John Jo

BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
DETERMINANTS OF NEW PRODUCT MARKET SUCCESS IN FOOD
PROCESSING COMPANY AND ITS IMPLICATION TO COMMERCIALIZE
MICROALGAE-BASED NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENT AND FOOD
(IN CASE BAHIR DAR CITY)
BY
YOHANES GETNET
ADVISOR; -MESELU ALAMNIE (PH.D.)
JULY 2022
BAHIR DAR, ETHIOPIA
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT MBA PROGRAM
DETERMINANTS OF NEW PRODUCT MARKET SUCCESS IN FOOD

PROCESSING COMPANY AND ITS IMPLICATION TO COMMERCIALIZE
MICROALGAE-BASED NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENT AND FOOD (IN CASE
OF BAHIR DAR CITY)
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT,

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS, BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
AWARD OF DEGREE OF MASTERS OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION (MBA).
BY: YOHANES GETNET

ADVISOR: MESELU ALAMINIE (PH.D.)
JULY, 2022
BAHIR DAR, ETHIOPIA
i
Student’s declaration
I, the undersigned, confirm that this study entitled “determinants of new product market success in
food processing company and its implication to microalgae-based nutritional supplement and food
commercialization” submitted by me for the award of the Degree of Master of Business
Administration at Bahir Dar University. This is my original work and has not been presented for award
of the Degree of in any other university, and that all sources of materials used for the study have duly
acknowledged.
Name: Yohanes Getnet
Signature______________________ Date:_____________
ii
Adviser declaration
This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as a University advisor.
Name: Meselu Alamnie (Ph. D)

Signature _____________________Date __________________
iii
Statement of Certification
This is to certify that Yohanes Getnet has carried out his research work on the topic entitled,
“Determinants of new product market success in food processing company and its implication to
microalgae-based nutritional supplement and food commercialization” in case of Bahir Dar city food
processing companies is his original work and is suitable for submission for the award of Masters
Degree in master of business administration.
Approved by Board of Examiners
Name Signature Date
1. Internal examiner
2. External examiner
3. Chairperson
Acknowledgement
It is my pleasure to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Meselu Alamine (PhD), for his all-round
help, guidance, valuable comments and encouragement throughout the progress of this paper.
I am indebted to thank you SATREPS-EARTH project for their unlimited financial and material support
and the project coordinator Solomon A. (PhD), who supported me by sharing his experience.
Furthermore, I would like to thank you all respondents, who spent their valuable time in filling the
questionnaire and the managers of food supplement companies for their cooperation for interview.
Finally yet importantly, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to all my family members
and friends for their constructive comments, criticisms and other related support, which helped me, get
to where I am.
Thank you so much!!!

