by

Joris Beerens
beerens_joris@bah.com

Alexander van Boetzelaer

van_boetzelaer_alexander@bah.com

Georg List
list_georg@bah.com

Peter Mensing
mensing_peter@bah.com

Steven Veldhoen
veldhoen_steven@bah.com

The Road Towards More Effective Product/Service Development

How Strict Adherence to Pragmatic Principles Increases the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Product/Service Development Activities

The Road Towards More Effective Product/Service Development

How strict adherence to pragmatic principles increases the effectiveness and efficiency of product/service development activities
Product development has universally been identified as a key driver for growth and value creation. Ask any senior executive and he will agree. As a result, companies are focusing significant investments on the pursuit of the so-called killer idea. In our opinion however, successful product development for many companies is not so much about developing these killer ideas as about being able to control their product development activities and ensuring scarce resources are used in the most efficient and effective way. Most companies struggle to maintain full control over their product development activities, often perceived as a black-box. Typical symptoms include a lack of focus on business priorities; unclear roles and responsibilities; frequent reprioritisation of projects and the discovery of phantom projects/ pet projects; lack of robustness -in the overall product development process and organisation; and lack of consequence management. Ultimately, deficiencies in innovation management hamper a companys success in the market place, for example because new product introductions are too late, too few in number or do not meet customer needs. For many companies, increased discipline and control yields a higher return on product development investments than an increased focus on pursuing the killer idea. We identified a pragmatic set of best practices that are largely applicable across industries for product development activities as well as in the development of services and the underlying service delivery capabilities (often IT-based, e.g. in CRM).
At Booz Allen, we have carried out an extensive range of projects in innovation-intensive industries such as automotive, aerospace and pharmaceuticals, where innovation projects typically are hugely complex, multi-billion dollar undertakings. We found that the fundamental lessons learned from these industries are valuable in other industries where innovation requirements are maybe less enormous in relative terms, but nonetheless demanding and vital to success. Overall, the law of diminishing returns for innovation investments requires companies to raise the effectiveness curve, not to ride it (see Figure 1). In other words, enhancing the impact and effectiveness of product development is about spending wisely, not necessarily spending more, for most companies. In this Viewpoint, we discuss a pragmatic set of best practices that allow companies to reduce the complexity and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their product development (and process improvement) activities through improved discipline, transparency and control. We focus on best practices in the five key areas of product development: strategy, roadmap, process, roles & responsibilities, and organisation. We talk about product development but many of the principles proposed in this Viewpoint apply equally to the development of services and underlying capabilities (e.g. IT platforms).

1) A clear product development strategy driving all product development activities A clear product development strategy is a prerequisite to provide clear focus and priorities to a companys product development activities. The product development strategy should be driven by the companys specific corporate strategy and be clearly linked to the available capabilities and resources. A good product development strategy will be pragmatic, realistic and focused on the bottom line: only a limited number of companies per industry will have the resources and/or capabilities to be innovation leaders and create breakthrough products (technology forward see Figure 2).

the search for the next killer idea. To make a fast follower strategy a success, the ability to flexibly manage a network of partners/subcontractors and suppliers is in many cases an essential prerequisite. 2) Adherence to an actionable product development roadmap Regardless of which of type of innovation strategy best supports the overall company strategy, companies require a well thought-through roadmap to guide their product development activities. A product development roadmap translates a companys business strategy and priorities into a market-driven agenda for product (and process) development. As such, a product development roadmap is an essential element in improving control over product development activities. A first rule for any product development roadmap is that if a product is not on the roadmap it will not be developed. This basic rule creates immediate transparency amongst all stakeholders about the scope of the companys product development activities at any given time. It eliminates resource-draining pet projects and contributes to avoiding frustrating and costly reprioritisation of projects. The roadmap

Only a limited number of companies per industry will have the resources and/or capabilities to be innovation leaders
For most companies a fast follower strategy is sufficient, which results in a completely different set of required capabilities and resources: for the fast followers, the key to success in product development lies more in focus and pragmatic trade-offs than in

allows companies to make informed choices, and results in more efficient use of the available budget and resources. The complexity and structure of a companys roadmap (e.g. how to prioritise product development activities, how to create a balanced selection of different types of ideas, how to continuously update the roadmap) will be driven by the chosen product development strategy. In general, it is advisable to make a clear distinction between new product/process development and more incremental enhancements, and between products and services and the underlying enabling technologies or platforms . The roadmap should be sufficiently flexible to allow a company to react to new market developments and ideas, and at the same time rigid enough to provide focus and avoid a continuous battle for resources.
Figure 2
Overview of Different Product Development Strategies

