Open Floor
 Margaret Mellinger
 OSU Business Librarian
 Overview of Tools Available to You
 Group Exercise on Getting Your
Information Needed
Information Exercise
 Think of Your Product (Service)
Concept/Idea…
 What Information Do You Need?
 Where in the OSU Library System Can You
Get It?
 How can You Use the OSU Library System
to Leverage Your Information Requests?
PART TWO
CONCEPT GENERATION
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All right reserved.
Concept Generation
Figure II.1
CHAPTER 4
PREPARATION AND ALTERNATIVES
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All right reserved.
Genius Thinking Strategies
Figure 4.1

Geniuses find many different ways to look at a problem. Einstein, for example, and da
Vinci, were well known for looking at their problems from many different perspectives.

Geniuses make their thoughts visible. Da Vinci’s famous sketches, and Galileo’s
diagrams of the planets, allowed them to display information visibly rather than relying
strictly on mathematical analysis.


Geniuses produce. Thomas Edison had a quota of one invention every ten days.
Mozart was among the most prolific composers over his short life.
Geniuses make novel combinations. Einstein found the relationship between energy,
mass, and the speed of light (the equation E=mc²).

Geniuses force relationships. They can make connections where others
cannot. Kekule dreamed of a snake biting its tail, immediately suggesting to
him that the shape of the molecule he was studying (benzene) was circular.

Geniuses think in opposites. This will often suggest a new point of view. Physicist Neils
Bohr conceived of light as being both a wave and a particle.

Geniuses think metaphorically. Bell thought of a membrane moving steel, and its
similarity to the construction of the ear; this led to the development of the telephone
earpiece.

Geniuses prepare themselves for chance. Fleming was not the first to see mold
forming on a culture, but was the first to investigate the mold, which eventually led to
the discovery of penicillin.
Source: Michael Michalko, “Thinking Like a Genius,” The Futurist, May 1998, pp. 21-25.
“Killer Phrases:”
Roadblocks to Creativity







It simply won’t work.
Are you sure of that?
You can’t be serious.
It’s against our policy.
Let’s shelve it for the
time being.
That won’t work in our
market.
Let’s think about that
some more.







I agree, but…
We’ve done it the
other way for some
time.
Where are you going
to get the money for
that?
We just can’t do that.
Who thought of that?
It’s probably too big
for us.
I believe we tried that
once before.
Figure 4.3
Historic Roadblocks to Creativity



“I think there is a world market for maybe five
computers.” Thomas Watson, Chair, IBM, 1943.
“Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5
tons.” Popular Mechanics, 1949.
“I can assure you that data processing is a fad that
won’t last out the year.” Business books editor, PrenticeHall, 1957.


“So we went to Atari and said, ...’We’ll give it to you. We
just want to do it. Pay our salary, we’ll come work for
you.’ And they said no. So then we went to HP, and
they said ‘We don’t need you, you haven’t got through
college yet.’” Steve Jobs, co-founder, Apple Computers.
“640K of RAM ought to be enough for anybody.” Bill
Gates, Microsoft, 1981.
Historic Roadblocks to Creativity

“Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?” H.M. Warner,

“Stocks have reached what look to be a permanently
high plateau.” I. Fisher, Prof. of Economics, Yale, 1929.
“We don’t like their sound, and guitar music is on the
way out.” Dick Rowe, Decca Records executive, rejecting

Warner Bros., 1927.
the Beatles’ demo tape, 1962.

“This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be
seriously considered as a means of communication [and]
is inherently of no value to us.” Western Union, 1876.
“Heavier-than’air flying machines are impossible.” Lord

“Everything that can be invented has been invented.” C.

Kelvin, President, Royal Society, 1895.
H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
Barriers to Firm Creativity




Cross-functional diversity: Diversity leads to
Figure 4.4
more creative stimulation but also to problem
solving difficulties.
Allegiance to functional areas: Team members
need to have a stake in the team’s success, or
won’t be loyal to the team.
Social cohesion: If interpersonal ties among
team members are too strong, candid debate
may not occur, resulting in less innovative
ideas.
Role of top management: Management should
encourage the teams to be adventurous,
otherwise only incremental changes will occur.
Required Inputs to the Creation
Process



Form (the physical thing created, or, for a
service, the set of steps by which the service
will be created)
Technology (the source by which the form is
to be attained)
Benefit/Need (benefit to the customer for
which the customer sees a need or desire)
Technology permits us to develop a form that
provides the benefit.
Some Patterns in Concept Generation
Customer need  firm develops technology
 produces form
Firm develops technology  finds match to
need in a customer segment  produces
form
Firm envisions form  develops technology
to product form  tests with customer to see
what benefits are delivered
Note: the innovation process can start with
any of the three inputs.
What is a Product Concept?