Abstract
Modern food industry leads to an increase of cheaper, healthier and more convenient products. In
order to become competitive enough, profitable and to meet the growing demand of customer’s need of
healthy and balanced food, food-processing firms develop new product continually. Contrary to the
case, there is an imminent treat faced by all companies, which is the market success rate record of new
products, is very low. The main objective of this study is to examine the determinants of new product
market success on food processing companies and its implication to microalgae-based nutritional
supplement and food commercialization in case of Bahir Dar city. Mixed research approach with
descriptive and explanatory research design was employed to examine the five determinants namely
technological orientation, new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution
and food safety regulation. Purposive sampling particularly criterion sampling was adopted as a
sampling method. Companies which are in operation currently, companies which have more than five
year operation experience in Bahir Dar city and the nature of the product that food-processing
company produce is set as a criteria. Based on the criterion 25 food processing companies are
selected. 100 questionnaires were distributed for each company general manager, marketing manager,
operation manager and research and development personals. 93 questionnaires were filed
appropriately and returned. Interviews were conducted for purposively selected food supplement
producing company managers.
The data has been analyzed using descriptive and inferential analysis techniques particularly;
frequency, mean, correlation and multiple linear regression analysis supported with SPSS
version 26. The result of correlation indicated all included independent variable have associate with
the dependent variable and the overall result of R=.756. The study found that technological
orientation, new product development process speed and timing, promotion and distribution have
significant and positive impact on new product market success and food safety regulation has
significant negative impact on new product market success. The model with these determinants was
found to predict 56.2% of the variability of dependent variable leaving the remaining 43.8% to
variables not included in this study.
The researcher recommends that food processing firms should realize the effect of determinants on new
product market success and draft and implement appropriate strategy.
Key words: technological orientation, new product development process speed and timing promotion,
distribution, food safety regulation, new product market success.
List of Acronyms
ANOVA - Analysis of Variance
FAO - Food and agriculture organization
NPD - New product development
FOSHU - Foods for Specified Health Use.
FNB - Food and Nutrition Board
NFPD - New food product development
SPSS - Statistical package for social science.
TO - Technological orientation.
PO - Promotion
DI - Distribution
UK - United Kingdom
FSR - Food safety regulation
NPMS - New product market success
NPDST - New product development process speed and timing
List of table
Table 3.1: Reliability Analysis of Variance....................................................................................................25
Table 4.1 Distribution of owners of companies..............................................................................................27
Table 4.2 Distribution of years of operation of companies in Bahir Dar city................................................27
Table 4.3 Sex distribution of respondents.......................................................................................................28
Table 4.4 Age distribution of respondents......................................................................................................28
Table 4.5 distribution of respondents’ responsibility....................................................................................29
Table 4.6 Educational qualification of study participants...............................................................................29
Table 4.7 Distribution of study participants by years of work experience.....................................................30
Table 4. 8: Descriptive statistics of variables of the study.............................................................................31
Table 4.9: Correlation between Variables.......................................................................................................35
Table 4.10 Collinearity Statistics....................................................................................................................37
Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics for normality..............................................................................................39
Table 4.12 Model Summary...........................................................................................................................42
Table 4.13 ANOVA........................................................................................................................................42
Table 4.14 Regression Coefficients of Determinants.....................................................................................43
Table 4.16: Summary results of hypothesis testing........................................................................................47
List of figure
Figure 2.1 conceptual framework...................................................................................................................19
Figure 4.1: New Products Success and Failure Rate......................................................................................32
Figure 4.2:-Types and number of New Products Developed in four-selected food processing firms............33
Figure 4.3 normality test histogram................................................................................................................38
Figure 4.4 normal p-plot.................................................................................................................................40
Figure 4.5 scatterplot......................................................................................................................................41
Table of content
Contents
Student’s declaration...........................................................................................................................................ii
Adviser declaration.............................................................................................................................................iii
Statement of Certification....................................................................................................................................4
Acknowledgement...............................................................................................................................................5
Abstract...............................................................................................................................................................6
List of Acronyms..........................................................................................................................................................7
List of table..........................................................................................................................................................8
List of figure.........................................................................................................................................................9
Table of content.................................................................................................................................................10
Chapter one.........................................................................................................................................................1
Introduction........................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background of the Study................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Statements of the Problem..............................................................................................................................2
1.3. Objectives of the Research............................................................................................................................5
1.3.1. General objective...............................................................................................................................................5
1.3.2. Specific objectives..............................................................................................................................................5
1.4. Research question.........................................................................................................................................5
1.5 Hypothesis of the Study..................................................................................................................................5
1.6. Significance of the study...............................................................................................................................6
1.7. Delimitation of the Study...............................................................................................................................6
1.8. Definition of operational Terms....................................................................................................................7
1.9. Organization of the paper..............................................................................................................................8
Chapter two.........................................................................................................................................................9
Review of related literature..................................................................................................................................9
Introduction........................................................................................................................................................9
2.1 The Nature and Concepts of new product in food processing industry............................................................9
2.3 New product development models......................................................................................................................11
2.3.1 Traditional Approach.......................................................................................................................................11
2.3.2. Modern Approach...........................................................................................................................................13
2.4 Empirical review..........................................................................................................................................14
2.4.1 New product market success............................................................................................................................14
2.4.1 The effect of technological orientation on new product market success.........................................................15
2.4.2 The effect of new product process development timing and speed on new product market success..............16
2.4.3 The effect of promotion on new product market success................................................................................17
2.4.4 The effect of distribution on new product market success..............................................................................18
2.4.5 The effect of food safety regulation on new product market success..............................................................18
2.5 Conceptual Framework................................................................................................................................19
Chapter Three...................................................................................................................................................20
Research methodology.......................................................................................................................................20
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................20
3.1 Research Paradigm...............................................................................................................................................20
3.2 Research Approach...............................................................................................................................................20
3.3 Research design....................................................................................................................................................21
3.4. Participant of the study and sampling technique.................................................................................................21
3.4.1 Target population........................................................................................................................................................................21
3.4.2 Sampling and Sample Size determination...................................................................................................................................22
3.5. Data source.........................................................................................................................................................22
3.6 Data collection instruments..................................................................................................................................22
3.7 Measurement of Variables...................................................................................................................................23
3.8. Data Analysis Methods........................................................................................................................................23
3.7 Validity and Reliability of Research Design...........................................................................................................24
(i) Validity..............................................................................................................................................................................................24
(ii) Reliability.........................................................................................................................................................................................25
3.8. Ethical Considerations.........................................................................................................................................26
Chapter Four.....................................................................................................................................................27
Data presentation, discussion and analysis........................................................................................................27
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................27
4.1 Descriptive statistics............................................................................................................................................27
4.1.1 Response Rate.............................................................................................................................................................................27
4.1.2 Organizations profile...................................................................................................................................................................27
4.1.3 Demographic characteristics of respondents..............................................................................................................................28
4.1.4 Descriptive statistics of the variables..........................................................................................................................................30
4.1.5 Discussions on the Interview part................................................................................................................................................31
4.2 Correlational Analysis...........................................................................................................................................35
4.3 Regression Analysis..............................................................................................................................................37
4.3.1 Assumption test of Multiple Linear Regression...........................................................................................................................37
4.3.2 Regression Test on the Effects of Independent Variables on new product market success......................................................41
4.4. Discussion on Regression Analysis.....................................................................................................................44
4.3.1 Result and Discussions of technological orientation...................................................................................................................45
4.3.2 Result and Discussions of new product development process speed and timing........................................................................45
4.3.3 Result and Discussions of promotion..........................................................................................................................................45
4.3.4 Result and Discussions of distribution.........................................................................................................................................46
4.3.5 Result and Discussions of food safety regulation........................................................................................................................46
Chapter five.......................................................................................................................................................48
Summary, conclusions and recommendations...................................................................................................48
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................48
5.1 Summary of major findings................................................................................................................................48
5.2 Conclusions..........................................................................................................................................................49
5.3 Recommendations................................................................................................................................................50
5.4 limitation of the study and recommendations for further studies........................................................................52
Reference...........................................................................................................................................................53
Appendix I..........................................................................................................................................................59
Appendix II.........................................................................................................................................................63
Appendix III........................................................................................................................................................68
Chapter one
Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
According to FAO 2020 report, Africa is making slow progress in achieving international hunger
targets. The region has been afflicted by conflict and natural disasters. Africa remains the region with
highest prevalence of under nourishment with around one in four people out of about one billion
estimated to be undernourished. From five African countries with the most number of people in a state
of hunger/under nourishment Ethiopia is number one with 32.1 million people in a state of hunger/under
nourishment.
afesse Kassa (2013) to address food insecurity problem, the government of Ethiopia is taking a strong
leadership role with programs that meet the varying needs of vulnerable households. It is making
significant investments and strides, particularly through its productive safety net program and
agriculture-led economic growth that tried to improved livelihoods and nutrition condition of the
population and can be a long-lasting solution to Ethiopia’s chronic poverty and food insecurity.
The food-processing sector in Ethiopia is by far the largest manufacturing industry in the country and
accounts for 39% of the gross value of production in large and medium size manufacturing in 2009/2010
The gross value of production (Eshetie, 2018).
Business firms spend large sums of money for new product development due to many important reasons.
In order to become competitive enough, profitable and to meet the growing demand of customer’s need
of healthy and balanced food food-processing firms develop new product continually. Functional foods,
being one of the major food categories of the global health and wellness market, are becoming a major
focus of new product development (NPD) in the food processing industry and the promising solution of
food insecurity (Khan, Grigor, Winger, & Win, 2013; Sousa, Gouveia, Batista, Raymundo, & Bandarra,
2008). With the popularity of functional foods, people are becoming increasingly aware of food quality
and the health benefits associated with different foods. As a result, people’s interest in consuming
healthy foods and the demand for healthy food products have increased significantly (Baker, Lu,
Parrella, & Leggette, 2022).
In Europe, food processing industry foods which have benefit for health or functional food as a new
food product sales have increased significantly; Germany, France, United Kingdom and the Netherlands
represent the most important countries within the functional food market (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2011).
By Yohanes G. Page 1
The demand for food for health is growing not just in the developed regions, but also in the developing
regions of the world such as in Africa due to increasing consumer awareness on the role of foods in
human health (Ashaolu & Adeyeye, 2022).
New product development brings core competency for the firm and helps to maximize the sales and
profit objectives, which will definitely results from first mover advantage. Contrary to the case, there is
an imminent treat faced by all companies, which is the success rate record of new products, is very low.
Demisse (2019) explained the situation that, around 80 percent of all new products launched to the
market was not be commercially successful due to various reasons. According to Mat and Jantan (2009),
between 33 percent and 80 percent of all new products fail to generate an economic return after reached
the market place in all industry.
To date, many studies have investigated the factors that may predict market success of newly developed
food product, and wide ranges of influential factors have been reported. the study conducted by Sharma
(2006) on determinants of new consumer product success shows the main determinants of new product
success are: product features, price, quality promotion, market information, service to customers and
wide distribution channel.
According to Topolska, Florkiewicz, and Filipiak-Florkiewicz (2021) awareness, attitudes, motivations,
willingness and nutritional knowledge is the most important of all factors. Khan et al. (2013) orientation
toward Innovation, market orientation, Collaborative networks, arrangements, and product development
process are determinant success factors.
The rationale for the conduct of the study is to find the alternatives how to reduce new product failure by
clearly identifying the contributing factors, since reduced failure rate can enhance success of the
product. Therefore, the paper will investigate five determinant factors (technological orientation, new
product development sped and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation) of new
product market success in food processing company in case of Bahir Dar city.
1.2 Statements of the Problem
Food is originally intended to respond to hunger, and thus provide nutrients needed for human survival.
Everyone agrees that a food is material eventually consumed by humans to satisfy physiological and
psychological needs (Link, 1987). Today foods are not intended to only satisfy hunger and to provide
necessary nutrients for humans but also to prevent nutrition-related diseases and improve physical and
mental wellbeing of the consumers (Menrad, 2003; Roberfroid, 2000). In this regard, food processing
firms modify their product continually and functional foods play an outstanding role. The increasing
demand on such foods can be explained by the increasing cost of healthcare, the steady increase in life
expectancy, and the desire of older people for improved quality of their later years (Roberfroid, 2000).
Modern food industry leads to an increase of cheaper, healthier and more convenient products. During
the last decades, consumer demands and increasing public interest in possible health benefits in the field
of food production have changed considerably (de Boer & Bast, 2015; Mollet & Rowland, 2002). Food
which has better advantage for health or functional foods, being one of the major food categories of the
global health and wellness market, are becoming a major focus of new product development (NPD) in
the food industry (Khan et al., 2013; Soni, Sudhakar, Rana, & Baredar, 2021).
Various food, pharmaceutical, and retail businesses have been motivated to enter this profitable industry
over the past couple of decades, with the possibility to earn larger returns and acquire a competitive edge
(Van Der Sluis, Dekker, Skrede, & Jongen, 2002; Van Kleef, Van Trijp, Luning, & Jongen, 2002).
However, the high failure rate of conventional new food products launched into this market does not
make easy reading for people managing new product development process (Hardy, 2010; Hoban, 1998).
Recently, several new products claiming to be functional food or food that is beneficial for health have
been launched into the market, but only a few have proven to be successful (Baker et al., 2022;
Supachaturat, Pichyangkura, Chandrachai, & Pentrakoon, 2017).
The failure rate for new product introduction in the retail grocery industry is 70-80 percent (Salnikova,
Baglione, & Stanton, 2019). For smaller in united states food businesses launching new products, the
success rate was 11.6 percent only. Demisse (2019) explained the situation that, around 80 percent of all
new products launched to the market was not be commercially successful due to various reasons in all
industry.
As the consumer becomes more interested in health, there is increasing interest in the foods that have
great benefit for health. Recent, launching of a new product that claims to be food that is good for health
is introduced into the market a lot, but there are just some products only to be successful in the market
(Supachaturat et al., 2017). Previous researchers try to investigate the determinant factors of new
product market success in their study.
Supachaturat et al. (2017) on the study of perspective on functional food commercialization in Thailand
revealed that marketing mix factors; (price, product, promotion and placement), lifestyle fit, market
timing, sharing, and regulation are determinant factors for market success of functional food. Siró,
Kápolna, Kápolna, and Lugasi (2008) when developing and commercializing novel food products,
potential technological difficulties, legislative issues, and customer expectations must all be considered.
Consumer approval, in particular, has been identified as a critical aspect in successfully navigating
market opportunities.
Wu and Chang (2013) on his study key market success factors are; superior skills in marketing research,
strong market orientation, strong sales force, high quality of sales effort, good launch management, and
excellent launch timing. Langerak, Hultink, and Robben (2004) found that there was a positive
relationship between market orientation with product advantage and to the proficiency in market testing,
launch budgeting, launch strategy, and launch tactics of product development process. Khan et al. (2013)
Orientation toward Innovation and technology, market orientation, Collaborative networks,
arrangements, and product development process are determinant success factors.
Ramaseshan, Caruana, and Pang (2002) while implementing a marketing plan is vital, the adoption of
proper marketing strategies is critical to the overall success of new products. The study also showed that
formulation of the marketing strategy has a significant and positive effect on the market performance of
new products. Razli (2009) Finding shows that variables of strategic orientation and marketing strategy
have significant influences on new product success while variables of market research activities have no
significant influences on new product market success.
As shown above there is inconsistence of findings of scholars for example, Razli (2009), Ramaseshan et
al. (2002) Supachaturat et al. (2017) Khan et al. (2013) agreed in common about determinants but, Wu
and Chang (2013) and Razli (2009) disagree on marketing research its impact on success of new
product. different researchers use different variables in their study to measure the market performance
and the over all performance of new product this shows there is knowledge gap on determinants of new
product market success.
Methodologically most of previous studies employed single research approach qualitative research
approach or quantitative approach like (Hirahara, 2004; Hultink & Robben, 1995; Link, 1987; Wu &
Chang, 2013) and geographically limited to a single case companies. To the best of the researcher,
knowledge there is no one documented research paper in the country level on the area of the study.
Therefore, considering the gaps of contextual newness, methodological gap, geographical gap and and
inconsistence of findings of previous researchers, this study tries to investigate the five determinant
factors (technological orientation, new product development sped and timing, promotion, distribution
and food safety regulation) for the market success of new product in case of Bahir Dar city food
processing company.
1.3. Objectives of the Research
1.3.1. General objective
The main objective of this study is investigating determinants of new product success in case of food
processing company and its implication to commercialization micro algae-based nutritional supplement
and food in case of Bahir Dar city food processing companies.
1.3.2. Specific objectives
 To describe the prevalence of determinants and new product market success in food processing
company in case of Bahir Dar city.
 To examine the association between determinants and new product market success in food
processing company in case of Bahir Dar city.
 To investigate the effect of determinants on new product market success in food processing
company in case of Bahir Dar city.
 To show the relative importance of determinants to influence new product market success in
food processing company in case of Bahir Dar city.
1.4. Research question
Research question is a question that the proposed research project is expected to answer. To this end,
this study was tried to answer the following research questions.
 What is the effect of technological orientation on new product market success in food processing
company in case of Bahir Dar city?
 What is the effect of timing and speed of new product development process on new product
market success in food processing company in case of Bahir Dar city?
 What is the effect of promotion on new product market success in food processing company in
case of Bahir Dar city?
 What is the effect of distribution on new product market success in food processing company in
case of Bahir Dar city?
 What is the effect of food safety regulation on new product market success in food processing
company in case of Bahir Dar city?
1.5 Hypothesis of the Study
Considering the Questions articulated above, the following hypotheses were investigated:
H1: Technological orientation has a positive and significant effect on new product market success.
H2: New Product development process speed and timing has positive and significant effect on new
H3: Promotion has positive and significant effect on new product market success.
H4: Distribution has positive and significant effect on new product market success.
H5: Food safety regulation has negative and significant effect on new product market success.
1.6. Significance of the study
The primary objective of the study is to investigate the determinants of new product success in food
processing company and its implication to microalgae-based nutritional supplement and food
commercialization. Therefore, it is believed to attain the following importance from the study:
 It provides relevant information for food processing companies. As a result, top management of
