August 2014

Design Reviews Reduce Time to Market

/ Blogroll, Process

Making Product Development Processes More Innovative [Machine Design – August 14, 2014] discusses ways that corporations can build more “innovation-think” time into their product development processes.  The article primarily focuses on improving the balance of activities that are required by company product development processes.

If capacity and throughput in Manufacturing and Production is accurately quantified as “equipment assisted by people,”  then R&D and Product Development is accurately quantified as “people assisted by equipment.” Paying attention to the specific activities that are required of development professionals is a key contributor to R&D productivity and throughput, more so than just about any function.  R&D-Product Development headcount is a single digit percentage of the work force that is required to generate fifteen to sixty percent of near and intermediate term revenues.  Time is a critical commodity.

Today’s product development process structures, many whose underpinnings date to times when digital simulation and testing were a very expensive commodity and there were far less computer models and illustrations on the shop floor, also bear a legacy of having test suites whose center of gravity and resultant corporate culture is after the product exists in physical form.  As such, Design Reviews last almost up to product launch.

Thinking best practices, physical form is late.  In physical form, one is answering a more reactive Quality Control question “does the as-built model conform to the requirements and specification?”  If yes, phew.  If no, as is usually the case, changes are required that can ripple through the entire supply chain.  Changes certainly take engineering time. These are not really Design Reviews.   Design reviews are reviews of design.

Analogous to re-balancing required pipeline activities to improve innovative thinking and new product creation potential, re-balancing a late center of gravity will also free time and energy for potential new product creation.

Design Reviews Reduce Time to Market [Machine Design – September 4, 2014] discusses how R&D-Product Development time can be saved by performing early and meaningful Design Reviews to help overcome legacy testing suites and a culture whose gravity is late into the process.  An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.  Design Reviews result in a more productive, collaborative, and satisfied R&D-Product Development community.

NOTE: The article is currently posted. The MD September 4 magazine issue URL will enliven when the issue is published.

The Embodiment of Open R&D Innovation Management Begins

/ Blogroll, Finance, Process, Strategy

In the July 7, 2014 issue of 2PLM, the scope and focus of recent research on R&D Operating Environments, Organic Innovation, Open Innovation, Intellectual Property, and the Top Corporate Metrics used to measure R&D and Product Development was described. The July 21 and August 4 issues addressed industry research findings regarding R&D Operating Environments and corporate practices in Organic R&D Innovation.

In this fourth of the six part series, published on August 25, selected GGI findings on Open R&D Innovation will be discussed. Open Innovation [OI] is the ability of a corporation to invent and innovate using outside sources and resources, excluding the use of contracted personnel to supplement employee-equivalent responsibilities.

Open Innovation is a two way street. GGI coined “Inbound Open Innovation” and “Outbound Open Innovation” to segment the research. If a company looks to make its capabilities available to other companies that may have an interest, that is Outbound. If a company is looking to acquire innovation to supplement its own Organic R&D Innovation capabilities, or perhaps to repackage and sell acquired innovation, that is Inbound. This article focuses on Inbound OI.

Five Inbound OI areas were researched: Importance of OI, Financial Tracking of OI, Financial Results from OI, Corporate OI Approaches To Acquire Capabilities, and Processes Used To Manage OI. Over 95% of all respondent companies provided answers to these research areas. That, in itself, is an indication that this evolving body of knowledge is likely to have staying power in the years ahead.

This article may be found at:

The Embodiment of Open R&D Innovation Management Begins

The pages at which 2PLM is published are:

Current Issue

Main 2PLM Portal

2PLM is a bi-monthly publication by John Stark Associates [JSA], based in Switzerland. JSA is focused on the body of knowledge of “Closed Loop Lifecycle Management (CL2M).” JSA and GGI have collaborated on various projects spanning three decades, including GGI’s primary research initiatives.

The six GGI primary research initiatives during the the past fifteen years may be found at GGI’s Primary Research site.