A product concept is a verbal or prototype
statement of what is going to be changed
and how the customer stands to gain or
lose.
Rule: You need at least two of the three
inputs to have a feasible new product
concept, and all three to have a new
product.
Why Do You Need a Product Concept
and Not Just an Idea?



Needed to judge whether it is worthy of
development
Potential customers do not have enough
information to judge the worthiness of an
idea: the product concept gives them the
required information.
Ex.: Would a taxi operator like cars with a 10
cents per mile operating cost? (need)

Not if it used Caterpillar tractor technology
instead of wheels! (need plus technology)
New Product Concepts and the
New Product
Figure 4.4
C
Need
C
“C”=
Concepts
Form
C
Technology
New
Product
Need-Form-Technology Example


Break into Small Group…
Identify two examples of a
product/service



Need
Form
Technology
The Designer Decaf Example



Benefit: “Consumers want decaffeinated
espresso that tastes identical to regular.”
Form: “We should make a darker, thicker,
Turkish-coffee-like espresso.”
Technology: “There’s a new chemical extraction
process that isolates and separates chemicals
from foods; maybe we can use that for
decaffeinating espresso coffee.”
Why would each of these taken individually not
be a product concept?
What a Concept Is and Is Not
“Learning needs of computer users can be met
by using online systems to let them see training
videos on the leading software packages.” (good
concept; need and technology clear)
“A new way to solve the in-home
training/educational needs of PC users.” (need
only; actually more like a wish)
“Let’s develop a new line of instructional videos.”
(technology only, lacking market need and form)
Methods for Generating Product
Concepts
 Two Broad Categories of Methods:


Gathering Ready-Made Product Concepts
Using a Managed Process Run by the New
Products Team
Best Sources of Ready-Made New
Product Concepts

New Products Employees



End Users






Technical: R&D, engineering, design
Marketing and manufacturing
Lead Users
Resellers, Suppliers, Vendors
Competitors
The Invention Industry (investors, etc.)
Idea exploration firms and consulting
engineers
Miscellaneous (continued)
Figure 4.6
Best Sources of Ready-Made New Product
Concepts (continued)

Miscellaneous Categories












Consultants
Advertising agencies
Marketing research firms
Retired product specialists
Industrial designers
Other manufacturers
Universities
Research laboratories
Governments
Printed sources
International
Internet
Figure 4.6
Lead Users

An important source of new product ideas.

Customers associated with a significant current
trend.


They have the best understanding of the
problems faced, and can gain from solutions to
these problems.
In many cases, have already begun to solve
their own problems, or can work with product
developers to anticipate the next problem in the
future.
BA 590
CHAPTER 5
PROBLEM-BASED IDEATION: FINDING
AND SOLVING CUSTOMERS’ PROBLEMS
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All right reserved.
Problem-Based Concept Generation
Figure 5.1
Problem Analysis: General Procedure
1. Determine product or activity
category for study.
2. Identify heavy users.
3. Gather set of problems associated
with product category.

Avoid “omniscient proximity” -- rate
importance of benefits and levels of
satisfaction.
4. Sort and rank the problems according
to severity or importance.
Problem Analysis Applied to the Cell Phone










Keeping the unit clean.

Breaks when I drop it.

Battery doesn’t stay
charged long enough.

Finding it in dark.

Battery dies in mid
conversation.

Who “out there” hears me?
Dropped calls.

Looking up numbers.

Voice fades in and out.

Hard to hold.
Figure 5.2
Health risks?
Can’t cradle between ear
and shoulder.
Antenna breaks off.
Flip cover breaks off.
Disruptive instrument.
Can’t see facial/body
language.
Rings too loud/too soft.
Wrong numbers.
Fear of what ringing
might be for.
The Bothersomeness Technique of Scoring
Problems
Figure 5.3
List of pet owners' problems:
Need constant feeding
Get fleas
Shed hairs
Make noise
Have unwanted babies
A
Problem Occurs
Frequently
98%
78
70
66
44
B
Problem is
Bothersome
21%
53
46
25
48
AxB
.21
.41
.32
.17
.21
Problem Analysis: Sources and
Methodologies



Experts
Published Sources
Contacts with Your Business Customers
or Consumers
Interviewing
 Focus groups
 Observation of product in use
 Role playing