companies and concerned bodies could be aware of the determinants of market success of new
product developed by food processing companies and draft best coping mechanism for
determinants influence.
 For SATREPS-EARTH project, this research will serve as valuable input to plan sound and
effective commercialization strategy to commercialize microalgae-based nutritional supplement
and food.
 It will serve as a pillar or cornerstone for further research investigation since the topic is entirely
new and undone in the country context.
 This study increases the knowledge of horizon and at the end of the day, the researcher will get
degree of masters of Arts in business administration.
1.7. Delimitation of the Study
In this research, the area of the study is delimited to the topic determinants of new product market
success in food processing company and its implication to commercialization to micro algae-based
nutritional supplement and food in case of Bahir Dar city. Even if the topic of the study is about
determinants of new product market success the study conceptually delimited on technological
orientation, new product development timing and sped, promotion, distribution and food safety
regulatory variables.
Methodologically, the study were delimited to mixed research approach, descriptive and explanatory
research design with cross-sectional survey data collection method, the main target population of the
study will be food-processing company in Bahir Dar city.
Geographically the area of the study was focused on Bahir Dar city. The study focus only on food
processing company in Bahir Dar city because of the study demanded large amount of effort the study
would not include other neighbor city.
1.8. Definition of operational Terms
New product market success: is the overall achievement of target sales volumes, revenues, customers
acceptance level and market share level that the firm plan to succeed or meet in the launch of new
product in to the market.
New product: completely original, improved or modified product, which is characterized by significant
technical and technological changes which better satisfy needs of existing or new buyers, is produced in
the process of research and development and is offered in the distribution channels for no longer than
one year since introduction to the market.
Technological orientation: Is the rapid integration of new technologies and the application of advanced
technology in new product creation and in overall operation.
Promotion: Refers to the methods that business firms use to gain the attention of the customers to their
products benefit, price and quality. It includes offering exclusive deals, discounts and other opportunities
for a limited amount of time, enticing customers to purchase their product or service.
Distribution: refers the means by which a business firm assures that its target market or markets have
access to the company's products. It includes number of distribution channels, warehousing facilities,
easily accessibility, location, and reliability of distribution channels.
Food safety regulation: Is a scientific discipline that describes how to handle, prepare, and store food to
avoid foodborne illness. Moreover it deals with what procedure should follow before we launch any new
food product.
1.9. Organization of the paper
The research a report is organized into five chapters. Each chapter has its own sub-units. The first
chapter deals introduction part is consisting of background of the study, statement of the problem,
objectives of the study, research question, research hypothesis, significance of the study, delimitation of
the study, definitions of operational terms and organization of the study. The second chapter deals with
review of related literature and conceptual framework of the study. The third chapter includes research
design, the research approach, research paradigm, target population and, sampling method, sample size,
data sources and collection techniques, research ethics and methods of data analysis and interpretation,
reliability and validity. Chapter four, deals data presentation; analysis and interpretation it consists
descriptive analysis, correlation analysis, regression analysis and discussion of major findings. Finally,
the fifth chapter deals with the summary of major findings, conclusions, recommendations and
limitations of the study and further research implication of the study.
Chapter two
Review of related literature
Introduction
This chapter is aimed to present a review of related literature that had been done by various researchers
on determinants of new product market success. Therefore, this chapter mainly focuses on the concepts,
empirical review of past studies on determinants of new product market success and conceptual
framework of the study.
2.1 The Nature and Concepts of new product in food processing industry
The concept of new product is susceptible to various definitions. A definition considered basic describes
a new product to cover original products, improved products, modified products and new brands
developed through an organization’s research and development efforts (Kotler & Armstrong, 1991).
Everyone believes that food is a material that humans consume to fulfill physiological and psychological
needs. New product defined as completely original, improved or modified product, which is characterized
by significant technical and technological changes which better satisfy needs of existing or new buyers, is
produced in the process of research and development and is offered in the distribution channels for no
longer than one year since introduction to the market (Kotler & Armstrong, 2006).
In order to become competitive enough, profitable and to meet the growing demand of customer’s need
of healthy and balanced food, food-processing firms develop new product continually. In such a case
development of food which are better for health or functional food gaining popularity in food processing
industry (Swinbanks & O'Brien, 1993). Food supplement and functional food are gaining popularity in as
new product in food processing industry. Food supplement and functional food is defined as "any
modified food or food ingredient that may provide a health benefit beyond that of the traditional nutrients
it contains," according to the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) of the Food and Nutrition Board, Institute
of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences in the United States.
At present, there is no universally accepted definition of functional foods. But, according to Foods for
Specified Health Use (FOSHU), Functional food is defined as food that are hazardous element removed
or an effective ingredient added to create a food that delivers nutrition, taste, and the maintenance of a
healthy condition (Pothisiri & Kongchuntuk, 1996).
In a much resent year microalgae is the promising source of functional foods. Micro-algal derived food
and food supplement products possess a huge potential to decelerate the rate of malnourishment in
developing nations. The abundance of proteins and other essential nutrients in microalgae can develop a
massive algae-based food industry, dedicated towards commercialization of healthy and functional foods
(Sousa et al., 2008). Previse studies have claimed benefits of such microalgae compounds upon human
health bearing anticancer, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antimicrobial, and anti-obesity capacities.
Hence, they may serve as nutraceuticals or functional food and their market value in food is expected to
rise on the short run (Galasso et al., 2019; Spolaore, Joannis-Cassan, Duran, Isambert, & bioengineering,
2006).
Business firms spend large sums of money for new product development due to many important reasons.
In food processing industry functional food are well demanded and promising new product due to the
rapid growth of population, attention for health, the increasing cost of health care service and other
factors (Supachaturat et al., 2017). The demand for certain product attributes can suddenly become so
intense that a firm is well-advised to create and introduce new marketplace for the new products in order
to exploit this new opportunity and meet the strong customer demand (Hise, 1978). New product
development has been defined as the process of transforming a new market opportunity into a
commercial product through a sequence of activities, with the purpose of achieving specific targets
(Azanedo, Garcia-Garcia, Stone, & Rahimifard, 2020). Business managers and marketing academics
alike agree that an essential element of an organization’s long-term survival is success in new product
development (Hart, 1993)
In general, new products are increasingly cited as the key to corporate success in the market. During the
1970s, new products accounted for 20% of corporate profits; in the 1980s, they accounted for 33 % of
profits (Takeuchi & Nonaka, 1986). In the 1990s, this figure has risen to 50 %. A recent study estimates
that new products provided over 42 % of company sales in the period 1985 – 1990, up from 33 % in 1980
(Slater, 1993). However, new products continue failing at an alarming rate. The most recent studies show
new product success rates at launch of less than 60 %-54.3 % for the UK, 59 % for the US, 59.8 % for
Japan and 49% for Spain (Edgett, Shipley, & Forbes, 1992). Recent years have witnessed extensive
research into the determinants of new product success; however, these new studies do not appear to have
had much of an impact on managerial performance. Therefore, a clear understanding of the factors that
drive product success is needed in order to help firms optimize the resources dedicated to the product
development process and increase the market demand for a firm’s new products.
2.3 New product development models
2.3.1 Traditional Approach
The traditional approach is based on early research work on NPD by various scholars including (Hauser,
Urban, & Weinberg, 1993); Kotler and Armstrong (1991) and (Stošić & Milutinović, 2014) who tried to
develop a systematic linear progression checklist for a successful NPD that business managers in
organizations would use or refer to while developing New products. Various scholars have advanced
several models though all follow a linear approach. Booz, Allen, Hamilton, and Advertisers (1965)
developed what came to be known as the Booz, Allen and Hamilton BAH model of NPD. The model
identified six stages or steps to be followed for a successful NPD. The BAH model started with
exploration as stage one, which is gathering of ideas from many diverse sources, consumers, experts,
employees, forums and others. The next stage is screening of the ideas by subjecting the ideas to different
parameters like technology requirements, costs and benefits.
Once the ideas are screened, they are moved to the next phase that is business analysis. In business
analysis it includes financial analysis to determine the profits, breakeven points, capital requirements and
prices. Marketing analysis is also done for internal environment shareholders, culture, human capital and
organization and external environment market size, growth potential and competition. The purpose of the
business analysis is to create a business plan for the ideas been developed and determine their suitability
and ease of manufacture. The next stage is development, where proto-types are made for testing in the
market to determine if suitable for target consumers. These proto-types made during the development
stage are moved to testing which is the next stage in BAH model.
Once the proto- types are improved as per organizations standard of acceptance, then they move to the
next stage which is commercialization. The pro-type is then produced in mass production for
consumption and selling in the trade. The BAH model lacked follow up in the market and the assumption
was the product will definitely be accepted without any supporting activity in the commercialization
stage. However, product failure rates continued to rise even with wide use of this model. Many other
scholars tried to improve the BAH model to reduce the failure rate. Many other versions of the model
were introduced.
Hauser et al. (1993) identified five steps in NPD process. This was opportunity identification, design of
the product, testing, introduction and product life-cycle management. The introduction of product life
cycle management was a move from the BAH model and tried to correct some of the flaws in the BAH
model. This stage was meant to control the longevity of the products within the different market stages
for maximum returns to the organizations.
According to Kotler and Armstrong (1991) there are six stages of NPD process. These were idea
generation, idea screening, concept development and testing, market strategy and development, business
analysis and product development. They introduced some new concept of market strategy and
development to the BAH model. They were propagating the use of three A’s- Availability, Affordability,
Accessibility in NPD. They state that these three A’s are important marketing tools critical in the success
of NPD and their inclusion would greatly enhance the success of the products. However they also
followed the linear approach as developed by the BAH model.
R. G. Cooper (1975) introduced a different approach to the NPD which was very different from the BAH
model. His studies on failures of NPD even to organizations adhering to the BAH model led him to
develop what is known as the Stage- Gate model of NPD, According to R. G. Cooper (1990) the stage-
gate model was developed to ensure that the NPD process was pro-active other than reactive in nature
like the BAH model. The stage- gate introduced two concepts, which were integrated, stages and gates in
the process. The model developed five stages to be followed. These were idea generation, business
analysis, development, testing, validation, and the product launch. The stages were similar to the BAH
model but another dimension of gates was introduced. The gates are decision barriers introduced at each
stage. They are meant to be decision barriers where the decision makers will decide whether to move
ahead with the project or kill it. R. G. Cooper (1990) refers to them as Go/ Kill gates in management.
This was meant to ensure the stages were followed and proper research was done to enable the process to
go through each stage. The model has been widely used in the manufacturing sector and updated versions
of the models developed depending on the sector, the current version is Next Gen stage model which is a
computer based system of decision making without need for physical management involvement.
However many organizations still had many NPD failures even with use of these models, leading
business managers running into huge losses. Other scholars Saguy and Graf (1990), Abbasi, Pouri, and
Hamidi (2015) in different manufacturing sectors developed models which complemented or combined
the broad models BAH or Stage- Gate model but with no fundamental differences. The traditional
approach is relevant to this study in providing a basis for understanding how various factors can be
contributing towards the success of failure of the new product in each steps of product development
process.
2.3.2. Modern Approach
This approach is also known as holistic approach or cross-functional approach. According to Yelkur and
Herbig (1996) they identify six stages of the NPD process. These were idea generation and screening. In
this stage like previous models ideas are sorted according to priorities and identified which are viable.
The next stage is concept development and testing. The development of concepts deviates from the
traditional approach. Focus groups are identified which are used as the benchmark for developing
products. These could be people with an experience in specific field, target groups of the final products
and knowledgeable people in future predictions on consumer patterns. A variety of concepts are selected
and tested with the focus groups. In the next stage market strategy and business analysis are done. Like in
the traditional approach financial, internal and external environment and technology are tested for
suitability.
The next step is Product development and market pre-test. While the previous marketing test was
checking on viability and acceptance, these tests involve trying the actual pro-types in order to determine
best performing or the most preferred. The next stage is Market strategy. Here the business organization
will identify the advertising, promotion campaigns and packing style that they will use for the product to
succeed in the market. The final stage is introduction of the product into the market or commercialization.
However unlike in the traditional approach in commercialization it involves continuous development and
analysis of the product as in the market. These improvements ensure the product remains relevant as it
also enhances chances of success.
According to Millward and Lewis (2005) modern approach improves the speed of the NPD process with
product life cycles shortening. This is due to the fact that modern approach uses cross- functional teams
in NPD. Work schedule is broken down into workable projects with each team made up of members from
different departments within the organization, Marketing, sales, research and development, technical,
production and finance. The teams work separately in their area of specialization meeting regularly for
updates with the head of the project. Due to this the time taken for product development is reduced
significantly.
(R. G. Cooper & Edgett, 2010) concluded that the new approach enables identification of strategic arenas
which the organization will compete in. Whereas this model does not fully guarantee success in NPD it
improves the chances for success. The approach also shortens the NPD time to launch new products and
introduces the element of product management after the commercialization to increase product life cycle
and develop other variants of the same product as the external environment changes. The modern
approach method is important in understanding various components of product development process
from the traditional approach. It puts in the concept of identifying strategic arenas for organizational
competitiveness.
2.4 Empirical review
A number of studies have examined about the determinants of new product success in many Countries
around the world. Most of the studies consider share similar variables like Market orientation,
Knowledge management, Decision making speed and support of top-level, managers, NPD team,
Technological advancement and NPD process. Here under the research variables of this study is
discussed according to previous study conducted by different scholars in the world.
2.4.1 New product market success
Market success, achieving target sales volumes and revenues, is often the measure of success and failure
for the overall company, the product families and the individual product. New product market success is
the overall achievement of target sales volumes, revenues, customers acceptance and target market share
level that we plan to success in the launch of new product in to the market. Market success is a large
increase in output without much of an increase in price. In industrial marketing to the food manufacturer
and the food service company, not only are the actual ingredient sales monitored but also the sales of the
resulting consumer products to confirm if the company is achieving its percentage of a growing or static
market. The efficiency of the marketing effort to achieve these sales is also a product success measure the
costs of the marketing effort including distribution, advertising and promotion and selling are measured
and related to the sales achieved.
In investigating the success and failure factors within new product development, researchers face a dual
task: as well as having to study the critical success factors, they must also define success. This is neither
an easy nor a straightforward task because NPD success is multidimensional. To date, it is still a question
which dimensions of success one should include and how to measure these dimensions. For example, the
determinants of new product success will probably be different when success is operationalized as met
market share goals than when success is operationalized as return-on-investment. Some researchers have
started to study these dimensions of success in the last decade.
Oliver, Dostaler, and Dewberry (2004) suggest that NPD performance should be valued upon external
and internal quality, cost, lead-time, schedule following and product profits. R. G. Cooper and
Kleinschmidt (2007) revealed that NPD success is actually in decline. Majority of success or failure
studies tend to treat new product performance as a single dimension, usually, financial performance.
However, numerous research works like (Atuahene-Gima & Li, 2004) have examined the outcomes of
new product performance specific in new product market performance and timeliness of development.
According to (Ganesan, Malter, & Rindfleisch, 2005) profitability and cycle time reduction conceded as
measure of success for new product. Reduce time and cost in NPD process measure the success of new
product (Meybodi, 2005). Speed to market and market performance also the other measure (Barczak,
Sultan, & Hultink, 2007). According to Hultink and Robben (1995) The most important measure to
evaluate commercial performance, is cash flow.
Hart (1993) attempted to overcome the lack of consistency in defining new product success among the
existing literature on NPD research by providing a framework. The framework has four building blocks:
the measure of success, the level of analysis, the source of data, and the data-collection method. First,
NPD studies have used a variety of different types of success measures: whereas some use financial
measures of success (e.g., profit and sales), others use nonfinancial measures (e.g. design and social
performance), and a third group uses a combination of the two.
Therefore, in this study success means the market performance of new product launched in to the market.
Non-financial and financial measures of market success dimensions used. Consumer acceptance, market
share, sales revenue and sales volume used to measure new product performance or market success in
this research.
2.4.1 The effect of technological orientation on new product market success
According to the literature, there are numerous definitions of technological orientation. Technological
orientation means the use of sophisticated technologies in new product development, the rapidity of
integration of new technologies and proactively developing new technologies and creating new product
ideas (Gatignon & Xuereb, 1997). Technological orientation is about the overall adaption of advanced
technology and the level of product in terms of technological newness. A technology-oriented firm
appears to possess the ability and will to acquire superior technological background and apply it in
commercializing new products (Song & Parry, 1997). Such firms embrace the idea that innovation should
be a strategic and cultural priority (Hurley & Hult, 1998). As a result, they are likely to excel in technical
proficiency, flexibility, and creativity and be proactive in the development of original products, services,
and processes.
A strong emphasis on technology mobilizes a firm’s entry into new market niches, renews its presence in
existing ones, and fosters its capability to respond to customers’ preferences in an effective way.
Prior research has identified technology orientation as valuable to new product success (R. G. Cooper,
2000; Song & Parry, 1997) Therefore, technology orientation could facilitate the commercialization of
more innovative products compared with those offered by competitors in lack of technology orientation.
However, Gao, Zhou, and Yim (2007) suggest that technology orientation has a negative effect on
business performance at low levels of technological prevalence and has a positive effect on business
performance at high levels of technological prevalence. Previous research also suggests that if there is a
mismatch between technology advancement and consumer demand, technological orientation would not
have an impact on performance e.g. (Burgelman & Sayles, 1988; Van de Ven, 1986). Despite such
concerns, our argument leads us to believe there is an overwhelming positive relationship between
technological orientation and new product commercialization or market success. Thus, we propose:
H1: Technology orientation has a positive and significant effect on new product market success.
2.4.2 The effect of new product process development timing and speed on new product
market success
The new product development process is defined as those activities that occur from idea generation
through to actual product launch in a typical new product project (R. G. Cooper & Kleinschmidt, 1994).
In addition, new product development is a continuous process starting from idea generation and strategic
evaluation of the new product, feasibility study, planning implementation and validation, and then to
product realization and performance feedback. The timing or season at which a product is launched
determines also how successful the product will be (R. G. Cooper, Edgett, & Kleinschmidt, 2002).
Timing refers to the time or season that a product is commercialized, launched, or introduced to the
market. The speed is defined as the time taken from conception of an idea or generation of product idea
to commercialization of the product in to the target market.
Research often suggests that formal NPD processes increase the success rate of NPD projects in a firm.
However, many firms still do not use a formal NPD process even though the effectiveness of product
development processes has been well proven (Al Shalabi & Rundquist, 2009; Rundquist & Chibba,
2004). There are various NPD models explaining the factors affecting NPD process. The generally used
model constitutes eight steps. These steps are idea generation, idea screening, concept development and
testing, marketing strategy, business analysis, product development, test marketing and
commercialization (Kotler & Keller, 2006). However, following formal new product development is not
a guarantee for the success of the product in the market.
According to Datar, Jordan, Kekre, Rajiva and Srinivasan (1997) as cited by (Ndiho, 2016) the speed to
the market of the new product determines the success of the new product. Whereas the product lifecycles
have become shorter the process of NPD must increase the speed at which new products are developed to
ensure they remain relevant and there is a constant flow of new products. This will ensure a higher
success rate of the new product. Hence, the time that a product is launched with have effect on the
success of new product. The hypothesis below proposed;
H2: New Product Development process has a positive and significant effect on new product market
success.
2.4.3 The effect of promotion on new product market success
product promotion is the process by which a company uses the mediums at their disposal to encourage
customers to buy their products. They can offer exclusive deals, discounts and other opportunities for a
limited amount of time, enticing customers to purchase their product or service. Because customers typically
want a good deal, product promotion could be the difference between them buying a product or not (Kotler &
Keller, 2006).
Promotion is the key to the market exchange process that communicates with present and potential
stakeholders, and the general public. Every firm or store must cast itself into the role of communicator and
promoter. Kotler, Keller, Brady, Goodman, and Hansen (2019) discovers that promotion has become a critical
factor in the product marketing mix which consists of the specific blend of advertising, personal selling, sales
promotion, public relations and direct marketing tools that the company uses to pursue its advertising and
marketing objective. Previous researches (Francis & Collins‐Dodd, 2004) have established significant
relationship between promotion and new product performance. Promotion, company is able to know
whether customers accept their products or not. Information can be gathered during promotion for further
improvement of company’s products in the future. In the study of Ramaseshan et al. (2002) it appears
that the formulation of appropriate marketing mix strategies is very critical for the market success of new
products. Since promotion is one marketing mix element it considered as critical factor for market
success of new product.
According to Thabit and Raewf (2018) promotion has a very high level of impact to increase the sales of
new products. The company’s policy for promoting has a very good reflection on increasing the sales of
products. Since promotion has impact on new product market success. The hypothesis below proposed;
H3: Promotion has positive and significant effect on new product market success
2.4.4 The effect of distribution on new product market success
This is about the distribution of the product from production to final customer or stores and the methods
used in distributing it to the customer. Kotler and Keller (2006) also define place or distribution as a set of
interdependent organizations involved in the process of making a product available for use or consumption by
consumers. Place strategy calls for effective distribution of products among the marketing channels such as
the wholesalers or retailers (Berman, 1996). According to Thabit and Raewf (2018) distribution or place
can be defined as the mechanism through which goods and services are moved from the provider or
manufacturer to the consumer.
Goi (2009) place is one of marketing mix elements and includes distribution channels, warehousing
facilities, mode of transportation, location, assortment, convergence, and distribution channel reliability.
Wherever this is, it should be easily accessible to the customer. For example, if you have a physical store,
it should be located in a place that can be easily discovered by the customer. If you own a website to
market your product, make sure it is easily navigable. Johnson, Scholes, and Whittington (2008) defines
place as any way that the customer can obtain a product or receive a service. According to Thabit and
Raewf (2018) good distribution of product can affect positively on market success of new product. The
hypothesis below proposed;
H4: Distribution or place has positive and significant effect on new product market success
2.4.5 The effect of food safety regulation on new product market success
Various environmental factors affect the success of new product development. These can be factors
within the firm or outside the firm. Among those they include governments’ policies, laws and
regulations and trade barriers (Baron, 1995). Trade barriers and regulations are designed to protect
production but in reality have had more negative effects on new product development and success.
Unfriendly trade barriers are specific to each scenario, limit the opportunities, and maintain the status
quo. This in return negatively affects the process of new product development (Ndiho, 2016).
Manufacturing firms have to adhere to regulatory bodies within their areas of operation. The affiliations
of governments to various economic bodies also influence the success of new product development.
According to Azaze and Haji (2005) performance of new products was found to relate with certification
of environmental factors, as well as promotion, distribution and design strategy. Food safety is one of the
most important issues food manufacturers face from the general environment.
Food safety regulation is a scientific discipline that describes how to handle, prepare, and store food to
avoid foodborne illness. Food safety is one of the most important issues food manufacturers face. Food
developers must have knowledge about the quality and storage requirements of raw materials and final
products, product, formulation and the processes needed to safely manufacture the final food product.
Consequently, food manufacturers play a pivotal role assuring product safety and identifying possible
hazards from the beginning of the NFPD process (Azanedo et al., 2020). The regulatory systems
worldwide are charged with the responsibility of ensuring consumer health is protected and that they are
not being misled and also with creating an environment for industry to grow and develop (Lalor & Wall,
2011). The hypothesis below proposed;
H5: food safety regulatory issue has negative and significant effect on new product success
2.5 Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework is a tool a researcher use to guide their inquiry, it is a set of ideas used to
structure the research and it offers a roadmap for the research (Kothari 2004). It is a research tool
intended to support a researcher in developing an understanding of the situation under investigation.
Thus, it is the researcher’s own point on the problem and direction of the research. As shown in Figure
2.1
Independent Variable Dependent Variable
Technology orientation
NPD process sped and

timing
Promotion New product market

.
success
Distribution
Food safety regulation
Source: own study of literature 2022

Figure 2.1 conceptual framework
Chapter Three
Research methodology
Introduction
In this section, research paradigm, research approach, research design, research site, source of data,
participants of the study, sampling technique, instruments of data collection, method of data analysis,
validity, reliability and ethical considerations are discussed.
3.1 Research Paradigm
According to Mackenzie and Knipe (2006) the term paradigm is used to express a researcher’s
“worldview”. This worldview is the perception, or thinking, or school of thought, or set of shared idea,
that notice the word or interpretation of research data. According to Candy (1989) research paradigm
can be divided into three main categories, namely positivist, interpretive & pragmatic paradigm.
The study employed pragmatic research philosophy than the other because the researcher believes the
area under study can be examined on what actually works. Means reality is neither solely by virtue of a
one scientific method as advocated by the positivist paradigm, nor were it possible to determine social
reality as builds under the interpretive paradigm. The pragmatic paradigm is useful for guiding research
design, especially when combinations of different approaches are employed in one study. Furthermore,
the researcher believes there is no one single reality concerning the subject of the study.
3.2 Research Approach
In this study, mixed research approach employed to address the predetermined objective of the study. A
mixed research approach with Concurrent procedures is useful to capture the best of both quantitative
and qualitative approaches. In which the researcher converges quantitative and qualitative data in order
to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research problem. Both forms of data collected and analyzed
at the same time during the study and then integrate the information obtained in the interpretation of the
overall results. The reason behind the selection of mixed research approach is that the research question
may not answered by using single research approach and for triangulating the information obtained
from both qualitative and quantitative data and to give sound interpretation.
3.3 Research design
Research design is a map that is developed to guide the research (Pandey & Chawla, 2016). It is a plan
of investigation so confirm to obtain answers to research questions or problems. The plan is the
complete scheme of the research. Based on the purpose, research could be broadly divided into
descriptive, exploratory and explanatory.
Descriptive research studies are those studies, which are concerned with describing the nature of
individual, or of a group (Kothari, 2004). A descriptive research is a study that seeks to portray an
accurate profile of a person, events or situations. It involves formalizing the study with real structures in
order to better describe or present reality about a phenomenon as it is perceived or as it is.
According to Kothari (2004) exploratory research is also expressed as formulating research studies. The
major emphasis in such study is on the discovery of new insights. Mostly, it is used when a researcher
wants to have a deeper understanding on the area of the study, so the study may new or vague that it
becomes critically important to examine unknown variable that may affect a phenomenon.
An explanatory research tries to establish relationship that exists between variables. It aims to identify
how one variable affects the other, it seeks to provide an empirical explanation of the causality and
causes and effects relationship between one or more variables (D. R. Cooper, Schindler, & Sun, 2006)
Based on the above justification, in this study both descriptive and explanatory research design with
cross-sectional survey data collection method are used. Descriptive research is concerned with
describing the nature of individual, or of a group (Kothari, 2004). A descriptive research is a study that
seeks to portray an accurate profile of a person, events or situations. It involves formalizing the study
with real structures in order to better describe or present reality about a phenomenon as it is perceived or
as it is. Explanatory research tries to establish relationship that exists between variables. It aims to
identify how one variable affects the other, it seeks to provide an empirical explanation of the causality
and causes and effects relationship between one or more variables.
3.4. Participant of the study and sampling technique
3.4.1 Target population
According to Mugenda (2003) defined population as a complete set of individuals, with common
characteristics. Population is entire set of individuals to which study findings are to be generalized.
The main targets of the study are food-processing companies in Bahir Dar city. According to Bahir Dar
city investment office, there are 23 small, 43 medium, 17 large food processing companies. Totally, in
the city there are 83 food-processing firms. However, in this study only 25 companies considered. After
case companies were selected, for collecting the required data associated to the study from food
processing companies only marketing manager, operation manager, head of research and development
center of the company and general managers of each company considered. This is because they are the
persons who have better experience in the new product commercialization and market success.
3.4.2 Sampling and Sample Size determination
The sampling technique selected for this study is purposive sampling. Particularly, the researcher used
criterion sampling to select sample food processing companies. Companies which are in operation
currently, companies which have more than five year operation experience in Bahir Dar city and the
nature of the product that food-processing company produce is set as a criteria. Food supplement
producing companies, pasta and macaroni factories, flour and biscuit factories and grain processing
companies that are in production currently and have more than five years experience selected as a
sample. Food processing companies, which fulfill this criterion, are selected as a sample because it is
believed that those firms have more new product experience than the other food processing companies.
Based on this criterion 25 company are selected as a sample. The major limitation of purposive sampling is
making description rather than generalization (Dawson, 2002). To minimize this limitation the
researcher considers that the sample size is sufficient to make sound conclusion about the population as
far as it covers around 30% of the total population. According to (Mugenda, 2003) a sample size of
between 10 and 30% present a good representation of the target population. The researcher attach
selected sample Company on appendix III.
3.5. Data source
In order to achieve the predetermined research objective the study used both primary and secondary
data. Primary data use to generate first hand data related to the determinants of new product market
success. Primary data will be collect through survey of questionnaire and interview method. The
secondary data are those, which have already been collected by someone other than the investigator
himself, and as such the problems associated with the original collection of data do not arise here. In this
study secondary data gathered from various sources such as researches, target company documentation,
international journal articles, research papers conducted locally, important books, related to the topic.
3.6 Data collection instruments
In this study, structured questionnaire and unstructured interview used as main data collection
instruments. Structured questionnaire distributed to marketing managers, research and development
body of the company, Operations/production manager and general managers of selected food processing
company in Bahir Dar city. From sample of 25 food processing company 4 food supplement producer
companies selected purposively. Interview designed and conducted for managers of food supplement
producing company in Bahir Dar city in order to have detail information about determinant factors of new
product market success and to drown factor implication for commercializing micro algae based food
supplement.
3.7 Measurement of Variables
The questionnaire used in this study is Likert Scale Method of summated ratings. It consisted of
statements where respondents indicated their degree of agreement or disagreement on a five- point
scales means Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, and Strongly Agree. The data collection
instrument, i.e., questionnaire, was mainly adopted from a European journal of Marketing, Brendan
Gray, Sheelagh Matear, Christo Boshoff and Phil Matheson and the European Journal of Business and
Management, Gatignon & Xuereb, Narver and Slater’s Market Orientation Concept, which was tested
for reliability and validity. Moreover, minor customizations were made to some of the questions in order
to reflect the objective of the study.
3.8. Data Analysis Methods
In this study before the analysis of data using SPSS version 26 started, data was cleaned, edited, checked
for accuracy and will coded. These processes are essential to ensure that the collected data will
systematically organize in a manner that facilitates analysis (Mugenda, 2003)
The qualitative type of data was analyzed by thematic data analysis technique. The steps was performed
as follows: Before starting, the analysis to understand the data the researcher read and re-read the data
gathered from interview guide. Next, the researcher systematically organized, classified, reduced and
coded the data in to themes. Then, the researcher grouped similar kinds of ideas and concept (data)
together in themes, main and sub categories uses as summery markers for analysis.
Under quantitative analysis the data, was summarize into numerical values to form both descriptive and
inferential statistics. These included; frequencies, percentages and means, standard deviation as well as
correlations, Z statistics, and R Squared values from the regression analysis.
Cohen, Swerdlik, and Sturman (2002) postulate that the Pearson Correlation Coefficient is a widely
used statistical method for obtaining an index of the relationships between two variables when the
relationships between the variables is linear and when the two variables are continuous. To ascertain
whether a statistically significant relationship exists between determinants (technological orientation,
new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation)
and new product market success the Pearson Correlation Coefficient has been used.
In order to examine the strength and relationship between the study variables, a multiple linear
regression model of the form below used. Multiple linear regression model is used when we want to
predict the value of a variable based on the value of another variable. Both dependent and independent
variables are continuous, multiple linear regression was used in this study.
Y=β0+β1TO+β2NPDST+β3PO+ β4DI+ β5FSR+Ɛ
Where Y = market success of new product
TO = Technological orientation
NPDST = New product development speed and timing
PO = Promotion
DI = Distribution
FSR = Food safety regulation
Ɛ= Error term
Β0 is the intercept term- it gives the mean or average effect on Y of all the variables excluded from the
equation, although its mechanical interpretation is the average value of Y when the stated independent
variables are set equal to zero. β1, β2, β3, β4 and β5 refer to the coefficient of their respective independent
variable, which measures the change in the mean value of Y, per unit change in their respective
independent variables.
3.9 Validity and Reliability of Research Design
The quality of research depends on the design of research instruments as well as application of these
instruments in data collection in the field. There are several criteria or tests for judging the quality of any
empirical research. These include validity and reliability (Singh & Easwaran, 2010)
(i) Validity
A test of an instrument is said to be valid if it measures the construct that it is supposed to measure
(Creswell, 2009). It can be measured as content and face validity. Content validity is obtained when the
instrument matches with contents that would be focused. In line with this, the questionnaire items were
based on what different scholars in the field stated in the literature. The other element, face validity, is
concerned with having a good appearance and attractiveness of the instrument. This instrument was
obtained by having the instrument judged, evaluated, commented and edited by the researchers’ advisor
and colleagues. Moreover, the questionnaires were distributed by the researcher and qualified assistants.
In order to ensure that all the participants complete the questionnaires by themselves, the participants
were made to complete them in the presence of the researcher and/or the assistants as much as possible.
(ii) Reliability
Reliability as the degree to which a survey instrument is considered reliable if its repeated application
results in consistent scores (Rosa et al., 2007). According to Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill (2003)
reliability refers to the degree to which data collection method yield consistent findings.
Theoretically, alpha varies from 0 to 1, the higher the Cronbach alpha, the more reliable the test results
will be. Different authors accept different values of Cronbach’s alpha so as to achieve internal
reliability, but the most frequently accepted value is 0.70 and above to reach internal reliability. If the
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is greater than 0.9 it implies excellent, greater than 0.8 is Good, greater
than 0.7 is acceptable, greater than 0.6 is questionable, greater than 0.5 is poor, and less than 0.5 is
unacceptable” (Gliem & Gliem, 2003). In this study, a sample of 16 respondents taken and the
questionnaire distributed in order to test internal reliability. The result of reliability analysis of variance
is shown below.
Table 3.1: Reliability Analysis of Variance
Variables Cronbach’sAlph Number
Coefficient of Items
1 Technological orientation .714 4
2 NPD process speed and .746 4
timing
3 Promotion .801 4
4 Distribution/placement .858 4
5 Food safety regulation .723 3
6 New product market success .873 6
Source: Survey data, 2022
3.10. Ethical Considerations
According to (D. R. Cooper et al., 2006) ethics refers to the appropriateness of your behavior in relation
to the rights of those who became the subject of your work or are affected by it. All the research
participants included in this study was appropriately informed about the purpose of the research and
their willingness and consent is secured before the beginning of conducting survey and interview.
Regarding the right to privacy of the respondents, the study maintains all participants has been briefed
about the research and joined with their full consent, the confidentiality of the identity of each
participant and the researcher report the findings in complete honesty.
Chapter Four
Data presentation, discussion and analysis
Introduction
This chapter is constituted of four main sub-sections. The first sub-section section is the descriptive
statistics. It includes a summary presentation of the main features of cases and study variables such as
mean, frequency and percentage. The second one is correlation analysis where by the nature of
association between the study variables is portrayed. The third sub-sections presents regression output of
the model. The fourth one contains discussion of the main findings.
4.1 Descriptive statistics
4.1.1 Response Rate
In the data collection stage of the research, 100 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents, out of
which 93 of them appropriately completed and collected. This makes the response rate 93%, which was
statistically acceptable for the purpose of making inference for the general population.
4.1.2 Organizations profile
The following table summarizes the organization profile and demographic data of the respondents.
Table 4.1 Distribution of owners of companies
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Private 93 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 4.1 reveals distribution of the targeted company by their owners company. As shown from the table
all 93 (100%) of served companies are privet owned companies. In this study, there is no governmental,
public and international company.
Table 4.2 Distribution of years of operation of companies in Bahir Dar city
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid 5-8 years 49 52.7% 52.7% 52.7%
9-12 years 26 28.0% 28.0% 80.6%
above 12 years 18 19.4% 19.4% 100.0%
Total 93 100.0% 100.0%
Table 4.2 shows the distribution of companies based on their years of operation or production in Bahir
Dar city. About 49(52.7%) of companies have five to eight years of operation experience in Bahir Dar
city. 26 (28%) of companies have nine to twelve years of operation experience in Bahir Dar city.
Whereas 18(19.4%) of companies have more than twelve years of operation experience. This shows all
the companies in this study have more than five year operation experience.
4.1.3 Demographic characteristics of respondents
For this study, the following table summarizes the demographic data of the respondents. The
demographic characteristics of the respondents such as sex, age, level of education, year of experience
and responsibility of of the respondents in the organization are presented and discussed.
Table 4.3 Sex distribution of respondents
Percent
Valid Male 57 61.3% 61.3% 61.3%
Female 36 38.7% 38.7% 100.0%
Total 93 100.0% 100.0%
The above table presents sex profile of study participants by frequency and percent. The results revealed
that out of 93 respondents, 57(61.3%) of them were males and 36 (38.7 %) were females. This shows the
existing of relative male predominance in the surveyed population.
Table 4.4 Age distribution of respondents

Percent
Valid 18-27 23 24.7% 24.7% 24.7%
28-37 35 37.6% 37.6% 62.4%
38-47 22 23.7% 23.7% 86.0%
48 and above 13 14.0 14.0 100.0
Total 93 100.0 100.0
Table 4.4 above reveals research participants divided in to four age categories. Respondents in the
category from 18 – 27 and 28 – 37 years count 23 (24.7 %) and 35 (37.6%) respectively; whereas, those
in the age category between 38 – 47 and 48 and above are 22 (23.7%) and 13 (14%) respectively. This
shows that the study population is dominated with young generation of employees in the productive age
category.
Table 4.5 distribution of respondents’ responsibility
Percent
Valid Marketing manager 25 26.9% 26.9% 26.9%
General manager 25 26.9% 26.9% 53.8%
Research and development 20 21.5% 21.5% 75.3%
Operational manager 23 24.7% 24.7% 100.0%
Total 93 100.0% 100.0%
Table 4.5 above reveals research participants responsibility in the organization. 25 (26.9%) of
respondents are marketing manager and general managers in their organization. 20 (21.5%) of
respondents are responsible for the research and development center of the organization. Whereas 23
(24.7%) of respondents are working as production manager. This shows that the study population more or
less has equal distribution of respondents by their responsibility.
Table 4.6 Educational qualification of study participants
Valid Certificate / Diploma 10 10.8% 10.8% 10.8%
Degree 50 53.8% 53.8% 64.5%
Masters 28 30.1% 30.1% 94.6%
PHD 5 5.4% 5.4% 100.0%
Total 93 100.0% 100.0%
Table 4.6 on the above shows level of educational achievement attained by respondents. Out of the total
participants 10 (10.8%) had college diploma level education. The majority, 50(53.8%) and 28 (30.1%)
have completed their first and second degrees respectively. 5 (5.4%) of respondents have PhD holders.
This shows that largest proportion of the study participants have first level educational background.
Table 4.7 Distribution of study participants by years of work experience
Valid 0-3 years 34 36.6% 36.6% 36.6%
4-7 years 48 51.6% 51.6% 88.2%
8-11 years 10 10.8% 10.8% 98.9%
Above 11 years 1 1.1% 1.1% 100.0%
Total 93 100.0% 100.0%
Table 4.7 above reveals distribution of respondents in four categories of work experience. About 34
(36.7%) of them belongs to the category of new entrants to employment with work experience of three
year and less than that. Whereas, 48 (51.6%) of them belong to those having four to seven years. About
10 (10.8) of respondent have eight to eleven years of experience. Only one respondent has more than
eleven years of experience. This shows majority of the respondents have more than five years of work
experience.
4.1.4 Descriptive statistics of the variables
Creating clear understanding and giving an overall picture of research data is very necessary step in
research work. To this end arithmetic mean and standard deviation, the most commonly used forms of
descriptive statistics, are given a due emphasis and computed for all of the research variables. According
to ziadatol and Bagheri (2009) as cited by (AYNIE, 2020) the mean score of is below 3.39 show low
prevalence of that variable, the mean value is between 3.40 and 3.79 indicates moderate prevalence of
the variable and the mean value of the variable is above 3.79 show the high prevalence in that case area.
Therefore, the mean score of the variables indicated in table 4.8 hereunder are analyzed in the light of
the specification of ziadatol and Bagheri (2009). As such, the means and standard deviation of the
variables are presented in table 4.8 hereunder.
Table 4. 8: Descriptive statistics of variables of the study
N Mean Std. Deviation
Technological orientation 93 4.0995 .34801
New product development process 93 3.1290 .45387
speed and timing
Promotion 93 2.8172 .30870
Distribution 93 2.7984 .32816
Food safety regulation 93 4.4086 .38426
New product market success 93 2.5161 .25308
Valid N (listwise) 93
Table 4.8 above shows the descriptive statistics of variables of the study. The first variable, which is
technological orientation, has a mean score of 4.0995 and a standard deviation of .34801. This high
mean value shows food-processing firms use advanced technology in their operation. The second
variable new product development process speed and timing has a mean distribution of 3.1290 and a
standard deviation of .45387. Promotion the third variable has a mean distribution of 2.8172 and a
standard deviation of .30870. The forth-variable distribution has a mean distribution of 2.7984 and a
standard deviation of .32816. The mean value promotion, distribution and new product development
process speed and timing categorized under low mean value shows the low prevalence of listed variables
in case area. Food safety regulation the fifth variable has a mean distribution of 4.4086, which is
relatively the highest among all independent variables, and a standard deviation of .38426 as shown in
the table. The dependent variable, which is new product market success, has a mean score of 2.5161 and
standard deviation of .25308. This shows that the market success of new product is low in food
processing companies.
4.1.5 Discussions on the Interview part
Since the the study is mixed research approach in order to collect qualitative data four purposively
selected food supplement producing companies namely Minabie Alimi migib, Quarit agro industry,
Misgana food complex and Birhanu Aragaw Alimi migib are considered. The researcher himself
interviews the managers of those companies.
On the past five consecutive years, food supplement producing companies gives more concern on new
product development projects in addition to mass production and distribution. In addition, on average at
least two new product was introduced to the market every year in each firm which means more than
eleven new products are introduced in the last five years in each firm. Out of the total new product
introduced in the past five years more than four of them were failed in each year, but the majority of
new product were successfully commercialized and have successes in the market. New product success
rate for four firms based on their five-year new product investment portfolio data and interview data is
given as follows.
Success Rate =Number of Successful NP = 32/55 =0.581= 58.1%
Total Number of NP
Failure Rate= Number of Failed NP = 23/55 = 0.418 = 41.8%
Total Number of NP
18
16 New product market success

