The State of Innovation and New Product Development in the North American Lumber and Panel Industry
Keywords:
Innovation, innovativeness, new product developmentAbstract
Softwood lumber and structural and non-structural panel manufacturers in North America were surveyed to develop a better understanding of the state-of-the-art within these sectors with respect to innovation and new product development. The 160 responding mills were heavily oriented towards process innovation as compared to product or business systems innovation. Overall, respondents lack a systematic approach to new product development and the use of new product development tools. Firms actively use financial analyses and process-related testing, but seldom use customer-centric, marketing-related new product development tools and steps. Very few differences were found among the three sectors of the industry. Forest products firms may benefit from a more well-balanced portfolio approach to innovation and a more structured approach to new product development.References
Armstrong J. S., and T. S. Overton. 1977. Estimating non-response bias in mail surveys, J. Marketing Res.14(3): 396-402.nBoer, H., and W. During. 2001. Innovation, what innovation? A comparison between product, process and organizational innovation. Int. J. Technol. Mgmt.22(1-3): 83-107.nBullard, S. H., and C. D. West. 2002. Furniture manufacturing and marketing: Eight strategic issues for the 21st century. Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Bulletin FP-227, Mississippi State University. 24 pp.nBumgardner, M. S., R. J. Bush, and C. D. West. 2001. Product development in large furniture companies: A descriptive model with implications for character-marked products. Wood Fiber Sci.33(2):302-313.nCapon, N., J. U. Farley, D.R. Lehmann, and J. M. Hulbert. 1992. Profiles of product innovators among large U.S. manufacturers. Mgmt. Sci.38(2):157-169.nCohen, D., and S. A. Sinclair. 1990. The adoption of new manufacturing technologies: Impact on the performance of North American producers of softwood lumber and structural panels. Forest Prod. J.40(11/12): 67-73.nCooper, R. G. 2000. Winning with new products, doing it right. Ivey Bus. J.64(6):54-60.nCooper, R. G., and E. J. Kleinschmidt. 1987. Success factors in product innovation. Ind. Marketing Mgmt.16(3):215-224.nCooper, R. G., S. J. Edgett, and E. J. Kleinschmidt. 2004. Benchmarking best NPD practices—1. Research, Technol. Mgmt.47(1):31-43.nDamanpour, F., K. A. Szabat, and W. M. Evan. 1989. The relationship between types of innovation and organizational performance. J. Mgmt. Studies26(6):587-601.nDawes, J. 2000. Market orientation and company profitability: Further evidence incorporating longitudinal data. Austr. J. Mgmt.25(2):173-199.nDillman D. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 464 pp.nFell, D., E. Hansen, and B. Becker. 2003. A comparison of methods for measuring innovation and diffusion. Ind. Marketing Mgmt.32(4):347-353.nFruehan, R. J., D. A. Cheu, and D. M. Vislosky. 1999. Steel. In U.S. Industry in 2000: Studies in Competitive Performance (1999). D. C. Mowery, ed. National Academy Press, Washington DC. 411 pp.nHan, J. K., N. Kim, and R. K. Srivastava. 1998. Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link? J. Marketing62(4):30-44.nHansen, E., C. Dibrell, and J. Down. 2005. Market orientation, strategy, and performance in the forest industry. Forest Science. Submitted.nHovgaard, A., and E. Hansen. 2004. Innovativeness in the forest products industry. Forest Prod. J.54(1):26-33.nHult, G. T., R. F. Hurley, and G. A. Knight. 2004. Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Ind. Marketing Mgmt.33(5)429-438.nHurley, R. F., and T. M. Hult. 1998. Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. J. Marketing62(7):42-54.nJuslin, H., and E. Hansen. 2003. Strategic marketing in the global forest industries, 2003 Update. Academic Press, Corvallis, OR. 610 pp.nKubeczko, K., and E. Rametsteiner. 2002. Innovation and entrepreneurship a new topic for forest related research. EFI-Innoforce-Discussion Paper I. IFSPE-Discussion Paper. Institute for Forest Sector Policy and Economics. University of Agricultural Sciences, Vienna. Austria. 29 pp.nKuczmarksi, T. D. 2000. Measuring your return on innovation. Marketing Mgmt.9(1):24-33.nLee, L., D. Cohen, and T. Maness. 1999. Markets and technology in western Canadian sawmills. Forest Prod. J.49(7/8):36-42.nLukas, B. A., and O. C. Ferrell. 2000. The effect of market orientation on product innovation. J. Academy Marketing Sci.28(2):239-247.nNational Innovation Initiative (NII). 2004. Innovate America. National innovation initiative report, thriving in a world of challenge and change. Council on Competitiveness. 68 pp. Accessed on March 15, 2005. http://www.compete.org'>www.compete.orgnNetemeyer, R. G., W. O. Bearden, and S. Sharma. 2003. Scaling procedures, issues and applications. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 206 pp.nNijssen, E. J., and R. T. Frambach. 2000. Determinants of the adoption of new product development tools by industrial firms. Ind. Marketing Mgmt.29(2):121-131.nO'Shea, A., and N. McBain. 1999. The process of innovation in small manufacturing firms. Int. J. Technol. Mgmt.18(5/6/7/8):610-626.nQuesada, H., and R. Gazo. 2003. Benchmarking study based on critical success factors for household, office and kitchen cabinet wood furniture industries in US. Purdue University. 8 pp.nRich, S. U. 1986. Recent shifts in competitive strategies in the U.S. forest products industry and the increased importance of key marketing functions. Forest Prod. J.36(7/8):34-44.nRogers, E. M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. The Free Press, New York, NY. 519 pp.nSchaan S., and F. Anderson. 2002a. Innovation in the forest sector. The Forestry Chronicle, 78(1):60-63.nSchaan S., and F. Anderson. 2002b. Innovation in the forest sector. Statistics Canada. Science, Innovation and Electronic Information Division. 18 pp.nSchuler, A., and U. Buehlmann. 2003. Identifying future competitive business strategies for the U.S. residential wood furniture industry: Benchmarking and paradigm shifts. USDA Forest Service GTR NE-304. 15 pp.nShook, S. R. 1997. Innovation and the U.S. Residential Construction Industry. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.nStora Enso. 2004. Corporate Annual Report. Helsinki, Finland. 58 pp.nStudt, T. 2005. Measuring innovation… gauging your organization's success. R&D Magazine47(2):42-44.nTokarczyk, J., E. Hansen, M. Green, and J. Down. 2005. Contrasting paths to success: Two multi-generational wood products companies. Int. J. Case Studies in Mgmt. Submitted.nUSDOC. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries 1999. Annual Survey of Manufactures. U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic and Statistics Administration. U.S. Census Bureau. 160 pp.nUSDOC. 2005. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries 2003. Annual Survey of Manufactures. U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic and Statistics Administration. U.S. Census Bureau. 99 pp.nVälimäki, H., A. Niskanen, K. Ternonen, and I. Laurila. 2004. Indicators of innovativeness and enterprise competitiveness in the wood products industry of Finland. Scand. J. Forest Res.19(5):1-7.nWagner, E., and E. Hansen. 2005. Innovation in large versus small companies: Insights from the U.S. wood products industry. Management Decision. (In Press).nWest, C. D., and S. A. Sinclair. 1992. A Measure of innovativeness for a sample of firms in the wood household furniture industry. Forest Science38(3):509-524.nWolfe, R. A. 1994. Organizational innovation: Review, critique and suggested research directions. J. Mgmt. Studies31(3):405-431.n
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.
