Sample Answers to Exercises and Thought Questions: Chapter 2
EX 2.1
Diagram a process for planning and cooking a family dinner. Does your process resemble the generic product development process? Is cooking dinner analogous to a market-pull, technology-push, process-intensive, or customization process?
One process might consist of the following steps:
1. Ask spouse, children, or roommates what they feel like eating and when they would like to eat.
2. Survey available ingredients.
3. Generate three or so alternatives that are both feasible and meet the desires of the other diners.
4. Select an alternative through a survey or by a subjective judgment.
5. Plan (usually informally and intuitively) the best sequence for preparing the food.
6. Cook and serve.
7. Reflect on the results and the process (just kidding).
The process of cooking dinner could be analogous to any of the four alternatives. It could be market-pull. (What do we want for dinner? Let’s go get what we need.) It could be technology-push. (What ingredients and equipment do we have? What can we make with the available resources?) It could be process-intensive. (The only equipment we have in the dorm room is a microwave oven.) It could be a customization process. (All we know how to make is pasta. Do we want spaghetti, ziti, or fettucini?)
EX 2.2
Define a process for finding a job. For what types of endeavors does a well defined process enhance performance?
The process of finding a job might consist of the following steps:
1. Establish criteria for job satisfaction.
2. Articulate constraints (does not require relocation, etc.)
3. Screen job advertisements relative to the criteria and constraints.
4. Generate a list of companies/jobs that satisfy the criteria and constraints.
5. Apply for the advertised jobs and inquire about the generated alternatives.
6. (Hopefully) interview for a set of jobs and receive offers.
7. Evaluate the offers with respect to the criteria.
8. Select the most promising job.
9. Negotiate terms and conditions of employment.
10. Accept job.
(Of course in some economic climates the process may be much simpler: receive a single offer, then decide whether to accept it or not.)
We would argue that almost any endeavor benefits from some measure of "process thinking." Defining a process encourages thinking ahead and anticipating contingencies. In the case of highly unusual and creative tasks, the process may consist of no more than a list of three general steps to pursue. In the case of repetitive tasks, the process might consist of hundreds of detailed steps, some of which may even be automated.
EX 2.3
What type of development process would you expect to find in an established company successful at developing residential air conditioning units? How about for a small company that is trying to break into the market for racing wheelchairs?
Air conditioners are fairly standard products embodying relatively stable technologies. We would expect companies developing air conditioners to have a customization process with some measure of market-pull. Initially the racing wheelchair company is likely to have a market-pull process. The firm will be looking for ways to satisfy the needs of the customers in the market. Eventually, the firm may adopt more of a customization process in which each customer receives a product tailored slightly to their own needs, but built around a standard product concept.
EX 2.4
Sketch the organization (in some appropriate graphical representation) of a consulting firm that develops new products for clients on a project-by-project basis. Assume that the individuals in the firm represent all of the different functions required to develop a new product. Would this organization most likely be aligned with functions, be aligned by projects, or be a hybrid?
One possible diagram of a consulting firm organization:
Diagram a process for planning and cooking a family dinner. Does your process resemble the generic product development process? Is cooking dinner analogous to a market-pull, technology-push, process-intensive, or customization process?
One process might consist of the following steps:
1. Ask spouse, children, or roommates what they feel like eating and when they would like to eat.
2. Survey available ingredients.
3. Generate three or so alternatives that are both feasible and meet the desires of the other diners.
4. Select an alternative through a survey or by a subjective judgment.
5. Plan (usually informally and intuitively) the best sequence for preparing the food.
6. Cook and serve.
7. Reflect on the results and the process (just kidding).
The process of cooking dinner could be analogous to any of the four alternatives. It could be market-pull. (What do we want for dinner? Let’s go get what we need.) It could be technology-push. (What ingredients and equipment do we have? What can we make with the available resources?) It could be process-intensive. (The only equipment we have in the dorm room is a microwave oven.) It could be a customization process. (All we know how to make is pasta. Do we want spaghetti, ziti, or fettucini?)
EX 2.2
Define a process for finding a job. For what types of endeavors does a well defined process enhance performance?
The process of finding a job might consist of the following steps:
1. Establish criteria for job satisfaction.
2. Articulate constraints (does not require relocation, etc.)
3. Screen job advertisements relative to the criteria and constraints.
4. Generate a list of companies/jobs that satisfy the criteria and constraints.
5. Apply for the advertised jobs and inquire about the generated alternatives.
6. (Hopefully) interview for a set of jobs and receive offers.
7. Evaluate the offers with respect to the criteria.
8. Select the most promising job.
9. Negotiate terms and conditions of employment.
10. Accept job.
(Of course in some economic climates the process may be much simpler: receive a single offer, then decide whether to accept it or not.)
We would argue that almost any endeavor benefits from some measure of "process thinking." Defining a process encourages thinking ahead and anticipating contingencies. In the case of highly unusual and creative tasks, the process may consist of no more than a list of three general steps to pursue. In the case of repetitive tasks, the process might consist of hundreds of detailed steps, some of which may even be automated.