A product development roadmap translates a companys business strategy into a market-driven agenda for product development
In our experience, most companies do have something that serves as a product development roadmap. In many cases this is an annual wish list of product development activities, which is outdated even before it is circulated. As such, these roadmaps do not offer a sound enough base for management and control. An effective roadmap should not be created once per year by a product development manager with the objective of maximising his product development resources. Instead, it should be the result of a company-wide effort, following a transparent process and applying

The Skunk Works

The Market Maker

R&D Driven (Technology Forward)

Description: Create breakthrough products then put them out there and see which stick Product Development Strategy: Intensive R&D; lab-focused; discovering protectable new technologies Consumer Insights: Minimal; customer feedback Marketing: Rely on early adopters, technoand fashion-geeks; word of mouth and niche marketing Examples: Bose, Philips

Description: Make a product then make a market Product Development Strategy: Invest in new technologies; continually refine existing products Consumer Insights: Focus on wants (aspirational) rather than needs (productspecific) Marketing: More aspirational; creating a strong brand umbrella; not focused on product specifics Examples: Nike, Coca-Cola, Vodafone, Apple

Innovation Approach
The Follower

The Listener

Market Driven (Market Back)

Description: Copy whatever the market leaders are doing Product Development Strategy: Duplicate successful product innovations of market leaders Consumer Insights: If any, focused on quick surveys to identify vulnerabilities of market leader Marketing: If any, intended to build awareness; no emphasis on differentiation, features; announcements Examples: Pepsi, Kia cars

Description: Find a consumer need then make a product Product Development Strategy: Develop products to meet identified consumer needs Consumer Insights: Focus on needs (productspecific) rather than wants (aspirational) Marketing: Focused on features/functionality of the new product; head-to-head testing against competition Examples: Lexus, Dell, P&G

None / Passive Consumer Insight Approach

Active / Aggressive

Figure 3:
Product Development Roadmap Key Principles and Guidelines

Roadmap

The roadmap defines a market-driven, 18 month agenda for Product & Process Development derived from the business strategy and priorities The roadmap guides product and process development, but is not an exhaustive project list. The roadmap is the basis for management and control of development activities (e.g. budgets, resources, progress measurements) Resources and budget are split over three project categories to ensure a balanced selection of different types of ideas: New Product & Process Development, Product Enhancements, and Process Enhancement

The roadmap is approved and owned by the Managing Board Products/services and capabilities that are not on the roadmap will not be developed The roadmap is updated regularly (on a six-month basis) to reflect development progress and new market insights, and thus is dynamic Effective roadmap use will increase the transparency of the product development process, allowing betterinformed choices to be made (e.g. enabling quick track changes)

clear financial, commercial and technological criteria to prioritise the development efforts. For a roadmap to be truly effective it must be driven by the companys strategy and owned by top management, it must be dynamic and continuously kept up to date, and it must be rigorously maintained as the sole source for product development activities within the company. A roadmap should also be realistic and hence must be strictly linked to the companys total product development resources both in terms of capacity and available skills. As stated above, a product that is not on the roadmap will not be developed. A properly maintained roadmap is a highly effective instrument for aligning product development activities with a companys overall strategy. 3) Rigid and strict process discipline Whereas a roadmap ensures that all product development activities support the companys overall strategy, disciplined product development processes ensure these activities are realised efficiently and effectively. Although product development processes will inevitably differ across companies, some common process best practices exist that facilitate continuous control over product development activities and their output.

In general, innovative companies tend to have a welldefined and formalised product development process with frequent decision gates (see Figure 4 for an example). As such, the product development process helps to ensure that projects are executed to plan (time, budget, quality). Most companies recognise the importance of a disciplined product development process and spend significant amounts of time and money in (re)designing their processes.

Many companies fail to properly manage the product development process

However, without rigid and strict process discipline these efforts will not deliver the expected results. Phantom projects are often a direct result of a lack of process discipline. Discipline in this sense does not mean bureaucratic process enforcement, but means that either all stakeholders stick by the rules to ensure process transparency, or else the project is killed off.

Best practice elements of process discipline include:

Individual stages and gates are defined in detail, with consistent and specific goals Project resources are strictly allocated per phase a project manager needs to pass the decision gate to obtain the budget and staff to execute the next phase of the project Projects are not allowed into a next phase of the development process if the previous phase has not been fully completed

However, process steps within a given phase may be run in parallel to allow for a faster flow and therefore reduced time-to-launch

Projects that no longer meet the original requirements and/or budget are reviewed and killed off when necessary Post-launch assessment closes the loop and helps to explicitly identify key lessons

4) Clear accountability through an end-to-end project manager and a business owner The involvement of a broad range of (internal and external) stakeholders in the product development process often results in confusion, especially about

who is accountable for project specifications and for project execution. This typically results in repeated budget overruns and costly delays. Two roles are crucial for proper project execution: the end-to-end Project Manager and the Business Owner.

