BA 296-1 and ME290P
Fall 1997

Managing the New Product Development Process: Design Theory and Methodology

• Industrial Designers Society of America
• The Design Management Institute
• The Corporate Design Foundation

1. Compare the three development projects discussed in the case. What explains the differences in performance you observe? (In doing this, it might be useful to think about how one ought to compare projects. That is, what are the relevant dimensions and criteria for comparison?)
   
2. What are the salient features of the traditional development process at Honeywell Residential? What have been some of the underlying drivers and incentives in this approach? What strengths and weaknesses does it have?
   
3. What is your evaluation of the new direction suggested for product development (for example, new procedures for product sourcing and product certification as well as the tiger team approach)? What should Molson do?
   

• First, read the background on the test available at http://sunsite.unc.edu/personality/keirsey.html
• Then, take and score the test available at http://sunsite.unc.edu/jembin/mb.pl. (Note that it is also available directly from the background page.)
  
• Based upon the information you gather in this process, write a one-page (max) paper about how you might use the information about your personality type and those of the other individuals in your design group to improve your group's work. How might others on your team use information about you? (Include your personality profile in the paper.)
  

• Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. and Behnam N. Tabrizi, "Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry," ASQ, March 1995
• Rosenthal, Stephen R., "Structuring the Work: Phases, Gates, and Simultaneous Engineering," pp. 17-49, Effective Product Design and Development, One Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1992.

• Your videotape with name of your team and names of all of your team members written on it. Include those assigned to observe the team.
  
• Delta Design game materials. You should keep a sketch on a separate piece of paper from the gameboard for your own purposes. The game materials will be kept and reused by another class.

• A sketch of your final design
  
• The calculations of the required performance measures (e.g., interior area, blue delta percentage, temperature, load, cost)
  
• A brief paragraph describing the virtues of your design
  These materials will be passed along with your videotape to another team in the class. That team will be charged with reviewing your design and analyzing the design process your team employed.

• Estimate the percentage of time spent in assimilation, documentation, planning, repair, specification and verification. (A full protocol analysis is not required.)
  
• How did your results follow those of Ullman, et al.? How were they different?
  
• What other observations to you have of the process the team used?
  
• Write a paper of two pages (max) describing your findings and observations. Return the videotapes and designs with your write-up.

• Bacon, Glenn, Sara Beckman, David Mowery and Edith Wilson, "Managing Product Definition in High-Technology Industries: A Pilot Study," California Management Review, Spring 1994.
  
• Khurana, Anil and Stephen Rosenthal, "Integrating the Fuzzy Front End of New Product Development, Sloan Management Review, Winter 1997.
  
• Meyer, Marc H., and James M. Utterback, "The Product Family and the Dynamics of Core Capability," Sloan Management Review, Spring 1993.
  
• Wheelwright, Steven C., and Kim B. Clark, "Creating Project Plans to Focus Product Development," Harvard Business Review, March-April 1992.
  

• "Conjoint Analysis: A Manager's Guide," Harvard Business School, 1990.
• Day, George S., "Continuous Learning about Markets," California Management Review, Summer 1994.
• Griffin, Abbie and John R. Hauser, "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, Vol. 12, No. 1, Winter 1993. (Provides more detail on the findings presented in Ulrich and Eppinger.)
• Kaindl, Hermann, "An Integration of Scenarios with their Purposes in Task Modeling," ACM 1995.
• Lynn, Gary S., Joseph G. Morone, and Albert S. Paulson, "Marketing and Discontinuous Innovation: The Probe and Learn Process," California Management Review, Spring 1996.
• Potts, Colin, "Using Schematic Scenarios to Understand User Needs," ACM 1995.
• Royer, Traci, "Using Scenario-Based Designs to Review User Interface Changes and Enhancements," ACM 1995.
• Urban, Glen L. and Eric von Hippel, "Lead User Analysis for the Development of New Industrial Products," Management Science, May 1988.

• BA 263: New Product Development
  
• BA 264: High Tech Marketing

• Using your own perspective, what are the most important user needs in the water purifier market? You might want to interview a few wilderness enthusiasts to help answer this question.
• How can you structure this user's needs data to assist Sandy Platter in creating his product concept?
• How do competitors' products meet those needs?
• What characterizes an outstanding concept for a water purification device for backpackers and other outdoor enthusiasts?

