1、中文 3340字 Small and medium district enterprises and the new product development challenge Literature dealing with the product development process in large-scale industries is abundant. However, there is general agreement that the new product development (NPD) process is not adequately studied in smal
2、l and medium enterprises (SMEs) and models and tools specifically focused for these units are lacking. The innovation process in SMEs possesses certain distinguishing features that would suggest a specific approach to NPD activities. When compared with large-sized firms, the innovative process in sm
3、all units is more informal and less structured, the base of managerial competencies is limited, availability of financial resources is lower, the attraction towards skilled labour weaker and the propensity for interaction with other firms is limited. Effective NPD has become the focal point of compe
4、titiveness in many industries, particularly those where product life has shortened, competition increased on a global basis, and customer demand for greater product variety has grown (Maylor, 1997； Pisano 1997). Consequently, research on best practices in product development, that is, practices and
5、methods which make firms good product innovators, has increased (see Abdalla, 1999； Griffin, 1997). Analysing these contributions we can note that most are ascribable to concurrent engineering (CE) tools and techniques. CE suggests an “integrated” design approach, that is, a systematic approach to t
6、he integrated, concurrent design of products and processes. This would force developers to consider all elements of the production cycle right from conception to expedition, including quality, cost, schedule and user requirements. There do not appear to be any papers on the specific problems of NPD
7、in IDs. However, various authors point out the characteristics of the innovativeprocess that typically develop in IDs. We can observe how the district localisation mitigates some of the limits mentioned, but can generate others: (1) District firms benefit from external economies (the presence of age
8、ncies that offer specific services, a specialised labour market, support infrastructures, lower transport cost, greater facilities for interaction thanks to geographic proximity and common cultural identities, etc.) (Nassimbeni, 2003). Thus, the district location mitigates problems related to: 1、 in
9、formation access and exchange； 2、 difficulties in developing and managing inter-organisation relationships； and 3、 the availability of a skilled workforce. (2) On the other hand the strong division of labour (specialisation), and the consequent fragmentation of production tasks that characterise the
10、 ID, hinder the “concurrent” management of innovative processes. Moreover, they prevent the development of product and process holism required for effective NPD activities. Thus, path dependency towards only a few (mainly) productive tasks emerges. Finally, it does not favour “systemic” innovation.
11、Robertson and Laglois (1995) observe that in the past industrial districts benefited from the rapid exchange of information, thanks to the firms geographical proximity and the high mobility of personnel. However, when innovation involves changes that span stages of production or even industries, spe
12、cialisation might retard the realisation that an innovation produced for one purpose could serve other needs. Moreover, innovations adopted at one stage of the process could prove to be sub-optimal for efficiency at other stages. This problem is particularly relevant nowadays, when many scholars are
13、 questioning the future of the local system. In the era of globalisation is the district formula maintaining its vitality, is it beginning to decline, or is it just changing shape? No unequivocal answer to this question can be found in the literature. On one hand there are those who think that globa
14、lity is showing up all the limits of local industrial systems (Ferrucci and Varaldo, 1993； Gottardi, 1996； Grabher, 1993). On the other we find experts who consider the contraposition between global and local only apparent (Becattini, 1999； Porter, 1990, 1998； Fabiani et al., 1998； Signorini, 1994).
15、 The literature indicates various positions regarding the prospects of local systems in the new competitive context. However it is a widely shared opinion that global economy is modifying the traditional territorial forms, changing their inner ties and strengthening their need to open up to the outs
16、ide (Amin, 1993； Rullani and Romano, 1998). The district firms, both those that are situated at the end of the production line and those that cover intermediate phases, are now urged to make changes on numerous fronts. End-producers are becoming more aware ofthe need to rethink the organisation and
17、localisation of the value chain activities. Among these, product development must be placed at the forefront. At the same time, the local subcontracting network, which in the past carried out most of the productive work, now must extend its expertise and capabilities beyond the production task. The
18、ability to manage all aspects concerning product development has become critical for these units too. A specificity requires a careful design approach, which should take into account all the technical constraints, so product and process engineering phases must be closely integrated. The first step i
19、s product concept resulting from a market analysis and has the objective of formalising the initial idea of the new model. Next comes prototyping when the prototype of a new model is constructed according to the original design, so the new-style eyewear becomes tangible. The similarity between the a
20、esthetic idea of the product and actual result obtainable can be verified from the prototype and, at the same time, difficulties in processing and the specifications needed identified. Then product and tools design starts. The new model is broken down into its various components (temples, rings, end
21、-pieces, nose-pieces, bridges, hooks) and the technical specifications and a detailed design for each is made. At this point the first supplier involvement takes place. Regardless of the amount and type of involvement, this is the moment when co-design begins. Some suppliers are invited to take part
22、 in the development activity and the type and characteristics of the components to be manufactured are disclosed to them. Next follows the cost analysis and part rationalisation. Here manufacturing cost is estimated and ways to rationalise the components defined in the previous phases are detected. For example, a standard might replace an ad hoc component, different materials can be selected, the product mix can be limited, etc. When the
