Transcript PART FOUR DEVELOPMENT

PART FOUR
DEVELOPMENT
McGraw-Hill/Irwin –
Merle Crawford Anthony Di Benedetto 9th Edition
Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Development
Figure IV.1
13-2
Chapter 13
Design
13-3
What Is Design?
• Has been defined as “the synthesis of
technology and human needs into
manufacturable products.”
• In practice, design can mean many things,
ranging from styling to ergonomics to setting
final product specifications.
• Design has been successfully used in a variety
of ways to help achieve new product objectives.
• One thing it is not: “prettying up” a product that is
about to manufactured!
13-4
Contributions of Design to the New Products
Process
Figure 13.1
13-5
Principles of Universal Design
Figure 13.2
• Equitable Use: The design is useful to people with varied abilities.
• Flexibility in Use: The design accommodates a wide variety of
preferences.
• Simple and Intuitive to Use: The design is easy for anyone to
understand.
• Perceptible Information: The design communicates the required
information to the user.
• Tolerance for Error: The design minimizes adverse consequences of
inappropriate use.
• Low Physical Effort: The design can be used efficiently by anyone
with minimal fatigue.
• Size and Space for Approach and Use: The product is easy to
reach, manipulate, and use.
•
Source: James M. Mueller and Molly Follette Story, “Universal Design: Principles for Driving Growth Into New Markets,” in P. Belliveau, A.
Griffin, and S. Sodermeyer (eds.), The PDMA Toolbook for New Product Development (New York: Wiley, 2002), pp. 297-326.
13-6
Range of Leading Design Applications
Figure 13.3
Purpose of Design
Item Being Designed
Aesthetics
Ergonomics
Function
Manufacturability
Servicing
Disassembly
Goods
Services
Architecture
Graphic arts
Offices
Packages
13-7
Product Architecture
• The process by which a customer need is
developed into a product design.
• Solid architecture improves speed to
market, and reduces the cost of changing
the product once it is in production.
• Product components are combined into
“chunks,” functional elements are
assigned to the chunks, and the chunks
are interrelated with each other.
13-8
Product Architecture Illustration
Figure 13.4
13-9
Product Architecture and Product
Platforms
• Product architecture development is
related to establishing a product platform.
• If chunks or modules can be replaced
easily within the product architecture,
“derivative products” can be made from
the same basic platform as technology,
market tastes, or manufacturing skills
change.
• Examples: 200 versions of the Sony
Walkman from four platforms.
13-10
Assessment Factors for an Industrial Design
Figure 13.5
13-11
Prototype Development
• Comprehensive Prototype: complete, fullyfunctioning, full-size product ready to be
examined by customers.
• Focused Prototype: not fully functioning or
developed, but designed to examine a
limited number of performance attributes
or features.
– Examples: a crude, working prototype of an electric
bicycle; a foam or wood bicycle to determine
customers’ reactions to the proposed shape and form.
13-12
Model of the Product Design Process
Figure 13.6
13-13
Improving the Interfaces in the Design
Process
•
•
•
•
•
Co-location
Digital co-location
Global teams
Produceability engineer
Upstream partnering with vendors
13-14
Computer-Aided Design (CAD)
• Greatly accelerates the design step and allows
assessment of multiple possible designs without
building expensive prototypes.
• Design for Manufacturability (DFM): search for
ways to minimize manufacturing costs.
• Design for Assembly (DFA): search for ways to
ease assembly and manufacture.
• Rational for DFM: A seemingly trivial detail in
design phase might have huge manufacturing
cost consequences later on!
13-15
Some of the Uses of CAD in Auto Industry
• Determining fit of subassemblies: does the
radio/CD player protrude too far into the
engine area?
• Facilitating “decking” of cars (attaching the
powertrain to the upper body): do all the
pieces fit together perfectly?
• Crashworthiness: can we modify any
aspects of the car’s design to improve its
ability to protect the passengers in a
crash?