14
12
number of products
number of new
product
10
success
8
failer
6
0
2009 2009.5 2010 2010.5 2011 2011.5 2012 2012.5 2013 2013.5 2014
years of production
Figure 4.1: New Products Success and Failure Rate

The types of product that are developed in the last five years are broadly lie on package changes, product
new to the business and product improvements. On average majority of newly produced products are
improved products. Products improved by their biochemical content means ingredients added in previous
product to meet the customer demand.
100
90
80
70
60
percent
50 number of product
40
30
20
10
0
packeging change product improvement entirely new product
Figure 4.2:-Types and number of New Products Developed in four-selected food processing firms.
According to the managers of food processing firms experience the major factor that determine the
market success of newly produced product are: - the environment that the firm operates, the technological
advancement of the company, promotion effort, distribution capacity of the firm, the price we set for the
product, the product it self, the competitor strategy for new product.
The environment that the firm operates is the totality of environmental factors such as social norms,
environment protection, rules and regulations, tread barriers and safety regulations. The managers’ side,
food safety regulations are the major environmental issue that they faced to develop and commercialize
new food products. Food safety is an important public health issue in Ethiopia, as foodborne disease
disrupts the lives of consumers due to high rates of adulteration and unhygienic food handling practices
across the food value chain. However, responsibility for food safety regulations, compliance, and
inspection in Ethiopia is fragmented and disjointed across different ministries and executive governing
bodies. Food safety authorities are distributed between several Ministries most notably, the Ethiopian
Food and Drug Authority within the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the
Ministry of Agriculture as well as their respective regional offices, local authorities, and municipalities.
At present, no integrated coordination mechanism exists to clarify overlaps or gaps in food safety
regulations. In Bahir Dar city the major responsible body to execute food safety regulation is state food
and drug authority bureau. Food processing firm must pay 40,000 birr to 80,000 birr for one laboratory
test to pass food safety regulation. Most food safety laws and regulations focus only on formal food
sectors, they dose not overlook traditional market settings. This creates illegal competition among firms.
In general, food safety regulation negatively affect the success of new product in food processing
companies in Bahir Dar city.
Technological advancement of the firm is the other issue that managers mention in their interview. In
food processing firms there are necessary equipment’s and machineries in which their features are
volatile in accordance with technology advancement. Companies dose its operation in latest version of
equipment are more successful in the market than the other. But acquiring those machine and equipment
is costly, not only acquiring but also getting the person that can operate and fix when they filed to operate
is rarely available and highly labored. On average companies, pay 12,000 birr for one machine operator
as basic salary and 20,000 to 50,000 birr for mechanics (the one who fix a machine). More or less they
agree that within the challenges firms try to use advanced technology and this increase the market
success of newly produced products.
Promotion effort is one of the determinant factors for success or the faller of the new product in the
market in Bahir Dar city food processing firms the managers’ side. Firms have great promotion effort
they will get success in the market and the reverse is true. Companies use radios, TV shows to promote
their product less frequently. Social media plat-forms like telegram channel and Facebook pages which
are opened by the name of the companies the major promotion means. Companies promote their new
product after launching it into the market. They did not promote before they launch the actual product in
to the market.
Distribution one of the marketing mix elements is the other determinant factor for the success of new
product produced by food processing companies in Bahir Dar city. Companies produce products by the
order of sponsoring organizations like governmental organizations, NGOs and other charity organizations
and distributed by NGOs and other charity organizations. One or the other way the product of companies
may found in factory site. Two of the target company products found in sealing stores opened by the
company in Bahir Dar city. As per managers say any one who are interested to buy the product of the
company must go to the factory site or can found any of retailer or company sealing stores.
The product itself and the price of the product also determine the market success of new product in food
supplement producing companies. The product benefit biochemical content, test and color and the price
quoted to the product can improve the market success of the product. Unexpected reaction from
competitors is also the factor that leads to fail new products.
Finally the managers side that infrastructure like water rode and electricity supply are the major hinders
for their overall operation and that are needed to be solved in near future. The researcher also went to
give his wetness for the infrastructural problem that food processing companies faced. During my survey,
I have checked that more than seven food processing firms are temporarily closed due to electricity
power imbalance and total absence of power.
4.2 Correlational Analysis
Correlation Analysis is statistical method that is used to discover if there is a relationship between two
variables or datasets, and how strong that relationship may be. Correlation is a statistical method used to
assess a possible linear association between two continuous variables. A Pearson's correlation is used
when you want to find a linear relationship between two variables. It is used when both variables being
studied are normally distributed (Mukaka, 2012).
Pearson correlational analysis is used to find out whether the dependent variable, new product market
success, is correlated with each independent variable which are; technological orientation, new product
development process sped and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation or not.
According to Sekaran and Bougie (2016) correlation is a parametric system it gives a measure of the
strength and direction of association between two variables. The strength of relationship (r) signifies
weak between 0.10 and 0.29, medium between 0.30 to 0.49 and strong between 0.50 to 1.0.
Table 4.9: Correlation between Variables
TO NPDST PRO DI FSR NPMS
TO Pearson Co 1
NPDST Pearson Co .412** 1
PRO Pearson Co .171 .257* 1
DI Pearson Co .273** .648** .209* 1
FSR Pearson Co -.219* -.493** -.143 -.352** 1
NPMS Pearson Co ** .589** .380** .552** -.559** 1
.439
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Note: TO= Technological orientation, NPDST= New product development process speed and timing,
PRO= Promotion, DI= Distribution, FSR= Food safety regulation, and NPMS= New product market
success. Source: SPSS output of Survey data, 2022
Table 4.9: above shows that there exists medium relationship between new product market success
and technological orientation (r= 0.439, p<0.001). This means firms capability of acquiring advanced
technology correlates positively and moderately with their new product market success in Bahir Dar
city food processing companies.
Table 4.9: above also indicated that there is strong relationship between new product development
process speed and timing and new product market success (r= 0.589, p<0.001). This means new
product development process speed and timing and new product market success positively and
significantly in Bahir Dar city food processing companies.
The other result table 4.9 shows is the relationship between promotion and new product market
success. As per the information displayed, there exist moderate relationship between firms promotion
effort and new product market success (r= 0.380, p<0.001). The relationship between the two
variables is further characterized as positive and moderate in food processing firms.
The other issue presented in table 4.9 is the relationship between distribution and new product market
success. It is depicted that distribution is correlated with new product market success (r= 0.552,
p<0.001). This shows the correlation between firms’ distribution means and new product market
success is strong and positive in direction.
Lastly, the correlation matrix revealed the relationship between food safety regulation and new
product market success. It is observed in the matrix that food safety regulation is related with new
product market success at (r= -0.559, p<0.001). This apparently indicates the strong and negative
association between the two variables in the city food processing companies.
Generally, among the five variables tested two of them; technological orientation and promotion are
found positively and moderately associated with the dependent variable new product market success.
The remaining two variables new product development process speed and timing and distribution are
found positively and significantly associated with new product market success. In addition, the other
independent variable food safety regulation found negatively correlated with strength of relationship
identified to be strong.
All these factual evidences can provide initial points to reach a conclusion that new product market
success is determined by the variables identified to exert their positive and negative relationship at a
different level of strength as observed in this particular study of the food processing firms in Bahir
Dar city.
4.3 Regression Analysis
Linear regression is the next step up after correlation. It is used when we want to predict the value of a
variable based on the value of another variable. Since the both dependent and independent variables
are continuous, multiple linear regression was used in this study. According to Denis (2018)
regression serves to predict a dependent variable through determinant variables. As such the data
gathered using ordinal scale measuring items whose means are incorporated in to their respective
variables. It was started with an investigation that has been made on whether the designated
assumptions apply in the regression analysis of this particular study or not.
4.3.1 Assumption test of Multiple Linear Regression
4.3.1.1 Multicolinearity
The presence of correlations between the predictors is termed colinearity (for a relationship between
two predictor variables) or multicolinearity (for relationships between more than two predictors).
Creswell and Creswell (2017) mentioned Multi- linearity to the existence of perfect linear relationship
among some or all determinants in a given regression model. Multicollinearity problem needs to be
explored with the assumption of tolerance and VIF statistics application of regression procedures.
According to (Field, 2013) a tolerance value below 0.1 and the variance inflation factor (VIF) grater
than 10 shows the existence of critical colinearity. Based on the cutoff point there is no an issue of
multi-colinearity problem between the predictor variables in this study as indicated in table 4.10.
Table 4.10 Collinearity Statistics
Model Tolerance VIF

Technological orientation .818 1.222
New product development process speed and timing .586 1.708
Promotion .930 1.087
Distribution .750 1.333
Food safety regulation .738 1.355
a. Dependent Variable: New product market success
Source: SPSS output of Survey data, 2022
4.3.1.2 Normality Test
Regression considers that variables have normal distributions and they do not describe which variables,
in particular, they are talking about but the inference seems to be that multiple regressions need that the
predictor or feedback variables be normally distributed. In reality, only the assumption of normally
distributed errors is relevant to multiple regressions. Specifically, considering that errors are normally
distributed for any arrangement of values on the predictor variables (Osborne & Waters, 2002). When
histograms are close to zero it is assumed that the data is normally distributed for the dependent variable.
However, when skewness and kurtosis are not close to zero and the histogram does not appear to have a
normal distribution. According to the information in figure 4.3 below indicated that the skewness and
kurtosis are not far from zero or between them the zero value is indicated histogram
Figure 4.3 normality test histogram
Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics for normality

N Mean Skewness Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error
New product market success 93 2.5161 .195 .250 .351 .495
Valid N (listwise) 93
When the standard z- value of Skewness statistics and kurtosis statistics lies on the standard z-value of
the p value which is 1.96 and -1.96 the distribution is normal (Thode, 2002). Then
Z= Skewness statistics/standard deviation =0.195/0.250 = 0.78
Z= kurtosis statistics/ standard deviation = 0.351/0.495 = 0.709
Therefor the value of Z skewness and Z kurtosis lies between Z value of p that is 1.96 and -1.96 which
are 0.78 and 0.709 for skewness and kurtosis respectively this shows that the distribution is normal.
4.3.1.3 Linearity test
The model that relates the response Y to the predictors X1, X2…XN is assumed to be linear in the
regression parameter (Bhattacherjee, 2012). This means that standard multiple regressions can only
accurately estimate the relationship between dependent and independent variables if the relationships are
linear. Linearity can be seen in relation to the amounts of the rate of change, between scores on two
variables, which are assumed to be constant for the entire range of scores for the variables (Gujarati &
Porter, 2003). To say a relationship is linear, the points in the normal p-p plot should be closer to the
diagonal line and should lie in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to top right. To check
the linearity, this study used residual scatterplot shown below.
Figure 4.4 normal p-plot
4.3.1.4 Homoscedasticity
Homoscedasticity errors are generally assumed to have an unfamiliar but finite variance that is constant
across all levels of the predictor variables. This assumption is also known as the homogeneity of
variance assumption. If the errors have a variance that is limited but not constant across dissimilar levels
of the predictors (i.e., heteroscedasticity is present), ordinary least squares estimates will be unbiased
and stablesince the errors are independent, but will not be efficient (Weisberg, 2005). As we have seen
in figure 4.5 below, it can be assured that the point is random and evenly throughout the scattered
diagram and no evidence of funnel-like the shape of points on one side than the other is observed, so no
heteroscedasticity in the data is confirmed.
Figure 4.5 scatterplot
Generally, the study discussed four major assumptions that must be fulfilled for one to analyze data using
multiple linear regression model. As all the four assumptions had not been violated, it became possible to
examine the data collected by schedule using multiple regression model as follow.
4.3.2 Regression Test on the Effects of Independent Variables on new product market success
Multiple regression analysis is used to measure the statistical effect of each individual independent
variable on the dependent variable. The model is an appropriate one for explanatory studies that involve
predicting the value of the dependent variable based on the value of more than one independent
variables in the study (Field, 2013). This measurement is made by referring the value of adjusted R 2 to
explain the magnitude of the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. Thus, the
model presents how much of the variance in new product market success is explained by independent
variables. The analysis of direct effect of all predictor variables on new product market success is
presented in the model and coefficient tables below.
Table 4.12 Model Summary

Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 .765 a
.586 .562 .16755 2.304
a. Predictors: (Constant), Food safety regulation, Promotion, Technological orientation, Distribution,
New product development process speed and timing
b. Dependent Variable: New product market success
Based on the results indicated in table 4.12 on the above, the value R is 0.765; is the correlation between
the dependent and independent variable values of the research. R2 is also called the squared multiple
correlation coefficient or the coefficient of determination since (R)2 = (0.765)2 =.586, Adjusted R2 (.562)
is taken for interpretation. It clearly reflects that the total variation in the dependent variable (new
product market success) is explained or caused by 56.2% of the change in all independent variables. The
remaining 43.8% of the variation in overall new product market success could be explained by other
variables which are not incorporated under this study.
As we can see from the model summary box, the Durbin Watson (DW) statistic is 2.3, which shows a
good autocorrelation in the residuals from a statistical regression analysis table. The Durbin-Watson
statistic will permanently have a value between 0 and 4. The value of 2.0 means there is no
autocorrelation detected in the sample. Generally, the residuals are not correlated if the Durbin-Watson
statistic is approximately 2, and an acceptable range is 1.50 - 2.50. Durbin Watson (DW) statistic is 2.3
is informative of the fact that the assumption of independence of residuals is met or satisfied.
Table 4.13 ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 3.450 5 .690 24.580 .000b
Residual 2.442 87 .028
Total 5.892 92
b. Predictors: (Constant), Food safety regulation, Promotion, Technological orientation, Distribution,
New product development process speed and timing

