1. 1 10-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

2. 2 10-2 CHAPTER TEN THE FULL SCREEN

3. 3 10-3 The Full Screen A step often seen as a necessary evil, yet very powerful and with long-lasting effects. Forces pre-technical evaluation, and summarizes what must be done. Methods range from simple checklists to complex mathematical models.

4. 4 10-4 Purposes of the Full Screen To decide whether technical resources should be devoted to the project. –Feasibility of technical accomplishment -- can we do it? –Feasibility of commercial accomplishment -- do we want to do it? To help manage the process. –Recycle and rework concepts –Rank order good concepts –Track appraisals of failed concepts To encourage cross-functional communication. To help build consensus.

5. 5 10-5 Screening Alternatives Judgment/Managerial Opinion Concept Test followed by Sales Forecast (if only issue is whether consumers will like it) Checklists Scoring Models Grids or matrices

6. 6 10-6 A Simple Scoring Model Answer: Go boating. Figure 10.2

7. 7 10-7 Source of Scoring Factor Models Figure 10.3

8. 8 10-8 A Scoring Model for Full Screen Note: this model only shows a few sample screening factors. Factor Score (1-5) Weight Weighted Score Technical Accomplishment: Technical task difficulty Research skills required Rate of technological change Design superiority assurance Manufacturing equipment... Commercial Accomplishment: Market volatility Probable market share Sales force requirements Competition to be faced Degree of unmet need... Figure 10.4

9. 9 10-9 The Scorers Scoring Team: Major Functions (marketing, technical, operations, finance) New Products Managers Staff Specialists (IT, distribution, procurement, PR, HR) Problems with Scorers: May be always optimistic/pessimistic (easy or hard grader) May be "moody" (alternately optimistic and pessimistic) May always score neutral May be less reliable or accurate May be easily swayed by the group May be erratic or subject to “halo effect” May lack detailed input

10. 10 10-10 IRI Scoring Model Technical success factors: Proprietary Position Competencies/Skills Technical Complexity Access to and Effective Use of External Technology Manufacturing Capability Commercial success factors: Customer/Market Need Market/Brand Recognition Channels to Market Customer Strength Raw Materials/Components Supply Safety, Health and Environmental Risks Source: John Davis, Alan Fusfield, Eric Scriven, and Gary Tritle, “Determining a Project’s Probability of Success,” Research-Technology Management, May-June 2001, pp. 51-57. Figure 10.5

11. 11 10-11 Alternatives to the Full Screen Profile Sheet Empirical Model Expert Systems Analytic Hierarchy Process

12. 12 10-12 A Profile Sheet Figure 10.6

13. 13 10-13 Empirical Screening Model (This example is based on Project NewProd database.) Eight Significant Factors Product superiority Overall firm/resource compatibility Market need, growth, and size Economic advantage of product to end user Technological resource compatibility Product scope (mass vs. narrow specialty) Market competitiveness (-) Newness to the firm (-) Figure 10.7

14. 14 10-14 Items Constituting the First Factor Factor One: Product Superiority 1. Product is superior. 2. Product has unique feature. 3. Product is higher quality. 4. Product does unique task. 5. Product cuts user's costs. 6. Product is first of kind. (There are about six items constituting each of the other factors as well.)

15. 15 10-15 Sample Items on Other Factors Factor Two: Overall Company Project Fit Good fit in terms of managerial, marketing, engineering skills; financial, R&D, production resources Factor Three: Market Need, Growth and Size High need level by customers for this product class Large, fast-growing market Factor Four: Economic Advantage to User Product reduces customer’s costs Product is priced lower than competitors

16. 16 10-16 Sample Items on Other Factors Factor Five: Newness to the Firm New product class, customer need served, technology, production process, sales force or distribution Factor Six: Technological Capability Good fit in terms of R&D and engineering resources Factor Seven: Market Competitiveness Intense price competition, many competitors, many new product introductions, changing user needs Factor Eight: Product Scope Market-derived new product idea, not a custom product (has mass appeal), mass market exists for product

17. 17 10-17 Sample Application of NewProd Screening Model Factor Mean Evaluation Impact Project Superiority 1.19POSITIVE Economic Advantage-0.49negative Company-Project Fit-0.16marginal (-) Tech. Compatibility-0.19marginal (-) Newness to Firm-0.24marginal (+) Market Need/Growth/Size 0.88POSITIVE Market Competitiveness-1.82positive Product Scope 0.90marginal (+) Figure 10.8

18. 18 10-18 Pros and Cons of Project Pros –1. Product Superiority/Quality –6. Market Need/Growth/Size –7. Market Competitiveness Cons –2. Economic Advantage to User Marginals –8. Product Scope –5. Newness to Firm –4. Technology Compatibility –3. Overall Company-Project Fit

19. 19 10-19 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Figure 10.9

20. 20 10-20 Partial Input to AHP Figure 10-10

21. 21 10-21 Abbreviated Output from AHP Figure 10-11