Design Management Group

Managing the NPD process

Design vs NPD processes

The NPD process focuses on how a development project is to be structured, managed, controlled and organised. The design process can be viewed in the context of the NPD process as the sequence of design activities and decisions to progress from idea to detailed solution. The design process is essentially iterative and involves the definition of the problem, gathering and codification of relevant information, a divergent search for solutions, convergence on the preferred solution and detailed implementation and optimisation. It has a narrower scope than the NPD process and is not concerned with management and control issues. For practical purposes, most organisations make no distinction between the NPD process and the design process.

A generic NPD process

Shown below is a generic NPD process. The product development process encompasses both the managerial activities and also the design related activities. The design process has been illustrated as three overlapping phases to indicate the iterative nature of product design. Within the first phase, emphasis is given to understanding the market, the user and the competition. During concept design, equal emphasis is given to technical and user focused activities such as aesthetic and ergonomic design. During detailed implementation, the process focuses on evaluation and design for production.

Managerial aspects of the process are indicated separately. Firstly, the project itself emerges from a range of ongoing business activities, such as idea generation, technology development and technology development. Secondly, individual projects need effective management, with strong decision points, requent design reviews, and good teamwork involving specialist designers where appropriate.

Each phase is now briefly described, along with the typical pitfalls encountered at each stage: Project generation

• New projects do not appear out of thin air! There are a range of ongoing 'pre-project' activities which are critical to ensure that a strong stream of new product ideas is generated. Equally important is the evaluation and screening of potential ideas to ensure that only the potential winners get taken through to the next phase. Typical problems encountered during this phase include:
  • Insufficient 'good ideas' resulting from a lack of up-front marketing and research activities
  • A tendency for 'technology push' concepts in engineering led companies
  • Inadequate user and customer exposure across the business
  • Poor 'project portfolio management' resulting in too many projects and not enough resources
  • No involvement of industrial designers to help draw together the market and technology perspectives
  • Platform and modularity opportunities not explored

Requirements capture

Often referred to as the feasibility, this phase aims to establish the commercial and technical viability of a project and establish the criteria for success. This requires a deep understanding of the needs of potential users, the environment and conditions of use and the benefits which will be delivered in a new product. The primary output from this phase is a normally a detailed product specification in addition to a clear business case to justify further investment. Typical problems encountered during this phase include:

• A poor understanding of the market, with little attempt to segment the whole market and clearly position a proposed new product
• Inadequate understanding of user requirements and a poor product 'vision' based on features rather than benefits
• A weak business case, based on unsupported 'guesstimates' of the potential opportunity
• Little consideration of the market, technical and commercial risks

Concept design

Having defined the potential opportunity and specified the characteristics of a successful solution, the concept design phase aims to ensure a divergent search for possible solutions. It is during this phase that the product architecture and usability issues will be established. These are critical decisions which require a close integration of industrial and engineering design specialists. Typical problems encountered during this phase include:

• Lack of creativity during concept design, and a tendency to choose the first solution
• Poor integration of industrial and engineering design, resulting in 'stylish but un-manufacturable' or 'practical but ugly' concepts
• No formal planning of the product architecture, leading to component proliferation and manufacturing inefficiency downstream
• Little modelling or testing of ideas resulting in late design changes as problems are found
• No analysis of the cost implications of design solutions

Implementation

Once an overall concept has been agreed, it must be translated into a reproducible and saleable reality. This is often one of the longer phases (in elapsed time), whilst prototypes and tooling is produced. It is vital that during this phase, the product does not drift away from the original concept as detailed engineering and design decisions are made. It is not unusual for a product to grow 20% in size during this phase! Typical problems encountered during this phase include:

• Late involvement of industrial design to 'tart up' an engineering led design
• Technical difficulties due to poor risk management and insufficient early prototyping
• Poor coordination and communication between functional groups means that the product is ready, but the sales plans are not in place
• Rushing to exhibition, before basic technical issues have been resolved
• No downstream involvement of industrial design results in an 'engineered product' which has lost the subtlety of the original concept

How detailed should the process be?

Most companies tend to move over time from one extreme to another - from being too bureaucratic to overly informal. In both cases, the result can be undesirable. There is no 'ideal' solution and the best companies continually improve their product development process to add or remove control points and formal structure as lessons are learnt. Effective companies aim to get the balance right, with a clear and simple overall structure which is easily understood by all and further detail accessible where necessary.

Further reading

• Cooper R G, (1993), Winning at new products: accelerating the process from idea to launch 2nd edition, Perseus Books Publishing, USA
• McGrath M E, (1996), Setting the PACE in product development: a guide to product and cycle time excellence, Butterworth-Heinemann, USA
• Pugh S, (1996), Creating innovative products using total design: the living legacy of Stuart Pugh, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, USA
• Ulrich & Eppinger, (2000), Product design and development, McGraw Hill, USA
• Wheelwright S C, Clark K B, (1992), Revolutionising product development: quantum leaps in speed efficiency and quality, Free Press, New York