According to (Field, 2013) ANOVA tells us whether the model, overall results in a significantly good
degree of prediction of the outcome variable or not. Thus, the above ANOVA table is produced to
determine the fitness or appropriateness of regression model used for this research purpose. Table 4.13
presented here above reveals that there is a statistically significant relationship between the independent
variables (Technological orientation, New product development process speed and timing, Promotion,
Distribution and Food safety regulation) and the dependent variable (New product market success).
From the statistics in the model the value of F > 1 and p< 0.05 revealed that the model is fit to predict
the effect of independent variables on dependent variable. As indicated by the result of the study, the
prediction power of the model is fit at F- value =24.58, P= .000 (p<0.001, F>1).
Generally, the model was found to be significant by explaining 56.2% (R 2 = .586, F = 24.58, p < 0.001)
of the variance on the dependent variable. Given the remaining 43.8% of the variance are attributed to
variables not included in this model, the over result indicates.
Table 4.14 Regression Coefficients of Determinants
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta T Sig.
1 (Constant) 1.472 .409 3.600 .001
Technological orientation .137 .055 .189 2.477 .015
New product development .104 .050 .187 2.069 .042
process speed and timing
Promotion .165 .059 .201 2.795 .006
Distribution .204 .061 .265 3.325 .001
Food safety regulation -.200 .053 -.304 -3.779 .000
The standardized and unstandardized beta values have to be used and interpreted separately (Field,
2013). The unstandardized beta helps to see the contribution of each independent variable to the
dependent variable and serve as a coefficient of independent variables in the statistical equation.
Moreover, the standardized beta ones can serve as instrument to compare the relative importance of
independent variables on the dependent variable. As such, unstandardized beta value has been used for
the interpretation of the contribution of each of the determinant factors to new product market success.
And standardized beta value has been used to compare the determinant factors based on their relative
importance to New product market success as indicated in the above table.
Table 4.14 revealed that all of the explanatory variables included in this study namely, technological
orientation, new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety
regulation can significantly explain at 95% confidence level to the variation on the dependent variable
new product market success.
The regression result in table 4.14 on the above shows, though at a varying level, five of the five
variables significantly affect variable new product market success in the food processing companies in
Bahir Dar city. The coefficient table showed that the degree of relationship between each determinant
variable with a constant (1.472), technological orientation (.137), new product development process
speed and timing (.104) promotion (.165), distribution (.204) and and food safety regulation (-.20) were
statistically significant since all of them had (p < 0.05).
In the regression analysis using the coefficient of determination table the linear regression model tasted
Y=β0+β1TO+β2NPDST + β3PO + β4DI+ β5FSR+Ɛ, arrived at the following conclusions; B0 = 1.47, B1
= .137, B2 = .104, B3 = .165, B4 = .204 and B5 = -.20. Therefore, Y= 1.47+ .141TO + .104NPDST
+ .165PO + .204 DI+ (-.20) FSR which means the constant (1.47) refers to the intercept in “Y” axis
where the regression line cross the axis. Whereas, one unit change in the independent variables TO,
NPDST, PO, DI and FSR do affect the dependent variable by one times each predicator values of 0.137,
0.104, 0.165, 0.204 and 0-.20 changes respectively.
The resulting equation has been formulated by using the unstandardized beta values:
Y= 1.47 + .137TO + .104 NPDST + .165PO + .204DI + (-.20) FSR
Based on the standardized beta values indicated in table 4.14 above, food safety regulation is the
predictor variable that contributes the highest to the variation of the dependent variable new product
market success because the standardized beta value for this predictor variable is the highest (-.304) as
compared to promotion, distribution and technological orientation. This implies that food safety
regulation creates the strongest distinct contribution to clarify the variation of the dependent variable
4.4. Discussion on Regression Analysis
A regression was run to determine the predictive power of the independent variables; technological
orientation, new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety
regulation.
The regression results above in table 4.14 revealed that independent variables (technological orientation,
new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation)
explain 56.2% of the variation in conditions new product market success in Bahir Dar city food
processing companies. All of independent variables included in the study are significant predictors of
new product market success at sig < 0.05.
4.3.1 Result and Discussions of technological orientation
As far as technological orientation is concerned, at 5% level of significance, the regression at
unstandardized coefficient is 0.137, its p value < 0.05. This shows that there is a positive significant
effect of technological orientation on new product market success.
Therefore, we failed to reject the alternative hypothesis H1 that is firms’ technological orientation has
significant and positive effect on new product market success. The results of this study also showed that
firms’ technological orientation has a positive effect on new product market success. The result suggests
that 1 unit change in technological orientation of the firm will lead to similar directional change by a rate
of 0.137 unit in new product market success and vice versa. The study funding also supported by
previous researchers output. According to (R. G. Cooper, 2000; Song & Parry, 1997) technology
orientation can facilitate the commercialization and improve the market success of the product. Means
technological orientation of the firm has positive effect on new product success.
4.3.2 Result and Discussions of new product development process speed and timing
With regard to new product development process speed and timing, at 5% level of significance, the
regression at unstandardized coefficient is 0.104, its p value < 0.05 and. This shows new product
development process speed and timing has significant effect on new product market success. Therefor
the researcher forced to accept H2 that is new product development process speed and timing has
positive and significant effect on new product market success. The result also supported by previous
research findings. Demisse (2019) delayed in product launches herm consumers understanding product pre-
announcements as credible promises to bring innovations to market at a given time. New product launching
speed and timing has positive and significant influence on new product market success.
4.3.3 Result and Discussions of promotion
With regard to promotion, at 5% level of significance, the regression at unstandardized coefficient is
0.165, its p value < 0.05. This shows that there is a positive and significant effect of firm’s promotion
capacity on new product market success.
Therefore, we failed to reject the alternative hypothesis H3 that is firms’ promotion has significant and
positive effect on new product market success. The result suggests that 1 unit change in firms promotion
effort will lead to similar directional change by a rate of 0.165 unit of market success of new product
and vice versa. This result is supported by earlier studies who had found out a significant positive
relationship between promotion effort of firms and new product success. A research study conducted by
Thabit and Raewf (2018) promotion has a very high level of impact to increase the sales of new
products. The company’s policy for promoting has a very good reflection on increasing the sales of
products.
4.3.4 Result and Discussions of distribution
As far as distribution is concerned, at 5% level of significance, the regression at unstandardized
coefficient is 0.204, its p value < 0.05. This shows that firms new product distribution capacity exert a
positive significant effect on new product market success.Hence, we failed to reject the alternative
hypothesis H4 that is distribution has significant and positive effect on new product market success.
This implies, holding other independent variables constant, distribution has an influence on the new
product market success food processing firms. The result implies that 1 unit of increment in distribution
effort will lead to similar directional change by a rate of 0.204 on new product market success. This
result is supported by earlier studies who had found out a significant positive relationship between
distribution capacity of the firm and new product success. According to Link (1987) in his study key to
new product success and frailer conclude that firms has strong distribution effort are are successful in
new product.
4.3.5 Result and Discussions of food safety regulation
Based on the SPSS computed result shown above, food safety regulation at p value < 0.05 has
unstandardized coefficient of (-0.20). This shows that food safety regulation exert a negative and
significant effect on new product market success.
Therefor the researcher forced to accept the alternative hypothesis H5 that is food safety regulation has
negative and significant effect on new product market success. The results revealed that holding other
independent variables constant, food safety regulation has negative and significant effect on new product
market success. Keeping all other independent variables constant, as 1 unit change in food safety
regulation leads to 0.20 unit change in new product market success to the opposite direction. This result
relates to previous researches. according to (Ndiho, 2016) a research study conducted in Kenya in
manufacturing sector found that environmental factors like tread barriers safety regulations negatively
affects the process of new product development and commercialization of new products.
Table 4.15: Summary results of hypothesis testing

SN Alternative hypothesis Accept Ha Reject Ha
1 H1: Technological orientation has a positive and √

2 H2: New Product Development process timing and √
speed has positive and significant effect on new
3 H3: Promotion has positive and significant effect on new √
4 H4: Distribution has positive and significant effect on √
5 H5: Food safety regulation has negative and √
Chapter five
Summary, conclusions and recommendations
Introduction
This chapter is constituted of four important sub-components. It starts with summary of results,
provides the conclusions based on the findings of this research, forward recommendations for
concerned body, show important aspects of limitations and future research implications.
5.1 Summary of major findings
This study was aimed at investigating the determinants of new product market success in food
processing companies in Bahir Dar city and drown implication to commercialize microalgae based
nutritional supplement and food. The study adopted mixed research approach and explanatory and
descriptive design with cross-sectional data collection method. The target of the study are food
processing companies operated in Bahir Dar city. 25 food processing firms are selected purposively. 100
Questionnaire was developed and distributed the general managers, operation managers, marketing
managers and research and development representative of each company. Unstructured interview was
used to get qualitative data from four selected food supplement producing company managers. After the
data were collected, the data analysis was done with the help of the statistical packages for social
sciences (SPSS) version 26. The demographic profiles of the respondents were analyzed using
percentages and frequencies. As for inferential statistics, tools such as correlation and regression
coefficient were used to analyze and study the nature of effects between independent and dependent
variables.
The result of interview analysis describes food processing firms give more attention for new product
development in past few years. Packaging change, product improvement and entirely new for firm are
major new product in food processing sector. There is an experience of new product market failed in
food processing companies. Promotion effort, competitors’ action, distribution means, the price of the
product, technological orientation, food safety regulation and new product development process speed
and timing are determinant factors.
The major results of the descriptive statistics showed that food safety regulation has the highest mean
score of 4.41, followed by technological orientation has a mean score of 4.01 which shows the high
prevalence of the variable. The third variable new product development process speed and timing which
has a mean score of 3.12. The fourth independent variable promotion which has a mean score of 2.82
and followed by the fifth independent variable distribution which has a mean score of 2.79. For
dependent variable, new product market success perceived by the respondents is the lowest mean of
2.52. shows the low prevalence of listed variables in case area.
The major findings with regard to the correlation result of this study presented that, the correlation result
on the determinants of new product market success, new product development process speed and timing
and distribution has positively and strongly correlate with new product market success with having
r=0.589 and p<.001 and r=0.552 and p<.001 respectively. Whereas, food safety regulation has
negatively and strongly related to new product market success that indicates the value of r= (-0.559) and
p<.001. The other important variables which are technological orientation and promotion moderately
and positively correlate with new product market that indicates the value of r=0.438 and p<.001 and
r=0.380 and p<.001 respectively.
The multiple regression results also revealed that the independent variables, technological orientation,
new product development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation
together explain 56.2% of the variation over the dependent variable new product market success. The
other remaining percentage (43.8 %) has covered by other variables, which are not included in this
model. All of the independent variables significant predictors of new product market success at sig <
0.05 and <0.01 level of significance. As such five out of five hypotheses set by the study are accepted as
per the presupposed statements. This enables to arrive at an overall inference that all the stated
independent variables have significant with the dimension of negative and positive effect new product
market success on food processing companies in Bahir Dar city.
5.2 Conclusions
This study was conducted to investigate the effect of technological orientation, new product
development process speed and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation on new
product market success in Bahir Dar city food processing companies.
 In this specific study, it has been found that food safety regulation is the first and the most
contributing determinant in the prediction of new product market success. As indicated from the
correlation and regression coefficient table, food safety regulations negatively influence the market
success of new product produced by food processing companies in Bahir Dar city. The interview
data analysis also support this finding, in the city food processing company there is huge approval
cost and length process for laboratory test and other safety issue approval. Moreover, it creates
illegal competition between formal and traditional food marketers.
 Distribution is the second most important determinant factor for new product market success in
Bahir Dar city food processing companies. As can be shown in the interview, descriptive, correlation
and regression analysis we can conclude that companies means of distribution of its new product can
determine the market success of the product. When the companies increase its distribution channel
and reliability of them, it can increase the success of its new product and vise versa.
 Based on the summery of analysis we can conclude that promotion effort and technological
orientation of the company have positive and significant effect on the market success of newly
produced product by food processing companies in Bahir Dar city.
 As can be seen from the summary, the relationship between companies new product development
process speed and timing to the market is positive and significant. This means the appropriate speed
and timing to launch the product to the market the more the market success of the product.
5.3 Recommendations
Based on the summary of findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are
forwarded to the management of the food processing companies, for food safety regulatory body and for
SATREPS-EARTH project.
 Top management of each food processing company should realize the contribution of promotion,
distribution and new product development process timing and speed for the market success of new
product developed in their company. Since promotion and distribution effort of the company and
the appropriate speed and timing to market have huge positive contribution for the success of
newly developed product, the top management of the companies should give higher attention for
this determinants. Examples increasing the advertising and promotion budget, promoting the
product in different social media plat forms, increase the reliability and the outlets of distribution
channel, working as partners with reputable whole seller and reseller can increase the success rate
of new product developed by food processing firms in the city.
 The responsible body to execute food safety regulatory issue in Bahir Dar city particularly the
State Food and Drug administrative office should realize the negative effect of food safety
regulatory issue on new product market success in food processing company and improve its new
product approval process of new product developed by food processing companies. Not only the
approval process lengthiness but also the cost of approving the product like laboratory test cost and
other related cost should be minimized. And the controlling mechanism should consider the
traditional food market, because it creates illegal competition between formal food processing
companies and traditional food marketers.
 Standing from the findings of the study the researcher would like to recommend SATREPS-
EARTH project the following tips in order to commercialize microalgae based nutritional
supplement and food in Bahir Dar city. Since microalgae based nutritional supplement and foods
are entirely new for food processing sector in the country as well as in the city the
commercialization success may determined in a number of factors, which are not included in this
study. Moreover, factors discussed in this study are considered as the primary determinant factors
for successful commercialization. Because microalgae based nutritional supplement and foods are
one part of new product developed by food processing firms all over the world.
For SATREPS-EARTH project should consider the legal and environmental issues.
Particularly getting license to operate and approval of microalgae based nutritional
supplement and foods, as conventional food in Ethiopia is challenging issue. Food safety
authorities are distributed between several Ministries most notably, the Ethiopian Food and
Drug Authority within the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the
Ministry of Agriculture as well as their respective regional offices, local authorities, and
municipalities. In order to get full approval from those government body the project should
show the health importance of food supplement as well as how it is the solution for food
insecurity appropriately and the project importance in environmental protection issue
Technologically the project should have a very advanced food-processing machine and
equipment. Not only the machine or the equipment the person who can operate that equipment
also should be considered. Because the use of advanced technology is one of the market
success factor for newly developed product in food processing sector.
Regarding to promotion the project should have a very aggressive promotion package. As we
know, majority populations in the city are not well informed about micro algae-based food
supplement the health importance of balanced diet. Promoting the product in TV shows, radio,
sponsoring social events, giving freely for testing, conducting bazars, promoting the product
by well known and respected individuals like sport mans, religious mans and like can increase
the acceptance of the product in the market.
Regarding to means of distribution the project should have a very reliable and well known
whole seller and reseller partners. Since the product is new, the consumer may frustrate the
adverse effect of the product. To minimize this frustration the project should sale its product
in a very reliable place like clinics, well-known supper markets. Working as partners with
NGO and sponsoring is also the alternative means of distribution and promotion.
Related to new product development process speed and timing, the project should launch its
product in appropriate speed and timing or season. Not to much shorter in process not to
longer process.
5.4 limitation of the study and recommendations for further studies

