Hubbry Logo
Phase-gate processPhase-gate processMain
Open search
Phase-gate process
Community hub
Phase-gate process
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Phase-gate process
Phase-gate process
Phase-gate process
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A phase-gate process (also referred to as a waterfall process) is a project management technique in which an initiative or project (e.g., new product development, software development, process improvement, business change) is divided into distinct stages or phases, separated by decision points (known as gates).

At each gate, continuation is decided by (typically) a manager, steering committee, or governance board. The decision is made based on forecasts and information available at the time, including the business case, risk analysis, and availability of necessary resources (e.g., money, people with correct competencies).

History

[edit]

A phased approach to investment decisions for development arose in large-scale projects for mechanical and chemical engineering, particularly since the 1940s.[citation needed] One source described eight phases.[1] In 1958, the American Association of Cost Engineers created four standard cost estimate type classifications to match these development and approval phases.[2] Other industries with complex products and projects picked up on the process. For example, NASA practiced the concept of phased development in the 1960s with its phased project planning or what is often called phased review process. The phased review process was intended to break up the development of any project into a series of phases that could be individually reviewed in sequence. Review points at the end of each phase required that a number of criteria be met before the project could progress to the next phase.[3] The phased review process consisted of five phases with periodic development reviews between phases.[4] NASA's phased review process is considered a first generation process because it did not take into consideration the analysis of external markets in new product development.[3]

The waterfall process variant arose through publication of Winston Royce's paper on large developments, as it illustrated work cascading down from each phase as a series of waterfalls from which work could not return to an earlier phase.[5]

Phase-gate processes are often called front-end loading or big design up front.

Effective gates

[edit]

Most firms suffer from having far too many projects in their product development pipelines, for the limited resources available. "Gates with teeth" help to prune the development portfolio of weak projects and deal with a gridlocked pipeline. Also, a robust innovation strategy, coupled with strategic buckets, refocuses resources on high value development initiatives.

Note that gates are not merely project review points, status reports or information updates. Rather, they are tough decision meetings, where the critical go/kill and prioritization decisions are made on projects. Thus the gates become the quality control check points in the process ensuring that the right projects move forward and are completed correctly.

Acceptance criteria

[edit]
Main article: Acceptance criteria

Gates must have clear and visible criteria so that senior managers can make go/kill and prioritization decisions objectively. Most importantly, these criteria must be effective—that is, they must be operational (easy to use), realistic (make use of available information) and discriminating (differentiate the good projects from the mediocre ones). These criteria can be:

  • Must meet: Knock-out questions in a check list, designed to kill poor projects outright
  • Should meet: Highly desirable characteristics which are rated and added in a point-count scheme

Example

[edit]

A sample list of criteria is shown below, from which a scorecard can be developed that can then be used to score projects at a gate meeting.

  • Must meet (checklist - yes/no)
    • Strategic alignment (fits business unit strategy)
    • Reasonable likelihood of technical feasibility
    • Meet EH&S policies
    • Positive return versus risk
  • Should meet (scored on 0-10 scale)
    • Strategic
      • Degree to which projects aligns with business unit strategy
      • Strategic importance
    • Product advantage
      • Unique benefits
      • Meets customer needs better than existing or competing product
      • Value for money
    • Market attractiveness
      • Market size
      • Market growth
      • Competitive situation
    • Synergies (leverages core competencies)
      • Marketing synergies
      • Technological synergies
      • Manufacturing / processing synergies
    • Technical feasibility
      • Technical gap
      • Complexity
      • Technical uncertainty
    • Operational viability
      • Go to market
      • Sales, marketing, and billing
      • Support and operation
    • Risk versus return

If the answers are "no" or "low" to many of these questions, the decision should be to send the project back for reconsideration, (such as, to adjust the scope, timelines, funding, or solution) or to kill it off altogether.[6]

Advantages and disadvantages

[edit]

Advantages

[edit]

