A Risk Diagnosing Methodology Web-based Tool for SME’s and Start-up Enterprises

Luís Pereira, Alexandra Tenera, João Bispo, João Wemans


This work presents a risk diagnosing methodology (RDM) web-based tool, that can provide to Small and Medium Enterprises (SME’s) the capability to identify, evaluate and manage the risks associated with a company’s idea development project portfolio. This tool was conceived to support successful innovative product/service development projects, from its idealization to its commercialization, and to encourage SME’s on systematic use of risk management approaches in order to increase their successful rates. This paper also includes a brief literature review of some of the risk management tools and models available to SME’s, as well as comparative analyses of the identified similar tools.


  1. Aleixo, G. G., & Tenera, A. B. (2009). New Product Development Process on High-Tech Innovation Life Cycle. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 58, 794-800.
  2. Black, J. (2003). Oxford Dictionary of Economics. Oxford.
  3. Brancia, A. (2011). SMES Risk Management: An Analysis of the Existing Literature Considering The Different Risk Streams. 8th AGSE International Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, 225-239.
  4. Di, Y. (2010). Study on the Mechanism of Project Integrated Risk Management for Technological Innovation Project. International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2, 197-201.
  5. Ebrahim, N. A., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2010). SMEs; Virtual research and development (R&D) teams and new product development: A literature review. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, Vol. 5(7), pp. 916-930.
  6. Emmenegger, S., Laurenzini, E., & Thönssen, B. (2012). Improving Supply-Chain-Management based on Semantically Enriched Risk Descriptions. International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing , 70-80.
  7. Freel, M. S. (2005). Patterns of innovation and skills in small firms. Technovation, 25, 123-134.
  8. Ganguly, A. (1999). Business Driven Research & Development. Palgrave Macmillan.
  9. Griffin, A. (1997). PDMA research on new product development practices: Updating trends and benchmarking best practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14 (6), 429-458.
  10. Henschel, T. (2008). Risk Management Practices Of SMEs: Evaluating And Implementing Effective Risk Management Systems. Berlin: Schmidt (Erich).
  11. Janney, J. J., & Dess, G. G. (2006). The risk concept for entrepreneurs reconsidered: new challenges to the conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 385-400.
  12. Jayathilake. (2012). Risk Management Practices in Small and Medium Enterprises: Evidence From Sri Lanka. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(7), 226-234.
  13. Keizer, J. A., Halman, J. I., & Song, M. (2002). From experience: applying the risk diagnosing methodology. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19, 213-232.
  14. Massa, S., & Testa, S. (2008). Innovation and SMEs: Misaligned perspectives and goals among entrepreneurs, academics, and policy makers. Technovation, 28, 390-407.
  15. Matthews, C. H., & Scott, S. G. (1995). Uncertainty and planning in small and entrepreneurial firms; an empirical assessment. Journal of Small Business Management, 33(4), 34-52.
  16. McKiernan, P., & Morris, C. (1999). Strategic planning and financial performance in UK SMEs: Does formality matter. British Journal of Management, 5, 31-41.
  17. Rothwell, R. (1991). External networking and innovation in small and medium-sized manufacturing firms in Europe. Technovation, 11(2), 93-112.
  18. Smit, Y., & Watkins, J. A. (2012). A literature review of small and medium enterprises (SME) risk management practices in South Africa. African Journal of Business Management, 6(21), 6324-6330.
  19. Vargas-Hernández, J. G., & García-Santillán, A. (2011). Management in the Innovation Project. Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, 1(7), 1-24.
  20. Vidal, R. V. (2009). Community facilitation of problem structuring and decision making processes: Experiences from the EU LEADER+ programme. European Journal of Operational Research, 199, 803- 810.
  21. Vos, J., Keizer, J. A., & Halman, J. I. (1998). Diagnosing Constraints in Knowledge of SMEs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 58(3), 227-239.
  22. Wang, J., Linb, W., & Huangc, Y.-H. (2010). A performance-oriented risk management framework for innovative R&D projects. Technovation, 30 (11-12), 601-6011.
