assessed these precarious factors, anticipating possible facts and then choosing appropriate approaches of dealing with them (Mobey and Parker, 2002).
In fact, Datuk Sri Mustapa Mohamed, Minister of International Trade and Industry (MIDA, 2014) address the country has secured committed investments of an approximately RM6 billion in the automotive sector with local carmakers, such as Perodua’s investment of RM1.8 billion till year 2015 to expend the production to increase 100,000 units a year of energy-efficient (EEV) vehicles ; Proton’s has invested around RM3.8 billion to be pumped in till year 2017. However, Mazda’s investments of RM450 million for a dedicated EEV line to produces 30,000 units a year. likewise, Honda has investments around RM1billion in that plant in Malacca area including a fully-fledged hybrid car facility to twice its production to achieve 100,000 units a year.
In order to address the above challenges, this research aims to identify the issues that are correlated with the NPD success in the automotive industry, specifically in Malaysia in a
Further, Gonzalez and Palacios (2002) suggested that the issues have common factors like NPD process and NPD strategies.
NPD Process and NPD strategy is very importance in NPD Success. According to Cooper (1984) failed cases neglected vital activities, like product prototype tests using customers, market research and creation filtration.
2. Literature Review
NPD Process
Development and launch of successful new products are the most confronting tasks managers face. In view of strategic point, new products well-adjusted to the voice of the customer, with apparent technical superiority, developed within launched ahead and budget of the competition offer a true competitive advantages for the industry (Hultink at al., 1997;
Crawford, 1994; Cooper and Kleinschmidt, 1987; Calantone and Cooper, 1979). These products nearly always spell success to a manufacturer.
According to Cooper (1994) postulate that new product development (NPD) process is a formal template, roadmap, blueprint or thought process for guiding a new product project from the idea stage through to beyond and market launch. Meanwhile, The NPD process comprises of the activities carried out by industrial when developing new products and launching (Bhuiyan, 2013). Furthermore, Souder (1987) address of any system of organized activities that transforms a technology from an idea to commercialization, even though not necessarily to commercial success, also indicates that the NPD process is everything about the movement of a new product project from conception to commercialization via organized activities and planned. This is the mantra of all industries. Based on previous studies, IT is recognized for its part in producing competitive and initial advantage and long-term sustained competitive advantage (Bakar et al., 2019; Barney, 1991; Feeny, D. F., & Ives, 1990).
Furthermore, Craig and Hart (1992) propose that NPD process are involves all the decisions and activities from the time when an idea is generated till the product is commercialized (launched into the market) highlighting that decisions also play a part in the new product development process. All the definitions above to suggest that the process generally begins with a concept and end, with the launch of a new product. There are no new product developments if there are no new creative flow and workable products that will reach the consumers. Organizations are constantly trying to upgrade themselves by acquiring and developing brand new technologies (Rashidi Md Dom & Murad Ahmad, 2019).
NPD Strategy
NPD strategy is defined within the framework of the ability and capability of the environment factors, manufacturer, past and present performance, corporate strength and resources availability. In general, three type of group can be categorized depending on the adopted new product development strategy. These are classed as reactors, planners and entrepreneurs (Ilori, Oke and Sanni, 2000). ‘Reactors’ become active when problems occur. For instance dwindling market shares, before attempting a result while ‘planners’ such difficulties anticipate before and try to avoid. ‘Entrepreneurs’, on the other hand, opportunities for timely exploitation and anticipate both problems, and set the tone for a new product process.
A simple classification can be given for NPD strategies as either defensive or offensive (Debruyne et al., 2002; Wilson et al., 1992). The offensive strategy opens up new markets or
expands the existing one through particular research and planning. Whereas competitive forces or other changes in the operating environment stimulate the defensive strategy into action as to save budgets. An organization’s keep on commitment to an offensive strategy could be not cheaper in term of the excessive degree of risk and investment of skill, time and money. But this is to be done for high return. This contrasts sharply with the relatively low return or low risk defensive strategy (Kim, Wong and Eng, 2004; Liu, Chen and Tsai, 2004).
In addition, with the rapid pace of development around the world, emphasis must not only be on content knowledge but also on developing soft skills with an emphasis on critical thinking (Choy, Yim, & Tan, 2020).