13-16
New Developments in CAD
• Stereolithography (rapid prototyping)
• Mechanical computer-aided engineering
(MCAE)
13-17
Chapter 14
Development Team Management
McGraw-Hill/Irwin –
Merle Crawford Anthony Di Benedetto 9th Edition
Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Some Terms in New Products Organization
• Functional: People in business departments or
functional areas are involved, and product
development activity must mesh with their work.
• Project: The product innovation activity requires
people who think first of the project.
• Matrix: Two people are likely to be involved in
any piece of work: project manager and line
function head.
14-19
Options in New Products Organization
Figure 14.1
1. Functional
2. Functional Matrix
3. Balanced Matrix
4. Project Matrix
5. Venture
These are listed in increasing projectization, defined as
the extent to which participants see themselves as
independent from the project or committed to it.
14-20
Options in New Products Organization
1. Functional: work is done by the various departments, very little
project focus.
– Usually a new products committee or product planning committee.
– Does not lead to much innovation.
2. Functional Matrix: A specific team with people from various
departments; project still close to the current business.
– Team members think like functional specialists.
– Departments call the shots.
3. Balanced Matrix: Both functional and project views are critical.
– May lead to indecision and delay.
– Many firms are making it work successfully.
4. Project Matrix: High projectization, team people are project people
first and functional people second.
– People may drive the project even against department’s best wishes.
5. Venture: Team members pulled out of department to work full time on
project.
14-21
Operating Characteristics of the Basic
Options
Figure 14.3
Characteristic
Functional <------------->Venture
Decision Power of Leader
Low
High
Independence of Group
Low
High
% of time spent on project by member Low
High
Importance of Project
Low
High
Degree of risk of project to firm
Low
High
Disruptiveness of project
Low
High
Degree of uncertainty
Low
High
Ability of team to violate
company policy
Low
High
Independent funding
Low
High
14-22
Decision Rules for Choosing Among the
Options
Figure 14.4
Score each on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high):
1. How difficult is it to get new products in the firm?
2. How critical is it for the firm to have new products at this time?
3. How much risk to personnel is involved?
4. How important is speed of development?
5. Will the products be using new procedures in their
manufacturing?
6. In their marketing?
7. What will be the $ profit contribution from each new item?
8. How much training do our functional people need in the
markets represented by the new products we want?
Rating: Below 15: functional matrix will likely work.
15-30: a balanced matrix will probably work.
Over 30: You need a project matrix or even a venture!
14-23
Another View:
Home Runs Vs. Singles
Characteristics of “home run” projects:
• Distance from regular business -- markets, technologies,
distribution system.
• Conflicts with regular business -- success will threaten people in
the organization’s regular business (production, sales,
technical).
• Major financial importance -- dollars, risk, or (especially) both.
• Timing -- a project that may be a “single” in normal times -competition, market change, threatened acquisition, insecure
management team, shortage of new product projects.
(Do the opposite conditions make for singles?)
The more like a “home run” a project is, the more suited
to a more projectized organizational structure.
14-24
Considerations when Selecting an
Organizational Option
Figure 14.5
• High projectization encourages cross-functional integration.
• If state-of-the-art functional expertise is critical to project
success (e.g., in a scientific specialty such as fluid dynamics),
a functional organization might be better, as it encourages the
development of high-level technical expertise.
• If individuals will be part of the project for only a short time, it
might make more efficient use of their time if they were
organized functionally. Industrial designers may be involved in
any given project for only a short time, so different projects
can simply draw on their expertise when needed.
• If speed to market is critical, higher projectization is preferred
as project teams are usually able to coordinate their activities
and resolve conflicts more quickly and with less bureaucracy.
PC makers often use project teams, as they are under severe
14-25
time pressure.
Who Are the Team Members?
• Core Team: manage functional clusters (e.g.,
marketing, R&D, manufacturing)
– Are active throughout the new products process.
• Ad Hoc Group: support the core team (e.g.,
packaging, legal, logistics)
– Are important at intervals during the new products
process.