Despite the contribution of the present study, its limitations must be noted. The small sample size and
the resources available to the researcher limited the study. In order to get a stronger picture of the
issues in different organizations, the researcher would have liked to involve a larger number of
respondents but due to the time frame limitations provided by the study program, this was not
possible. The data was collected from 100 respondents in 25 food-processing companies in Bahir Dar
city. This sample is a very small proportion of the entire target of food-processing companies.
Therefore, the study suggests another research site in the country for better justification and
generalization.
This research was done on only technological orientation; new product development process
sped and timing, promotion, distribution and food safety regulation The study suggests that
further studies should examine the effects of other determinants including the variables like
price, consumer knowledge, competitors action, quality of the product and other variables
that may have significant mediating and moderating effects.
This study adopted a cross-sectional data collection method. In this method, the data was collected at
a time. Therefore, relationships among variables must be interpreted with caution. True causal
inferences require testing models using longitudinal data. Hence, it is suggested for future
researchers to employ longitudinal design.
Reference
Abbasi, R. P., Pouri, M., & Hamidi, F. (2015). Presenting a conceptual model of new product
development process in active techno-entrepreneur ventures. Journal UMP social sciences and
technology management vol, 3, 251-262.
afesse Kassa, T. (2013). The Impact of the PSNP on Food Security in Selected Kebeles of Enebse Sar
Midir District East Goj j am Zone, Amhara National Regional State. Food Security, Safety Nets
and Social Protection in Ethiopia, 301.
Al Shalabi, A., & Rundquist, J. (2009). Use of processes and methods in NPD—A survey of Malaysian
industry. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 6(04), 379-400.
Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2011). Functional foods development in the European market: A
consumer perspective. Journal of functional foods, 3(3), 223-228.
Ashaolu, T. J., & Adeyeye, S. A. (2022). African Functional Foods and Beverages: A Review. Journal of
Culinary Science & Technology, 1-36.
Atuahene-Gima, K., & Li, H. (2004). Strategic decision comprehensiveness and new product
development outcomes in new technology ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4),
583-597.
AYNIE, M. (2020). DETERMINANTS OF INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR OF EMPLOYEES IN
SELECTED PRIVATE BUSINESS SECTOR ENTERPRISES IN BAHIR DAR CITY.
Azanedo, L., Garcia-Garcia, G., Stone, J., & Rahimifard, S. J. S. (2020). An overview of current
challenges in new food product development. 12(8), 3364.
Azaze, A., & Haji, A. (2005). The impact of strategic and environmental factors on the Malaysian
Furniture Industry Export Marketing Performance. Unpublished Masters Thesis, School of
Management, Selangor, Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Baker, M. T., Lu, P., Parrella, J. A., & Leggette, H. R. (2022). Consumer Acceptance toward Functional
Foods: A Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
19(3), 1217.
Barczak, G., Sultan, F., & Hultink, E. J. (2007). Determinants of IT usage and new product performance.
Journal of product innovation management, 24(6), 600-613.
Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California management
review, 37(2), 47-65.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices.
Booz, Allen, Hamilton, & Advertisers, A. o. N. (1965). Management & Advertising Problems in the
Advertiser-agency Relationship: Association of National Advertisers.
Burgelman, R. A., & Sayles, L. R. (1988). Inside corporate innovation: Simon and Schuster.
Candy, P. C. J. S. i. t. E. o. A. (1989). Constructivism and the study of self-direction in adult learning.
21(2), 95-116.
Cohen, J., Swerdlik, M., & Sturman, E. (2002). Validity. RJ Cohen & ME Swerdlik’s Psychological
testing and assessment: An introduction to test and measurement, 154-187.
Cooper, D. R., Schindler, P. S., & Sun, J. (2006). Business research methods (Vol. 9): Mcgraw-hill New
York.
Cooper, R. G. (1975). Why new industrial products fail.
Cooper, R. G. (1990). Stage-gate systems: a new tool for managing new products. Business horizons,
33(3), 44-54.
Cooper, R. G. (2000). Product innovation and technology strategy. Research-Technology Management,
43(1), 38-41.
Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. J. (2010). Developing a product innovation and technology strategy for your
business. Research-Technology Management, 53(3), 33-40.
Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2002). Portfolio management: fundamental to new
product success. The PDMA toolbook for new product development, 1, 331-364.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1994). Determinants of timeliness in product development. Journal
of Product Innovation Management: An international publication of the product development &
management association, 11(5), 381-396.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2007). Winning businesses in product development: The critical
success factors. Research-Technology Management, 50(3), 52-66.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research (Vol. 3, pp. 95-108): SAGE
publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches: Sage publications.
Dawson, C. (2002). Practical research methods: A user-friendly guide to mastering research: How to
books.
de Boer, A., & Bast, A. (2015). International legislation on nutrition and health claims. Food Policy, 55,
61-70.
Demisse, E. (2019). Addis Ababa University School of Graduate Studies Department of Marketing
Management.
Denis, D. J. (2018). SPSS data analysis for univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistics: John Wiley
& Sons.
Edgett, S., Shipley, D., & Forbes, G. (1992). Japanese and British companies compared: contributing
factors to success and failure in NPD. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(1), 3-10.
Eshetie, T. (2018). Ethiopia’s Manufacturing Industry Opportunities, Challenges and Way Forward: A
Sectoral Overview. Nov Tech Nutr Food Sci, 2.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: sage.
Francis, J., & Collins‐Dodd, C. (2004). Impact of export promotion programs on firm competencies,
strategies and performance: The case of Canadian high‐technology SMEs. International
Marketing Review.
Galasso, C., Gentile, A., Orefice, I., Ianora, A., Bruno, A., Noonan, D. M., . . . Brunet, C. J. N. (2019).
Microalgal derivatives as potential nutraceutical and food supplements for human health: A focus
on cancer prevention and interception. 11(6), 1226.
Ganesan, S., Malter, A. J., & Rindfleisch, A. (2005). Does distance still matter? Geographic proximity
and new product development. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 44-60.
Gao, G. Y., Zhou, K. Z., & Yim, C. K. B. (2007). On what should firms focus in transitional economies?
A study of the contingent value of strategic orientations in China. International journal of
research in marketing, 24(1), 3-15.
Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J.-M. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance.
Journal of marketing research, 34(1), 77-90.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha
reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales.
Goi, C. L. (2009). A review of marketing mix: 4Ps or more. International journal of marketing studies,
1(1), 2-15.
Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2003). Basic econometrics (ed.). Singapore: McGrew Hill Book Co.
Hardy, R. W. (2010). Utilization of plant proteins in fish diets: effects of global demand and supplies of
fishmeal. Aquaculture Research, 41(5), 770-776.
Hart, S. (1993). Dimensions of success in new product development: an exploratory investigation.
Journal of marketing management, 9(1), 23-41.
Hauser, J. R., Urban, G. L., & Weinberg, B. D. (1993). How consumers allocate their time when
searching for information. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(4), 452-466.
Hirahara, T. (2004). Key factors for the success of functional foods. Biofactors, 22(1-4), 289-293.
Hise, E. C. (1978). Performance report for the ACES demonstration house, August 1976 through August
1977: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Hoban, T. J. (1998). Trends in consumer attitudes about agricultural biotechnology.
Hultink, E. J., & Robben, H. S. (1995). Measuring new product success: The difference that time
perspective makes. Journal of Product Innovation Management: AN INTERNATIONAL
PUBLICATION OF THE PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION,
12(5), 392-405.
Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an
integration and empirical examination. Journal of marketing, 62(3), 42-54.
Khan, R. S., Grigor, J., Winger, R., & Win, A. (2013). Functional food product development–
Opportunities and challenges for food manufacturers. Trends in food science & technology, 30(1),
27-37.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques: New Age International.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (1991). Principles of Marketing, Engelwood Cliffs. NJ, Prentice Hall,
19941, 79-80.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2006). Principles of marketing: 11E: Prentice Hall Video Gallery.
Kotler, P., Keller, K., Brady, M., Goodman, M., & Hansen, T. (2019). Marketing Management: 4th
European Edition: Pearson UK.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2006). Marketing management 12e. New Jersey, 143.
Lalor, F., & Wall, P. G. (2011). Health claims regulations: comparison between USA, Japan and
European Union. British Food Journal.
Langerak, F., Hultink, E. J., & Robben, H. S. (2004). The impact of market orientation, product
advantage, and launch proficiency on new product performance and organizational performance.
Journal of product innovation management, 21(2), 79-94.
Link, P. L. (1987). Keys to new product success and failure. Industrial Marketing Management, 16(2),
109-118.
Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. J. I. i. e. r. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and
methodology. 16(2), 193-205.
Mat, N., & Jantan, M. (2009). Trust and coordination in cross-functional new product development
(NPD) teams and the effects on new product development performance: The Malaysian
perspective. International Journal of Management and Innovation, 1(2), 72.
Menrad, K. (2003). Market and marketing of functional food in Europe. Journal of food engineering,
56(2-3), 181-188.
Meybodi, M. Z. (2005). Strategic manufacturing benchmarking. The TQM Magazine.
Millward, H., & Lewis, A. (2005). Barriers to successful new product development within small
manufacturing companies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development.
Mollet, B., & Rowland, I. (2002). Functional foods: At the frontier between food and pharma. Current
Opinion in Biotechnology, 5(13), 483-485.
Mugenda, O. (2003). &Mugenda A.(2003). Research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches.
Mukaka, M. M. (2012). A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi
medical journal, 24(3), 69-71.
Ndiho, S. (2016). Factors Affecting The Success Of New Product Development In The Manufacturing
Sector In Kenya. KCA University.
Oliver, N., Dostaler, I., & Dewberry, E. (2004). New product development benchmarks: The Japanese,
North American, and UK consumer electronics industries. The Journal of High Technology
Management Research, 15(2), 249-265.
Osborne, J. W., & Waters, E. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple regression that researchers should
always test. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation, 8(1), 2.
Pandey, S., & Chawla, D. (2016). Using qualitative research for establishing content validity of e-
lifestyle and website quality constructs. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal.
Pothisiri, P., & Kongchuntuk, H. (1996). The prospect for functional foods in Thailand. Nutrition
reviews, 54(11), S172.
Ramaseshan, B., Caruana, A., & Pang, L. S. (2002). The effect of market orientation on new product
performance: a study among Singaporean firms. Journal of Product & Brand Management.
Razli, I. A. (2009). Factors affecting new product development in Malaysian manufacturing industry.
Roberfroid, M. B. (2000). Prebiotics and probiotics: are they functional foods? The American journal of
clinical nutrition, 71(6), 1682S-1687S.
Rosa, A. R., Sánchez-Moreno, J., Martínez-Aran, A., Salamero, M., Torrent, C., Reinares, M., . . .
Ayuso-Mateos, J. L. (2007). Validity and reliability of the Functioning Assessment Short Test
(FAST) in bipolar disorder. Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 3(1), 1-8.
Rundquist, J., & Chibba, A. (2004). The use of processes and methods in NPD—A survey of Swedish
industry. International journal of innovation and technology management, 1(01), 37-54.
Saguy, I. S., & Graf, E. (1990). Food product development: from concept to the marketplace: Springer
Science & Business Media.
Salnikova, E., Baglione, S. L., & Stanton, J. L. (2019). To launch or not to launch: An empirical estimate
of new food product success rate. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 25(7), 771-784.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods forbusiness students. Essex: Prentice
Hall: Financial Times.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach: john wiley
& sons.
Sharma, B. N. (2006). Determinants of new consumer product success or failure in Nepal. Journal of
Nepalese Business Studies, 3(1), 70-77.
Singh, S., & Easwaran, S. (2010). Marketing Research Concepts, Practices and Cases: Oxford. University
press.
Siró, I., Kápolna, E., Kápolna, B., & Lugasi, A. (2008). Functional food. Product development,
marketing and consumer acceptance—A review. Appetite, 51(3), 456-467.
Slater, S. F. (1993). Competing in high-velocity markets. Industrial marketing management, 22(4), 255-
263.
Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997). A cross-national comparative study of new product development
processes: Japan and the United States. Journal of marketing, 61(2), 1-18.
Soni, R. A., Sudhakar, K., Rana, R., & Baredar, P. (2021). Food Supplements Formulated with Spirulina
Algae (pp. 201-226): Springer.
Sousa, I., Gouveia, L., Batista, A. P., Raymundo, A., & Bandarra, N. M. J. F. c. r. d. (2008). Microalgae
in novel food products. 75-112.
Spolaore, P., Joannis-Cassan, C., Duran, E., Isambert, A. J. J. o. b., & bioengineering. (2006).
Commercial applications of microalgae. 101(2), 87-96.
Stošić, B., & Milutinović, R. (2014). Possibilities of opening up the stage-gate model. INDUSTRY
PERFORMANCE MODEL 1675, 1700.
Supachaturat, S., Pichyangkura, R., Chandrachai, A., & Pentrakoon, D. (2017). Perspective on functional
food commercialization in Thailand. International Food Research Journal, 24(4).
Swinbanks, D., & O'Brien, J. (1993). Japan explores the boundary between food and medicine. Nature,
364(6434), 180-180.
Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (1986). The new new product development game. Harvard business review,
64(1), 137-146.
Thabit, T., & Raewf, M. (2018). The evaluation of marketing mix elements: A case study. International
Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 4(4).
Thode, H. C. (2002). Testing for normality: CRC press.
Topolska, K., Florkiewicz, A., & Filipiak-Florkiewicz, A. (2021). Functional food—Consumer
motivations and expectations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 18(10), 5327.
Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management science,
32(5), 590-607.
Van Der Sluis, A. A., Dekker, M., Skrede, G., & Jongen, W. M. (2002). Activity and concentration of
polyphenolic antioxidants in apple juice. 1. Effect of existing production methods. Journal of
agricultural and food chemistry, 50(25), 7211-7219.
Van Kleef, E., Van Trijp, H. C., Luning, P., & Jongen, W. M. (2002). Consumer-oriented functional food
development: how well do functional disciplines reflect the ‘voice of the consumer’? Trends in
Food Science & Technology, 13(3), 93-101.
Weisberg, S. (2005). Applied linear regression. Minnesota: John Wiley and Sons.
Wu, M.-F., & Chang, P.-L. (2013). Key success paths theory: Navigator of new product development
strategy. African journal of business management, 7(26), 2533-2547.
Yelkur, R., & Herbig, P. (1996). Global markets and the new product development process. Journal of
Product & Brand Management.
Appendix I
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
RESPONDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Respondent,
My name is Yohanes Getnet. I am currently undertaking a Master of Business Administration
(MBA) program in the Bahir Dar University. As part of my final assessment, I am required to
submit a master’s thesis. Therefore, I am conducting a research study on “determinants of new
product market success in food processing company” in case of Bahir Dar city.
I am kindly requesting you to spare some of your time and respond to this questionnaire for me as
honestly as possible by ticking or filling in the spaces provided. The information provided will be
treated with strict confidentiality and will be used for academic purposes only.
Your dedication and participation are highly valued and I would like to thank you very much in
advance for your cooperation. If you have any queries, do not hesitate to contact me with the
address indicated below.
Bahir Dar,
Yhanes Getnet
Yohanesatdku@gmail.com
+251921104627
With kindest regards!!
Section A: Organization Profile

1. Owners of organization
A. Private C. Governmental
B. Public D. international
2. Years of Operation in Bahir Dar city--------------------------------------
Section B: Demographic Characteristics of the respondent

1. Gender A. Male B. Female
2. What is your responsibility in your organization?
A. Marketing manager
B. General manager
C. Research and development
D. Operations/production manager
3. Educational level.
A. Certificate / Diploma
B. Bachelor’s
C. Masters
D. PHD
4. Year of work experience in the company----------------------------------------------
Section C: Here under the questions with regard to the determinants of new product market success
in your company, therefore, you are kindly requested to put “X” mark on the box which represents
your degree of agreement. 1= Strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4= Agree 5= Strongly
agree.
Statement on technological orientation 1 2 3 4 5
1 Our company acquire and uses sophisticated technologies
in its operation.
2 Our new products are always at the state of the art of the
technology.
3 Our company use advanced technology to sale its products.
4 Our company technological advancement increases the market
success of new product we develop.
Statement on New Product Development process timing and 1 2 3 4 5

speed
1 Our company does commercialization of new products always
within given timelines.
2 Our company has a schedule of launching new products in
particular seasons.
3 We enjoy a first mover advantage in new product
commercialization.
4 Our company new product development process has shorter speed.
Statement on promotion 1 2 3 4 5
1 Our company new products promotion through various types of
media effectively can explain the product benefit and quality.
2 To promote new products our company conducts marketing
events.
3 To promote new products our company gives price reduction.
4 Our company review products on internet web and related social
media.
Statement on distribution/placement 1 2 3 4 5
1 Our company new products found in convenient location.
2 Our new products are easily accessible to buy.
3 Our new products are sold on internet.
4 Our company new products are sold in reliable place.
Statement on food safety regulation 1 2 3 4 5