The advantages to using the phase-gate process for product development typically result from its ability to identify problems and assess progress before the project's conclusion. Poorly performing projects can be rejected by disciplined use of the process. Using the phase-gate process on a large project can help reduce complexity of what could be a large and limiting innovation process into a straightforward rule-based approach. When a phase-gate process incorporates cost and fiscal analysis tools such as net present value, the organization can potentially be provided with quantitative information regarding the feasibility of developing potential product ideas. Finally, the process is an opportunity to validate the updated business case by a project's executive sponsors.[7]

Disadvantages

[edit]

One problem with the phase-gate process is the potential for structural organization to interfere with creativity and innovation, as overly structured processes may cause creativity to be reduced in importance and to hinder the largely iterative process of innovation.[citation needed]

Opportunity management

[edit]
Main article: Opportunity management

The opportunity management funnel is a visual representation of phase-gate decision making. Opportunity management is defined as "a process to identify business and community development opportunities that could be implemented to sustain or improve a local economy."[8] The components of opportunity management are:

  1. Identifying opportunities.
  2. Evaluating and prioritizing these opportunities - This may involve developing criteria, deliberating, and ranking the alternatives.
  3. Driving opportunities - Involves assigning leads, accountability, action plans, and project management
  4. Constant monitoring - May require one of the following actions:
    • Advance - Commit additional resources to move the idea forward
    • Rework - More investigation/ rethinking
    • Kill - Stop working on the idea and move on

The goal of the opportunity management funnel is to eliminate weak or bad ideas before money or resources are contributed to realize these opportunities. The benefit of the opportunity management funnel when utilizing phase-gate decision making is that the funnel generates efficiencies where weak ideas are efficiently eliminated leaving a strong set of viable alternatives. To fulfill its mandate, the opportunity management funnel filters the broadest range of opportunities and ensures that all priority sectors are represented. When selecting which opportunities to filter through the process, economic developers should be aware that initially, there are no bad ideas or limits. The unviable alternatives will be filtered out throughout the process using phase-gate decision-making process

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Phase-gate process

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The phase-gate process, also known as the Stage-Gate model, is a structured framework for managing and (NPD) that divides the journey from idea generation to market launch into sequential phases, each separated by decision-making gates where projects are rigorously evaluated for viability. Developed by Robert G. Cooper in 1986 and first detailed in his seminal work, it serves as a risk-assessment and resource-allocation tool to improve project outcomes by focusing efforts on high-potential initiatives while eliminating underperformers early. At its core, the process features a series of stages—typically five in the classic model: Discovery (idea generation and screening), Scoping (preliminary assessment), (detailed planning and feasibility), Development (prototyping and design), and Testing & Validation (market trials and refinement)—culminating in Launch and a post-launch review. These stages involve cross-functional teams executing defined tasks, such as , technical prototyping, and customer validation, to build cumulative knowledge and deliverables. Gates act as quality-control checkpoints at the end of each stage, where senior leaders apply standardized criteria—including strategic fit, product superiority, market attractiveness, competitive scenario, financial return, and risk—to approve continuation (Go), request revisions (), hold (On Hold), or cancel (Kill) the project. This gated structure addresses the inherent uncertainties of NPD, where traditional linear approaches often lead to wasted resources on flawed ideas. Widely adopted by leading firms in industries like consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, and , the phase-gate process has demonstrated tangible benefits, including accelerated time-to-market, enhanced profitability, and success rates up to 2.5 times higher than industry averages (e.g., 63-78% vs. 24% for ungated projects). Over decades, it has evolved into agile hybrids like NexGen Stage-Gate and, more recently, the fifth-generation model, incorporating lean principles such as iterative spirals, co-creation, scalable adaptations, multiple pathways for different project types, and considerations to foster faster, more flexible in dynamic markets.

