TIMBERLAND : INNOVATION,

THINKING OUTSIDE THE SHOE BOX

MM6042 Corporate Performance Management
Company Background
Founder Nathan Swartz, 1952, bought interest in The Abington Shoe Company,
Boston, Massachusetts.
1970 brand Timberland ; performance-driven customer Boots that cost plenty..
And should.
The 3 Big Ideas : ( through inventions, the company earned a leadership position in boots, casual
footwear and high-performance outdoor recreation)

Instant success 1960s : First waterproff boots

1978 comfortable casual shoe (favorite among college students) and start selling
clothing and accessories
1980 Euro Hiker ; hiking boots with running shoe midsoles
Problem Background
Lack of collaboration across team/group especially between in-line team and iF team
iF as a team with the sprit of bring the big past innovation for Timberland has plenty of ideas, but gets
difficulty when its come to adapt the new invention to mainstream process by in-line team
Pushback from selected in-line team when adapt to the new product invented by iF team to mainstream
process

Current Organization Focus

Cross functional product team; organized by specific consumer and tried to meet every consumer need; customer
in-line teams

Product variation and growth ; added many consumer focus teams for new segment

Function vs Fashion ; marriage of innovation and consumer relevance

Speed team; to handle fashion responsiveness, developed quickly, and immediately sent to market

iF (Invention Factory); spirit of Timbelands past innovation focus in new ideas required longer development.
Problem Statement

How Timberland managing invention and integrate the

process to ensure the best use of resources without
restricting innovation.
Lesson learn from selected product
invention and integration process
Travel gear : great idea but lack of wholesales interest due to complexity and not adaptable to
for wholesales feasibility, because iF team working only by themselveis.
Precise fit : system project, to by reducing complexity in the shoe sizing process, which could
mean significant efficiency gains, service improvement, and enhanced margins.Transitioned a
major system project to the mainstream by creating transition team.
Mion; platform project, separate brand that focus on comfortable as possible in wet condition
boots, may create too much separation between iF and exiting in-line team
Urban Renewal; replicate the firefighter boots and made them available for urban youth, in-line
team has agreed to launch it, but some of in-line team member were concerned that the line
would not resonate with consumers

IF redefine its mission, shift their focus to toward getting in-line adoption, rather
than only product creation and development. to foster a company-wide culture of
innovation by identifying, creating, validating and delivering breakthrough
concepts and process.
Option for managing invention
1. iF only focus in creating idea and hand it to in-line
team to adapt.
Pros :
iF will have a lot of time to focus on creating new ideas for
breakthrough product in the future, as the spirit of past
Timberland.
Cons :
In-line team have lots of complaining and debating the new
idea if its adaptable to mainstream process or not
Because in-line team dont give birth to the new idea, they
have dont have passion for it
Not integrating both team result in high risk market failure
when its not feasible to mainstream process.
7 Option for managing invention
2. Making transition team that consisted of members from both in-line and iF
for transition the new invention product to mainstream process
Pros :
Each member of each team can complementary each other from each point of view,
to smoother transition of new idea to mainstream process.

Cons:
Have a transition team after the idea turn to product and taken to mainstream process
can be a late step if the product gets rejected by retailer or wholesales.
Due to the integration team is only consisted of member of both team, it may not
represent all the idea or concern of the whole process, so it can get push back from
any person in the in-line process.
8 Option for managing invention
3. iF as a separate business infrastructure team, in charge of create
idea, until selling product.
Pros :
iF will have control of fully resources and will have passion for selling the invention
product

Cons:
Lots of investment to build new business infrastructure for iF it self
iF will have to start from the beginning to establish sales force, factory partner which
already establish by the in-line team
Will create too much separation between existing team and iF team
9 Option for managing invention
4. Having integrating process by involving in-line team from the
beginning of new invention and process product with iF team
Pros :
Each team from iF and in-line team can complementary each other in early process of
the new invention from the product to the whole process after.
Reduce the risk of market failure or rejection from retailer or wholesales in the beginning
of product invention
In line team can have attachment to the product when they are involved in the
decision making in the first place

Cons:
Possibility of getting longer time of getting each team agreed of new invention product
to be approved and start
10 Conclusion
Based on analysis the option for managing invention, our group selected to
use option no 4,
Having integrating process by involving in-line team from the beginning of new
invention and process product with iF team.
Since this option will carefully have consideration from new idea to the process
in the very beginning stage and would reduce the rejection from the in-line
team or retailer/wholesales. In the other hand this option will making the
organization having an integration team without separate between the in-line
team and iF team.
11

Thank you