• Extended Team Members: less critical members (e.g.,
from other divisions)
14-26
Participants in the Product Management
Process
Figure 14.6
• Project Manager
– Leader, integrator, mediator,
judge
– Translator, coordinator
• Project Champion
– Supporter and spokesperson
– May be the project manager
– Enthusiastic but play within
the rules
• Sponsor
– Senior executive who lends
encouragement and
endorsement to the champion
• Rationalist
• Strategist
– Longer-range
– Managerial -- often the CEO
– Spelled out the Product
Innovation Charter
• Inventor
– Creative scientist
– “Basement inventor” -- may be
a customer, ad agency
person, etc.
– Idea source
• Facilitator
– Enhance team’s productivity
and output
– The “show-me” person
14-27
Myths and Truths About Product Champions
Figure 14.7
The Myths:
The Truths:
• Champions are associated with
market successes.
• Champions are excited about
the idea.
• Champions get involved with
radical changes.
• Champions arise from high (or
low) levels in the firm.
• Champions are mostly from
• Champions get resources and
keep projects alive.
• They are passionate,
persuasive, and risk-taking.
• Champions work in firms with
or without formal new product
processes. Champions are
sensitive to company politics.
• Champions back projects that
align with the firm’s innovation
strategy.
marketing.
14-28
Guiding Principles in New Product Process
Implementation
Figure 14.8
Clarity of Goals and Objectives
Ownership
Leadership, at both senior and team levels
Integration with business processes
Flexibility
14-29
Issues in Team Management
• Team compensation and motivation
– Monetary vs. non-monetary rewards?
– Process-based vs. outcome-based rewards?
• Closing the team down
14-30
Clues to Good Policy in Interface
Management
Figure 14.9
14-31
Five Conflict Management Styles
Figure 14.10
Conflict Management Style
Confrontation
Definition
Collaboratively solve the problem
to reach a solution the parties are
committed to.
Give and Take
Reach a compromise solution that
the parties find acceptable.
Withdrawal
Avoid the issue, or the
disagreeable party.
Smoothing
Minimize the differences and find
a superficial solution.
Forcing
Impose a solution.
Example
Debate the issue, conduct
customer interviews, generate
possible solutions, find the one
most supported by customers.
Negotiate a set of features to
build into the product, to keep the
project moving ahead.
Team members with unpopular
positions don't think it's worth the
trouble, and back out of the
decision.
Accommodate to the team
members that are strongly
committed to certain product
features, for the sake of group
harmony.
Project manager steps in and
makes the decisions.
Source: Adapted from David H. Gobeli, Harold F. Koenig, and Iris Bechinger, "Managing Conflict in
Software Development Teams: A Multi-Level Analysis," Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol.
15, No. 5, September 1998, pp. 423-435.
14-32
Some Insights on Global Innovation From
Senior Executives
Figure 14.11
• Idea Generation:
– Leverage global knowledge.
– Source ideas from customers, employees,
distributors, etc.
• Product Development:
– Focus on incremental vs. home run breakthroughs.
– Share development costs.
– Use standardization to better manage global
operations.
• Commercialization:
– Early vs. late entrant decision.
– Consider local support/local partner.
14-33
Managing Globally Dispersed Teams
• Reasons for growth:
– Increasing product complexity
– Accelerated product life cycles
• Issues:
– Levels of language skills among team
members
– Physical distance among team members
– Cultural differences among team members
14-34
Chapter 15
Product Use Testing
McGraw-Hill/Irwin –
Merle Crawford Anthony Di Benedetto 9th Edition
Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
What is Product Use Testing?
Product use under normal operating
conditions.
Some terms:
– Alpha testing: done in-house.
– Beta testing: done at the customer site.
Typical goals of beta testing: to determine if
the product works and is free of “bugs.”
15-36
The Role of Marketing During Development
• Marketing is involved from the beginning
of the new products process.
• Advises the new product team on how the
product development fits in with firm’s
marketing capabilities and market needs.
• Early involvement of marketing increases
product’s chances for success.
• Think of marketing’s task as more
information coordination than information
gathering.
15-37
Marketing Ramp-Up
• The “I think we’ve got it” phase.
• Once this point is reached, the team’s attitude
toward the project changes.
• Marketing’s role increases as marketing
people “rev up” their operations.
– Plan field sales and service availability.
