case discussion:DEO Product Development


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

case discussion:DEO Product Development

  1. 1. Case Discussion: IDEO Product DevelopmentPresented By: Group-4 1
  2. 2. Agenda 1.Company Profile 2.Company Analysis 3.IDEO Development & Design process 4.Situation Analysis 5.Problem Identification 6.Available Alternatives 7.Possible Solution 2
  3. 3. Company Profile Is a design and innovation firm founded in 1991 by merger of ID two and David Kelly Design. The merger brought many services like engineering (both mechanical and electrical) ergonomics, information technology, prototype machining and cognitive psychology under one umbrella. Company Type Private Headquarters Palo Alto, California, United States Area served Worldwide Key people Tim Brown, CEO Tom Kelley, General Manager David Kelley Employees 550+ Major Client Apple Computer, AT & T, Samsung, Philips, Amtrak, Steelcase etc. Website 3
  4. 4. Company Analysis Process CulturePH 0 :- Understand/observe 1. Playful and Messy Environment.PH- I :- Visualize /realize 2. Learning culture.PH- II :- Evaluating/refining 3. Frequent Prototyping and brainstorming.PH- III:- Implement (Detailed 4. Freedom to showcaseEngineering) Innovative and creativePH- III:- Implement ideas and inspiring(manufacturing liaison) innovators. 5. Operated on the principleFunnel Process & Provide all of failing often to succeedservices under one umbrella that sooner.client needs. 4
  5. 5. Company Analysis Organization Management1. Extremely Flat organization. 1. Creative and inspired group2. No permanent team, job and of people. assignment to promote fresh 2. At times company’s leader ideas. follow a deep dive3. Flexible and have experience of approach. over a thousand projects. 3. Creating a democracy of4. Respect for new ideas and ideas. invention. 4. Fast decision making.5. Comfortable with confusion , incomplete information. 5
  6. 6. IDEO Development & Design Process Phase 0 1.Feasibility of designing of OUTPUT product. Feasibility record 2.Understanding along with major and observing the discoveries about clients needs and market place and its business and users. consumer needs. 6
  7. 7. IDEO Development & Design Process Phase I OUTPUT 1.Potential solution through prototypes. 1.Understanding of product context. 2. Involved similar activates as phase -0 2.Manufacturing . Like market strategy research data 3. Concept for 3D model 7
  8. 8. IDEO Development & Design Process Phase II 1. Development of functional prototype. OUTPUT 2. Resolve technical problem and user 1. Functional model. concerned 3. Engineering part 2. Documentation of also comes in this detailed engineering phase 4. Close coordination and technical with other project specification groups for proper alignment 8
  9. 9. IDEO Development & Design Process Phase III 1. Product designing and verification of OUTPUT working. 2. Validate 1. Fully functional manufacturability and design model. performance. 2. Tooling database and 3. Low level involvement technical with design team and documentation. machine shop. 3. Vender selection. 4. Testing for government regulation 9
  10. 10. IDEO Development & Design Process Phase IV 1. Issue resolving in final design. To ensure smooth release for manufacturing. OUTPUT 2. Supervision of tooling production, 1. Product handover to regulatory approval. the client. 3. Construction for pilot run and testing manufacturing feasibility 10
  11. 11. Case Situation analysis IDEO developed Pam V hand –held computer for 3Com considered a successful product with large commercial potential. Now IDEO was asked to design the Palm competing product called Visor with the same team they had worked during development of Palm V. Now the same team is working for Handspring a new venture with a goal to develop a Palm V competing product. Hawkins and Dubinsky decided to keep the price of Visor $150 far below Palm series. Since, They wanted to reach Visor to customers as quickly as possible. For the reason they propone the date of launch in late 1999 instead of spring 2000 which was earlier communicated to IDEO. 11
  12. 12. Problem IdentificationThis would force the IDEO to reduce the product development cycle by 10 months.Which would require them to eliminate many of the early development stages that firm was particularly good at.Forcing IDEO to Sacrifice innovation and design in order to meet client goal that could effect the quality of design and product may fail. 12
  13. 13. Question Arises?? What would be the difference in the quality of the product if it is launched in late 1999 rather than in spring 2000? Will visor lose market share if launched in 2000? Is market research necessary for such an innovative and never seen before product? Can IDEO sustain its quality standards by designing the product in less than half of the time which they usually take to design a new product? 13
  14. 14. AnalysisContingency Table:Product launch 1999 2000Target GroupMenWomenChildrenMarket share More LessProduct Quality Less MoreInnovation in product Less MoreCustomer loyalty for More Less (Competition)next product in the 14series
  15. 15. Alternatives:1. Don’t accept the project.2. Accept the project only if handspring management provides enough time to complete it.3. Accept the project as it is.4. Negotiate to get some more time but accept the project anyways. 15
  16. 16. Alternative 1.Do not Accept the IDEO Perspective Pros:project 3. Failure of development can be avoided. Cons: 1.IDEO will miss the opportunity to develop a revolutionary product with the team they already had done a successful project Palm V. 2.It will effect the reputation of IDEO as it had potential to meet challenging deadlines. 16
  17. 17. Alternative 2Delay the release RISK- Handspring’sso that more time Perspective Risk of missing out oncould be spent valuable market entrydesigning it timing, which could cutproperly for the into profits or allowmarket it was competitors time to gain control of theintended for. market and gain followers that potentially could have been Visor customers. 17
  18. 18. Alternative 3Accept the RISK- IDEO Perspective 1. Though the IDEO team isproject as it is. capable but still the chances are there that product could fail. Handspring’s Perspective 1. Product will be avail. At the time of festival season which could help to gain mkt share. 18
  19. 19. Alternative 4Negotiate to get some RISK- Handspring’smore time but accept Perspectivethe project anyways. Risk of missing out on valuable market entry timing, which could cut into profits or allow competitors time to gain control of the market and gain followers that potentially could have been Visor customers. 19
  20. 20. Suggested Possible Solution• Request for more time :- So that high quality end product can becreated. Emphasize on need for market research; the Palm V and the Visor are similar products in some ways, but are, in fact, different in fundamental ways that will affect the appeal for the target customers. Knowing who their target customers are in the first place will help them to design the product that their customers want.• If Accept, Provide complementary promise of(put large amount f resource) offerto handspring. It will give IDEO a chance to live up to its reputation as a world-classinnovative designing consultancy.• If Declines, will request that they engage in whatever market research they areable to do before pushing ahead the design and production of the new device. Thiswill contribute to a better product that is more tailored for the consumers when itdoes enter the marketplace**.** In this situation several independent teams would require working simultaneouslyon the Visor project to increase innovation over the short period of time. 20
  21. 21. Thank You 21