Competition forces firms to continuously engage in defensive and offensive strategies according to the pulse of the market force. Rivalry happens due to one or more competitors either feels the pressure or realizes an opportunity to move into a factory to increase its position within factory, and stay active. In most cases, competitive movers by industry have noticeable effect on its competitors and thereby may invite retaliation or efforts to counter a move with updated and different products (Porter, 1980). Industry respond to competitor challenges with cutting prices, enhancing innovation, advertising expenditures, and even accommodating the entrant by doing nothing or introducing new products, (Karakaya, Fahri, and Yannopoulos, 2011; Scherer, 1980).
According to, Johne and Snelson (1990) give two methods in formulating new product development strategies one a market-based and the second a traditional asset-based. The components of the traditional asset-based approach are given as product modification, product-line extension, product cost-cutting and new product line. These, seeking a growth in existing product-lines. Technical know-how, are applied in the existing market with greater intensity especially in new markets. Beyond the regular asset-based approaches, the market- based options seek for a widespread and a more valuable exploitation of prospects. Sharper focus placed on prospective market opportunities outside an industry’s business.
Contemplated a novel and exciting approach, it is made up of service offering, commodity offering, system offering and project offering strategies within a product support matrix.
These offering strategies consider a wider myriad of benefits a product offers to specific target market, therefore the differentiations in products and support considered appropriately to keep sustainability.
New Product Development Success
New product is vulnerable to various meanings. A meanings considered essential, describes a new product as covering original products, modified products, improve products and intro of new brands developed through an organization’s research and development efforts (Ulrike, 2000; Kotler, 1991). Likewise Petrick and Echols, (2004); Stanton et al., (1994), have identified of new products. Those that are really innovative replacing unsatisfactory products with that of decidedly different from the existing one in benefits provided and form function.
These are imitative products new to the organization but nothing new to consumers.
Nevertheless, new products had been defined along two dimensions as 1) newness to the markets and 2) newness to the organization. From low ranking to high ranking on each dimension, five categories have been recognized. These classifications are a) cost reductions, b) repositioned products, c) new product lines allowing a industry to enter markets, d) improvements in existing products, e) intro to the world products that generate new markets (Ilori et al., 2000; Pujari et al., 2003).
Diversity of factors contributes to the success of new product development in any industry, and these will be reviewed in this study. According to Montoya-Weiss and Calatone (1994), previous empirical study on new product success has provided considerable proof that a wide variety of antecedent factors can influence the results of NPD process and cause acceptable results. Barclay et al., (2000) gave the opinion that new product development is a ‘correct’
process, “a company’s development environment that is unique to that company” and requirement. Therefore, new product development processes have to be ‘tailored’ to suit the specific circumstances of the industry involved.
On the previous research, proficiency in NPD can contribute to the success of many industrials and elevate profit margin. As a result, Poolton and Barclay (1998), posted that a industrials can increase their effectiveness at launching a new products so that it could reach bigger market and they can double their bottom line. It is one area left with the excellent potential for manipulation and improvement. In the past decades, many researchers have conducted focused on success or failure of new product development connected to critical success factors (CSFs).
Organizations spend their limited resources on factors that distinctive between their failure and success (Bullen and Rockart, 1981). According to (Freund, 1988) critical success factors (CSFs) must be taken into consideration if a company is to be successful and point, to the few things that organizations apply perfectly to improve their business (Leidecker and Bruno, 1984). Even though, satisfying critical success factors does not guarantee success to sustain competitive advantage, competitive failure will happen in some cases if they are dissatisfied in view of fulfillment of corporate objective (Freund, 1988).
Relation between NPD Process and NPD Success
The first to reveal that the new product process was a formula to successful of new product development (Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1982). According to Cooper and Kleinschmidt (1986) took this a step further by examining the link among NPD success and the activities undertaken during the NPD process. Their findings reveal that excessive performance is related to technical assessments and conducting preliminary market, product development, business analysis, customer prototype testing, production start-up, market launch, and in- house product testing. In another research, Cooper (1986) postulate that industries proactive in idea generation efforts were high new product performers.
