Search for: All records

Engineering design education frequently focuses on the methods and tools that enable and enhance product creation. These tools range from individual and group ideation techniques to innovation portfolio management for organizations and originate from a diversity of consulting, academic, and industrial sources. The factors that drive the adoption, use, and ongoing success of these tools are not well understood and are likely driven by a complex interaction of human, organizational, and economic factors. This paper investigates innovation method and tool adoption in industry through semi-structured interviews with individuals from a Fortune 500 company. This work explores three resulting themes 1) individual incentives and motivation for adoption, (2) the appropriateness of tool selection for the organizational product domain and compatibility with existing processes, and (3) executive and management support for adoption. The implications for engineering education are also discussed. 

Academics have developed a wide range of tools and methods to support innovation and the product development process. Unfortunately, few of these methods and tools have been widely adopted in industry. The current work seeks to identify what catalyzes and blocks the adoption of R&D innovation tools and methods in large organizations. Semi-structured exploratory interviews were conducted at several U.S.-based Fortune 500 companies. Interviewees include executives, managers, and individual contributors. Future work includes interviews with at least two more organizations with at least eight to ten individuals per organization. Initial interviews were transcribed, and open coding sought themes (commonly called categories) containing the catalysts and barriers. Initial findings indicate six themes that catalyze adoption: Confidence in the Method, Characteristics of the Method, Characteristics of the Practitioner, Practitioner Benefits, Leadership, and Organization. Barriers identified include Organization, Characteristics of the Method, Characteristics of the Practitioner, and Practitioner Drawbacks.This is an example of the abstract style. The abstract should be between 100 and 150 words.