• Willyard, Charles H. and Cheryl W. McClees, "Motorola's Technology Roadmap Process," Research Management, September-October 1987.
  

• Adams, James L., Conceptual Blockbusting
  
• Michalko, Michael, Thinkertoys: A Handbook of Business Creativity for the `90s

• Sony Electronics
• Walkman Stereos

• Butler, Keith, "Designing Deeper: Towards a User-Centered Development Effort," ACM 1995.
  
• Ulrich, Karl T. and Karen Tung, "Fundamentals of Product Modularity," MIT Working Paper #3335-91-MSA, September 1991
  
• Ulrich, Karl, "The Role of Product Architecture in the Manufacturing Firm," MIT Working Paper

Read CHAPTER 8: INDUSTRIAL DESIGN. Consider thought questions 1 and 3. In preparation for the OXO case, interview at least five users with experience using these three kitchen gadgets: peeler, can opener, pizza cutter. Ask the product users to describe what they like and don't like about the gadgets they use. List the specific responses to your questions on a piece of paper. At the bottom of the page, produce a summary of the important features of these products. Bring this paper and your favorite kitchen gadget to class for discussion.

Assignment due: Kitchen gadget assessment

Reference On-Line Case Study in Industrial Design: Cyclone Grinder Case with Ingersoll Rand.

While the case focuses on physical design principles (e.g., ergonomics), many of the same basic principles apply to design of software user interfaces. In preparation for class discussion, choose three of the user interface design rules listed below. First, interpret what they mean, and then use your favorite software package(s) to find examples of their implementation (or lack of implementation.)

Following is a list of user interface design rules that you may find helpful in your team's work:

• Know thy user, and YOU are NOT thy user.
  
• Things that look the same should act the same.
  
• Everyone makes mistakes, so every mistake should be flexible.
  
• The information for the decision needs to be there when the decision is needed.
  
• Error messages should actually mean something to the user, and tell the user how to fix the problem.
  
• Every action should have a reaction.
  
• Don't overload the user's buffers.
  
• Consistency, consistency, consistency.
  
• Minimize the need for a mighty memory.
  
• Keep it simple.
  
• The more you do something, the easier it should be to do.
  
• The user should always know what is happening.
  
• The user should control the system. The system shouldn't control the user. The user is the boss, and the system should show it.
  
• The idea is to empower the user, not speed up the system.
  
• Eliminate unnecessary decisions, and illuminate the rest.
  
• If I made an error, let me know about it before I get into REAL trouble.
  
• The best journey is the one with the fewest steps. Shorten the distance between the user and their goal.
  
• The user should be able to do what the user wants to do.
  
• Things that look different should act different.
  
• You should always know how to find out what to do next.
  
• Don't let people accidentally shoot themselves.
  
• Even experts are novices at some point. Provide help.
  
• Design for regular people and the real world.
  
• Keep it neat. Keep it organized.
  
• Provide a way to bail out and start over.
  
• The fault is not in thyself, but in thy system.
  
• If it is not needed, it is not needed.
  
• Color is information.
  
• Everything in its place, and a place for everything.
  
• The user should be in a good mood when done.
  
• If I made an error, at least let me finish my thought before I have to fix it.
  
• Cute is note a good adjective for systems.
  
• Let people shape the system to themselves, and paint it with their own personality.
  
• To know the system is to love it.
  

• The idea is to empower the user, not speed up the system.
  
• Don't overload the user's buffers.
  
• Let people shape the system to themselves, and paint it with their own personality.
  
• Minimize the need for a mighty memory.
  
• Eliminate unnecessary decisions, and illuminate the rest.
  

1. What does DFM mean at Midwest? What is your evaluation of Thurlow's approach to implementing DFM at Midwest?
   
2. Compare and evaluate the experience of Raleigh, Coventry, and Chicago in implementing DFM. What explains the outcomes you observe? What lessons should Midwest senior management draw from those experiences?
   
3. Suppose you were given the job as Thurlow's replacement and charged with moving DFM off its plateau at Midwest. What would you do? Develop a plan of action.
   

Reference On-Line Case Study in Design for Assembly and Manufacture: Mattel Color Spin and IBM Proprinter.

1. What are the causes and consequence of BMW's quality problems with newly launched products? What should be done to improve "launch quality?"
   
2. What are your recommendations to Carl-Peter Forster concerning the 7-series prototypes? What should he do regarding future development projects?
   
3. What changes would you recommend in the way BMW develops new models? What attributes of newly launched products would you expect to improve as a result of these recommendations? Which attributes might deteriorate?
   
4. What recommendations would you make to Chairman von Kuenheim regarding BMW's strategy to compete against new Japanese entrants into the luxury car market?

• Lichter, Horst, Matthias Schneider-Hufschmidt and Heinz Zullinghoven, "Prototyping in Industrial Software Projects -- Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 11, November 1994.
  
• Schrage, Michael, "The Culture(s) of Prototyping," Design Management Journal, Vol. 4, No. 1, Winter 1993. (An interesting view of the different roles that prototypes play in new product development.)
  
• Sutcliffe, Alistair, "Requirements Rationales: Integrating Approaches to Requirement Analysis," ACM 1995.

1. What is required to be successful in the Winchester disk drive industry? What do you think accounts for Quantum's success?
   
2. What is your evaluation of Quantum's progress to-date in developing and applying team concepts?
   
3. How effective have the major teams been? What accounts for their primary differences in effectiveness?
   
4. How would you recommend that Dave Brown address the team-related issues raised at the end of the case? Why? Are there other team issues that you would add as high priority on his list?
   
5. Develop an overall plan of action for addressing these issues. How should they be linked to other aspects of Quantum's management approach? How should they measure and track their progress in implementing that plan? (Be specific as to actions taken, their timing, and the results expected.)

1. Analyze NEC's approach to the development of products based on advanced technologies. What are its critical elements?
   
2. What are the advantages of NEC's approach? What are the drawbacks?
   
3. There are three basic options for future projects to be performed by NEC's packaging engineering group. The first two focus on the requirements of developing a new traditional vector supercomputer by 1993 and a new mainframe by 1995. The third deals with the development of new parallel computer concepts. These efforts would precede a formally approved parallel computer project which would probably begin around the middle of 1992. The options focus on the bipolar packaging group which currently consists of 36 engineers. The CMOS packaging group is already stretched to its limit in developing packaging systems for laptops, personal computers, and workstations over the next three to four years.
   • Option 1: Extension of the SX-3 module. The combination of polyimide and ceramics that had rendered the SX-2 and SX-3 successful could once again be stretched to provide the performance necessary for the 1993 traditional vector supercomputer and the 1995 mainframe. The project would not be easy, since the SX-3 design is already close to several material limitations. The entire bipolar packaging group would essentially have to be dedicated to the effort to be certain they would finish in less than three years, as required. This would probably be the last supercomputer generation based on this module concept.
     
   • Option 2: Glass ceramic module. This option involved introducing the glass ceramic technology that had been considered as the third option in the SX-2 project. Glass ceramics have thermal and electrical characteristics superior to those of the materials used in the SX-2 and SX-3 projects. Scientists envision large performance improvements that would suffice for at least tow generations of future vector supercomputers. (IBM recently introduced a mainframe module based on glass ceramics that exhibited impressive performance characteristics.) This project would be an "all-out" technical effort involving more resources than the first option, including at least the entire bipolar packaging group plus ten scientists from the R&D laboratory (the total umber of scientists with expertise in high performance packaging,) Meeting the tight time schedule for the introduction of the 1993 vector supercomputer would be a concern, but could probably be done.
     
   • Option 3: Feasibility study of parallel computer module. This option involves the systematic evaluation of parallel computer packaging concepts. At this point in time, because there is no dominant design in the industry, there are several ways that parallel computer concepts could develop. However, NEC's senior management has implied that the parallel computer will be manufactured in the same facility in Fuchu City as the vector machines. Additionally, the results of the software and integrated circuit studies performed so far imply that future parallel computers will probably be based on CMOS microprocessors. The challenge for the packaging group is to find a way to package between 100 and 1,000,000 of these microprocessor close to each other. There are many ways to exploratory projects could be implemented. First, the packaging engineering group could devote engineers to discussing and building models of processor concepts. The necessary resources would depend on the number of technical approaches to be considered, involving about six engineering for each approach. Second, NEC could initiate studies with outside suppliers. This would be a bit expensive, and the packaging group would have to make a strong case for it to senior management. Third, the group could simply wait a year or two, since a full scale parallel computer project has not yet been approved. If approach, the project would not begin until 1992.