Every industry needs to refresh the market with NPD success. NPD success is widely recognized as an important source of on competitive market an industry’s survival is being placed on systems which simultaneously produce quality, customization variety, speed of response, and frequency (Souder and Sherman, 1994; Cooper, 1994; Smith and Reinertsen, 1991; Crawford, 1991; Johne and Snelson, 1988). To become a leader in a highly competitive industry, players in automotive and other manufacturing sectors must enhance their competitiveness especially in product and market development (Usman, Hashim, Salim, Shariff, & Bakar, 2019; Wad, P., & Govindaraju, 2011)
In order to meet these challenges, concentration has been placed on reconfiguring internal mechanisms for integrating and optimizing the NPD process such as early involvement advanced tools, con-current engineering, cross-functional working, and etcetera (Thomas, 1993; Wheelwright and Clark, 1992). According to Cooper (1994,1988) with shorter life
cycles and demand for greater product variety, pressure is also placed upon NPD success to work with a larger portfolio of new product ideas and to manage the risks associated with progressing till completion and introduction to the market (Cooper, 1994,1988). To deal with this, attention must be given to progression frameworks, systematic screening and monitoring likes Cooper's 'stage-gate' approach.
Relation between NPD Strategy and NPD Success
According to Kotabe (1990) conclude in his study that the product innovation stage has not indirect relation to performance such as the greater the product innovation stage, the performance is better. Davis (1988) examined three NPD cases with seven activities suggested by Booz, Allen and Hamilton, in summary, which one are succeeded and two failed.
Both the two specifies that neglecting the vital developing activities, product test, lead to failure. A succeeded case for new product in a hotel is mainly because of implementation of product development activities phase by phase. Furthermore, Cooper (1984) examined 58 innovative factories products from 30 different factories. From that, only seven factories follow new product development activities. The successful cases had completed implementation activities. While failed cases neglected vital activities, such as market research and product prototype tests using customers, creation filtration, product prototype tests using customers and market research (Cooper, 1984).
Hise et al., (1989) postulates in their research that an industry that performs its operations with no a specific procedure or lacking a complete development schedule would drop off its success rate for NPD and entry to the market. If a non-dominant industry wants to produce a brand new product into a new market, that industry must adopt a complete procedure for success. If that industry wants to produce exiting product into overseas markets, conception evaluation, creation generation and some other procedures could be omitted.
Zirger and Maidique (1990) examined case studies using 23 variables and eight models to compare each failure or success characteristic between 148 electronic products. The outcomes showed that an industry with excellent R&D organization had higher success probability in NPD success strategy because the completeness of the development activities.
Wheelwright and Clark (1992) postulates out that if a industry wanted to succeed integration of all upstream such as design meanwhile downstream such as manufacturing problems, all design activities need include the following three capabilities; (1) zero-error design; (2) rapid problem solving; (3) possessing a keen perception in solving downstream problems.
These design capabilities rely extremely upon the complete product development activities.
According to Cooper and Kleinschmidt (1991) interviewed senior managers from five large industries. It is Emerson Electric, Northern Telecom, 3M, and IBM. That had implemented NPD procedures. The entire manager from these five industries agreed on the positive effect of implementing NPD procedures. For instance, shortening development, improving communication within team and shortening of rework time to increasing the rate of speed for a new product, all spelled development success.
Research Framework and Hypothesis
This paper attempts to fill the practical gaps and theoretical by proposing a conceptual framework for future study to provide empirical support on the relationships that exist among
NPD Process and New Product Development Success. Figure 3 below depicts the conceptual framework which represents the main variables of this study.
Figure 3: Conceptual Framework
The relationship between NPD Process and NPD Strategy toward NPD Success is based on the Resource Based View (RBV) theory that proposes the performance of an organization is influenced by internal resources. An organization achieves excellent performance than its competitors by effectively utilizes its internal resources. Hence, it is important for managers to make a deliberated effort toward developing a performance-driven organizational culture (Shaari, 2019). Nevertheless, in order to bring up distinctive capabilities, the resources must be rare, non-transferable, non-substitutable, non-imitable and valuable (Barney, 1991).