Most companies have project managers responsible for project execution and delivery but they are often responsible for only part of the development process. In our experience, handovers within the development process are bound to result in inefficiencies, fundamentally due to diminished ownership and accountability for the end-to-end project.

Successful companies create clear accountability for project execution and commercial success
End-to-end responsibility for project execution and delivery with a single project manager creates transparency over project ownership, reducing delays and budget overruns. The Project Manager with overall project responsibility remains the same throughout, while the make-up of his team may vary over the lifetime of the project depending on the varying needs for specific (technical) expertise.

that are developed (often at great cost) but never launched, or in product specifications that increasingly deviate from the original project requirements. Appointing a Business Owner to provide business sponsorship throughout the project ensures the project has continuous and full support from the end-user organisation, and creates clear accountability within the project organisation for the commercial success of product development. Ideally, the manager who will assume responsibility for the product P&L post-launch assumes the role of Business Owner during product development.

Business Owner best practices include:

The Business Owner is responsible for the (continuously updated) product business case (both revenue and cost) during all phases of the development process The Business Owner signs off the project content at each decision gate, thus ensuring that project requirements remain in line with business priorities The Business Owner is responsible for the final product (incl. business case results)

Project Manager best practices include:

The Project Manager has end-to-end responsibility for the entire project from feasibility to commercial launch The Project Manager owns the project budget and resources committed to his project for a specific phase of the project development process. The Project Manager can make decisions within the project boundaries (i.e. requirements, resources, timing, budget) The Project Manager is accountable for all elements of delivery (quality, time, budget)

End-to-end Project Managers facilitate accountability for project execution; they do not facilitate accountability for the content of the project, and in particular the evolution of product/service requirements and specifications during project execution. This all too frequently results in products

5) Clearly-defined and enforced roles and responsibilities at different levels within the organisation Enforcing the best practices described here requires a transparent organisation with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. Diffuse roles and responsibilities often result in confusion, lack of collaboration and (in the most extreme form) inertia from which many companies suffer. Unguided product development can become an area of endless trench warfare between the technical, commercial, purchasing and financial departments involved. We typically distinguish four organisational elements that play a crucial role in driving product development:

a) The Management Board The Management Board is directly responsible for setting the overall direction and boundaries for all product development activities. It does this through defining the companys product development strategy, signing off the product development roadmap and determining the overall company resources available for product development activities. In addition, senior management involvement in product development provides the formal authority required to negotiate and to obtain resources and information from different parts of the organisation. b) The Innovation Board A cross-company Innovation Board, consisting of relevant department heads, is responsible for realisation of the company roadmap. The Innovation Board effectively holds (delegated) decision-making authority for budget and resource allocation to projects (always in line with the roadmap). It is for example the Innovation Board that makes the Go/No Go decisions at each stage of the product development process. c) The Product Development Department The Product Development Department is responsible for overall project execution, guided by the Innovation Board. Bringing the end-to-end execution of the product development process (i.e. project management and product development factories) together in a single Product Development Department creates clear process ownership with accountability for the quality of the entire product development process and its output. In addition, the Product Development Department ensures transparency of the product & process development process to the rest of the organisation, allowing rapid decision-making and reprioritisation. d) The end-to-end Project Manager The end-to-end Project Manager is located within the Product Development Department and is responsible for the day-to-day execution of a single project, as discussed under point 4.

Conclusion Booz Allen Hamilton has helped companies to improve product development performance across a range of industries often by applying the five best practices discussed above to the clients specific market and organisational context. Typically, the complexity of enhancing innovation effectiveness lays not so much in identifying improvement levers and creating tools, but rather in making the change happen in an inherently complex environment that spans multiple departments/business units. Companies who have successfully enforced discipline and control in their product development activities have reported significant reductions in time-to-market, and make more effective and efficient use of resources. Furthermore, these companies have realised a significant freeing-up of management time due to increased clarity and accountability within the product development process. In our experience, the cost of missed growth due to late or absent product development is too high to ignore for many companies, while at the same time improving innovation effectiveness is less painful and more lucrative than most other improvement initiatives a company could undertake. Bottom line, improved effectiveness of a companys product and process development activities results in both a revenue increase (due to more and timelier successful product launches) and in cost savings on the total product development budget.

What Booz Allen Brings

Booz Allen Hamilton has been at the forefront of management consulting for businesses and governments for 90 years. Booz Allen combines strategy with technology and insight with action, working with clients to deliver results today that endure tomorrow. With over 15,000 employees on six continents, the firm generates annual sales of $2.7 billion. Booz Allen provides services in strategy, organisation, operations, systems, and technology to the worlds leading corporations, government and other public agencies, emerging growth companies, and institutions. Booz Allen has been recognised as a consultant and employer of choice. In a 2003 independent study by Kennedy Information, Booz Allen was rated the industry leader in performance and favourable client perceptions among general management consulting firms. Additionally, for the past two years, Working Mother has ranked the firm among the top 10 in its 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers list. To learn more about the firm, visit the Booz Allen Web site at www.boozallen.com. To learn more about the best ideas in business, visit www.strategybusiness.com, the Web site for strategy+business, a quarterly journal sponsored by Booz Allen.

