University of Brighton
Brighton Business School
Module Report Template
Product Design
Module Title
Module Code
Courses/ Years Taught
Module Leader
Other members of the teaching team
Semester (or weeks taught if block mode)
Academic Year
MK202
BSc (Hons) Business with Enterprise
Joint Honours Business
Dr George Tsekouras
None
2
2013-14
Introduction
The experience gained through teaching this module has been great. The students had the
chance to gain insights not only into the product design but also the wider new product
development process. The module combined the outcome of several research projects in
our University with established literature (innovation management, product design etc.) to
provide a business roadmap for product design and new product development. The module
was filled with real case studies and real examples that gave the students the opportunity to
‘connect’ with the covered themes. Overall the students have shown great enthusiasm and
strong engagement. The experience was equally rewarding for the lecturer (myself) since it
gave the opportunity to communicate complex business issues to undergraduate students.
Statistical data including passes and referrals
The assessment took place at the end of the semester through a written exam. 13 students
took the test, out of which 12 pass the exam. Three of the students received a 1st class
mark, in line with their performance within the class.
Level
1st
2.1
2.2
3rd
fail
No
3
2
2
5
1
Percentage
23%
15%
15%
38%
8%
Table 1: Exams results for MK202
The test was comprised by a set of ‘minor’ questions (10% each) and a set of ‘major’
questions (60% each). The students could select the questions to respond out of a wider
choice of questions. The most popular minor questions were proved to be (i) the productmarket matrix (also called the Ansoff table); (ii) the role of the lead users and how they can
benefit the process of product development and (iii) the difference between the generic
product and the augmented products. The average grade was 8% (out of 10%) for the first
two questions and 10% on the last one.
As for the ‘major’ (and more complex) questions the most popular question was the case
study of a consumer goods company which wants to develop a new product. The students
were asked to consult the company on (a) ways to segment the targeted market(s); (b) the
definition of thee different kinds of “gaps” that can be identified in each of these segments
and (c) the levels of awareness that potential customers may have for their needs and
wants. The median mark in this question was 36%.
Attendance:
The attendance was very good throughout the course with about 12-14 students being
present in almost every meeting. Only exception was the first meeting where a combination
of misunderstanding on the start date of the course and a problem with trains on the day
caused a rather reduced participation.
Student Feedback:
The students appreciated the depth and the academic vigour of the course. They loved the
combination of established theoretical models, ongoing research on business enterprises
and case studies and examples from real cases. They also liked the fact that all the themes
were connected in a clear structure, linked up in a new product development roadmap - a set
of six steps with issues to consider and actions to take).
The students also pointed out some improvements on the module. The most important point
was the suggestion to ‘lighten up’ the content of the module as it currently contains a lot of
(new to the students) concepts and theoretical approaches, which are difficult to digest in the
period of a semester.
Method of returning feedback:
Feedback was received from the students throughout the delivery of the module. In addition,
a special questionnaire was distributed to the students towards the end of the semester as
an aid to a special workshop organised (as part of the last session). The questionnaire
included structured and open-ended questions on each of the delivered sessions.
The special workshop gave the students the opportunity to offer their opinions on each of the
delivered sessions, discussing what they like and what they would like to see improved in
the module.
Module/component organisation
The module underwent through some changes this year compared to previous incarnations.
While the focus of the module remained the product design, more emphasis was put on the
process of (new) product development and the wider business issues that affect the product
design. The new approach assumes that a lot of product design decisions depend on other
decisions made during the product development process (e.g. the involvement or not of lead
users) and on wider business considerations (e.g. the ‘distance’ between the existing
competence of the company and the mentality of the targeted markets).
This new approach was considered necessary since the discussion on product design risks
to be meaningless, if the other variables are not discussed and considered thoroughly.
More emphasis was also put on innovation management issues since the product design (in
the context of new product development) was considered to be a typical innovation
management problem.
The overall structure of the module delivery was also made to fit an integrated roadmap for
new product development, so the students can ‘carry’ with them in the post-university
professional life. Each session focused on one of the roadmap steps, drawing from the
relevant theoretical discussion as well as from real cases and examples.
External Examiner Comment
A short commentary on issues raised by external examiners and action taken as a result.
This will need to be added after external examiner comment has been received.
Action Plan
A list of action points arising from the above including timescale and responsibilities
Routing of report:
An electronic copy of this module report should be submitted to the administrative office
responsible for the courses where the module is delivered at the same time that marks are
submitted to the office, so (where necessary) the report can be circulated to the relevant external
examiner(s), with sample work, prior to the meeting of the examination board. The office will also
upload copies of module reports into the Quality Folder on BBS storage, so that they can then be
accessed on Studentcentral.
Where an external examiner makes comments about a module at an examination board or in their
external examiner report, these comments may be incorporated into, and responded to, in a
revised module report, which is then forwarded in electronic form to the School Quality Director
(SQD) and the relevant subject group leader. The module leader’s response should be conveyed
to the external examiner by the person designated to formally respond to the particular external
examiner (who will normally be a subject group leader or course leader). The SQD will arrange for
the relevant office to upload a revised copy of the module report into the Quality Folder in BBS
storage.
The SQD will monitor reports, and will liaise with subject group leaders about any outstanding
issues.