**11. Critical success factors in NPD and innovation**

Innovation and NPD present an opportunity for strategic advantage in the automotive and other industries as related processes necessary to identify a firm's activities or critical success factors (CSFs) [17]. Numerous authors have intensified efforts on the role of CSFs; the literature review indicates management commitment as crucial for NPD [18], survival and success. Team development skills are other extensively studied CSFs [18] and the internal processes companies use to retain a trained workforce. Similarly, authors have highlighted the processes for the identification of the following: market needs [19, 20], the translation of those needs into a workable design to be manufactured [21, 22] and the cultural adaptations made as companies introduce the structural changes required to keep people continuously informed in an even developmental process [13, 22].

The present study [15] recently authenticated three dimensions addressed in [21] as CSFs. These dimensions are product, market and process characteristics. Furthermore, [15] confirmed organisational and marketing characteristics, suggesting that these CSFs are relevant in NPD.

Several authors have presented their evidence and finally identified benefits gained from NPD for both customers and companies worldwide. **Table 1** presents the most important benefits. However, the question is, "Are these findings applicable to South African automotive component manufacturers as processes and innovation


#### **Table 1.**

*Benefits of open innovation in ACMs. Source: Own.*

practices? The answer is based on the relationship between innovation and NPD and the benefits derived from open innovation explored in the next section.

Open innovation is not a walk in the park [7], especially for start-up ventures which lack adequate capabilities regarding capital investments and research and development activities. Hence, open innovation presents an excellent opportunity for ACMs to venture into new product development [28]. Nevertheless, [29] criticises [30], the founder of open innovation, for exaggerating its applicability to research and development by claiming that it is often long-term, expensive and always risky and requires the protection of consequences. He argues that closed innovation remains an effective way for research and development investment. Internet-based tools such as Web 2.0 are increasingly gaining leverage in the internal and external capabilities of ACMs [31]. Some scholars argue that ACMs are more effective than OEMs in parallel using various open innovation practices because of their unwavering support and dedication to parent companies' requirements [32]. However, [33] found that most ACMs still pursue closed over open innovation. [34] argue that firms that provide their ideas to external parties are more product innovative orientated than non-providers. They found that mutual rather than one-way exchanges are relationships that significantly raise the probability for automotive component manufacturers to experience a substantial benefit from contributing to other firms' new product development projects. [35] explored Danish small and medium enterprises and identified the costs linked to numerous sources of innovation. However, the automotive manufacturers found that market and science sources are related to decreased costs and collaboration, so suppliers of a similar knowledge base are related to the performance of the market and collaboration with customers in lesser project fees.

Nevertheless, they found that novelty in new products is lower than in those embedded with suppliers. Technology scouting is a low cost but valuable alternative for SMEs involved in high-tech activities [36]. Overall, SMEs are increasingly adopting open innovation as a part of operational strategies [37, 38].

A critical study by [38] found that ACMs adopt open innovation primarily for commercial interests such as meeting customer demand and keeping up with competitors. [39] demonstrated that ACMs' interaction with sources of innovation is not essential during the phase of recognising the innovation process but also at the end-stage to facilitate the successful commercialisation of a product or service. Kang et al. [40] asserted that the firm size and government support significantly impact the commercialisation of automotive component manufacturers. They established that appropriability, innovative capabilities and investment in external research and development have profoundly positive impacts on ACMs' commercialisation initiatives. [28] further, argue that ACMs are good at inventions but lack essential commercialisation resources. Hence, ACMs suggest that collaboration with other partners, including intermediaries at the commercial stage, may help overcome their limitations for commercialisation. Collaboration for ACMs is more critical in the commercialisation stage than in other stages such as ideation, research, and development [38–41]. For ACMs, open innovation is less practical than revenue generation [32, 42]. Nevertheless, cooperation with industry incumbents helps to overcome challenges ACMs encounter [38].
