Although many new‐products professionals may harbor hopes of developing “the next big thing” in their respective industries, most product development efforts focus on incremental innovations. Accordingly, most research on the new‐product development (NPD) process focuses on the development of evolutionary products. For new‐products professionals seeking insights into the means for achieving breakthrough innovations, a fundamental question remains unanswered: Does the NPD process for discontinuous products differ from the process for incremental, or continuous, products? To provide a better understanding of managerial practices associated with discontinuous innovation, Robert Veryzer presents findings from an in‐depth study of eight discontinuous product development projects. The study explores the key factors that affect the discontinuous NPD process, as well as the methods that the firms in this study use for assessing the radically new products they have in development. From the findings in this study, he develops a descriptive model of the discontinuous product development process, and he offers insights into the requirements for effective management of discontinuous innovation projects. Although half the firms in the study use a formal process for evaluating radically innovative products, the participants in the study generally do not employ a formal, highly structured process for managing discontinuous NPD efforts. However, these firms do follow a consistent, logical process in the development of radical innovations, and their process differs significantly from incremental NPD processes. The processes used by the firms in this study are more exploratory and less customer driven than the typical, incremental NPD process. The impetus for all the projects in this study comes from the convergence of developing technologies, various contextual or environmental factors (for example, government regulations), and a product champion or visionary. Starting from these drivers, the discontinuous NPD process focuses on formulating a product application for the emerging technologies. In all cases, these firms developed prototypes at an earlier stage than the typical, incremental NPD process. To aid in the formulation of a new product application from emerging technologies, prototype construction in these discontinuous NPD projects precedes opportunity analysis, assessment of market attractiveness, market research, and financial analysis.
Despite the growing recognition of industrial design's value in creating sustainable competitive advantage, few studies have attempted to quantify the contribution that design makes to company financial performance. This article examines the relationship between industrial design and company financial performance in order to assess industrial design's contribution to this performance. Effective industrial design was evaluated by asking a panel of 138 industrial design experts to rank the industrial design effectiveness of publicly traded firms within nine selected manufacturing industries; the ranking process yielded 93 firms. Based on the rankings, firms within each industry were divided into two groups: those judged as exhibiting high design effectiveness versus those judged as low in design effectiveness. Audited financial data reported to the SEC across a seven-year period from 1995 to 2001 were used to evaluate financial performance.Using traditional financial ratios senior managers consider essential performance measures, those firms with high design effectiveness were hypothesized to have higher returns on sales, returns on assets, and growth rates of sales, net income, and cash flow than firms with low design effectiveness. High design effectiveness firms further were hypothesized to have higher stock market returns. These comprehensive, corporate financial measures incorporate expenditures made on industrial design (industrial designers' salaries, design consultants' fees, computer-aided industrial design equipment) and expenditures that designers influence through their design choices (material costs, manufacturing equipment).This analysis reveals that firms rated as having ''good'' design were stronger on all measures except growth rate measures. These results provide strong evidence that good industrial design is related to corporate financial performance and stock market performance even after considering expenditures on industrial design. Further, the patterns of financial performance over the seven-year horizon suggest that these effects are persistent.
Design offers a potent way to position and to differentiate products and can play a significant role in their success. In many ways it is the focus on deep understanding of the customer or user-what may be termed user-oriented design (UOD)-that transforms a bundle of technology with the ability to provide functionality into a ''product'' that people desire to interact with and from which they derive benefits. Even though the importance of this type of design is gaining recognition, several fundamental relationships between user-oriented design contributions and the new product development (NPD) process and outcomes (i.e., product) remain unresearched, although they are assumed. This article examines the fundamental relationships underlying the incorporation of a user orientation into the NPD process. The discussion is organized around UOD's impact in terms of enhancing collaborative new product development (process oriented), improving idea generation (process oriented), producing superior product or service solutions (product oriented), and facilitating product appropriateness and adoption (product oriented). Each of these is developed and presented in the form of a research proposition relating to the impact of user-oriented design on product development. The fundamental relationships articulated concerning UOD's impact on NPD form a conceptual framework for this approach to product design and development.For practitioners, the article suggests how user-oriented design can improve NPD through its more grounded and comprehensive approach, along with the elevated appreciation of design challenges and heightened sense of possibilities for a product being developed. For scholars, the article identifies four important areas for UOD research. In addition to the rich avenues offered for research by each of these, the framework presented provides a foundation for further study as well as the development of new measures and tools for enhancing NPD efforts.
Common sense, as well as plenty of research, tells us that customer feedback can play an important role in successful product development efforts. By understanding the key factors that affect customers' evaluations of a new product, a project team improves its chances of making the right decisions throughout the design and development effort. However, customers typically lack a useful frame of reference for evaluating discontinuous, or really new products. In all likelihood, the key factors that affect customers' evaluations of radically new products differ from those for incremental innovations. Robert Veryzer describes the results of a study that examines the customer research efforts and findings of seven firms involved in the development of discontinuous new products. This study has the following objectives: gaining insight into the customer research inputs such companies use during the development of discontinuous new products, and exploring the critical factors that influence customers' evaluations of these really new products. The subjects in this study conducted relatively little formal customer research during the early stages of the NPD projects. The methods used for obtaining customer input during the concept generation and exploration stages were primarily qualitative. Although the companies in the study still did not focus consistently on customer issues during the technical development and design stage, the less discontinuous projects did use such traditional quantitative techniques as concept tests, clinics, and experiments during this phase of NPD. Throughout the projects in this study, the real opportunities for obtaining customer input came during the prototype testing and commercialization phases of the NPD projects. Several key factors appeared to influence customer evaluations of the products that were being developed by the NPD teams in this study. Lack of familiarity was manifested in customers' resistance to the new products in the study. Similarly, unfamiliarity with these new products often seemed to lead customers to focus on product attributes that development team members viewed as relatively unimportant. Other factors that affected customer evaluation of the products in this study included customer uncertainty about the benefits and risks associated with the product, customers' ability to understand how the product operates, perceptions of the product's safety, and product aesthetics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.