Overview and Fundamentals

Definition and Purpose

The phase-gate process is a structured methodology that divides complex initiatives, particularly in (NPD), into distinct sequential phases separated by known as . At each gate, project progress is rigorously evaluated against predefined criteria to determine whether to proceed to the next phase, revise the approach, hold for further work, or terminate the project entirely. This framework builds on fundamental project lifecycle concepts, where initiatives progress through stages of ideation, , execution, and closure, but imposes formal checkpoints to manage uncertainty and more effectively. The primary purpose of the phase-gate process is to mitigate risks in high-uncertainty environments by committing resources incrementally rather than upfront, thereby avoiding large-scale investments in potentially unviable projects. It ensures that projects remain aligned with organizational objectives, such as market needs and strategic goals, through ongoing reviews that incorporate cross-functional input and validation. By facilitating informed at gates, the process enhances overall project success rates; for instance, companies employing a disciplined phase-gate system report new product success rates up to 2.5 times higher than those without such structure. This approach is especially valuable in NPD, where it promotes faster time-to-market while controlling costs and improving innovation outcomes. Also referred to as the stage-gate process, this methodology was coined in the 1980s to emphasize the linear progression through "stages" of work punctuated by "gates" of control and evaluation, reflecting its origins in addressing inefficiencies in traditional NPD workflows. The term and framework were developed by Robert G. Cooper as a practical roadmap for transforming ideas into commercial successes, drawing from extensive research on practices across industries.

Key Components

The phase-gate process, also known as the stage-gate model, is structured around discrete phases and intervening gates as its foundational building blocks. Phases represent time-bound periods of focused work, where cross-functional teams execute prescribed activities to advance a project, such as initial ideation to generate and screen ideas, scoping to assess preliminary feasibility, and subsequent testing to validate concepts against market needs. These phases ensure progressive commitment of resources, building on prior outputs while minimizing upfront investment in unviable ideas. Gates serve as critical at the conclusion of each phase, functioning as formal meetings that involve senior cross-functional teams evaluating project progress. During these gates, deliverables are assessed against predefined criteria, including technical viability, market potential, and alignment with strategic objectives, resulting in decisions to proceed, halt, recycle for revisions, or hold the project. This mechanism enforces and risk reduction by gating . At the core of the process are inputs, outputs, and gate-specific deliverables that facilitate and . Inputs typically comprise and artifacts from the preceding phase, such as or preliminary designs, providing the foundation for the current phase's activities. Outputs are the tangible results produced within a phase, including or detailed plans, which must meet thresholds to pass through the gate. Gate deliverables, such as a robust justifying or a functional demonstrating proof-of-concept, are essential for approval and often require holistic across technical, financial, and operational dimensions. The overall flow of the phase-gate process depicts a sequential progression through multiple phases, visualized as a linear with acting as control valves to regulate advancement. This structure allows for possible iterative loops, where projects may cycle back to earlier phases for refinement if criteria are not fully met, promoting adaptability without abandoning the disciplined framework.

History and Evolution

Origins

The phase-gate process, also known as the stage-gate model, was developed by Robert G. Cooper in the mid- as a structured framework for managing (NPD). Drawing from extensive into NPD practices, Cooper identified widespread inefficiencies and high failure rates in product launches during the and , where success rates were often below 40%, prompting the need for a more disciplined approach to mitigate risks and improve outcomes. This innovation was motivated by studies of leading firms, such as and , which demonstrated that systematic processes correlated with higher innovation success by focusing resources on viable projects and enabling timely decision-making at key checkpoints. The foundational ideas emerged from Cooper's Project NewProd, a major study launched in the late 1970s that analyzed hundreds of NPD projects across industries to pinpoint differences between winners and losers. These insights revealed that chaotic, unstructured processes contributed significantly to failures, often exceeding 60% in industrial settings, and underscored the value of phased progression with evaluation gates to build commitment and control. The model was first detailed in Cooper's book Winning at New Products, which synthesized research findings into practical guidelines for transforming ad-hoc innovation efforts into repeatable systems, emphasizing upfront planning and market validation to address common pitfalls like poor market fit and resource waste. Cooper formalized the stage-gate terminology and structure in his seminal 1990 article "Stage-Gate Systems: A New Tool for Managing New Products," published in Business Horizons, where he presented the process as a series of discrete stages separated by decision gates to evaluate progress and allocate resources efficiently. Early adoption occurred primarily in and R&D-intensive sectors, such as and chemicals, where firms sought to tame unstructured pipelines and boost launch success rates from historical lows. This initial helped structure previously haphazard efforts, laying the groundwork for broader acceptance as a standard NPD tool.