EX 2.3
What type of development process would you expect to find in an established company successful at developing residential air conditioning units? How about for a small company that is trying to break into the market for racing wheelchairs?
Air conditioners are fairly standard products embodying relatively stable technologies. We would expect companies developing air conditioners to have a customization process with some measure of market-pull. Initially the racing wheelchair company is likely to have a market-pull process. The firm will be looking for ways to satisfy the needs of the customers in the market. Eventually, the firm may adopt more of a customization process in which each customer receives a product tailored slightly to their own needs, but built around a standard product concept.
EX 2.4
Sketch the organization (in some appropriate graphical representation) of a consulting firm that develops new products for clients on a project-by-project basis. Assume that the individuals in the firm represent all of the different functions required to develop a new product. Would this organization most likely be aligned with functions, be aligned by projects, or be a hybrid?
One possible diagram of a consulting firm organization:
Consulting firms almost always have a strong project focus and are either project organizations or heavyweight project matrix organizations. Teams form and dissolve almost daily in order to meet the needs of new client engagements. In some firms, there will also exist some measure of functional organization. For example, there may be a member of the firm responsible for ensuring that the mechanical engineers have the software tools they need or that the marketing professionals know the latest research techniques. Nevertheless, the dominant organizational structure is the project.
TQ 2.1
What role does basic technological research play in the product development process? How would you modify Exhibit 2-3 to better represent the research and technology development activities in product development?
This is a large and open-ended question. There is a good discussion of this topic in Clark and Wheelwright Revolutionizing Product Development. One answer is that technology development is a parallel activity that provides proven technologies that can be taken "off the shelf" and used in product development efforts. Clark and Wheelwright call this the "pizza bin" approach, because technological "ingredients" are proven and then shelved until they are needed to create a "pizza" (product). The amendment to Exhibit 2-3 would include a technology development activity with an arrow to the concept development activity. Some might argue that technology development may also lead to the identification of new product opportunities. In this case, the technology development activity would have an arrow to an earlier product planning or product strategy activity (not shown in Exhibit 2-3).
In some settings the technology development and product development are more tightly coupled. For example, some start-up companies begin with a basic technology or invention and then work to quickly commercialize it. In such cases, much of their early work could be considered technology development. It is fraught with uncertainty and, in fact, may result in failure. Nevertheless, there are some technologies with so much commercial promise that these risks are worth taking.
TQ 2.2
Is there an analogy between a university and a product development organization? Is a university a functional or project organization?
(Based on a solution by Louise Jandura)
We can make the analogy between a product development organization and a university by considering whether there are university equivalents to both the product development process and the product development organization.
Although a university has many purposes, its primary purpose is the development of undergraduate students. The student development process is analogous to the product development process. The student development process takes as its input a high school graduate whose mission statement is to get an undergraduate degree. Its output, instead of a product launch is the graduation of the student. Along the way there is a well-defined series of steps complete with milestones as in the product development process. Although the detailed series of steps in the student development process is different than in the product development process, the advantages of the well-defined process are similar. In both cases the process ensures the quality of the output of the process (student), the coordination of the resources on the development team (faculty, admissions, physical plant), the timely completion of the project (graduation in 4 years), the management of the project, and the improvement of the process.
Having established the analogy between the product development process and the student development process, the next step is to look at the analogy between the product development organization and the university. The two primary organizational types are the functional organization where the primary links are among those who perform similar functions and the project organization where the primary links are among those who work on the same project. A university is a functional organization. Some of these functions include:
• faculty, whose primary role is to teach students.
• admissions, who admit students to the process.
• bursar’s office, who monitor student finances.
• physical plant, who maintains the facilities.
There are certainly other functions that make up a university but using just these four as an example we can see that they are indeed organized by the function they perform. Although they are all part of the development of the "product", the student, their strongest ties are to those who share the same function. As in a product development organization, those sharing the same function are usually located near each other and report to the same manager.
If we look even further into the organization of the faculty we see that within the faculty the organization continues to be a functional organization. Breaking it down further we see:
• faculty, who all teach students.
• schools, who teach students in a particular field, e.g., engineering.
• departments, who teach students in a still more specified field, e.g., mechanical engineering.
The great strength of a functional organization is that it maintains deep expertise in the functional areas. The great weakness is that the efficiency of coordination among the functions is not as good as it could be. This characteristic is seen among universities as well. A university’s great strength is the vast amount of knowledge contained in its areas of expertise, not its ability to coordinate among its different functions.
TQ 2.3
What is the product development organization for students engaged in projects as part of a product development class?
This is a classic project organization. Although the students may come from different "functions" (e.g., departments, educational backgrounds), they do not have strong organizational linkages to these functions. For the purposes of the course, they have one goal: to get the project done. Especially if they are graded as a team, the organizational structure closely mirrors that of a "start-up" or other autonomous project teams. Note that a strong project organization can exist even without heavyweight project managers. In a course, no manager is explicitly assigned to each team, yet the team is autonomous and has the ultimate authority and responsibility to make decisions.
