Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:50:01.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT IN PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PORTFOLIOS: THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY AGENDAS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Andy Mattulat Filipovic ,
Torgeir Welo ,
Pelle Lundquist Willumsen  and
Josef Oehmen
Andy Mattulat Filipovic*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology; Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Technical University of Denmark
Torgeir Welo
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology;
Pelle Lundquist Willumsen
Affiliation:
Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Technical University of Denmark
Josef Oehmen
Affiliation:
Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Technical University of Denmark
*
Filipovic, Andy Mattulat, NTNU, Denmark, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Increased focus on sustainability significantly impacts product development portfolio management in organizations. This paper focuses on the significant unaccommodated uncertainty caused by the green transition for current mid- and long-term portfolio management processes. These uncertainties arise in areas such as the regulatory environment, market demands, and technical capabilities. This paper makes four contributions: First, current product portfolio management literature is mostly employing deterministic practices. Uncertainties are incompletely addressed, and current methods fail to address the deep uncertainties of the green transition. Second, building a literature-based conceptual framework of the sources of uncertainty in 6 areas: Business Models, Technology, Regulation and Legislation, Finance and Insurance, Market and Consumer, and Organizational Context. Third, preliminary empirical evidence supports the usefulness of our model for product development portfolio management. Fourth, concluding with a suggested empirical research agenda to develop a deeper understanding of challenges towards method and theory development to support the green transition on the portfolio management level.

Keywords

Portfolio managementUncertaintySustainabilityGreen transition
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 3681 - 3690
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2015), Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cash, P.J. (2018), “Developing theory-driven design research”, Design Studies, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R., Edgett, S. and Kleinschmidt, E. (2001), “Portfolio management for new product development: Results of an industry practices study”, R and D Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 361–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R.G. (2017), Winning at New Products: Creating Value through Innovation, 5th. ed., Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Dumrose, M., Rink, S. and Eckert, J. (2022), “Disaggregating confusion? The EU Taxonomy and its relation to ESG rating”, Finance Research Letters, Elsevier Inc, Vol. 48, p. 102928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study Research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission. (2019), “The European Green Deal”, European Commission, Vol. 53 No. 9, p. 24.Google Scholar
European Commission. (2022), “The Innovation Fund's call for large-scale projects”, available at: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/funding-climate-action/innovation-fund/large-scale-calls_en (accessed 2 December 2022).Google Scholar
Geraldi, J., Oehmen, J., Thuesen, C. and Ruiz, P.P. (2019), “Organization and Systems Theory Toolset”, Evolving Toolbox for Complex Project Management, Auerbach Publications, pp. 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, N., Park, H. and Phaal, R. (2022), “The portfolio planning, implementing, and governing process: An inductive approach”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier Inc., Vol. 180, available at:https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2022.121652.Google Scholar
Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., Walker, W.E. and ter Maat, J. (2013), “Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: A method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
INCOSE. (2015), “Systems Engineering Handbook (Fourth Edition)”, Systems Engineering, Beaverton: Ringgold, Inc, Beaverton.Google Scholar
ISO. (2018), “International Standard ISO 31000: Risk management - Principles and guidelines”, Iso 31000, Vol. 2, p. 36.Google Scholar
Jaafari, A. (2001), “Management of risks, uncertainties and opportunities on projects: Time for a fundamental shift”, International Journal of Project Management, Pergamon, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 89–101.Google Scholar
W, K.E.. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage,.Google Scholar
Kahn, K.B. (2015), Product Planning Essentials, 2nd ed., Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Korhonen, T., Laine, T. and Martinsuo, M. (2014), “Management control of project portfolio uncertainty: A managerial role perspective”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreye, M.E., Cash, P.J., Parraguez, P. and Maier, A. (2022), “Dynamism in Complex Engineering: Explaining Uncertainty Growth Through Uncertainty Masking,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 1552–1564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, Q., Wu, W. and Liu, Y. (2021), “The fit between technology management and technological capability and its impact on new product development performance”, Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), Basel: MDPI AG, Basel, Vol. 13 No. 19, p. 10956.Google Scholar
