1. Concept Generation/Ideation
Marketing 4250
February 1, 2007

2. Translating Observations
into Interpreted Needs (Empathic Design)




Observation
Capture “data” - use video or still pictures,
don’t write
Show “data” to people who didn’t observe
first-hand and discuss observations
Brainstorm for solutions

3. Translating Verbatim Statements
into Interpreted Needs



Identify the benefit and not the function
(what
the product does, not how it should/must do it). “I want a 1/4”
hole, not a 1/4” drill bit.”
Describe an attribute of the product or the
user
If possible, avoid words like “must” and
“should.”

4. Designing a Kitchen Tool
Customer Comment
“It hurts my hand.”
“It only does one
thing.”
“It is not very
attractive.”
Interpreted Needs
“The tool is comfortable.”
“The tool can peel,
gouge, cut, etc.”
“The tool looks stylish.”

5. Designing a CoffeeMaking Machine
Verbatim Needs
Interpreted Needs
“I would like it to remind me of an
English butler.”
The product is elegant and
unassuming, with clean lines.
”I hate it when it drips if I pull out
the pot or the filter.”
The product keeps itself and the
area around it clean.
“I don’t like having the cord
stretched all over the counter.”
The product has good cord
management.
“I just want a good tasting cup of
Joe.”
The product makes good coffee.
The product heats and keeps
water at the appropriate
temperature.

6. Structuring the Interpreted Needs
Categorize the interpreted needs
into a smaller number of
categories.
 What “primary interpreted needs”
labels should we attach to these
categories?


7. Prioritizing Interpreted Needs

Kano Classification (one approach )
 L = Linear Satisfiers
(“The more the merrier.”)
 N = Neutral/Indifferent
(“No big deal.”)
 M = Must Haves
(“I won’t buy without!”)
 D = Delighters
(“What an unexpected treat!”)

8. Kano’s Model of (Non-Linear)
Customer Satisfaction
Customer
Satisfied
Delighter (D)
Linear Satisfier (L)
Requirement
Not Fulfilled
Indifferent (I)
Customer
Dissatisfied
Must Have (M)
Requirement
Fulfilled
See (1) Matzler, et al.., 1996,
Journal of Product & Brand Mgmt
(2) Matzler and Hinterhuber, 1998,
Technovation
(3) Center for Quality Mgmt

9. EMPATHIC (OBSERVATION) VS. USER
ARTICULATION (INQUIRY)
Strengths
Empathic
(Observation)
User
Articulation
(Inquiry)
- Innovation possible beyond
what users are able to tell you.
- Technique relies upon real
actions.
- Information can be acquired
on attitudes and reasoning
from users.
- Easy to acquire information.
Weaknesses
- Technique relies upon welltrained observers who can
convert observations to
innovative solutions.
- Inability to measure attitudes.
- Users may be unable to
articulate needs (e.g unnoticed
workarounds).
- Interview/interaction process
may bias response.

10. Translating the
“Voice”-of-the-Customer
Observations
Customer
Verbatims
Interpreted
Needs
Scenario Planning
Or Market Driving
Forecasting
Product
Specifications
Product
Concepts

11. Phase II:
Concept Generation

12. What is a Product
Concept?




A concept includes:
a specific product form (the attributes)
a specific technology (the source of
the form)
a specific benefit for a particular
usage situation
see Page and Rosenbaum (1992), “Developing an Effective Concept Testing
Program for Durables,” J Product Innovation Mgmt

13. Definition of a Creative Concept:
One that is both
original
AND
useful

14. Creativity:
is it an individual trait or is it
situation-driven?


Both
Individual Trait:




Scientific Creativity (Engineer, Chemist)
Artistic Creativity (Painter, Composer)
Combo (Inventor) -- rare
Situation-Driven:



No creative ability
Low creative ability
Some creative ability
No Situation Effects
Some Situation Effects
Strong Situation Effects

15. Strategy Implications

Individual Trait



Use Cross-Functional Teams
Use Personality Testing in Hiring
Situational Effects




Culture/Processes (3M, TI, IDEO, Kellogg’s)

“No more mistakes and you’re through!” - John Cleese
Reward Structures (IBM, Campbell’s)
Ideation Strategies (Analogies)
Analytical Strategies (Perceptual Mapping, Relationship
Analysis, Morphological Matrix)

16. But, do you know
creativity
when you see it?

17. Are these creative new product
concepts?

18. What about these?

19. Or these?

20. Concept Generation / Ideation





Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Step 4:
Step 5:
Clarify the Problem
Search Externally
Search Internally
Explore Systematically
Reflect on the Results and the Process

21. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 2: Search Externally

Experts - Lead User Analysis

Lead Users - experience the need ahead of the mass
market; not the same as early adopters

22. General Principle of Lead
User Research

Extreme versus Means


Identification of functionally novel products
and service concepts should be done at the
leading edge of markets and applications
Evaluation of commercial potential should be
done at the “means” of markets and market
segments

23. Important Innovations by
Consumers

Category







Health Products
Personal Care
Sports
Food
Office
Computers
Apparel

Example







Gatorade
Protein-based Shampoo
Mountain Bike
Chocolate Milk
White-out Liquid
E-mail, Desktop Publishing
Sports Bra

24. Benefiting from Lead Users


Lead User innovations form the basis
for new products and service of value to
manufacturers.
Lead Users


Have new product or service needs that will be
general to the marketplace, but they face them
months or years before the bulk of the market
Expect to benefit significantly by finding a
solution to those needs

25. 
Adopter Categorization on the
Basisare not the same as “early adopters”
of Innovativeness
Lead users

26. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 2: Search Externally

Experts - Lead User Analysis




Lead Users - experience the need ahead of the mass
market; not the same as early adopters
Interviewing
Observation - Empathic Design
Focus Groups

27. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 3: Search Internally

Analogy


Near Vs. Far
Relations Vs. Attributes

28. Exercise



A recent article in the Wall Street Journal identified
the difficulties and problems inherent in eating in a
moving vehicle.
“Automotive dining” has created a new opportunity
for an innovative product introduction.
You are asked to develop a new product concept
that will meet the needs/solve the problems of the
commuting diner.