According to (Sekaran, 2003), the concept of conceptual framework is to explain the relationship between the variables in a study. The development of the conceptual framework of this study is done based on the outcome of the reviews of literatures on theories and concept of NPD Strategy.
Hypotheses are statements in a quantitative study, in which the researcher formulates a prediction or a conjecture about the result of a relationship between the variables or attributes. A quantitative research mainly focuses on numerical results and limiting human factor influence. It provides objective and unbiased results, which is normally influenced by the researcher (Hussey and Hussey, 1997). Manheim and Rich (1995) postulate that a quantitative research is about a collection of primary data from a set of sample data, which is utilized to make presumption over a larger population. Creswell (2012) states that hypotheses are traditionally used in experimental research and they serve as research questions that narrow the purpose statement to specific predictions. Hypothesis is a clear statement of what is anticipated to be examined. Usually, hypothesis development is established prior to the conduct of the research that identifies the main concepts involved in the research. The high level hypotheses statements are as follows:
H1: New product development process is significantly related to new product development success.
H2: New product development strategy is significantly related to new product development success.
New Product Development Process
New Product Development Success
Independence Variable Dependence Variable
New Product Development Strategy
3. Methodology
Population and sampling design
In order to test the research framework and hypotheses, samples will be selected from associations registered in the Proton's directory, Toyota’s directory, Produa’s directory, Honda’s directory, directory of MATRADE and Malaysian Automotive Institute (MAI).
Filtration has been carried out and only companies that actively and directly deal with the carmakers are selected as the population.
The objective of developing the instruments is to obtain measures of the research constructs.
The basis for the instrument development of this study arises from the proposed conceptual framework and existing literatures on NPD strategy and NPD success. The instrument employed by this study to collect data is in the form of questionnaires. It is considered one of the most appropriate data collection instruments used by survey based researchers (Sekaran, 2003).
4. Data Analysis
Respondent Profile
A number of variables were used to describe the sample characteristics namely the organization has been in existence, current position, type of organization, number of full-time employees, working in automotive sector, type of product, products launch in the last 5 years and R&D expenditure per year. Table 2 describes the characteristics of the companies and the respondents according to their demographic background. The results shown that the number of respondents based on the organization has been in existence, less than 1 year 2 respondents (5.9%), 1 to 5 years 3 respondents (8.8%), 6 to 10 years 5 respondents (14.7%), more than 10 years 24 respondents (70.6%). This shows that most of organization are well experienced in automotive industry. Base on curent position, the results show that 12 respondents (35.3%) are executive, 6 respondents (17.6) are senior executive, 7 respondents (20.6%) are manager / head of department, 3 respondents (8.8) are senior manager, 4 respondents (11.8%) are general manager / senior management and 2 respondents (5.9%) are managing Director. This show majority of respondents are from executive level.
Based on question type of ownership of the organization, the results show that 22 respondents (64.7%) are 100% local, 1 respondent (2.9%) are 100% foreign while 11 respondents (32.4%). The majoriti of respondents from 100% local companies. For number of full-time employees in organization, the results show that 6 respondents (17.6%) are less than 75, 7 respondents (20.6%) 75 to 199 while 21 respondents more than 200. This show majority of companies are larges.
Base on the types of product produced in organization, the results show that 15 respondents (44.1%) are metal parts, 8 respondents (23.5%) are plastic parts, 3 respondents (8.8%) are electrical parts, 2 respondents (5.9%) are rubber parts while 6 respondents (17.6%) are other.
For how many new product did organization launch in the last 5 year, 1 to 5 products 8 respondents (23.5%), 6 to 10 products 5 respondents (17.6%) while more than 10 products 20 (58.8%).
Base on the question how many percentage does the organization allocate for R&D expenditure per year, the results show that 4 respondents (11.8%) are below 1%, 5 respondents (14.7) are 1 % to 1.99% , 2 respondents (5.9%) are 2% to 2.99%, 4 respondents
(11.8%) are 3% to 3.99% , 2 respondents (5.9%) are 4% to 4.99% while 17 respondents (50.0%) are more than 5%. This shows that most of companies are allocate for R&D expenditure per year in automotive industry, in turn, it relevance of this research study.