– Begin work on packaging and branding.
– Begin work with advertising agency reps.
– etc.
• Marketing “ramps up” for the product launch.
15-38
Arguments Against Product Use Testing
•
•
•
•
•
•
A fortune has already been spent on the product.
Market research says the product is a winner.
Competitor is working on a similar product.
May suggest lack of faith in product.
Customers have to learn how to use the product.
Competitor may steal our idea and beat us to the
market.
15-39
One Argument For Product Use Testing:
Dry Idea Deodorant
Figure 15.1
• Process was anything but linear.
• Gillette discovered flaws in product design
through in-house “alpha testing” and beta testing
with users.
• Gillette got some surprises in terms of benefits
sought -- “back to the drawing board” near end
of process! (Luckily, quick fix was available.)
15-40
Two More Reasons to Do Product Use
Testing
Figure 15.3
• 3M Scotch Brite Never Rust steel wool
pads and Never Scratch non-scratching
pads.
• Hot Scoop frozen microwaveable
chocolate sundaes.
15-41
Arguments For Product Use Testing
• Better to build off a technology base that
provides some insulation from competitive
copying than to worry about such copying.
• Customer needs are complex sets -- use testing
would have identified problems with GTE
Airfone, Apple Newton, P&G Olestra.
• Delivering a total quality product -- avoiding
"horror stories" of poor product quality before
product is marketed.
15-42
Knowledge Gained From Product Use
Testing
Figure 15.4
•
•
•
•
Pre-use sense reactions.
Early use experiences ("Does it work?").
Major benefits results (beta tests).
Diagnostic information.
15-43
Common Pitfalls of
Beta Testing
Figure 15.5
• Beta test site firm has no internal capacity to test the performance of
the product at the required level and lacks the funding to hire an
outside firm to do the test.
• Developer puts in a wishy-washy performance requirement like
"user-friendly" which is meaningless without a measurable
specification.
• Testing is done too late in the new products process, which almost
ensures that development time will be extended and production
delays will occur. Doing testing in increments throughout the
process can avoid this pitfall.
• Developers attempt to beta-test their own products. By definition
they are too close to the product to critically test it and find
problems.
• Developers ignore early negative results, hoping that the product will
improve by itself during the new products process. All beta test
results, whether positive or negative, need to be honestly evaluated.
15-44
Gamma Testing
• Beta testing may not meet all the product developer’s
requirements.
– Does the new product meet customers’ needs?
– Is it cost-effective for them?
• Gamma testing involves thorough use and evaluation of
the new product by the end user.
• It’s an ideal product use test -- but in many cases firms
go with beta testing.
– Cost and time considerations
– Keeping ahead of competitors
15-45
Some Key Testing Dimensions
• User groups to contact (lab personnel, experts,
employees, stakeholders).
• Mode of contact (mail vs. personal, individual vs. group,
point of use vs. central location).
• Identity disclosure (avoid halo-image effects).
• Degree of use explanation (no comment, some, full
explanation).
• Degree of control over use (supervised vs.
unsupervised)
• Singularity (monadic usually less sensitive than paired or
triangular comparison).
15-46
More Key Testing Dimensions
•
•
•
•
Duration of use (single use vs. extended periods).
Source of product (batch, pilot plant, final production).
Product form (single product vs. variants).
Mode of recording reaction (like/dislike, preference,
descriptive information).
• Source of norms (past experience, market research
firms).
• Research service (internal vs. outside personnel).
15-47
Types of Product Use Tests
Figure 15.6
Type
Monadic
Products
The new product alone.
Paired comparison
The new product and another
one: the market leader, the leader
in a key segment, the "best."
The new product and two others,
or two variants of the new
product and one other.
Triangular
Instructions
"Try this new toothbrush, and tell
me how you like it."
"Try these, and tell me how you
like them and which you prefer."
Same as above.
Multiple-product techniques can use side-by-side or staggered (sequential monadic) product-use
approaches.
15-48
Data Formats: Like/Dislike
Figure 15.7
15-49
Data Formats:
Preference and Descriptive
Figure 15.7
(cont.)
15-50