Maier, H.R., Guillaume, J.H.A., van Delden, H., Riddell, G.A., Haasnoot, M. and Kwakkel, J.H. (2016), “An uncertain future, deep uncertainty, scenarios, robustness and adaptation: How do they fit together?”, Environmental Modelling and Software, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 81, pp. 154–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchau, V.A.W.J., Walker, W.E., Bloemen, P.J.T.M. and Popper, S.W. (2019), Decision Making under Deep Uncertainty: From Theory to Practice, Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, Cham.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinsuo, M. (2013), “Project portfolio management in practice and in context”, International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 794–803.Google Scholar
Martinsuo, M., Korhonen, T. and Laine, T. (2014), “Identifying, framing and managing uncertainties in project portfolios”, International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 732–746.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, M. (2018), The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths, Penguin, S.l.Google Scholar
Messerly, P., Murniningtyas, E., Eloundou-Enyegue, P., Foli, E.G., Furman, E., Glassman, A. and Richarson, K. (2019), “Global Sustainable Development Report 2019: The Future is Now – Science for Achieving Sustainable Development”, United Nations, New York, No. November, p. 252.Google Scholar
De Neufville, R. (2011), Flexibility in Engineering Design, edited by Scholtes, S., MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, G.C. and Rice, M.P. (2013), “A Comprehensive Model of Uncertainty Associated with Radical Innovation”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Hoboken, Vol. 30 No. SUPPL 1, pp. 2–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oehmen, J., Locatelli, G., Wied, M. and Willumsen, P. (2020), “Risk, uncertainty, ignorance and myopia: Their managerial implications for B2B firms”, Industrial Marketing Management, Elsevier, Vol. 88, pp. 330–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterwalder, A. (2010), Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers, edited by Pigneur, Y., Clark, T. and Pijl, P. van der, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Parris, T.M. (2006), “Corporate sustainability reporting”, Environment.Google Scholar
Patterson, M.L. (2005), “New Product Portfolio Planning and Management”, 2nd Editio., Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, pp. 46–58.Google Scholar
Pawlak, N., Czechowski, P.O., Czuba, T., Oniszczuk-Jastrząbek, A. and Badyda, A. (2018), “Business insurances as an element of sustainable development of small and medium enterprises in Poland”, SHS Web of Conferences, Les Ulis: EDP Sciences, Les Ulis, Vol. 57, p. 1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petro, G. (2022), “Consumers Demand Sustainable Products And Shopping Formats”, Forbes.Google Scholar
Pinkse, J. and Bohnsack, R. (2021), “Sustainable product innovation and changing consumer behavior: Sustainability affordances as triggers of adoption and usage”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Chichester: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc, Chichester, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 3120–3130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PMI. (2017), The Standard for Portfolio Management, Fourth Edi., Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA.Google Scholar
Quatrini, S. (2021), “Challenges and opportunities to scale up sustainable finance after the COVID-19 crisis: Lessons and promising innovations from science and practice”, Ecosystem Services, Elsevier B.V, Vol. 48, p. 101240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yin, R. K.. (2018), Case Study Research and Applications Design and Methods Sixth Edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc, Vol. 21.Google Scholar
Stricker, L., Pugnetti, C., Wagner, J. and Zeier Röschmann, A. (2022), “Green Insurance: A Roadmap for Executive Management”, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, Basel: MDPI AG, Basel, Vol. 15 No. 5, p. 221.Google Scholar
Taebi, B., Kwakkel, J.H. and Kermisch, C.F.N. (2020), “Governing climate risks in the face of normative uncertainties”, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Climate Change, Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, USA, Vol. 11 No. 5, p. n/a.Google Scholar
Trapp, C.T.C. and Kanbach, D.K. (2021), “Green entrepreneurship and business models: Deriving green technology business model archetypes”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 297, p. 126694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villamil, C., Schulte, J. and Hallstedt, S. (2021), “Sustainability risk and portfolio management—A strategic scenario method for sustainable product development”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 1042–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, W.E., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., van der Sluijs, J.P., van Asselt, M.B.A., Janssen, P. and von Krauss, Krayer, M.P. (2003), “Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support”, Integrated Assessment, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Weck, O.L. (2022), Technology Roadmapping and Development: A Quantitative Approach to the Management of Technology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, R.K. (2018), Case Study Research and Applications, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods.Google Scholar
Žužek, T., Gosar, Ž., Kušar, J. and Berlec, T. (2021), “A new product development model for smes: Introducing agility to the plan-driven concurrent product development approach”, Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), Basel: MDPI AG, Basel, Vol. 13 No. 21, p. 12159.Google Scholar