Developments and Variations

In the 1990s, Robert G. Cooper expanded the original stage-gate model through third-generation processes, emphasizing more rigorous yet flexible gate criteria—including detailed evaluations of market potential, technical feasibility, and resource needs—to enhance and reduce failure rates. These refinements transformed the process into a more adaptable tool widely adopted by firms for systematic . By the 2000s, the stage-gate integrated lean principles to address inefficiencies, culminating in the Next-Generation Stage-Gate (NexGen) model introduced by Cooper in 2006. This evolution incorporated seven core principles—such as customer focus, spiral development for iterative learning, and lean, scalable —to streamline workflows and boost productivity, as evidenced by adoption among leading companies like and . Variations emerged to enhance flexibility, including the Next-Generation Stage-Gate, which features adaptable pathways like XPress for rapid projects and full-scale versions for complex ones. Hybrid models combining stage-gate with agile and Scrum methodologies gained prominence in the 2010s, allowing iterative sprints within stages while retaining gate oversight for , as explored in Cooper's 2016 research on Agile-Stage-Gate hybrids. Digital tools influenced further adaptations in the , with software platforms enabling real-time gate tracking, , and data-driven reviews to support distributed teams. Concurrently, the process aligned with global standards like ISO 9001:2015, where stage-gate structures fulfill requirements for design and development controls under clause 8.3, facilitating in certified organizations. In the 2020s, integrations with (AI) have emerged as a key development, applying AI tools across stages for idea screening, , prototyping acceleration, and to improve efficiency and outcomes, as outlined by Cooper in 2024. Criticisms of the model's early rigidity, particularly its linear structure ill-suited for uncertain environments, prompted variants such as fuzzy gates and spiral approaches. In 1994, Cooper proposed enhancements including fuzzy gates—conditional decision points tailored to project specifics—alongside fluidity, focus, flexibility, and speed to mitigate bureaucratic constraints. Spiral variants, inspired by iterative models, further addressed rigidity by incorporating overlapping phases for high-uncertainty projects.

Process Implementation

Typical Phases

The phase-gate process, as originally conceptualized by Robert G. Cooper, typically consists of a linear sequence of five main stages—Scoping, , Development, Testing and Validation, and Launch—preceded by a front-end Discovery stage, separated by decision gates to guide projects from initial ideation to market launch while managing risk through progressive evaluation. These stages build on each other to refine the project and allocate resources incrementally, with activities involving cross-functional teams conducting , technical prototyping, and customer validation. In the Discovery stage, teams conduct initial opportunity identification and idea generation, often through brainstorming sessions involving internal stakeholders, customers, and suppliers to uncover potential aligned with business needs, followed by an initial screening to shortlist viable ideas. This early stage emphasizes low-cost exploration, including basic market scans and internal reviews, to filter broad opportunities before deeper commitment. The Scoping stage involves a quick preliminary assessment of selected ideas to evaluate their alignment with strategic goals, market potential, and feasibility. Activities include desk , voice-of- studies, and initial technical assessments to flesh out preliminary product concepts, incorporating input on value propositions, functional requirements, and competitive positioning. This stage focuses on defining the product's core attributes to ensure it addresses unmet needs while eliminating unpromising concepts efficiently. During the Business Case stage, teams develop a comprehensive justification, including detailed , financial projections, resource requirements, feasibility studies, risk identification, and a roadmap to demonstrate the concept's viability and . Key activities encompass cross-functional input to build a robust plan for approval. In the Development stage, the product is designed and prototyped, with teams executing technical work such as , , and small-scale testing to create a functional while adhering to the approved . This stage requires coordinated cross-functional efforts to meet milestones and refine the product based on emerging insights. The Testing and Validation stage entails rigorous verification, including laboratory tests, pilot production, field trials, market simulations, and customer to confirm the product's performance, manufacturability, and market fit, alongside finalizing production and marketing plans. Activities here aim to identify and resolve any remaining issues before full-scale commitment. Finally, the Launch stage coordinates full commercialization, involving production ramp-up, marketing rollout, sales distribution, and post-launch monitoring to ensure successful market entry and initial performance tracking. This culminates the process with a focus on execution and early revenue generation. Resource allocation escalates across these stages, starting with minimal investment in early exploratory activities (e.g., desk research in Discovery and Scoping) and progressing to substantial commitments in later stages (e.g., full prototyping and production in Development and Launch), thereby controlling costs and risks. Gates serve as checkpoints between stages to review progress and authorize advancement. While this sequence forms the core framework of the classic model, phases can be adapted by industry or scale—for instance, might incorporate agile elements to condense phases for greater agility, or pharmaceuticals may expand Testing and Validation for —yet the progressive structure with escalating commitments remains fundamental.