TQ 2.4
Is it possible for some members of a product development organization to be organized functionally, while others are organized by project? If so, which members of the team would be the most likely candidates for the functional organization?
Yes, this is possible. In fact it happens all the time. A team may consist of several members who have strong organizational links to the project and of members with strong functional links. The team members with strong functional links tend to be part-time participants. Examples include industrial designers, stress analysts, technical writers, model makers, and sales people. The design, manufacturing, and marketing people on the team with on-going responsibilities for project work may be linked together by strong project ties, while the part-time participants may not share those links.
TQ 2.1
What role does basic technological research play in the product development process? How would you modify Exhibit 2-3 to better represent the research and technology development activities in product development?
This is a large and open-ended question. There is a good discussion of this topic in Clark and Wheelwright Revolutionizing Product Development. One answer is that technology development is a parallel activity that provides proven technologies that can be taken "off the shelf" and used in product development efforts. Clark and Wheelwright call this the "pizza bin" approach, because technological "ingredients" are proven and then shelved until they are needed to create a "pizza" (product). The amendment to Exhibit 2-3 would include a technology development activity with an arrow to the concept development activity. Some might argue that technology development may also lead to the identification of new product opportunities. In this case, the technology development activity would have an arrow to an earlier product planning or product strategy activity (not shown in Exhibit 2-3).
In some settings the technology development and product development are more tightly coupled. For example, some start-up companies begin with a basic technology or invention and then work to quickly commercialize it. In such cases, much of their early work could be considered technology development. It is fraught with uncertainty and, in fact, may result in failure. Nevertheless, there are some technologies with so much commercial promise that these risks are worth taking.
TQ 2.2
Is there an analogy between a university and a product development organization? Is a university a functional or project organization?
(Based on a solution by Louise Jandura)
We can make the analogy between a product development organization and a university by considering whether there are university equivalents to both the product development process and the product development organization.
Although a university has many purposes, its primary purpose is the development of undergraduate students. The student development process is analogous to the product development process. The student development process takes as its input a high school graduate whose mission statement is to get an undergraduate degree. Its output, instead of a product launch is the graduation of the student. Along the way there is a well-defined series of steps complete with milestones as in the product development process. Although the detailed series of steps in the student development process is different than in the product development process, the advantages of the well-defined process are similar. In both cases the process ensures the quality of the output of the process (student), the coordination of the resources on the development team (faculty, admissions, physical plant), the timely completion of the project (graduation in 4 years), the management of the project, and the improvement of the process.
Having established the analogy between the product development process and the student development process, the next step is to look at the analogy between the product development organization and the university. The two primary organizational types are the functional organization where the primary links are among those who perform similar functions and the project organization where the primary links are among those who work on the same project. A university is a functional organization. Some of these functions include:
• faculty, whose primary role is to teach students.
• admissions, who admit students to the process.
• bursar’s office, who monitor student finances.
• physical plant, who maintains the facilities.
There are certainly other functions that make up a university but using just these four as an example we can see that they are indeed organized by the function they perform. Although they are all part of the development of the "product", the student, their strongest ties are to those who share the same function. As in a product development organization, those sharing the same function are usually located near each other and report to the same manager.
If we look even further into the organization of the faculty we see that within the faculty the organization continues to be a functional organization. Breaking it down further we see:
• faculty, who all teach students.
• schools, who teach students in a particular field, e.g., engineering.
• departments, who teach students in a still more specified field, e.g., mechanical engineering.
The great strength of a functional organization is that it maintains deep expertise in the functional areas. The great weakness is that the efficiency of coordination among the functions is not as good as it could be. This characteristic is seen among universities as well. A university’s great strength is the vast amount of knowledge contained in its areas of expertise, not its ability to coordinate among its different functions.
TQ 2.3
What is the product development organization for students engaged in projects as part of a product development class?
This is a classic project organization. Although the students may come from different "functions" (e.g., departments, educational backgrounds), they do not have strong organizational linkages to these functions. For the purposes of the course, they have one goal: to get the project done. Especially if they are graded as a team, the organizational structure closely mirrors that of a "start-up" or other autonomous project teams. Note that a strong project organization can exist even without heavyweight project managers. In a course, no manager is explicitly assigned to each team, yet the team is autonomous and has the ultimate authority and responsibility to make decisions.
TQ 2.4
Is it possible for some members of a product development organization to be organized functionally, while others are organized by project? If so, which members of the team would be the most likely candidates for the functional organization?
Yes, this is possible. In fact it happens all the time. A team may consist of several members who have strong organizational links to the project and of members with strong functional links. The team members with strong functional links tend to be part-time participants. Examples include industrial designers, stress analysts, technical writers, model makers, and sales people. The design, manufacturing, and marketing people on the team with on-going responsibilities for project work may be linked together by strong project ties, while the part-time participants may not share those links.