Portfoliomanagement von Innovationsprojekten im deutschen Maschinen- und Anlagenbau

Theses:
-The assessment of the companies surveyed according to the 6 performance measures derived from the objectives of the portfolio management of innovation projects enables a classification into the group profiles: High Performer, Average and Low Performer.-

- The High Performer profile serves as a role model to emulate, as the group members have high value project landscapes aligned with their strategy (according to their own criteria) and their spending in this reflects the strategic targets. Furthermore, they outperform the other two groups in terms of processing efficiency, time efficiency, balance and concentration.

- The profile of the average group represents the majority of the companies classified. In line with its name, its average performance characteristics act as a starting and comparison point for the top (top performers) and bottom (low performers).

- The low performers group has installed a portfolio management system for innovation projects. However, there is a lack of orientation towards the objectives of this concept. The companies are clearly in the lower range of performance assessments. Their innovation projects are only aligned with formulated strategies to a small degree and are therefore poorly backed up by strategy-related expenditure. Overall, they are not equipped with valuable projects. In addition, the portfolio elements have long implementation periods. The concentration and balance of the overall project portfolio receive little attention.

- The characteristics of the 6 performance measures show a correlation to innovation success. This is particularly true when not only purely monetary performance indicators are considered, but also the companies' own assessment of success. This shows that the portfolio management of innovation projects has an impact on success. Companies that have not yet applied it should therefore consider installing a portfolio concept.

- The application of performance assessments (group profiles) to formalization aspects shows that successful companies have installed explicit methods for portfolio management and have clear rules and processes for their application. Formalization is therefore a success factor of portfolio management.

- In particular, it can be seen that the process of portfolio management of innovation projects must be lived in order to be successful or to be accepted and established in the long term.

- Companies should be aware of the status of their portfolio concepts within their industry and review their methods and rules accordingly. However, even if they perform comparatively satisfactorily, they should not abandon optimization efforts, as otherwise there is a risk of neglecting improvements and more consistent implementation of portfolio management.

- The assessments signal that methods are used that do not exactly match the respective management style. The compromise of having to carry out prioritization and selection is accepted here. This signals a need for methods that are better tailored to the specific needs of the innovation area.

- By applying the performance assessments to evaluation statements on the methods used, it can be seen
that successful portfolio management is characterized by methods that have a justifiable cost-benefit ratio, that are efficient (continuation/termination decisions) and, in particular, that are easy to understand in their application.

- Across the group divisions, the identification of the right innovation projects receives high ratings. This indicates satisfaction or little need for change. However, less successful companies in particular should critically question their assessments with regard to the portfolio management of innovation projects.

- The reluctance to recommend their own methods indicates that overall it can be assumed that companies still see room for improvement in their portfolio management method competence.