Gate Reviews and Criteria

Gate reviews in the phase-gate process serve as structured evaluation points at the end of each , where cross-functional teams present deliverables to senior gatekeepers for assessment. These reviews typically involve formal meetings focused on reviewing completed work against predefined criteria, scoring the 's , and determining whether to advance, revise, or terminate the initiative. The process emphasizes a disciplined examination of from the preceding to ensure alignment with objectives and . Core criteria for gate evaluations encompass multiple dimensions to provide a holistic assessment. Key elements include technical feasibility, which evaluates the project's development capabilities and potential risks; market potential, assessing attractiveness and customer needs; financial viability, often measured through metrics like (NPV) to gauge ; and strategic fit, ensuring alignment with organizational goals. These criteria are commonly applied via checklists or scoring matrices that quantify qualitative and quantitative factors, such as product superiority and market attractiveness, to facilitate objective . Decision outcomes from gate reviews are binary or conditional, guiding and project trajectory. Possible results include a full "go" to proceed to the next with approved resources; "hold" or "," where the project is paused for additional information or revisions; "kill," terminating the project to reallocate resources; or "conditional go," advancing with specific stipulations like early milestones. Each outcome requires documented rationale, including prioritization levels and commitments, to maintain transparency and accountability. Best practices for effective gate reviews highlight the role of cross-functional gatekeepers from diverse departments to ensure balanced perspectives and reduce biases. Predefined metrics, such as NPV thresholds for financial gates, promote consistency and rigor in evaluations. Additionally, implementing tough go/kill criteria and incorporating portfolio-level help optimize resource use across projects, fostering a lean and adaptable process.

Benefits and Challenges

Advantages

The phase-gate process excels in by enabling early identification and mitigation of potential issues through structured evaluations at each gate. This systematic approach filters out underperforming projects before significant resources are committed, thereby reducing overall project failure rates. Research by Robert G. Cooper indicates that organizations employing best-practice stage-gate systems achieve new product success rates of 63-78%, which is 2.5 times higher than the 24% success rate of poor performers, effectively lowering failure rates by substantial margins. Resource efficiency is another key advantage, as the process employs incremental tied to approvals, preventing over-investment in projects unlikely to succeed. By aligning with strategic priorities and ongoing assessments, companies avoid the sunk costs associated with unviable initiatives, allowing capital to be redirected toward high-potential opportunities. This gated mechanism has been shown to optimize portfolio management and enhance in product development efforts. The structured oversight of the phase-gate process contributes to improved project success by ensuring higher-quality deliverables and accelerating time-to-market for viable projects. Gates enforce rigorous criteria that promote thorough and execution, resulting in products that better needs and customer expectations. Studies demonstrate that this leads to faster launch cycles, with some implementations reducing development timelines by up to 39% while maintaining quality standards. On an organizational level, the phase-gate process fosters enhanced communication across multidisciplinary teams by providing clear milestones and decision points that facilitate collaboration and accountability. This transparency helps align stakeholders, streamlines progress tracking, and builds a culture of disciplined , ultimately supporting sustained in dynamic markets.

