RESOURCES

GGI in the News
Reading Rooms
Press Releases
GGI Webinars
Primary Research
Research Product Development Conference Seminar
GGI Podcasts
GGI Summits

PUBLICATIONS

Complimentary
Publications
GGI Rnews

GENERAL INFORMATION

Book Library
Calendar
Bibliography

SOCIAL MEDIA

Driving Product Development™

GGI Blog Signup
GGI Blog Home

Tangible Innovation!™

GGI Blog Sign-Up
GGI Blog Home

Follow Us on Twitter

Twitter

ARCHIVES

Tangible Innovation Archive
Rapid News
Gateways
GGI Summits

CLIENT SERVICES

Private Research
Secure Access Area

Sitemap
 

2004 R&D-Product Development Metrics Survey

"Product Selection, IP, and Top Corporate Metrics Practices"

Every two years since 1998, Goldense Group, Inc. [GGI] surveys industry on product development practices and metrics topics of current interest. Questionnaires are sent to a wide distribution of product development professionals in industries ranging from industrial and medical products to aerospace, defense, electronics, and chemicals, in North America, Europe and Asia.

GGI's 2004 Product Development Metrics Survey is primary research that focuses on five areas where there is significant industry activity. Respondents completed a 12-page questionnaire covering their demographic information and the following five areas: the product selection process and tools used by industry to approve products for development and commercialization, ground breaking work on company's intellectual property (IP) management processes and tools, and the current rankings of top corporate metrics used in RD&E with comparisons to the metrics usage from our past surveys in 2002, 2000 and 1998.

This research was conducted by distributing the questionnaires by a combination of e-mails and mailers, with a small number of handouts. Net total pieces distributed were 4050. There were 202 valid surveys received for a response rate of 5%, giving statistically robust results. Margin of error calculations are shown on graphs where applicable. The 2004 survey was completed by respondents from April through early August, 2004 and published in October 2004. Responses are held in strict confidence to encourage honest and full reporting of sensitive information.

Results of this ground breaking primary research are offered in three reports having increasingly detailed views of survey observations, analysis and key findings, with insights into new developments and trends. These reports are a text only executive-level Highlights Report (MR31), a text plus extensive graphics middle management Summary Report (MR32), and the Results Report (MR34), the most detailed version with added multiple "cuts" of the report into a variety of segmentations of the 202 respondent companies.

GGI's 2004 Metrics Survey contains six sections, each comprised of a number of questions, as follows:

Sec. A: Respondent Profile: The basic questions asked are title and functions performed of the person completing the survey, the type/scope of the reporting organization within the company, the company's industry or service, and places in the world the company does sales, R&D and manufacturing. Also asked are questions that categorize each company within the population of companies that responded to this survey. This provides the ability to do "cuts" of the entire survey population data into segments, such as public vs. private, smaller vs. larger sales, more vs. fewer employees, high tech vs. low tech, and process vs. repetitive/discrete vs. job shop companies.

Sec. B: Product Selection Process: This section investigated various aspects of the process which companies use to select projects or products to be sent on to full development. Companies list the number of review/decision steps they use to formally approve or reject a proposed product or project for development, and the number of decision-makers and the degree of formality of meetings at each decision step. They report the organizational format they use for the product selection/decision process, and if R&D uses these same methods for advanced development projects. If no, they note if the R&D process is more formal or less formal.

Sec. C: Product Selection Tools: This section investigated the tools used during the product selection process. Respondents report which tools and/or techniques are used to analyze and/or document a proposed product or project before the point of approval for development leading to commercialization. And, which tools and/or techniques also help to generate innovative thinking and/or visible innovation. They also check which tools help generate copyrightable, trademarkable, or patentable Intellectual Property [IP]. They note the frequency with which this happens.

Sec. D: Intellectual Property [IP] Management Process: This section investigated the process companies use to make decisions about the management of their IP. Companies identify how many times (decision steps) a potential copyrightable, trademarkable, or patentable IP proposal is reviewed before making a business decision to formally approve or reject the proposal, and also the number of decision-makers and the degree of formality of meetings at each decision step.

The next series of questions in this section are asked in the context of "registering the company's IP," "licensing IP from others," "license IP out to others," and "sell your IP to others," and how frequently this happens. The questions explore the degree to which each company actively applies processes for managing IP at any point during the product lifecycle, and repeats the question for prior to and up to the point of approval of a product for development and commercialization. Companies are asked to what extent the product selection and IP management decision-making processes are mutually dependent, and to what extent the people making the product selection decisions also participate in making the decisions for intellectual property.

Respondents select the organizational format their IP management process takes during the entire product lifecycle, the structure of the organization that supports the IP management process, and if their company believes that IP management will be more important in the next five years than it was in the past five years

Sec. E: Intellectual Property [IP] Management Tools: This section investigated the tools and systems which companies use in the IP management process. Companies are asked to what degree they have formal documented processes for managing IP (from registering your own IP to sell to others, as above), and, to the degree that the company automates its IP process, what type of system is used to manage the inventory of IP, what types of IP are in use and to what degree (six categories of IP to choose from across five levels of frequency of use).

Sec. F: R&D Metrics Used In Industry: This section investigated the metrics companies use to measure their R&D process. The same single question is asked as in GGI's 2002, 2000, and 1998 surveys. Identify the R&D metrics that are "in use" at your company, with 75 choices available. The four qualifications for "in use" are that they are measured at least annually, be visible to all members of top management as active/ongoing tools, numerous people in the organization have easy access to the results, and that there is consistency in the method used to calculate these metrics from year to year.



2004 Research Questionnaire Documents

  • PRESS RELEASE - RESEARCH ANNOUNCEMENT: Not Created
  • RESEARCH DESCRIPTION: Download PDF
  • RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE: Download PDF

2004 Research Findings Documents



General Information About GGI's Research

If you participate in our primary research you will receive a copy of our "Summary" document described below. You may also elect to purchase prior reports we generated from prior research.

Participants who submit complete questionnaires will receive a copy of our "Summary" document which will be on the order of 30-50 pages in length. It will contain factual observations, analysis, and graphical results of every survey question across the survey population. We are well aware of how busy everyone is. We will give you back a comprehensive set of results in recognition of our appreciation for your time, interest and expertise.

If you decide to purchase prior reports, you may choose the one that's right from the options described below. These reports contain the results on how companies, typically North American industrial and high tech companies, responded to the questions; along with observations, analysis and key findings written by GGI's research team. Our "Highlights" Report contains in depth text of these results; our "Summary" Report adds extensive graphics, and our "Detailed Results" Report further adds five special cross-section analyses of the survey data: Public vs. Private, High-Tech vs. Low-Tech, Large Revenues vs. Small Revenues, Many Employees vs. Few Employees, and Process vs. Repetitive vs. Discrete vs. Job-Shop Operations.

You can buy a Hard Copy[h], or a soft copy PDF with an associated Corporate[c] license enabling you to post the document on your corporate intranet and/or VPN for the use of all employees. Click here to go to The Wisdom iStore to purchase these reports.

GGI surveys industry approximately every two years. We are experienced primary and secondary researchers.

GGI Primary Research Projects






Home | Profile | Experience | Trademarks | Gateways to Knowledge® | Design Reviews | Products | iStore | Contact Us

Sitemap

Goldense Group, Inc. [GGI]
1346 South Street, Needham, MA 02492

P.O. Box 350, Dedham, MA 02027-0350
Phone: (781) 444-5400   Fax: (781) 444-5475

Privacy Statement

Copyright © 1996-2017 __ Goldense Group, Inc. __ All Rights Reserved.