320 likes | 595 Views
Managing Product Innovation Portfolios and Timing Market Entry. Robert Monroe Innovative Product Development April 9, 2012. By The End Of Class Today, You Should:.
E N D
Managing Product Innovation PortfoliosandTiming Market Entry Robert Monroe Innovative Product Development April 9, 2012
By The End Of Class Today, You Should: • Understand common constraints and drivers that inform decisions on when to enter a new market (also known as timing market entry) • Be able to explain the concept of a product innovation portfolio • Understand why thinking of an organization's innovation efforts as a portfolio can be an effective way to: • Coordinate multiple initiatives • Manage the firm's overall risk exposure
Timing Market Entry: Framing The Issue • The challenge: bring your innovative product to market at just the right time, not too early, not too late • Questions: • How could you possibly be too early to market? • What are the problems of entering the market too late? • How do you know, a priori, what the right time is to enter? Time ofMarket Entry Too Early Just Right Too Late
Market Entry Examples: Digital Music Players Diamond RioMP3 Player 1998 Apple iPod 2001 MicrosoftZune 2006
Technology Improvement Cycles Limit of Technology Performance Effort (or Time) Source: [Sch10] Page 54
Technology / Innovative Product Adoption Cycles • There are common, recurring patterns of technology and innovative product adoption • Understanding these cycles, and where your target market is in that adoption process, should play an important part in your decision on when to enter a market • The following three patterns look at technology/product adoption from different lenses – all are useful, provided that you understand what they tell you • S-Curves • The Gartner Group’s Hype Cycle™ • Geoffrey Moore’s ‘Crossing the Chasm’ lifecycle
Classic S-Curve Technology Adoption Cycles Source: Original concept from Everett Rogers in “Diffusion of Innovations” book, 1962. Image courtesy Wikipedia
Classic S-Curve Technology Adoption Cycles Source: Stuart Staniford’s blog, http://earlywarn.blogspot.com/2010/06/technology-adoption-in-hard-times.html
Geoffrey Moore’s Technology Adoption Lifecycle Source: Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm, Harper Collins, 1991. Image courtesy Wikipedia
Gartner Group’s “Hype Cycle” Curve Source: Gartner Group via Wikipedia
Hype Cycle Example: Social Analytics in July 2011 Source: Gianluigi Cuccureddu, BusinessInsider.com, commenting on Gartner’s published hype cycle graph http://www.businessinsider.com/gartners-hype-cycle-2011-social-analytics-and-activity-streams-reach-the-peak-2011-8
Common Market-Entry Strategies For New Products • First-Mover • Be first to market, build up a large lead that nobody can catch up to • Fast Follower • Let somebody else lead, learn what works, then catch up quickly • Foot-Dragger • Do everything you can to delay the growth of the market, adoption of the technology/product or the entry of market participants • Late Entry • Wait for others to clearly define the market, then improve what they have done (or buy the company/product/technology)
Market Entry Examples Redux: Digital Music Players • Which strategy did each of these companies take? • Who won? Diamond RioMP3 Player 1998 Apple iPod 2001 MicrosoftZune 2006
Disruptive vs. Sustaining Technological Innovation • Sustaining innovations: • Revolutionary or discontinuous: an innovation that creates a new market by allowing customers to solve a problem in a radically new way • Evolutionary: an innovation that improves a product in an existing market in ways that customers are expecting • Disruptive innovations are innovations that create a new (and unexpected) market by applying a different set of values Source: [Chr97] – Concept of Disruptive vs. Sustaining Technologies, examples from Wikipedia
Discussion Where on the Gartner Hype Chart and Moore’s Technology Adoption Lifecycle chart are the following technologies? • Basic mobile phones • Smartphones • iOS • Android OS • Windows 7 • Social network games • Self-driving cars • Face recognition software
Remember: Innovation Resources Are Limited Resources Available for Innovative New Product Development
Stage-Gate Issue: Evaluating Projects In Isolation • A common problem with gate decisions in the Stage-Gate process is that each project is evaluated on its own merits, in isolation from the rest of the company’s previous commitments • This tends to lead to: • Too many projects being approved without really understanding the broader implications on the organization’s resource commitments • A myopic approach to broad product strategy and its mapping to the broader business strategy • Poor balancing of time demand across company groups
Key Idea: Don’t Consider Innovation Projects In Isolation • Companies should deliberately manage their mix of innovation products to reflect the organizations: • Overall business strategy • Resource constraints • Core competencies • Desired risk profile (along several dimensions) • A product innovation portfolio allows an organziation to: • Identify and track all of the innovation projects it is working on • Understand relative investments across areas and innovation types • Manage organizational risks • Allocate resources effectively
Visualizing Innovation Portfolios: Aligned Spectra Product Process Radical Incremental Competence-Enhancing Competence-Destroying Architectural Component Disruptive Evolutionary High Risk Low Risk
Finding Where You Are: Capacity vs. Demand Analysis • Option 1: Assess demand created by your active projects • Determine demand for organization resources across all projects, go into detail for each major functional group • Determine the capacity for each of those groups over time • Look for mismatches • Typical discoveries include: • You really do have too many projects (often by a factor of 2 or 3) • You discover which groups are the bottlenecks • You can evaluate how effectively different groups are spending their time (both effectiveness and efficiency) Source: [CE09] pages 268-269
Finding Where You Are: Demand Generated By NPD • Option 2: Assess demand generated by business goals • Begin by determining your product goals for next N time periods • Translate those goals into numbers of major and minor new products to make it through each gate review • Map those projects to work-days required • Compare that to your capacity in each area • Flag places where demand will exceed capacity • Typical discoveries include: • You really do have too many projects (often by a factor of 2 or 3) • You should probably modify your goals to match capacity Source: [CE09] pages 268-269
Adapting Stage-Gate For Portfolios • Option 1: incorporate portfolio review into gate reviews • Option 2: regular (quarterly) executive product portfolio reviews Source: [CE09]
Challenge Problem 7 • For Challenge Problem 7 you will need to write a 2-3 page, single-spaced, case analysis of one of the following three cases that we will be studying over the next three weeks: • MediSys product development project (Wednesday, April 4) • AravindEyecare Clinic, India (Wednesday, April 11) • Dannone in South Africa (Wednesday, April 18) • Pick any one of these three cases to do your analysis – you only need to submit one case analysis • Each case will have specific questions you will need to address in your analysis • Your analysis must be submitted before the class in which we cover the case begins. No late submissions will be accepted. • CP 7 must be done individually.
References [CE09] Robert G. Cooper and Scott Edgett, Successful Product Innovation, Product Development Institute, 2009, ISBN: 978-1-4392-4918-5. [Chr97] Christensen, Clayton M., The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business Press, 1997, ISBN 9780875845852 [KL01] Tom Kelly with Jonathan Littman, The Art of Innovation, Doubleday, 2001, ISBN: 0-385-49984-1. [Sch10] Melissa A. Schilling, Strategic Management of Technological Innovation, 3rd Edition, McGraw Hill, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-07-338156-5