|
Volume
3, Issue 3- March 29, 2002
GGI RapidNews is published monthly
R&D SURVEY
RESULTS
2000 Metric
Survey "Special Cuts": GGI's 2000 Product Development
Metric Survey Results (MR14), which has just been released
(see below), contains five separate "special cuts" at the
2000 survey data, in addition to the analysis of the overall
survey population responses. These separate, stand-alone survey
analyses reveal interesting aspects of industry measurement
practices. GGI will discuss one section at a time over the
next several issues of RN. The "special cuts" describe differences
in metrics practices between Public vs. Private, Smaller vs.
Larger, Higher vs. Lower Technology, More vs. Fewer Employees
and Process, Repetitive/Discrete and/or Job Shop companies.
Public vs. Private is the RN subject this month.
Findings For
Public vs. Private Companies: Below are some differences
between publicly traded and privately held company metrics
practices. There were 71 public and 43 private companies in
the 2000 survey sample, with 7 non-respondents:
* 46% of Public
and only 21% of Private Companies have a clearly defined set
of corporate metrics, while 24% of Private and only 6 % of
Public Companies could not derive such a set.
* Similarly, 48%
of Public and only 21% of Private Companies have a clearly
defined set of R&D (product development) metrics, while 44%
of Private and only 13% of Public Companies could not derive
such a set.
* Perhaps the
biggest product Portfolio Management difference between Public
and Private Companies was that 10% of Private Companies did
not use any of the typical frameworks for product/project
analysis (Product Family Model, Line of Business, Product
Type, Platform, Derivative, Project Size, etc.)
* 45% of Private
and only 25% of Public Companies said they did not track or
calculate product life cycles.
* More Public
than Private Companies were apt to have a formal product obsolescence
or retirement practice. 90% of Private vs. 79% of Public Companies
let products fade away.
* Public Companies
were more apt to use a formal framework for product portfolio
analysis than Private Companies. Increases over Private Companies
were 100% for "Growth Potential over Market Share;" "Product
Return vs. Product Investment" and "Market Risk vs. Technical
Risk," albeit Public Companies still had a low percentage
usage of these methods.
* 64% of Private
vs. 42% of Public Companies did not use quantitative financial
data to determine the success or failure of their products
in the marketplace.
In summary, public
companies have more formalized metric practices than do private
companies. Public company reporting requirements to the SEC
probably drive the improved usage of metrics by public companies.
MANAGEMENT
PRODUCTIVITY
Attributes
Of Successful Product Launch Strategies: New product development
and launch success is "risky business." To be successful,
companies must accurately identify their end user's needs,
develop products to address those needs and effectively communicate
that the user needs have been satisfied through its new product
launch approach.
What are the characteristics
of a company's new product launch support program that most
affect its product success in the marketplace? Do successful
product launch decisions generically differ for consumer and
industrial products? Is there a Body of Knowledge (BOK) for
product launch success?
The authors* conclude
that new product launch decisions have not been systematically
(empirically) investigated. They conducted their investigation
in three parts: a literature review, a case history of 1,018
new product introductions in 3 countries, and a presentation
of their findings with resulting research and management implications.
The 4 principal research questions can be stated as 2 broader
questions:
1. What are the
differences in strategic/tactical launch decisions for consumer
and industrial products?
2. What are the
differences in strategic/tactical launch decisions for successful
and unsuccessful consumer or industrial products?
Typical Launch
Scenarios
Strategies for
consumer products often launch small improvements to mass-marketed
products with innovation levels similar to competitors to
extend existing or add new lines. The strategy appears focused
on defending the firm's position by further penetrating existing
markets.
Strategies for
industrial products often launch technologically innovative
products with marked performance improvements that are targeted
at fast-growing niches or new markets.
Consumer product
launches often represent brand extensions equal to competitors;
are launched through existing channels priced similarly to
competitors; and are promoted to trade and customers through
print and broadcasting media.
Industrial product
launches often represent a broader product assortment than
competitors; are introduced with skimming prices through new
channels with lower distribution expenditures; and are promoted
through personal selling, direct marketing and public relations
efforts.
Factors In
Successful & Unsuccessful Products
Launching new
and innovative products, or products which improve image in
existing markets, are more often associated with strategic
success. This finding is irrespective of market type.
Launching broader
assortments of products using print advertising are more often
associated with greater tactical success. This finding is
also irrespective of market type.
Strategically
successful consumer products are often launched with short
to moderate cycle times into moderately growing markets to
utilize excess capacity and/or erect competitive barriers.
Strategically
successful industrial products are often launched with shorter
cycle times into markets with higher growth rates. In addition,
more successful products are launched in the maturity phase
of the life cycle. These later stage entries typically encounter
fewer market competitors and enable increased penetration
at lower introduction cost.