Table 2: Demographic Profile of Respondent
Items Frequency Percent
The organization has been in existence for …
Less than 1 year 2 5.9
1 to 5 years 3 8.8
6 to 10 years 5 14.7
More than 10 years 24 70.6
The current position is … Executive 12 35.3
Senior Executive 6 17.6
Manager / Head of
Department 7 20.6
Senior Manager 3 8.8
General Manager / Senior
Management 4 11.8
Managing Director 2 5.9
Type of ownership of organization 100% Local 22 64.7
100% Foreign 1 2.9
Joint venture 11 32.4
Number of full-time employees in organization …
Less than 75 6 17.6
75 to 199 7 20.6
More than 200 21 61.8
Have been working in automotive sector for …
1 to 5 years 6 17.6
6 to 10 years 6 17.6
More than 10 years 21 64.7
Types of product produced in organization …
Metal Parts 15 44.1
Plastic Parts 8 23.5
Electrical Parts 3 8.8
Rubber Parts 2 5.9
Other 6 17.6
Products launch in the last 5 years 1 to 5 products 8 23.5
6 to 10 products 6 17.6
More than 10 products 20 58.8 Percentage allocate for
R&D expenditure per year
Below 1% 4 11.8
1% to 1.99% 5 14.7
2% to 2.99% 2 5.9
3% to 3.99% 4 11.8
4% to 4.99% 2 5.9
More than 5% 17 50.0
Reliability Analysis
According to Hair et al. (2010) if the value of Cronbach’s alpha value is in the range between 0.60 to 0.70, it is indicates the value are in the lowest limit of acceptance, while if a Cronbach’s alpha value is between 0.70 to 0.80, it is considered adequate. A Cronbach’s
presents the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient from 0.915 to 0.962. Therefore, the data will generally be considered as reliable and acceptable for further analysis.
Table 3: Reliability Analisis
Variable Items Cronbach Alpha
NPD Process 13 0.956
NPD Strategy 8 0.915
NPD Sucess 8 0.962
Correlation
According to Table 4, the correlation analysis shows that NPDPro and NPDStr have positive correlations with NPDSuc and it’s at significance level of 0.01. The result also shows that the strength of the relationships is strong. Referring to Hair et al. (2008), when the coefficient scale is between ±0.41 and ±0.70, the relationship strength is considered as strong.
Table 4: Correlation Analysis
NPDPro NPDStr NPDSuc
NPDPro 1
NPDStr .867** 1
NPDSuc .808** .691** 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
b. Listwise N=34
Multiply Regression Analysis
Multiple regression analysis explained to what extent the variance of the criterion (dependent) variable is linked to the predictor (independent) variable (Zikmund et al., 2010).
Likewise, Tabachnick and Fidell (2007) explained that a basic assumptions prior to regression analysis such as multicollinearlity, normality, outliers, issues of the right sample sizes, homodescedascity of residual, and linearity. According to Table 5, the result for NPDPro show has a supported meanwhile the NPDstr not supported.
Table 5: Result of Multiply Regression Analysis
Independent Variable
Standardized Beta
t-value Sig. Result
NPDPro .841 3.959 .000 Supported
NPDStr -.039 -.181 .857 Not Supported
F Value 29.173
R2 .808
Adjusted R2 .631 Note : p <.001
5. Conclusion and Recommendation
The focus of this research was to examine the NPD strategy and NPD process of industries in the car maker industry. Moreover, it explored the effect of NPD strategy and NPD process towards NPD success and the links between NPD strategy and NPD process. The results have vital implications for new product managers and industries operating in the car maker industry.
From this research, the correlation analysis shows that NPD process and NPD strategy has positive correlations with NPD success and it is significance level of 0.01. However the results of NPD process shown have a significant relationship with NPD success while NPD strategy is the opposite. According to Kiss & Barr (2017) the results of the study show that large industries have a negative relationship with small companies and their relationships have a positive relationship. In this study also covers 61.8% is a large company.
Additional research is needed, the researcher suggest to improve the NPD strategy such as innovativeness in the market. This dimension refers to the contribution of new technology to which the product applies creating new innovation in the marketplace itself. The previous dimensions on newness of embodied technology and newness of market application, consider new product introductions with respect to the existing technologies and markets of the organization. However, the standard to which a product introduction is new or unique with respect to the marketplace, and thus with respect to the industry’s competitors, is also an important determinant in the value created by that new.