Typical Questions for Problem Analysis
Focus Groups





What is the real problem here – what if the
product category did not exist?
What are current attitudes and behaviors of
focus group members toward the product
category?
What product attributes and benefits do the
focus group members want?
What are their dissatisfactions, problems, and
unfilled needs?
What changes occurring in their lifestyles are
relevant to the product category?
Observation and Role Playing in
Problem Analysis



Carmakers send their designers out to parking
lots to watch people and how they interact with
their cars (Ford called this “gorilla research”).
Honda got insights as to how large the
passenger compartments of their SUVs should
be by observing U.S. families.
Bausch and Lomb generated ideas on making
contact lenses more comfortable by getting
pairs of executives to act out skits in which they
played the eyeball and the contact lens.
Scenario Analysis



“Extending” vs. “leaping”
Using seed trends for an “extend“
scenario
Techniques:
Follow “trend people”/”trend areas”
 “Hot products”
 Prediction of technological changeover
 Cross-impact analysis

Relevance Tree Form of Dynamic Leap
Scenario
Figure 5.4
Wild Card Events and Their
Consequences
Figure 5.6

No-Carbon Policy: Global warming may cause
governments to put high taxes on fossil fuels, shifting
demand to alternative sources of energy. This changes
the allocation of R&D investment toward alternative
energy, possibly causes new “energy-rich” nations to
emerge, and ultimately may lead to a cleaner
environment for everyone.

Altruism Outbreak: This is the “random acts of
kindness” movement – solve social problems rather than
leaving it up to the government. Schools and other
institutions will revive due to community actions, and
perhaps inner cities would be revitalized.

Cold Fusion: If a developing country perfects free
energy, it becomes prosperous overnight. It gains
further advantages by becoming an energy exporter.
Solving the Problem


Group Creativity Methods/Brainstorming
Principles of Brainstorming:



Deferral of Judgment
Quantity Breeds Quality
Rules for a Brainstorming Session:




No criticism allowed.
Freewheeling -- the wilder the better.
Nothing should slow the session down.
Combination and improvement of ideas.
Brainstorming Techniques





Brainstorming circle
Reverse brainstorming
Tear-down
Phillips 66 groups (buzz groups)
Delphi method
Electronic Brainstorming
 Supported by GSS (group support systems)
software.
 Overcomes many drawbacks of brainstorming
(only one can talk at a time, fear of contributing,
“social loafing”).
 Participants sit at networked terminals.
 Contributions are projected on screen, and also
recorded (so no errors are made in transcription).
 Can be done over multiple sites via computer
linkups or videoconferencing.
 Can handle larger size groups (into the hundreds).
CHAPTER 6
ANALYTICAL ATTRIBUTE APPROACHES:
INTRODUCTION AND PERCEPTUAL
MAPPING
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All right reserved.
What are Analytical Attribute
Techniques?

Basic idea: products are made up of
attributes -- a future product change must
involve one or more of these attributes.

Three types of attributes: features,
functions, benefits.

Theoretical sequence: feature permits a
function which provides a benefit.
Gap Analysis

Determinant gap map (produced from
managerial input/judgment on products)

AR perceptual gap map (based on
attribute ratings by customers)

OS perceptual map (based on overall
similarities ratings by customers)
A Determinant Gap Map
Figure 6.2
A Data Cube
Figure 6.3
2.
1
Attributes
1
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
700
.
.
1
2
3
.... Options .... X
Ideal
Obtaining Customer Perceptions
Rate each brand you are familiar with on each of the
following:
Disagree
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Agree
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
1..2..3..4..5
Figure 6.4
Snake Plot of Perceptions
(Three Brands)
Figure 6.5
Ratings
5
4.5
4
Aqualine
3.5
Islands
3
2.5
Sunflare
2
1.5
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 Attributes
Data Reduction Using Multivariate
Analysis

Factor Analysis


Reduces the original number of attributes to a
smaller number of factors, each containing a set
of attributes that “hang together”
Cluster Analysis