Tactically successful
consumer products are often launched as a broad range of brand
extensions with higher distribution and promotion costs through
print, TV and radio ads, and are priced similarly to their
competition.
Tactically successful
industrial products are often launched with distribution and
promotion expenses similar to their competitors through direct
marketing and print advertising. A broader product assortment
is often associated with higher success.
Management
Implications
These analyses
suggest that industrial firms achieve higher levels of product
success when they use innovation to outperform competitors
by increasing market penetration in existing markets through
reductions in product cost. These analyses also suggest that
successful vs. unsuccessful launches, with respect to firm
strategy, differ largely in degree rather than principal.
Consumer firms
may want to pay greater attention to preferred pricing tactics
and relative promotion expenditure levels with a greater focus
on increased distribution spending.
Industrial firms
may want to reconsider the introduction of new products through
new channels, which are too often associated with failure.
Additionally, these firms may want to consider higher distribution
spending levels and avoidance of agents/brokers to penetrate
new markets.
Summary
Consumer firms
should pay closer attention to assortment, distribution and
promotion spending levels, and pricing tactics. Industrial
firms should pay closer attention to distribution decisions
and promotion tactics.
* "Launch Decisions
and New Product Success: An Empirical Comparison of Consumer
and Industrial Products" Erik Jan Hultink, Susan Hart, Henry
S.J. Robben and Abbie Griffin, JPIM, Volume 17, Number 1,
January 2000, pages 5-21.
CONFERENCES
OF INTEREST
Society of
Concurrent Product Development 7th Annual Conference:
The 7th Annual Conference for SCPD will be held at the Boston
University Executive Education Center in Tyngsboro, MA on
Wed.-Thurs. May 29-30, 2002. Several world-recognized speakers
will be participating, but their names cannot officially be
released yet. This conference is a great value. Please visit
http://www.scpdnet.org
for further updates and registration information.
Boothroyd-Dewhurst's
2002 International Forum on DFMA: This internationally
respected conference will be held in Newport, Rhode Island
on June 10-12, 2002. Mark your calendars. You will see the
leading practitioners and thought leaders for DFMA, Design
for Serviceability, Design for Disassembly, Design for Recycleability,
Design for Environment, and Green Design. Brad Goldense will
be presenting a newly written paper "Measuring R&D Projects:
Best Practices" at the 2002 Forum. Please visit http://www.dfma.com
for further updates and registration information.
"FEATURED"
iSTORE PRODUCTS
MR4 - 1998
Product Development Metrics Survey Results: The largest
and most complete of the three reports prepared on the 1998
Product Development Metrics Survey - "Research Results" (MR4)
- has been "deep-discounted" to $1,965.00. Typically selling
for $2,620.00, this 131 page report's price has been reduced
25%.
Research "Results"
is GGI's most complete of the three published 1998 survey
reports. This report provides 104-pages of presentation slides,
in addition to the text. The report focuses on four areas:
Corporate Metrics, Project Metrics, Metrics Systems, and Links
to Reward and Recognition practices. The survey population
of 190 companies is analyzed as a whole. The survey's findings
may surprise you.
In addition, this
Results report is the only one of the three reports to contain
the five "special cuts" sections that GGI employs in all our
research: Public vs. Private, Smaller vs. Larger, Higher vs.
Lower Technology, More vs. Fewer Employees and whether companies
are Process, Repetitive/Discrete and/or Job Shop. The survey
population is segmented and compared five ways.
Visit http://www.goldensegroupinc.com/cgi/catalog.cgi?display_promo
for additional information.
NEW iSTORE
PRODUCTS
GGI's relocation
of our corporate offices this past year to Needham, Massachusetts
detracted from our ability to keep our iStore up to date.
This past month, a substantial number of GGI publications
have been added to our iStore at the URL below.
Market Research
MR14 - 2000
Product Development Metrics Survey Results: MR14's 211
pages represents the most complete and authoritative summary
and analysis on the state of product development metrics inside
corporate America. Research "Results" is GGI's most complete
of the three published 2000 survey reports.
The report analyzes
data from an industry survey that targeted issues of R&D Linkages
to Corporate Strategy, Product Portfolio Management, Product
Selection Practices, Determination of Product Success, and
an analysis of the most frequently used R&D metrics.
In addition to
the main body which analyzes the survey population as a whole,
the report analyzed the same 'special cuts" sections consistent
the structure of the 1998 survey: Public vs. Private, Smaller
vs. Larger, Higher vs. Lower Technology, More vs. Fewer Employees
and whether companies are Process, Repetitive/Discrete and/or
Job Shop.