Reference
Bakar, Z. A., Yaacob, N. A., Udin, Z. M., Hanaysha, J. R., & Loon, L. K. (2019). Business Continuity Management Implementation In The Malaysian Public Sector. International Journal of Business and Technology Management, 1(1), 18–27.
Barclay I, Dann Z, H. P. (2000). New product development: A practical workbook for improving performance. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Bhuiyan, N. (2013). A framework for successful new product development Abstract : Purpose : The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework of critical success, 4(4), 746–770.
Booz-Allen, & Hamilton. (1982). New Product Management for the 1980s. New York, NY.
Bullen CV and JF Rockart. (1981). A primer on critical success factors. Center for In- formation Systems Research Working Paper No. 69, Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Calantone, R. J., & Cooper, R. G. (1979). A discriminant model for iden- tifying scenarios of industrial new product failure. Journal of the Acad- Emy of Marketing Science, 7(3), 163–183.
Choy, S. C., Yim, J. S., & Tan, P. L. (2020). A Metacognitive Knowledge, Metacognitive Experience, And Its Effects On Learning Outcomes For Stem And Non-Stem Malaysian Students. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society, 2(1), 1–14.
Cooper, R. G. & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). Success factors in product innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 16(3), 215–223.
Cooper, R. G. and Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1986). An investigation into the new product process:
steps, deficiencies, and impact.No Title. Journal of Product Innovation Management, (3), 71–85.
Cooper, R.G. and Kleinschmidt, E. . (1991). New product processes at leading industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 20(2), 137–147.
Cooper, R. (1988). . Winning at New Products, Kogan Page, London.
Cooper, R. . (1984). New product strategies: what distinguishes the top performers? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2, 151–164.
Management, 17–25.
Cooper, R. G. (1994). Third Generation New Product Processes. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11, 3–14.
Craig, A. and Hart, S. (1992). Where to Now in NPD Research? Journal of Marketing, 26(11), 2–35.
Crawford, C. (1991). . New Products Management (3rd Edn), Irwin, Homewood, IL.
Crawford, C. M. (1994). New product management. Homewood.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). . Educational Research : Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Davis, J. . (1988). New product success & failure: three case studies. Industrial Marketing Management, 17, 103–108.
Debruyne, M., Moenaert, R., Griffin, A., Hart, S., Hultink, E.J., Robben, H. (2002). The Impact of New Product Launch Strategies on Competitive Reaction in Industrial Markets. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19, 159–170.
Freund, Y. (1988). Critical success factors. Strategy & Leadership, 16, 20–23.
Gonzalez, F.J.M., Palacios, T. M. . (2002). The Effect of New Product Development Techniques on New Product Success in Spanish Firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 261–271.
Hise, R.T., O’Neal, L.A., Parasuraman, A., Mc. Neal, J. . (1989). The effect of product design activities on commercial success levels of new industrial products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 6, 43–50.
Hultink E., Griffinm, A., Hart, S., & Robben, H. (1997). Industrial new product launch strategies and product development performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(4), 243–257.
Ilori, M.O., Oke, J.S., Sanni, S. . (2000). Management of new product development in selected food companies in Nigeria. Technovation, 20, 333–342.
JK Leidecker and AV Bruno. (1984). Identifying and using critical success factors. Long Range Planning, 17, 23–32.
Johne, A., Snelson, P. (1990). Successful Product Development: Lessons from American and British Firms, Basil Blackwell Inc, UK.
Johne, A. and Snelson, P. (1988). . Successful New Pro- Duct Development, Blackwell, Oxford.
Karakaya, Fahri, & Yannopoulos, P. (2011). Impact of Market Entrant Characteristics on Incumbent Reaction to Market Entry. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 19(2), 171–185.
Kasava, N. K., Yusof, N. M., Zameri, M., & Saman, M. (2020). Sustainable Manufacturing Application In Malaysian Automotive Manufacturing. International Journal of Business and Technology Management, 2(1), 34–39.