1 There is definite rule and regulation that govern new product
commercial lunch.
2 Getting approval for our new product from state food and
medicine assurance authority is lengthy process.
3 Getting approval for our new product from state food and
medicine assurance authority is very expensive.
Section D: Here under the questions with regard to the new product market success in your company,
therefore, you are kindly requested to put “X” mark on the box which represents your degree of
agreement. 1= Strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4= Agree 5= Strongly agree.
New product market success in food processing 1 2 3 4 5
1 Our c o m p a n y become more competitive in the market due to
t h e new product.
2 Many of the new products have significantly changed the
consumer patterns of our customers.
3 Our company market share increased in areas we have
introduced the new product.
4 Our company meet the market share goal we set on new product
sales.
5 New products have significantly increased our organization
revenues.
6 Our company successes unit sales goal we plan to sale new
product sales.
Thank you for your participation!!
Appendix II
Interview guide for functional food producing company managers
1. What is your current or most recent responsibility in the organization?
2. What does the experience of your company look like in terms of introducing new products? Do
you experience failure or success with the new product you introduced in the past?
3. How many new products do you introduce to market for the last five years? How many of the
new product was failed in the past five years?
4. What are the reasons of new product failure?
5. Does your company currently uses new technologies in the dev’t of new product or uses the
existing technologies? What are the challenges? to get access to technology
6. What aspects of the product development process need improving? What specific
recommendations do you have for making the company’s new product process more effective?
7. How aggressively your company promote new products? Dose your company promote its new
product before and after lunching it in to the market? How successful it is?
8. What are the means of distributions of your company new products? Moreover, where customers
can buy your company product?
9. How the food safety regulation affect your company new product success?
10. Does your company have any other problems during the NPD process? (Internal or External)
11. What is the current performance of your company regarding new product introductions and
market success?
ባህር ዳር ዩኒቨርሲቲ
የቢዝነስ ና ኢኮኖሚክስ ኮሌጅ
የማኔጅመንት ትምህርት ክፍል
የተከበሩ የጥናቱ ተሳታፊ
ዮሐንስ ጌትነት እባላለሁ። በአሁኑ ወቅት በባህር ዳር ዩኒቨርሲቲ የማስተር ኦፍ ቢዝነስ አድሚኒስትሬሽን
(ኤምቢኤ) ፕሮግራም እያጠናሁ ነው። በመሆኑም እንደ መጨረሻ ግምገማዬ፣ የማስተርስ ተሲስ ማቅረብ
አለብኝ። ስለዚህ በባህር ዳር ከተማ “በምግብ ማቀነባበሪያ ድርጅት ውስጥ የአዲስ ምርት ገበያ ስኬትን
የሚወስኑ” በሚል ጥናት እያካሄድኩ ነው።
የተወሰነ ጊዜዎን ሰጠውኝ ለዚህ መጠይቁ በተቻለ መጠን በታማኝነት የተሰጡትን ቦታዎች በመሙላት
እንዲመልሱልኝ በአክብሮት እጠይቃለሁ። የቀረበው መረጃ በጥብቅ ሚስጥራዊነት የሚያዝና ለአካዳሚክ
ዓላማዎች ብቻ ጥቅም ላይ ይውላልል።
የእርስዎ ቁርጠኝነት እና ተሳትፎ በጣም የተከበረ ነው እናም ስለ ትብብርዎ አስቀድሜ አመሰግናለሁ።
ማንኛውም አይነት ጥያቄ ካሎት ከታች በተጠቀሰው አድራሻ ለማነጋገር አያመንቱ።
ባህር ዳር,
ዮሐንስ ጌትነት
Yohanesatdku@gmail.com
+251921104627
ክፍል ሀ፡ የድርጅት መገለጫ
1. የድርጅቱ ባለቤቶች
ሀ. የግል ሐ. መንግስታዊ
ለ. የህዝብ መ. ዓለም አቀፍዊ
2. ኩባንያዎ በባህር ዳር ከተማ ለምን ያህል ጊዜ በሥራ ላይ ቆይቷል?______________________
ክፍል ለ፡ የተሳታፊወች አጠቃላይ መረጃ፤
1. ጾታ ሀ. ወንድ ለ. ሴት
2. በድርጅቱ ውስጥ እርስዎ ያለወት ኃላፊነት ምንድን ነው?
ሀ. የግብይት ሥራ አስኪያጅ
ለ. ዋና ሥራ አስኪያጅ
ሐ. ምርምር እና ልማት
መ. የምርት ሂደት ሥራ አስኪያጅ
3. የትምህርት ደረጃ
ሀ. የምስክር ወረቀት / ዲፕሎማ ሐ. ማስተርስ
ለ. ባችለር ዲግሪ መ. ፒኤችዲና ከዚያ በላይ
4. በድርጅቱ ውስጥ ያገለገሉበት ዓመት_________________________
ክፍል ሐ፡ ከዚህ በታች በድርጅትዎ ውስጥ አዲስ የምርት ገበያ ስኬትን የሚወስኑትን በሚመለከቱ መግለጫወች
ቀርበዋል ፣ስለዚህ፣የእርስዎን የስምምነት ደረጃ በሚያመለክተው ሳጥን ላይ “X” ምልክት እንዲያደርጉ በአክብሮት
እንጠይቃለን። 1= በጣም አልስማማም ፣ 2= አልስማማም ፣ 3= ገለልተኛ ፣ 4= እስማማለሁ 5= በጣም እስማማለሁ
።
ከቴክኖሎጂ አቅም ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 ኩባንያችን በምርት ሂደት ውስጥ የተራቀቁ ቴክኖሎጂዎችን ይጠቀማል።
2 አዲሶቹ ምርቶቻችን ሁልጊዜ በቴክኖሎጂው የከፍታ ደረጃ ላይ ናቸው።
3 ኩባንያችን ምርቶቹን በገበያ ተደራሽ ለማረግ እና ለመሸጥ የላቁ
የቴክኖሎጂ ውጤቶችን ይጠቀማል።
4 የኩባንያችን የቴክኖሎጂ እድገት በአዲስ ምርት የገበያ ስኬት ላይ መልካም
አጋጣሚወችንይፈጥራል፡፡
የአዲስ የምርት ልማት ሂደት ጊዜ እና ፍጥነት ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 ድርጅቱ ባአቀደው የጊዜ ገደብ ውስጥ ሁልጊዜ አዳዲስ ምርቶችን ለገበያ
ያቀርባል።
2 በልዩ ወቅቶች አዳዲስ ምርቶችን ወደ ገበያ የማውጣት መርሃ ግብር አለን።
3 በአዳዲስ ምርቶች የመጀመሪያ አንቀሳቃሽ ጥቅም እናገኛለን።
4 የአዳዲስ ምርቶች የልማት ሂደትን በአጭር ፍጥነት መከወን የአዲስ ምርት
ገበያ ስኬት ይጨምራል።
ከማስታወቂያ ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 የኩባንያችን አዳዲስ ምርቶች በተለያዩ የመገናኛ ዘዴዎች ማስተዋወቅ
የምርቱን ጥቅምና ጥራት ያብራራል።
2 ምርቱን ለማስተዋወቅ ኩባንያችን የግብይት ዝግጅቶችን ያካሂዳል።
3 ምርቱን ለማስተዋወቅ ኩባንያችን የዋጋ ቅነሳን ያደርጋል።
4 ኩባንያችን በኢንተርኔት እና በማህበራዊ አውታረ መረቦች ላይ ምርቶችን
ያስተዋውቃል።
ከማከፋፈል ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 የኩባንያችን ምርቶች ለገዠወች ምቹ በሆነ ቦታ ላይ ይገኛሉ።
2 የእኛ ኩባንያ ምርቶች ለመግዛት ቀላል ናቸው።
3 የእኛ ኩባንያ ምርቶች በኢንተርኔትና መሰል ድህረ-ገጾች ይሸጣሉ።
4 የኛ ኩባንያ አዳዲስ ምርቶች በአስተማማኝ ቦታ ይሸጣሉ።
ከምግብ ደህንነት ደንብ ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 አዳዲስ ምርቶችን ወደገበያ ለማስገባት የሚመራ ህግ እና ደንብ አለ።
2 ለአዲስ ምርቶችን ከምግብ እና መድሃኒት ማረጋገጫ ባለስልጣን ፈቃድ
ማግኘት ረጅም ሂደት ነው።
3 ለአዲስ ምርቶችን ከምግብ እና መድሃኒት ማረጋገጫ ባለስልጣን
ፈቃድ ማግኘት በጣም ውድ ነው።
ክፍል መ፡ በኩባንያዎ ውስጥ ስላለው አዲሱ የምርት ገበያ ስኬትን በሚመለከቱ መግለጫወች ቀርበዋል
፣ስለዚህ፣የእርስዎን የስምምነት ደረጃ በሚያመለክተው ሳጥን ላይ “X” ምልክት እንዲያደርጉ በአክብሮት
እንጠይቃለን። 1= በጣም አልስማማም ፣ 2= አልስማማም ፣ 3= ገለልተኛ ፣ 4= እስማማለሁ 5= በጣም
እስማማለሁ ።
የአዲስ ምርት የገበያ ስኬት ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

1 ብዙዎቹ አዳዲስ ምርቶች በከፍተኛ ሁኔታ የደንበኞችን የመግዛት ልምድ
ወይም ባህሪ ቀይረዋል።
2 አዲስ ምርት ባስተዋወቅንባቸው አካባቢዎች የኩባንያችን የገበያ ድርሻ
ጨምሯል።
3 ኩባንያችን በአዲስ ምርት ምክንያት በገበያ ላይ የበለጠ ተወዳዳሪ ሆኖል።
4 ኩባንያችን በአዲሱ የምርት ሽያጭ ላይ ያቀድነውን የገበያ ድርሻ ግብ
አሳክቷል።
5 ባአዲስ ምርቶች የድርጅታችን ገቢ በከፍተኛ ሁኔታ ጨምሯል።
6 የኛ ኩባንያ በአዲስ ምርት ሽያጭ የሽያጭ ግብ ለመሸጥ ያቀደውን
አሳክቷል።
ስለተሳትፎዎ እናመሰግናለን!!
Appendix III
Table 3.1 target food-processing company
No Target food-processing company
1. ፉሪ ጠ/ን//ኀ/የ/የግ/ማ
2. አዱኛ መኮነን/ ዩኒክ ማካሮኒ
3. ሽገዝ ዱቄት ፋብሪካ /አያልሰው
4. አለሙ ነጋ ዱቄት ና ብስኩት
5 ቋሪት አግሮ ኢንዱስትሪ ኃ/የተ/የግ/ማ
6 ሀይማኖት ዱቄት ብስኩት ና ማኮሮኒ ማምረቻ/ለዛ ዱቄት
7 ጨጨሆ በቆሎ ማቀነባበር
8 እሱባለው ነጋ ብስኩት
9 ካሳሁን ጥራጥሬ ማቀነባበር
10 ወርቁ ሙሀመድ/አብሲኒያ ዱቄት ና ብስኩት
11 አበባ ዱቄትና ብስኩት ፋብሪካ
12 ምናቤ አልሚ ምግብ
13 ጊዮን ዱቄት ፋብሪካ/ምንይችል ባየ
14 ጌታቸው አባት የምግብ ማቀነባበሪያ
15 አባይና ጣና የምግብ ማቀነባበሪያ ኃ/የተ/የግ/ማ
16 ጣና የምግብ ማቀነባበሪያ
17 ምስጋና ጣፋጭ
18 ቲንአብ ኢንዱ ኃ/የተ/የግ/ማ/ማርዛ ዱቄት
19 ክሳዳይል ጥራጥሬ ማቀነባበር
20 ኢትዮ ካሊፎርኒያ ዱቄት ፋብሪካ ኃ/የተ/የግ/ማ
21 አባይ ዱቄት ፋብሪካ
22 ዘመኑ ጥላየ/ እፁብ ዱቄት ፋብሪካ
23 ባ/ዳር ወተት ልማት ግብይት የህ/ሰ/ማህበር
24 ብርሃኑ አራጋው አልሚ ምግብ
25 ማርታ ዱቄት
Source: Bahir Dar city investment office (2022)

John Jo

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

John Jo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

ADVISOR; -MESELU ALAMNIE (PH.D.)

DETERMINANTS OF NEW PRODUCT MARKET SUCCESS IN FOOD

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT,

BY: YOHANES GETNET

Name: Yohanes Getnet

Name: Meselu Alamnie (Ph. D)

Approved by Board of Examiners

Name Signature Date

Thank you so much!!!

NPD process sped and

Promotion New product market

Food safety regulation

Source: own study of literature 2022

Table 4.4 Age distribution of respondents

16 New product market success

Figure 4.1: New Products Success and Failure Rate

NPDST Pearson Co .412** 1

PRO Pearson Co .171 .257* 1

DI Pearson Co .273** .648** .209* 1

FSR Pearson Co -.219* -.493** -.143 -.352** 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.10 Collinearity Statistics

Model Tolerance VIF

4.3.1.2 Normality Test

Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics for normality

Figure 4.4 normal p-plot

Figure 4.5 scatterplot

Table 4.12 Model Summary

Source: SPSS output of Survey data, 2022

Table 4.15: Summary results of hypothesis testing

1 H1: Technological orientation has a positive and √

5.4 limitation of the study and recommendations for further studies

With kindest regards!!

Section A: Organization Profile

Section B: Demographic Characteristics of the respondent

Statement on New Product Development process timing and 1 2 3 4 5

Statement on food safety regulation 1 2 3 4 5

New product market success in food processing 1 2 3 4 5

Thank you for your participation!!

የማኔጅመንት ትምህርት ክፍል

የተከበሩ የጥናቱ ተሳታፊ

የሚወስኑ” በሚል ጥናት እያካሄድኩ ነው።

እንዲመልሱልኝ በአክብሮት እጠይቃለሁ። የቀረበው መረጃ በጥብቅ ሚስጥራዊነት የሚያዝና ለአካዳሚክ

ዓላማዎች ብቻ ጥቅም ላይ ይውላልል።

የእርስዎ ቁርጠኝነት እና ተሳትፎ በጣም የተከበረ ነው እናም ስለ ትብብርዎ አስቀድሜ አመሰግናለሁ።

ማንኛውም አይነት ጥያቄ ካሎት ከታች በተጠቀሰው አድራሻ ለማነጋገር አያመንቱ።

ለ. የህዝብ መ. ዓለም አቀፍዊ

2. ኩባንያዎ በባህር ዳር ከተማ ለምን ያህል ጊዜ በሥራ ላይ ቆይቷል?______________________

ክፍል ለ፡ የተሳታፊወች አጠቃላይ መረጃ፤

2. በድርጅቱ ውስጥ እርስዎ ያለወት ኃላፊነት ምንድን ነው?

መ. የምርት ሂደት ሥራ አስኪያጅ

ሀ. የምስክር ወረቀት / ዲፕሎማ ሐ. ማስተርስ

ለ. ባችለር ዲግሪ መ. ፒኤችዲና ከዚያ በላይ

4. በድርጅቱ ውስጥ ያገለገሉበት ዓመት_________________________

ከቴክኖሎጂ አቅም ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

የአዲስ የምርት ልማት ሂደት ጊዜ እና ፍጥነት ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

ከማስታወቂያ ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

ከማከፋፈል ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

ከምግብ ደህንነት ደንብ ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

የአዲስ ምርት የገበያ ስኬት ጋር የተያያዙ መግለጫዎች 1 2 3 4 5

You might also like

DI Pearson Co .273 .648 .209* 1

FSR Pearson Co -.219* -.493 -.143 -.352 1