Quotations
& Citations Published in the Trade Press
Q19 - "Interview:
More on Linking Corporate Strategy to R&D: A Conversation
with Brad Goldense," Best Practices Report, Management Roundtable,
Inc., August 2001, 4 pages.
Q18 - "New Study
Examines Links Between R&D, Corporate Metrics" Best Practices
Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., December 2000, 4 pages.
Q17 - "Does R&D
Contribute To Profits?" Injection Molding Magazine, Penton
Publishing Company, May 2000, 2 pages.
Q16 - "A P/L for
R&D" CFO Magazine, The Economist Group, February 2000, 5 pages.
[Backordered]
Q15 - "What Is
The Current State of Metrics Information Systems" Best Practice
Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., December 1999, 3 pages.
Q14 - "Measuring
Profits, R&D Grows Vital" Providence Business News, Herald
Press, September 20-26, 1999, 2 pages.
Q13 - "New Study
Reveals How To Improve Product Development Metrics" Managing
Design Engineering, Institute of Management & Administration,
Inc., February 1999, 4 pages.
Q12 - "Pipeline
Index Helps You Identify Product Development Overload" Managing
Design Engineering, Institute of Management & Administration,
Inc., January 1999, 2 pages.
Published Articles
A37 - "Corporate
R&D Metrics: Barometers of Process Maturity" Best Practices
Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., December 2001, 2 pages.
A36 - "Measuring
R&D's Linkage to Corporate Strategy: It Can Be Done" Best
Practices Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., August 2001,
2 pages.
A35 - "Product
Development Metrics Systems" Integrated Engineering Technologies,
Cornhill Publications Limited, Issue 1, 2001, 12 pages. [Backordered]
A34 - "Project
Measurement Practices in Manufacturing and High Tech" Machine
Design, Penton Publishing, July 26, 2001, 5 pages.
A33 - "Virtual
Collaboration: Practically Speaking" Best Practices Report,
Management Roundtable, Inc., April 2001, 2 pages.
A32 - "R&D Portfolio
Management: Progress and Opportunities" Best Practices Report,
Management Roundtable, Inc., December 2000, 2 pages.
A31 - "Virtual
Co-Location: Technology Directions Are Focused On Maslow's
Hierarchy" Best Practices Report, Management Roundtable, Inc.,
August 2000, 2 pages.
A30 - "Metrics
for Aligning Strategy, R&D, and the Factory" Best Practices
Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., April 2000, 2 pages.
A29 - "Metrics
Bring Control to Product Development" Machine Design, Penton
Publishing, March 23, 2000, 1 page.
A28 - "Product
Development: Metrics Macrotrends" Best Practices Report, Management
Roundtable, Inc., December 1999, 2 pages.
A27 - "The Future
of Concurrent Engineering" Design News, Cahners Publishing,
November 1, 1999, 1 page.
A26 - "Metrics
Strategy: Manage The Revenue Drivers" Best Practices Report,
Management Roundtable, Inc., August 1999, 3 pages.
A25 - "Product
Development Process: Ready for the Next Century!" Best Practices
Report, Management Roundtable, Inc., April 1999, 2 pages.
A24 - "The Latest
On Product Development Metrics" Best Practices Report, Management
Roundtable, Inc., December 1998, 3 pages.
Published Technical
Papers
T29 - "R&D Baselining:
Diagnostic Medical Instruments" R&D and Clinical Trial Performance
with Metrics Conference Proceedings, IIR - Institute for International
Research, January 29, 2002, 40 pages.
T28 - "Building
an R&D Website for Competitive Advantage [Presentation" Best
Practices for Web-Enabled Collaborative Product Design Conference
Proceedings, IQPC - Interational Quality & Productivity Center,
July 31, 2001, 32 pages.
T27 - "Measuring
R&D Portfolio Success: Best Practices" The 2001 International
Forum on DFMA Conference Proceedings, Boothroyd-Dewhurst,
Inc.,Newport, June 4-5, 2001, 41 pages.
T26 - "Measuring
R&D Portfolio Success: Best Practices" The 2001 International
Forum on DFMA Conference Proceedings, Boothroyd-Dewhurst,
Inc., June 4-5, 2001, 10 pages.
T25 - "The State
of Product Development Measurement & Reward Practices" The
2000 International Forum on DFMA Conference Proceedings, Boothroyd-Dewhurst,
Inc., June 12, 2000, 9 pages.
Visit http://www.goldensegroupinc.com/cgi/catalog.cgi
for additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RapidNews is an e-mail publication from Goldense Group,
Inc (GGI). Its subject matter includes survey findings, company
news, book reviews, key industry conferences and R&D information
of interest to clients and associates. Please send communications to rn(at)goldensegroupinc.com.
Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|