New Product Development (NPD) is a complex undertaking for any company, but where the initial stage of idea screening is what commonly determines the ultimate success or failure of a product. This important phase usually involves the evaluation of countless product ideas, each of which must be scrutinized for technical feasibility, commercial viability, and practicality. It can throw up many problems, not least because of the uncertainty inherent in predicting a product’s market success based on early-stage concepts.
Research in the International Journal of Business Excellence has introduced a new approach to idea screening that could make it more reliable. Mahesh Caisucar of Goa College of Engineering and Rajesh Suresh Prabhu Gaonkar of the Indian Institute of Technology Goa in Ponda-Goa, India, have proposed an approach that addresses one of the key limitations in existing decision-making frameworks, particularly those used in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM). MCDM techniques are used to evaluate and prioritize options based on various factors, each of which may hold different levels of importance. However, these weightings can often be skewed inadvertently and so lead to poor decisions.
The new approach uses a hierarchical ranking system that takes into account the relative weight of each option by considering how it stacks up against the sum of all other ratings. This, the researchers suggest, offers a more subtle perspective on how likely a new product is to be successful. The team has undertaken tests on their hierarchical approach that works across five main criteria: design, manufacturing, cost, ergonomics, and handling. This gives them a ranking method for obtaining an overall performance score for each product idea.
The team suggests that the success of their approach could improve the ability of a company to choose product ideas most likely to be successful in the market.
Caisucar, M. and Gaonkar, R.S.P. (2024) ‘A novel hierarchical ranking method for idea screening in new product development’, Int. J. Business Excellence, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp.585–601.
No comments:
Post a Comment