Joris Beerens is a Principal in Booz Allen Hamiltons Amsterdam office. He consults primarily with clients in telecom, media and fast moving consumer goods. He specialises in demand-side effectiveness improvement with a focus on marketing and innovation. Alexander van Boetzelaer is a Project Leader in Booz Allens Amsterdam Office. Alex advises clients in the telecom, food and financial services industries on formulation and execution of innovation strategies. Georg List is a Principal in Booz Allen Hamiltons Amsterdam office. Georg is specialised in driving strategic transformation programmes for clients in the automotive, aerospace and other industries with high engineering content, with a focus on innovation strategy and effectiveness.

Peter Mensing is a Senior Vice President and Managing Partner of Booz Allen Hamiltons Amsterdam Office. He has served major corporations across a range of consumer and service companies on strategy and organisation related topics. Steven Veldhoen is a Vice President with Booz Allen Hamilton based in the Tokyo Office. Steven primarily serves clients in the automotive and aerospace industries on strategic transformation programmes, with a particular focus on innovation strategy and costdriven engineering. Also contributing to this report were Booz Allens Alex Kandybin (kandybin_alex@bah.com) and Christian Koehler (koehler_christian@bah.com).

Downloadable digital versions of this article and other Booz Allen Hamilton publications are available from www.boozallen.com.

Worldwide Offices
Abu Dhabi
Charles El-Hage
971-2-6-270882

Buenos Aires

Alejandro Stengel
54-1-14-131-0400

Gteborg

Anders Sewerin
46-31-725-93-00

McLean

Martin J. Bollinger
703-902-3800

Philadelphia
Molly Finn
267-330-7900

Sydney

Tim Jackson
61-2-9321-1900

Amsterdam

Peter Mensing
31-20-504-1900

Caracas

Jos Gregorio Baquero

58-212-285-3522

Helsinki

Kari Iloranta
358-9-61-54-600

Melbourne
Tim Jackson
61-3-9221-1900

Rio de Janeiro
Paolo Pigorini
55-21-2237-8400

Tampa

Joe Garner
813-281-4900

Atlanta

Joe Garner
404-659-3600

Chicago

Chris Disher
312-346-1900

Hong Kong

Salamah Ghassan
852-2634-1878

Mexico City

Alonso Martinez
52-55-9178-4200

Rome

Fernando Napolitano
39-06-69-20-73-1

Tokyo

Eric Spiegel
81-3-3436-8600

Bangkok

Tim Jackson
66-2-653-2255

Cleveland

Les Moeller
216-696-1900

Houston

Matt McKenna
713-650-4100

Miami

Alonso Martinez
305-670-8050

San Diego
Foster Rich
619-725-6500

Vienna

Helmut Meier
43-1-518-22-900

Beirut

Charles El-Hage
961-1-336433

Colorado Springs
Glen Bruels
719-597-8005

Jakarta

Tim Jackson
6221-577-0077

Milan

Enrico Strada
390-2-72-50-91

San Francisco
415-391-1900

Bruce Pasternack

Warsaw

Reg Boudinot
48-22-630-6301

Berlin

Ren Perillieux
49-30-88705-0

Copenhagen
Torsten Moe
45-3393-36-73

Lexington Park
Neil Gillespie
301-862-3110

Munich

Richard Hauser
49-89-54525-0

Santiago

Alejandro Stengel
562-445-5100

Wellington

Tim Jackson
64-4-915-7777

Bogot

Jaime Maldonado
57-1-313-0202

Dallas

Tim Blansett
214-746-6500

London

Peter Bertone
44-20-7393-3333

New York

David Knott
212-697-1900

So Paulo

Letcia Costa
55-11-5501-6200

Zurich

Jens Schdler
41-1-20-64-05-0

Boston

John Harris
617-428-4400

Dsseldorf

Thomas Knstner
49-211-38900

Los Angeles
Tom Hansson
310-297-2100

Oslo

Karl Hie
47-23-11-39-00

Seoul

Jong Chang
82-2-2170-7500

Brisbane

Tim Jackson
61-7-3230-6400

Frankfurt

Rainer Bernnat
49-69-97167-0

Madrid

Mercedes Mostajo
34-91-411-8450

Paris

Bertrand Kleinmann
33-1-44-34-3131

Stockholm

Torbjrn Kihlstedt
46-8-506-190-00

NL_621_VP_001 PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS 2004 Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.