Kim, J.Y., Wong, V., Eng, T. . (2004). Product Variety Strategy for Improving New Product Development Proficiencies. Technovation, In Press.
Kiss, A. N., & Barr, P. S. (2017). New Product Development Strategy Implementation Duration and New Venture Performance. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1185–1210.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314549251
Kotabe, M. (1990). Corporate product policy and innovation behavior of European and Japanese multinationals: an empiric investigation. Journal of Marketing, 54, 19–33.
Kotler, P. (1991). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control, 7th ed, Prentice Hall, Inc, New Jersey.
Liu, P.L., Chen, W.C., Tsai, C. . (2004). An Empirical Study on The Correlation Between The Knowledge Management Method and New Product Development Strategy on Product Performance in Taiwan’s Industries. Technovation, In Press.
M, Montoya-Weiss and R, C. (1994). Determinants of new product performance: A Review
and Meta-analysis. J. Prod. Innov. Manag, 11, 397–417.
Malaysian Automotive Association. (2015). Malaysian Automotive Association. Market Review For 2015, (Retreived on 9 August, 2016 from: http://www.maa.
Malaysian Investment Development Authority. (2014). Malaysia Investment Performance, KL. Malaysian Investment Development Authority. Malaysian, Retrieved from http://www.mida.gov.my/home/82/page.
Meybodi, M. Z. (2003). Strategic Manufacturing Benchmarking. The TQM Megazine, 17(3), 249–258.
Mobey, A., and Parker, D. (2002). Risk evaluation and its importance to project implementation. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 51(4), 202–208.
Petrick, I.J, Echols, A. . (2004). Technology Roadmapping in Review: A Tool for Making Sustainable New Product Development Decisions. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 71, 81–100.
Poolton J and Barclay I. (1998). New product development from past research to future application. Ind. Mark. Manag, 27, 197.
Porter, M. E. (1980). . Competitive Strategy, New York: The Free Press.
Pujari, D., Wright, G., Peatie, K. (2003). Green and Competitive Influences on Environmental New Product Development Performance. Journal of Business Research, 56, 657–671.
Rashidi Md Dom, F. B., & Murad Ahmad, A. B. (2019). An Impact of Cultural Change on Employees Engagement and Organization Performance: A Literature Review. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 1(1), 1–6. Retrieved from http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ajress
Scherer, F. . (1980). . Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, Chicago:
Rand McNally.
Sekaran, U. (2003a). . Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, (4th ed.).
New York, NY: John Willey & Sons.
Sekaran, U. (2003b). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th ed.). In New York, NY: John Willey & Sons.
Shaari, N. (2019). Organization Culture As The Source Of Competitive Advantage. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 1(1), 26–38.
Smith, P. and Reinertsen, D. (1991). . Developing Products in Half the Time, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Souder, W. and Sherman, J. (1994). . Managing New Technology Development, McGraw- Hill, New York.
Souder, W. E. (1987). Managing New Product Innovations, Lexington, Massachusetts.
Stanton, W.J., Etzel, M.J., Walker, B. . (1994). Fundamentals of Marketing, 10th ed.
McGraw Hill, Inc, New York.
Thomas, R. (1993). . New Product Development: Managing and Forecasting for Strategic Success, John Wiley, New York.
Ulrike, B. (2000). Innovative Versus Incremental New Business Services: Different Keys for Achieving Success. Product Innovation Management, 18, 169–187.
Usman, A., Hashim, M. H., Salim, I., Shariff, A. R. M., & Bakar, Z. A. (2019). Ethical leadership in automotive industry. Asian Journal of Research in Business and Management, 1(2), 40–48.
Wad, P., & Govindaraju, V. G. R. C. (2011). Automotive industry in Malaysia: An assessment of its development. International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, 11(2), 152–171.
New York.
Wheelwright, S.C., Clark, K. . (1992). Competing through development capability in a manufacturing-based organization. EMR Fall, 26–37.
Wilson, R.M.S., Gillican, C., Pearson, D. (1992). Strategic Marketing Management:Planning, Implementation and Control, Butterworth- Heinemann Limited, Oxford.
Zirger, B.J., Maidique, M. . (1990). A model of new product development: an empirical test.
Management Science, 36(7), 867–883.
