Jeff Thompson, Director of Innovation Programs at Aesynt and PDMA Pittsburgh Board Member, shares insights from PDMA's 2013 Product Innovation Management Conference (#PIM13)
I can’t believe it just days before Thanksgiving and I’m
finally getting around to record my thoughts after attending the Product
Development Management annual conference at the end of October. It really pains me that the conference was in
Phoenix and I’m now looking out of my Pittsburgh office window seeing snow. (I shoveled it today as well.)
I have not been to the PDMA conference for many years, and
frankly did not know what to expect. My
anticipation was high; to be with a group of product development professionals
mostly focused on innovation seemed like it had great potential especially
since the conference was put together in a highly interactive style. I knew something about that format since I
was recruited as a “thought leader” in two of David Matheson’s sessions. (I place “thought leader” in quotes because,
as I explained to David, I was attending as a student and not as a
teacher! Still I guess I had something
to contribute on agile innovation and portfolio management having seen some
good and bad on both those fronts.)
As usual I went to the conference with a very specific
learning goal (if you don’t do this try it!).
My target was to understand how people were managing the early phases of
development of radical innovation; that nasty stage that follows the ideation
and framing of the concepts when you begin to scale the development team. It’s a really tough spot and one I thought
where we at Aesynt (formerly McKesson Automation) could do better. Retrospectively having this singular focus
was about like going hunting with only one arrow in your quiver – but hey this
sure seemed like the group that would know the secret sauce to successful
radical innovation. I planned to ask.
What a positive initial impression. The meeting was at the Arizona Biltmore; so
that meant inspiration by the architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright … works for me! I have no idea if the planning committee
thought about the importance of surroundings and artistic and environmental
inspiration as part of innovation, but I do and this setting was great! It was easy to find attendees sitting around
the fire pits , tv’s, and of course the bar and so it was simple to get
conversations going. The first night I
spent some time meeting the conference planning committee who horned in on my
exclusive fire pit which I claimed early in the evening. (I forgave them!)
So after two conference days did I get the answer to my
question? Well yes and no. No one came forward and divulged the secret
sauce. As usual the word “innovation”
created a challenge. Some things
referred to as “innovation” certainly did not fit my definition; others however
did. They seemed to involve different
process and different metrics; not just early in the process but far into the
development cycle. As I reflected on
what I heard in the sessions, during the breaks, and in the interactive
sessions I realized I got at least part of my answer.
The early stages are really different for radical innovation. In the best practices we go on planned learning
journeys, value learning plans and options, are excited when we learn, and we
expect to pivot (change direction) as we learn.
We use design thinking, not the scientific method; we want to learn fast
and be directionally correct. “Not this
way” was a great answer for us in radical innovation. It’s not anywhere near a straight line and
our tools and techniques don’t expect it to be.
On the contrary the best practices of those with incremental
innovation (or line extensions) used QFD, liked a detailed stage gate
methodology, and seemed to transition very quickly from the concept stage to a
very explicit project plan – all in a very straight line and according to
schedule.
Interestingly enough once both reached the requirements and
PRD point the next steps in the development process looked eerily similar. That is until the end, commercialization.
At commercialization the radical innovators wanted to talk
about throttling (and learning), re spinning, and being very cautious in how
quickly they scaled. They spoke of
controlling leadership and shareholder growth expectations.
Enter those incremental innovators (or line extensions);
they could not fathom why you would not want to put your foot in it. We’ve
got to scale quickly to build market position; after all we are being
followed! Our ROI demands rapid adoption
(and our “s” curve is going to top out quick)
So I got my answer and am now off trying to figure out how
to make those improvements; to recognize these differences. To be sure we respect those differences and
apply them properly to the program at hand.
(No one said that the application of the knowledge would be easy, but I
have my start.)
So would I attend the PDMA conference again? You bet!
(These are Jeff’s personal thoughts and do not represent
opinions or views of Aesynt or PDMA)
Paul
O'Conner, an expert in the field of New Product Development and a past PDMA
president authored the white paper - Strategizing, Roadmapping and Executing
the Product Line - which is available for you to download. The white
paper provides an in-depth exploration of product line strategy and
roadmapping. You'll learn the value of product line
strategies, their relationship to product line roadmaps, and techniques for
successful planning, execution, and communication.