  23. Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency and Quality. Free Press.
  24. Yang, C., & Man-li, Z. (2010). Research on product innovation project risk identification thought. 2nd Int. Conference on Information Science and Engineering (ICISE), 3056-3059.
  25. Yun-hong, H., Wen-bo, L., & Xiu-ling, X. (2007). An Early Warning System for Technological Innovation Risk Management Using Artificial Neural Networks. Int. Conference on Management Science & Engineering, 14, 2128-2133.
  26. 1. The idea has a clear business proposition: operational, cost, product, customer or resource leadership.
  27. 2. The idea has “springboard potential” (i.e. good prospects to become products or services).
  28. 3. The idea has a value proposition with unique points, clear for buyers and partners.
  29. 4. The idea is based on a solid market research.
  30. 5. The project team has listed all the characteristics that the intended client seeks in the product/service.
  31. 6. The target market is well defined and there are clearly described channels.
  32. 7. There is a proposal for an effective action plan including eventual contingencies.
  33. 8. The team has clearly identified channels to access external knowledge and skills regarding technology, marketing and management.
  34. 9. Outsourcing solutions have been identified and are available.
  35. 10. The idea is free of eventual property rights disputes.
  36. 11. Possible ideas under development from competitors have been described.
  37. 12. There is a clear list of competitors by market segment.
  38. 2.Feasibility Stage
  39. 1. The team possesses the critical competences to develop, produce and market the intended product/service.
  40. 2. Partners will deliver in time, with all the specifications as agreed upon.
  41. 3. Organization and relations within the team members and partners are clear and goal oriented.
  42. 4. The product/service will meet all requirements in terms of licenses, safety, environment, regulations, or others.
  43. 5. The company is ready to provide future after sales services.
  44. 6. The product/service will satisfy demands and expectations from stakeholders and external bodies/agencies.
  45. 7. Financial resources are guaranteed to develop the product/service.
  46. 8. The product/service can be delivered with prices that are acceptable to buyers.
  47. 9. The product/service will contribute to the long term financial position of the company.
  48. 1. There is a clear production/supply process to provide a reliable product delivery.
  49. 2. Future scaling up of process has been clearly addressed and described.
  50. 3. Prototypes of the product/service have been tested to reach clear pre-defined criterion.
  51. 4. Schedule and costs are realistic and achievable.
  52. 5. Sales projections for the new product/service are based on consistent data.
  53. 6. There is contingency plan to correct schedule and cost deviations along the project.
  54. 3.Capability Stage 4.Launch Stage
  55. 1. There is an action plan to react to competitors' response to the introduction of the product/service.
  56. 2. The roll out of the product/service will happen as planned without information leaks.
  57. 3. There is a plan to increase and protect the barriers that the new product/service will create against competitors.
  58. 4. The key opinion makers are identified and assured.
  59. 5. There is a clear process to measure the product acceptance and marketing & sales.
  60. 6. There is a clear strategy to spread the marketing information through multiple channels.
  61. 7. A clear ratio of cost/income will be monitored during the launch processes.
  62. 8. A financial budget and monthly burn-rate thresholds are clearly defined.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Pereira L., Tenera A., Bispo J. and Wemans J. (2013). A Risk Diagnosing Methodology Web-based Tool for SME’s and Start-up Enterprises . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2013) ISBN 978-989-8565-75-4, pages 308-317. DOI: 10.5220/0004548103080317

in Bibtex Style

author={Luís Pereira and Alexandra Tenera and João Bispo and João Wemans},
title={A Risk Diagnosing Methodology Web-based Tool for SME’s and Start-up Enterprises},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2013)},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2013)
TI - A Risk Diagnosing Methodology Web-based Tool for SME’s and Start-up Enterprises
SN - 978-989-8565-75-4
AU - Pereira L.
AU - Tenera A.
AU - Bispo J.
AU - Wemans J.
PY - 2013
SP - 308
EP - 317
DO - 10.5220/0004548103080317