Transcript File
Slide 6.1 Chapter 6 Managing the new product development process Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.2 Agenda Modelling the new product development (NPD) process * Stage models * Conversion process models * Response models Weaknesses of stage models Multiple convergent processing Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.3 The most widely accepted normative model of the new product development process is that proposed by Booz-Allen Hamilton in 1982 which conceives of this as a linear sequential process of the following kind. Company objective Exploration Screening Business analysis Development Testing Commercialization Product success Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.4 While encompassing the tasks involved in NPD the BAH model fails to capture the complexities of the process which frequently appear to account for success and failure. Several other models have been proposed which attempt to capture the complex reality which Saren (1984) has classified as follows: • • • • • Departmental stage models Activity-stage models Decision-stage models Conversion process models Response models Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.5 Departmental and activity stage models are of the BAH ‘pass the parcel’ configuration and fail to communicate the need for integration. By contrast decision stage models of the kind proposed by Cooper (1983) suggest the need for integration of functional inputs and feedback loops to achieve this. Conversion process models seek to avoid the imposed rationality of stage models by adopting a ‘black box’ approach which offers no insight into the process itself. Finally response models are only really concerned with the initial stage(s) of the NPD process as they focus on organisational response to change, i.e. the catalysts for NPD. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.6 Conceptually stage models appear to offer the most useful representation of the NPD process. This is particularly so when regarded as a critical path with feedback loops. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.7 The implications of iteration in the NPD process are clearly apparent from the figure: Screening Concept Test Reformulate No–new idea emerges Successful? No Modifications possible No–new opportunity spotted Business analysis No–abandon Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.8 But stage models, even with feedback loops, suffer from at least two weaknesses: 1. The NPD process is idiosyncratic to the individual firm. 2. There is no clear beginning, middle and end to the NPD process. Thus, while stage models assume termination if a phase is not completed satisfactorily in reality the iterative nature of the process may suggest both new directions as well as recycling. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.9 As the figure implies it is not essential for discrete activities in the NPD process to be implemented sequentially. In reality many activities can be carried on simultaneously hence simultaneous engineering, or in parallel hence parallel processing. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.10 The potential of simultaneous engineering and/or parallel processing addresses three key issues which emerge from a review of the NPD literature, all of which have a significant impact on ultimate success or failure: • The need for interdisciplinary inputs. • The need to develop product advantage. • The need for speed in the process. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.11 Symbolically the problem with the concept of parallelism is obvious. Parallel lines are separated by an equal distance at every point and never touch or intersect. What we need is a concept which conveys a critical path, simultaneity in contributing activities, and integration to achieve a common conclusion, what we need is: Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.12 MULTIPLE CONVERGENT PROCESSING TM Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.13 The early stages of the multiple convergent process Research and development Suppliers Marketing Customers Manufacturing R&D projects (ongoing) Changes to product lines Competitor analysis Market trend forecasts etc. Specific demands Potential improvements Process improvement projects Modifications to ideas Preference inputs Study of required alterations Study of resource implications Collaboration on concepts may be both technical and commercial Evaluation of the implications of the alternative concepts in terms of resources and costs Functional performance of product, collaboration on the development Modifications to production process in light of development Convergent point: IDEA GENERATION Feasibility studies Time projection(s) Initial specifications Specifications of potentially required changes etc. Estimations of market potential Comparison with Competitors Initial financial assessment Convergent point: IDEA(S) EVALUATION Early design(s) Concept developed technically Cost of concepts Development work on changes/new products required Fuller market assessment Concept(s) introduced to market for evaluation Positioning of concept(s) Price indications Convergent point: CONCEPT EVALUATION and CHOICE Convergent point: FULL BUSINESS ANALYSIS Physical product development Development of altered parts, etc., if required Preparation of marketing and launch plan Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.14 As the example illustrates four immediate advantages of using the phases of a stage model as points of convergence for multiple simultaneous activities are that: 1. Iterations among participants within stages are allowed for 2. The framework can easily accommodate third parties 3. Mechanisms for real integration throughout the process among different functions are set in the convergent points. 4. The model can fit into the most appropriate NPD structures for the company Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.15 It is clear that conceptually the MCP model is a direct derivative from network analysis which has resulted in the development of specific techniques such as PERT and CPA. It is to network analysis that we should turn for trial and validation of the new paradigm. It is proposed that a combination of Auster’s (1990) Analytical Dimensions and Bieman’s (1992) Five characteristics of interaction will provide an appropriate framework for analysis of the new product development process. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 6.16 The potential for integration is particularly important as recent work by Biemans (1992) has shown that while networks involving both manufacturers and customers are becoming commonplace in NPD, integration remains problematic. All three benefits of the MCP model address this particularly through its provision of the opportunity for information sharing which is neglected by other models. Michael Baker and Susan Hart, Product Strategy and Management, 2nd Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2007