Sie sind auf Seite 1von 16

Slide 6.

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 Business analysis No–abandon


spotted

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

Competitor analysis Market Specific demands


R&D projects (ongoing) Changes to product lines Process improvement projects
trend forecasts etc. Potential improvements

Convergent point:
IDEA GENERATION

Feasibility studies Estimations of market potential


Specifications of potentially Modifications to ideas Study of required alterations
Time projection(s) Initial Comparison with Competitors
required changes etc. Preference inputs Study of resource implications
specifications Initial financial assessment

Convergent point:
IDEA(S) EVALUATION

Fuller market assessment


Early design(s) Development work on Concept(s) introduced to Collaboration on concepts Evaluation of the implications
Concept developed technically changes/new products market for evaluation may be both technical and of the alternative concepts in
Cost of concepts required Positioning of concept(s) commercial terms of resources and costs
Price indications

Convergent point:
CONCEPT EVALUATION
and CHOICE

Convergent point:
FULL BUSINESS ANALYSIS

Functional performance of
Development of altered parts, Preparation of marketing and Modifications to production
Physical product development product, collaboration on the
etc., if required launch plan process in light of development
development

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

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen