ESF project 4895: Meer werk maken van innovatie voor werkgelegenheid en arbeidsmarkt
ANALYSIS FICHE OF LITERATURE
TITLE OF LITERATURE: The stage-gate idea to launch process update
AUTHOR : R G Cooper
TYPE OF AUTHOR (academic, consultants, practitioners, other): consultant
COMMISSIONER OF LITERATURE (IF APPROPRIATE): J. Product Innovation Management, Volume 25,
Number 3, May 2008
ORIENTATION OF LITERATURE (check with X):




innovation in general: X
innovation by / within the public sector:
innovation oriented towards citizens:
innovation oriented towards social and employment issues typically dealt with by ESF:
LESSONS LEARNT REGARDING:
A. How to define innovation e.g. in types
B. How to formulate an innovation strategy (in terms of scope, types of innovation,
requirements)
C. How to organize innovation as a process in different stages?
There are 5 stages, AFTER “discovery”:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Scoping
Build business case
Development
Testing and validation
Launch
Stages 1 and 2 involve very little funding.
Each stage is designed to gather info to reduce key uncertainties. Each costs more than the preceding
one. Within 1 stage activities are undertaken in parallel by different functional areas: there is no R&D
or marketing or engineering or production stage. They are all involved in each stage. This team must
be engaged from start to end, under leadership of a project captain. There are NO hand-overs
between functions.
Open innovation can happen at all stages.
As of stage 2, spirals to users are foreseen (build/test/feedback/revise loops)


In stage 2, this is done a first time to understand unmet needs, benefits sought, problems
with the new service. Not much is showed to users, it is more about listening and watching.
The second time it is done with a representation of the proposed service. This should be
enough to give users a feel for the service. Think about a dummy brochure, a storyboard to
simulate a TV ad, … The aim is to gauge interest, liking, preference and intent to engage.
Dislikes and necessary changes are input to the next phase.
Successively more detailed, integrated prototypes are fed to users and adapted based on
their feed-back.
This also means that although stage 4 is a testing phase, tests are conducted also in 2 and 3 but then
on parts / mock-ups.
Certain projects (smaller, less risky such as improvements, modifications, extensions) should go
faster. They make takes stage 1+2 together as wells as 3,4,5. Others may do 1+2, 3+4 and 5.
Some key mistakes to avoid:
a) It is NOT a linear process:
 Not all project go through all stages or gates
 Activities can be moved from one stage to another
 Activities and deliverables can be by-passed
 Activities and Stages may overlap. This increases risks so the benefit of this (e.g. speed)
versus the risk has to be weighed.
 Inside stages there is much iteration but also between stages there can be iteration.
b) It is not a substitute for project management. Project management (team building, timelines,
critical paths, milestone reviews) must be applied within each stage (as appropriate).
c) Have long lists of required activities / deliverables per stage everyone must do. There is NO
universal list. It is the project team that proposes a “go-forward” plan from which next gate
gate deliverables are derived in advance.
A final stage is the post-launch review: how well did a new service actually do in the end, relative to
what the project team foresaw? Typically about three months after launch. After that a monitoring
of 2 years is done. If projections were very wrong, try to ascertain why and try to trace it back to the
innovation process to avoid this happening again.
D. How to define outputs of innovation e.g. in terms of idea, concept, prototype…?
E. How to make decisions regarding progress of an innovation?
Gates consist of 1) deliverables (decided at the previous gate) , 2) criteria with “must meet” knock
out criteria and “should meet” (with points) for prioritization, 3) outputs namely a decision and
action plan for the next stage (timeline, resources, deliverables).
Gatekeepers should be only the senior people who OWN the resources, required for the project
team to move forward. Seniority increases with funding: at gate 1 and 2 mid-level managers, ramping
up to senior for 3,4,5 for major projects (for smaller ones, mid-level again suffices).
Mistakes to avoid:
a) If all resources are approved for a project at the first gate, it will not be possible to kill it
anymore.
b) If the gatekeepers are also the same people as the project leaders this usually means
gatekeepers want to use gates as control systems to micromanage the project.
c) Deliverables over-kill: detailed explanations or research, overly detailed descriptions, etc.
add no value for decision –making. Gatekeepers should know the project and whether the
deliverables were properly done before the meeting (the meeting is not an education
session). The quality of the data is NOT the focus of the gate meeting. The focus is now on
risks and commitments required, based on the data. Try to go for one-two pages (with four
pages as attachments) and three slides. It is NOT about showing the work that was done but
to highlight the results from work that help decision-making.
A 60-90 minute meeting should go as follows: 1) project team present 2) vigorous Q&A session
where gatekeepers challenge the project team 3) each gatekeeper scores individually 4) results
displayed. Areas of disagreement highlighted and discussed. It is also possible here to see how a
team scored themselves.
An example of a list of criteria:
Extra ‘process’ criteria could relate to the project team’s capability: eg how well they deliver on their
own plans (costs and timing), how good their work is, how well they are able to keep users on board.
While stage/gate is focused on individual projects, portfolio management is required as well to
manage the whole set of projects. Portfolio management requires good stage/gate processes: how
else will it be possible to compare projects if the data required to make comparisons is not agreed at
a gate. But it happens twice to four times a year and looks at the mix of projects (eg short term vs
long term, high vs low impact, high risk vs low risk) within a strategic theme/area.
F. What roles exist for different actors in the innovation process? What competences are
required for these roles?
G. How to organize interaction with external stakeholders (open innovation)?
H. Specific tools that are explained (list briefly for each tool in what stage, by which role, why,
how it is to be used).
a) Tool 1: rules of engagement for gatekeepers