Disadvantages

The phase-gate process, with its structured linear progression, can impose significant rigidity on product development efforts, potentially stifling and hindering rapid adaptation in dynamic markets. This sequential nature requires projects to complete all predefined tasks before advancing through gates, which limits the incorporation of emerging information or iterative adjustments, leading to teams rushing to meet criteria under pressure rather than fostering innovative exploration. Administrative overhead represents another key drawback, as the process often involves time-intensive reviews, extensive documentation, and bureaucratic checkpoints that can inflate project costs, particularly in smaller initiatives. These elements, including mandatory templates and deliverables, frequently result in non-value-adding work that slows momentum and diverts resources from core development activities. Scalability challenges arise when applying the phase-gate model to highly uncertain or fast-paced environments, such as or discontinuous innovation, where its one-size-fits-all structure proves ill-suited without modifications like truncated versions for simpler projects. In such contexts, the emphasis on upfront planning and gate approvals can delay responses to market shifts, exacerbating risks in volatile sectors. Cultural barriers further complicate implementation, as the process demands a mature, collaborative organizational environment to succeed, often encountering resistance in siloed companies where departmental misalignment or aversion to formal reviews undermines adoption. Without strong cultural alignment, these dynamics can lead to project failures and reduced team morale.

Applications and Management

In Product Development

The phase-gate process, also known as the Stage-Gate model, is predominantly applied in (R&D) for (NPD) across industries such as consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, and , where it structures from idea generation to market launch. In consumer goods, companies like (P&G) integrate it into their innovation pipelines to manage internal and external ideas, ensuring rigorous evaluation at each gate to align projects with market needs and resource availability. In pharmaceuticals, the process adapts to regulatory demands by dividing into stages like discovery, preclinical testing, and clinical trials, with gates assessing , , and commercial viability before advancing. Technology firms employ it in hardware and software R&D to mitigate risks in iterative prototyping and scaling, often customizing gates for agile integration. A representative case in the illustrates the process's progression: projects typically begin with concept ideation and feasibility studies in the initial stage, advance through design and prototyping in subsequent stages, undergo rigorous testing for safety and performance, and culminate in production validation before full-scale manufacturing. Major automakers such as , , , and Daimler have implemented this model to streamline vehicle development, reducing time-to-market while ensuring compliance with industry standards; for instance, gates evaluate prototypes against criteria like emissions and durability before proceeding to integration. This structured flow, akin to the typical phases of scoping, development, and testing in NPD, enables cross-functional teams to iterate efficiently. Studies indicate that firms adopting the phase-gate process in NPD achieve marketplace success rates of 63-78%, compared to approximately 24% for those using unstructured methods, highlighting its role in improving outcomes through early identification and . These metrics underscore the model's impact on reducing failure rates in ad-hoc approaches (where success rates are as low as 24%, implying failure rates around 76%), by enforcing data-driven decisions at gates. To support implementation, specialized software tools like Stage-Gate NPD software facilitate tracking across product pipelines by digitizing workflows, automating gate reviews, and providing dashboards for portfolio visibility and resource forecasting. These platforms integrate with existing systems to enforce criteria, generate reports, and ensure compliance, enabling real-time collaboration in complex NPD environments.

Opportunity and Risk Integration

In the phase-gate process, opportunity management begins at the initial gates through structured idea screening and market opportunity evaluation, where project teams assess potential value based on strategic alignment, market size, and competitive positioning to prioritize initiatives with the highest return potential. Subsequent gates incorporate portfolio balancing by reviewing ongoing projects against the organization's overall opportunity pipeline, ensuring resource allocation favors high-value opportunities while divesting from underperformers to maintain a balanced mix of short- and long-term initiatives. Risk strategies within the phase-gate framework emphasize quantitative assessment at each gate, enabling decision-makers to quantify uncertainties such as technical feasibility or regulatory hurdles. Per phase, contingency planning is integrated by developing mitigation actions tailored to identified risks, such as resource buffers or alternative pathways, which progressively reduce overall project uncertainty as phases advance. Beyond traditional domains, the phase-gate process applies to IT projects through agile-phase hybrids, where iterative sprints occur within stages, allowing to evaluate software prototypes for opportunity viability while managing risks like in dynamic environments. In , it supports for large-scale endeavors like LNG by gating approvals based on site-specific hazards and opportunity evaluations of project timelines, ensuring phased commitments align with economic feasibility. Service industries adapt the model for opportunity screening in areas like consulting or , using to balance client needs with internal risk profiles. Integration techniques link the phase-gate process to broader portfolio management by feeding gate outcomes into centralized opportunity pipelines, where aggregated data from multiple projects informs strategic decisions on resource distribution and risk diversification across the enterprise. This linkage enhances overall opportunity realization by aligning individual project gates with portfolio-level reviews, fostering a cohesive approach to value creation.

References

  1. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem05014
  2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4883499_Stage-Gate_Systems_A_New_Tool_for_Managing_New_Products
  3. https://www.stage-gate.com/blog/the-stage-gate-model-an-overview/
  4. https://www.five-is.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Cooper_2006_Formula_for_Success.pdf
  5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365900408_The_5_th_Generation_Stage-Gate_Idea-to-Launch_Process
  6. https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/phase-gate-processes-promising-complex-547
  7. https://profwurzer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1990-Stage-Gate-ANewToolforManagingNPD-BusHor-1990-1.pdf
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229580801_New_Products-What_Separates_the_Winners_from_the_Losers_and_What_Drives_Success
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279563021_Winning_Businesses_in_Product_Development_The_Critical_Success_Factors
  10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247070071_New_Product_Success_in_Industrial_Firms
  11. https://books.google.com/books/about/Winning_at_New_Products.html?id=B4ZYAAAAYAAJ
  12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/000768139090040I
  13. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-5885.1110003
  14. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303144920_Agile-Stage-Gate_Hybrids
  15. https://gensight.com/stage-and-gate-software/
  16. http://mpd-qe-consulting.com/assets/CERM_phase_2_2.15.17.pdf
  17. https://www.stage-gate.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/SGI-Articles-Transform-NPD-with-AI-by-Dr-Cooper-Part-2.pdf
  18. https://pure.port.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/58045715/04_Baxter_et_al.indd.pdf
  19. https://www.toolshero.com/innovation/stage-gate-process/
  20. https://bptrends.info/wp-content/publicationfiles/07-06-ART-Stage-GateForProductDev-Cooper-Edgett1.pdf
  21. https://www.stage-gate.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Stage-Gate-The-Quintessential-Decision-Factory.pdf
  22. https://www.stage-gate.com/blog/using-stage-gate-to-enable-digital-transformation-success/
  23. https://corasystems.com/guidebooks/stage-gate-process-modern-innovation-guide
  24. https://repository.up.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/a6450ab7-75ec-48e7-a373-514cbb14aafa/content
  25. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1190&context=etm_fac
  26. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/79426/849909951-MIT.pdf?sequence=2
  27. https://emeritus.org/blog/stage-gate-process/
  28. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497216302474
  29. https://www.wellspring.com/blog/how-to-manage-your-innovation-process-the-stage-gate-framework
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827114003217
  31. https://www.stage-gate.com/solutions/products/stage-gate-npd-software/
  32. https://cerri.com/stage-and-gate-software
  33. https://www.stage-gate.com/blog/portfolio-management-fundamental-for-new-product-success/
  34. https://scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1815-74402009000100015&lng=en&nrm=iso
  35. https://www.iaarc.org/publications/fulltext/S32-7.pdf
  36. https://www.stage-gate.com/
  37. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09718907241243188
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.