29. Some Interpreted Needs

30. Results

Teams of 2 Designers



Texas Instruments
TXS Industrial Design
Ignition

32. Results from comprehensive
study



Number of benchmarks or no
benchmark
Design Strategy - use many vs. few
analogies
Results:

34. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 4: Explore Systematically

GAP Analysis with Perceptual Maps

Determinant GAP Maps

35. A Determinant Gap Map

36. A Determinant GAP map exercise

Sandwich shops in Boulder

Make a list of 10-12 sandwich shops in Boulder

Include:









Deli Zone
Half Fast Subs on the Hill
Jimmy Johns
Snarfs
Subway
Silvermine Subs
Think about the shops and use your judgement to identify the two
most important factors that differentiate them from each other. Use
those factors as axes
Place all of the shops on your list onto the map
Are there any noticeable gaps? How do you interpret them?

37. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 4: Explore Systematically

GAP Analysis with Perceptual Maps


Determinant GAP Maps
Perceptual Maps based on Attribute Ratings (AR)

38. Data Reduction Using Multivariate
Analysis

Factor Analysis


Reduces the original number of attributes to a
smaller number of factors, each containing a set
of attributes that “hang together”
Cluster Analysis

Reduces the original number of respondents to a
smaller number of clusters based on their
benefits sought, as revealed by their “ideal brand”

39. Obtaining Customer Perceptions
Rate each brand you are familiar with on each of the
following:
Disagree
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Agree
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5

40. Selecting the Number of Factors
Percent Variance
Explained
Factor
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
The Scree
1
2
3
4
5
Eigenvalue
6.04
3.34
0.88
0.74
0.62
0.54
0.52
0.44
0.40
6
7
8
9
Percent Variance
Explained
40.3
22.3
5.9
4.9
4.2
3.6
3.5
3.0
2.7
No. of Factors

41. Factor Loading Matrix
Figure 6.7
Attribute
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Factor 1 -“Fashion”
.796
.791
.108
.803
.039
.102
.754
.093
.762
.758
.043
.807
.810
.800
.106
Factor 2 -“Comfort”
.061
.029
.782
.077
.729
.833
.059
.793
.123
.208
.756
.082
.055
.061
.798

42. Factor Scores Matrix
Attribute
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Figure 6.8
Factor 1 -“Fashion”
0.145
0.146
-0.018
0.146
-0.028
-0.021
0.138
0.131
-0.021
0.146
-0.029
0.146
0.148
0.146
-0.019
Factor 2 -“Comfort”
-0.022
-0.030
0.213
-0.017
0.201
0.227
-0.020
0.216
-0.003
0.021
0.208
-0.016
-0.024
-0.022
0.217
Sample calculation of factor scores: From the snake plot, the mean ratings of Aqualine on Attributes
1 through 15 are 2.15, 2.40, 3.48, …, 3.77. Multiply each of these mean ratings by the corresponding
coefficient in the factor score coefficient matrix to get Aqualine’s factor scores. For example, on
Factor 1, Aqualine’s score is (2.15 x 0.145) + (2.40 x 0.146) + (3.48 x -0.018) + … + (3.77 x -0.019)
= 2.48. Similarly, its score on Factor 2 can be calculated as 4.36. All other brands’ factor scores are
calculated the same way.

43. The AR Perceptual Map
Comfort
Figure 6.9
Aqualine
Gap 1
Islands
Molokai
Fashion
Splash
Sunflare
Gap 2

44. Concept Generation / Ideation

Step 4: Explore Systematically

GAP Analysis with Perceptual Maps



Determinant GAP Maps
Perceptual Maps based on Attribute Ratings (AR)
Perceptual Maps Based on Overall Similarities (OS)

45. Dissimilarity Matrix
Figure 6.10
Aqualine
Islands
Sunflare
Molokai
Splash
Aqualine
X
Islands
3
X
Sunflare
9
8
X
Molokai
5
3
5
X
Splash
7
4
7
6
X

46. The OS Perceptual Map
Figure 6.11
or
mf
Co
Aqualine
t
Islands
Molokai
Fashion
Splash
Sunflare

47. Analytical Strategies

Step 4: Explore Systematically


GAP Analysis with Perceptual Maps
Relationship Analysis
Event
Insured
Against
Injury from
Fire
Getting Lost
Normal
Death
Kidnapping
Being Insulted
Person/Animal Insured
Newborns
Geniuses
Dogs/
Cats
Tropical
Birds
New
Jobholders
Newlyweds

48. Analytical Strategies

Step 4: Explore Systematically



GAP Analysis with Perceptual Maps
Relationship Analysis Gap Analysis
Morphological Matrix
Dimension 1:
Cleaning
Instrument
Dimension 2:
Ingredients
Broom
Brush
Sponge
Steel Wool
Vacuum
Alcohol
Ammonia
Disinfectant
Pine Oil
Dimension 3: Dimension 4:
Object to be
Package
Cleaned
Aerosol
Air
Bag
Boat
Bottle
Carpet
Can
Floor
Tube
Fence
Dimension 5:
Substance
Removed
Blood
Dirt
Mildew
Paint
Rust