Table of contents:
0 List of figures10
1 Introduction 11
1.1 Motivation of the study 11
1.2 Understanding of the study's terms 13
1.2.1 Innovation 14
1.2.2 Innovation process or project 14
1.2.3 Portfolio management of innovation projects16
2 Objectives and design of the study 17
2.1 Objectives 17
2.2 Implementation 17
2.2.1 Conception phase 18
2.2.2 Survey phase 19
3 Portfolio management of innovation projects 20
3.1 Objectives of portfolio management of innovation projects 20
3.1.1 Transparency 20
3.1.2 Balance 22
3.1.3 Concentration 22
3.1.4 Value maximization 23
3.1.5 Strategy alignment 23
3.2 Special features of portfolio management of innovation projects 24
3.2.1 Looking to the future 24
3.2.2 Data quality 24
3.2.3 Dynamic environment 24
3.2.4 Project status diversity 25
3.2.5 Interdependencies 25
3.3 Importance of portfolio management of innovation projects 25
3.3.1 Project initialization 25
3.3.2 Project maintenance 26
3.3.3 Criteria quality 28
3.3.4 Strategy implementation 28
4 Characteristics of the surveyed study participants 30
4.1 Characteristics of the respondents 30
4.2 Characteristics of the companies surveyed 32
4.2.1 Distribution of turnover 32
4.2.2 Distribution of employees 33
4.2.3 Positioning in the value chain 33
4.2.4 Order volumes 34
4.2.5 Target markets 35
4.2.6 Product structure 35
4.3 Innovation-related characteristics of the companies surveyed 36
4.3.1 Innovation indicators 37
4.3.2 Innovation projects 38
4.3.3 Lack of success of innovation projects 38
4.3.4 Innovation strategy 40
4.3.5 Technology/product roadmap 44
4.4 Core results 47
5 Status quo of portfolio management of innovation projects 49
5.1 Application diffusion 49
5.2 Application duration 50
5.3 Portfolio sizes 51
5.4 Organizational portfolio location 53
5.5 Portfolio contents 57
5.6 Exceptions 64
5.7 Core results 66
6 Importance of portfolio management of innovation projects 69
6.1 Assigned strategic importance 69
6.2 Detailing the attributed strategic importance 71
6.2.1 Competitive situation/position 72
6.2.2 Resource allocation 73
6.2.3 Strategy implementation 73
6.2.4 Linkage: resources and strategy implementation 74
6.2.5 Concentration 75
6.2.6 Balance 76
6.3 Detailing the assigned importance of activities 76
6.3.1 Strategic selection and prioritization 77
6.3.2 Systematic control 77
6.3.3 Consideration of resource bottlenecks 78
6.3.4 Project networking 78
6.3.5 Budgeting 79
6.4 Core results 79
7 Types of application of portfolio management of innovation projects 81
7.1 Criteria for selection and prioritization 81
7.2 Prioritization and selection as a round-based process 85
7.2.1 First evaluation step 90
7.2.2 Second evaluation step 92
7.2.3 Additional evaluation steps 93
7.3 Portfolio reviews 95
7.4 Methods of prioritization and selection 97
7.4.1 Real options method 99
7.4.2 Point value method 99
7.4.3 Portfolio visualizations 100
7.4.4 Value-based ratios 101
7.4.5 Dynamic investment methods 101
7.4.6 Methods that take uncertainty into account 103
7.4.7 Checklists and catalogs of requirements 103
7.4.8 Static investment calculation methods 103
7.4.9 Return on investment methods 104
7.5 Follow-up: Lessons learned? 105
7.6 Key findings 107
8 Effectiveness and efficiency of portfolio management of innovation projects 109
8.1 Success of portfolio management of innovation projects 109
8.1.1 Strategy alignment 111
8.1.2 Valuable portfolio content 111
8.1.3 Linkage: Strategy and expenditure allocation 112
8.1.4 Time efficiency 112
8.1.5 Balance 113
8.1.6 Concentration 114
8.2 Review of success effectiveness 115
8.3 Success classification and formalization 117
8.3.1 Method and criteria installation 118
8.3.2 Rule installation 120
8.3.3 Lived process 120
8.3.4 Industry assessment 122
8.4 Classification of success and methods used 122
8.4.1 Management style and culture 123
8.4.2 Identification 125
8.4.3 Continuation and termination decisions 125
8.4.4 Effort/benefit ratio 127
8.4.5 Realistic assessments 128
8.4.6 Ease of application 130
8.4.7 Recommendation 130
8.5 Key findings 131
9 Implications for the portfolio management of innovation projects 133
9.1 Portfolio management of innovation projects works! 133
9.2 Formalization is a decisive factor! 133
9.3 Portfolio management of innovation projects must be lived! 134
9.4 Portfolio management of innovation projects is not limited to the Fnkt! 134
9.5 Full consideration of innovation resources! 134
9.6 Promotion of exchange between several portfolios! 135
9.7 There is no one true portfolio management method! 135
10 Literature 136
11 The initiators of the study 138
12 Introduction of the authors 139