Hart – depart from the classical ”rational way of making decisions” – System 2 which is the common approach to assess ideas.
Eling – introduce intuition as a decision-making alternative (sytem 1) which also was identified by Hart et al as an alternative criterion.
Mangusson/Net/Wästlund – demystify intutition and links it to three establised criteria.
Magnusson/Wästlund/Netz – test whether or not users migh be able to do more than just generate ideas – i.e. can they also be part of the decision-making activities (are they as good as experts when assessing ideas?)
The innovation process can be described in various ways however, traditionally
Hart et al studied Dutch and UK firms – survey 166 answered.
RQ1 What criteria are used most frequently at the NDP evaluations gates?
Found that the used criteria changes depending on were in the innovation process the decision is made. They used a cut-off point of 50% when arguing for which criteria were used. Technical feasibility (“can it be done”) Uniqueness Market potential Market chance Customer acceptance Intuition – it is interesting that intuition is seen/described as a criteria.
At this point in time all evaluations are more or less subjective depending on how much information is given in regards to the different criteria. But given the highlighted criteria it seems that both the market as well as internal aspects are of interest to assess. – Which can be traced back to our definition of an idea as both having a problem and a solution side – thus it is important to look at both sides when assessing the idea.
RQ2 Which evaluative dimensions are used most frequently at the NPD evaluations gates? (they cluster the critera)
Market acceptance part of all decision gates Financial dimension used in later stages of the process Product performance focused on mostly when testing the product
Discuss why and under which conditions it may or may not be beneficial to use intuition as a decision-making approach during Front end innovation from a creativity perspective.
P1: The use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions increases new product concept creativity.
P2: The positive effect of the use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions on the creativity of new product concepts is weaker for more incremental product development.
P3: The positive effect of the use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions on the creativity of new product concepts is weaker the less relevant experience the individual decision-maker has.
P4: The positive effect of the use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions on the creativity of new product concepts is weaker when FFE team members have multiple goals simulations during FFE execution. (more goals can affect our intuitive abilities negatively)
P5: The positive effect of the use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions on the creativity of new product concepts is weaker when a rational decision culture is in place. (intuition is hard to explain and if a culture of “justification of a decision exists” an intuitive decision might be negative.
P6: The positive effect of the use of intuition in making FFE execution decisions on the creativity of new product concepts is weaker when hierarchical or democratic decision-making are applied on team decision-making. Since intuition cannot easily can be articulated – it is thus difficult to discuss it.
Intuition can generate new (unconscious) associations which is not made with the same ease if a rational approach is used. In simple terms intuition make us able to make decision based on more divers information compared to a more narrowly focused rational decision.
The risk with intuition is that the decision outcome might be coloured by previous experiences (which on the other also can be good)
2015 - artikeln visar att bedömningarna blir bättre (kvaliteten ökar) om man först gör en intutiv screening och därefter utvärderar de “intuitivt utvalda idéerna” baserat på kriterer.
The aim of the article is to achieve a better understanding of idea screening selection based on intuition in relation to formal specific criteria
Four experienced experts used two approaches to independently evaluate a set of 83 ideas.
The first approach was “gut feeling”, whereby the experts rated each idea on the basis of their intuition. In the second approach the same ideas were rated instead using three established specific criteria (Originality, User Value, and Producibility).
Regression analysis showed that the three criteria explained about 50 percent of the intuitive assessments. Furthermore, one of the experts thought out loud during his intuitive assessment, thus revealing further influencing. Thus showing the link between underlying criteria and intutive assessments.
In addtion to the three criteria, both strategic-fit and profitability were mentioned frequently (somewhat contraditcting Hart et al, but that article is on the other hand base on retrospective data were as this one is
the purpose of this paper is to investigate the appropriateness of using users as a proxy for professional experts during the initial idea screening of new product/service ideas.
Are users conformat with experts when screening ideas– i.e. do they assess ideas in a similar way?
Mobile telephone context
Three groups, experts, technically skilled users, and novice
In summary, the results showed that the two user panels (technically skilled users and technically naïve users) showed relative conformance with the experts’ evaluations.
Taken together, the results showing a highly consistent pattern, whereby having experience of technology leads to lower scores. This result is true for all pairwise comparisons on all three measures, except for the pairwise comparisons between the technically skilled and the professionals regarding producibility, for which the scores were identical.
”higher expertise leads to lower scores”
Comparing the top ideas (based on two index, one promoting radical ideas and the other promoting incremental ideas The results showed that, with respect to the ideas selected on the basis of the incremental index, a 57% overlap existed among the three panels. Furthermore, with respect to the ideas selected on the basis of the radical index, a 50% overlap existed;
Thus users –could approximately reduced the initial sample of ideas with 50%, without risking the rejection of the experts’ highest-ranked ideas.
1. Rational or intutive?
Reserch about decision making in the front end innovation phase (i.e. the first evaluations of new ideas)
Introduce you to idea management, front end innovation and open innovation
Introduce you to idea generation, who can gerenate ideas, how can we
Im74 course webinar_(m4) idea assessment
Webinar (module 4)
Agenda for Webinar
• Article summary
• Wrap up / Next step
“Order” of papers
1. Hart et al (2003). Industrial companies’ evaluation criteria in new product
development gates. Journal of Product Innovation Management
2. Eling et al (2014). Using Intuition in Fuzzy Front‐End Decision‐Making: A
Conceptual Framework. Journal of Product Innovation Management
3. Magnusson, P. R., Netz, J., & Wästlund, E. (2014). Exploring holistic intuitive
idea screening in the light of formal criteria. Technovation
4. Magnusson, P. R., Wästlund, E., & Netz, J. (2016). Exploring users’
appropriateness as a proxy for experts when screening new product/service
ideas. Journal of Product Innovation Management
1. How does your organization assess/screen ideas?
2. What challenges have you experienced when screening ideas?
Wrap up / Next step
Read through all the ideas that are submitted, and screen at least 10 ideas.
Write a blog post about your experiences from screening ideas (you may
reference the videos and articles in the module). You can for example
describe how you worked when you screen your ideas during this module, or
how your firm/organization works with idea screening.
The post should be uploaded before the Tweetchat 9th May (12.30 CET)
and contain a maximum 500 words.