The 2014 primary research, entitled the “2014 Product Development Metrics Survey”, was conducted by sending questionnaires to a wide range of companies developing products throughout North America. Participating companies had headquarters throughout the Americas, Europe, and Asia, but their response was for North American R&D-Product Development operations. Complete data sets were received from 200 companies. Consumer, industrial, medical, chemical, and automotive/vehicular products were the top respondent industries. Participants completed 31 questions across the five primary research subjects. The research period was September 2012 to October 2013. The results were published March 3, 2014 in a 138-page report. This research is statistically valid and provides a Margin Of Error for each research question.

The Sophistication of Organic R&D Innovation Management Continues

/ Blogroll, Finance, Process, Strategy

In the July 7, 2014 issue of 2PLM, the scope and focus of recent research on R&D Operating Environments, Organic Innovation, Open Innovation, Intellectual Property, and the Top Corporate Metrics used to measure R&D and Product Development was described. The July 21 issue addressed R&D Operating Environments.

In this third of the six part series, published on August 4, selected GGI findings on Organic R&D Innovation will be discussed. Organic Innovation is the ability of a corporation to invent and innovate from within, including the use of contracted personnel to supplement employee-equivalent responsibilities.

Three Organic R&D Innovation areas were researched: Types of R&D Performed, R&D Processes for Pre-Product Development Innovation, and Product Development Processes. All three of these areas were researched thoroughly in our 2008 study enabling a pre/post great recession analysis.

This article may be found at:

The Sophistication of Organic R&D Innovation Management Continues

The pages at which 2PLM is published are:

Current Issue

Main 2PLM Portal

2PLM is a bi-monthly publication by John Stark Associates [JSA], based in Switzerland. JSA is focused on the body of knowledge of “Closed Loop Lifecycle Management (CL2M).” JSA and GGI have collaborated on various projects spanning three decades, including GGI’s primary research initiatives.

The six GGI primary research initiatives during the the past fifteen years may be found at GGI’s Primary Research site.

The 2014 primary research, entitled the “2014 Product Development Metrics Survey”, was conducted by sending questionnaires to a wide range of companies developing products throughout North America. Participating companies had headquarters throughout the Americas, Europe, and Asia, but their response was for North American R&D-Product Development operations. Complete data sets were received from 200 companies. Consumer, industrial, medical, chemical, and automotive/vehicular products were the top respondent industries. Participants completed 31 questions across the five primary research subjects. The research period was September 2012 to October 2013. The results were published March 3, 2014 in a 138-page report. This research is statistically valid and provides a Margin Of Error for each research question.

The Great Recession Changed R&D Operating Environments

/ Blogroll, Finance, Metrics, Process, Strategy

In the July 7, 2014 issue of 2PLM, the scope and focus of recent research on R&D Operating Environments, Organic Innovation, Open Innovation, Intellectual Property, and the Top Corporate Metrics used to measure R&D and Product Development was described.

In this second of the six part series, published on July 21, selected GGI findings on R&D Operating Environments are discussed.

Four R&D Operating Environment areas were researched: R&D-Product Development Strategy, Importance of Innovation, Centralization vs. Decentralization, and Facility Deployment. Several of these areas were researched thoroughly in our 2008 study enabling a pre/post great recession analysis.

This article may be found at:

The Great Recession Changed R&D Operating Environments

The pages at which 2PLM is published are:

Current Issue

Main 2PLM Portal

2PLM is a bi-monthly publication by John Stark Associates [JSA], based in Switzerland. JSA is focused on the body of knowledge of “Closed Loop Lifecycle Management (CL2M).” JSA and GGI have collaborated on various projects spanning three decades, including GGI’s primary research initiatives.

The six GGI primary research initiatives during the the past fifteen years may be found at GGI’s Primary Research site.

The 2014 primary research, entitled the “2014 Product Development Metrics Survey”, was conducted by sending questionnaires to a wide range of companies developing products throughout North America. Participating companies had headquarters throughout the Americas, Europe, and Asia, but their response was for North American R&D-Product Development operations. Complete data sets were received from 200 companies. Consumer, industrial, medical, chemical, and automotive/vehicular products were the top respondent industries. Participants completed 31 questions across the five primary research subjects. The research period was September 2012 to October 2013. The results were published March 3, 2014 in a 138-page report. This research is statistically valid and provides a Margin Of Error for each research question.