Reduces the original number of respondents to a
smaller number of clusters based on their
benefits sought, as revealed by their “ideal
brand”
Selecting the Number of Factors
Percent Variance
Explained
Figure 6.6
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
The Scree
1
2
3
4
5
Factor
Eigenvalue
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
6.04
3.34
0.88
0.74
0.62
0.54
0.52
0.44
0.40
6
7
8
9
Percent Variance
Explained
40.3
22.3
5.9
4.9
4.2
3.6
3.5
3.0
2.7
No. of Factors
Factor Loading Matrix
Figure 6.7
Attribute
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Factor 1 -“Fashion”
.796
.791
.108
.803
.039
.102
.754
.093
.762
.758
.043
.807
.810
.800
.106
Factor 2 -“Comfort”
.061
.029
.782
.077
.729
.833
.059
.793
.123
.208
.756
.082
.055
.061
.798
Factor Scores Matrix
Figure 6.8
Attribute
1. Attractive design
2. Stylish
3. Comfortable to wear
4. Fashionable
5. I feel good when I wear it
6. Is ideal for swimming
7. Looks like a designer label
8. Easy to swim in
9. In style
10. Great appearance
11. Comfortable to swim in
12. This is a desirable label
13. Gives me the look I like
14. I like the colors it comes in
15. Is functional for swimming
Factor 1 -“Fashion”
0.145
0.146
-0.018
0.146
-0.028
-0.021
0.138
0.131
-0.021
0.146
-0.029
0.146
0.148
0.146
-0.019
Factor 2 -“Comfort”
-0.022
-0.030
0.213
-0.017
0.201
0.227
-0.020
0.216
-0.003
0.021
0.208
-0.016
-0.024
-0.022
0.217
Sample calculation of factor scores: From the snake plot, the mean ratings of Aqualine on Attributes
1 through 15 are 2.15, 2.40, 3.48, …, 3.77. Multiply each of these mean ratings by the corresponding
coefficient in the factor score coefficient matrix to get Aqualine’s factor scores. For example, on
Factor 1, Aqualine’s score is (2.15 x 0.145) + (2.40 x 0.146) + (3.48 x -0.018) + … + (3.77 x -0.019)
= 2.48. Similarly, its score on Factor 2 can be calculated as 4.36. All other brands’ factor scores are
calculated the same way.
Comfort
The AR Perceptual Map
Figure 6.9
Aqualin
e
Islands
Gap 1
Molokai
Fashion
Splash
Sunflare
Gap 2
Dissimilarity Matrix
Figure 6.10
Aqualine
Islands
Sunflare
Molokai
Splash
Aqualine
X
Islands
3
X
Sunflare
9
8
X
Molokai
5
3
5
X
Splash
7
4
7
6
X
The OS Perceptual Map
Figure 6.11
Aqualine
Islands
Splash
Molokai
Sunflare
Comparing AR and OS Methods
Figure 6.12
AR Methods
OS Methods
Input Required
Brand ratings on specific attributes
Overall similarity ratings
Attributes must be pre-specified
Respondent uses own judgment of similarity
Analytic Procedures Commonly Used
Factor analysis; multiple discriminant analysis
Multidimensional scaling (MDS)
Graphical Output
Shows product positions on axes
Shows product positions relative to each other
Axes interpretable as underlying dimensions
Axes obtained through follow-up analysis or must
(factors)
be interpreted by the researcher
Where Used
Situations where attributes are easily articulated or
Situations where it may be difficult for the
visualized
respondent to articulate or visualize attributes
Source: Adapted from Robert J. Dolan, Managing the New Product Development Process: Cases and Notes
(Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993), p. 102.
Failures of Gap Analysis




Input comes from questions on how brands
differ (nuances ignored)
Brands considered as sets of attributes;
totalities, interrelationships overlooked; also
creations requiring a conceptual leap
Analysis and mapping may be history by the
time data are gathered and analyzed
Acceptance of findings by persons turned off
by mathematical calculations?
E. & J. Gallo Example

Attributes

Perceptual Maps

MDS Graph
CHAPTER 7
ANALYTICAL ATTRIBUTE APPROACHES:
TRADE-OFF ANALYSIS
AND QUALITATIVE TECHNIQUES
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All right reserved.
Trade-Off (Conjoint) Analysis



Put the determinant attributes together
in combinations or sets.
Respondents rank these sets in order
of preference.
Conjoint analysis finds the optimal
levels of each attribute.
Conjoint Analysis Input: Salsa Example
Figure 7.2
Thickness
Spiciness
Color
Actual
Ranking*
Regular
Regular
Regular
Regular
Regular
Regular
Thick
Thick
Thick
Thick
Thick
Thick
Extra-Thick
Extra-Thick
Extra-Thick
Extra-Thick
Extra-Thick
Extra-Thick
Mild
Mild
Medium-Hot
Medium-Hot
Extra-Hot
Extra-Hot
Mild
Mild
Medium-Hot
Medium-Hot
Extra-Hot
Extra-Hot
Mild
Mild
Medium-Hot
Medium-Hot
Extra-Hot
Extra-Hot
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
Red
Green
4
3
10
6
15
16
2
1
8
5
13
11
7
9
14
12
17
18
* 1 = most preferred, 18 = least preferred.
Ranking as
Estimated
by Model
4
3
10
8
16
15
2
1
6
5
13
11
7
9
14
12
18
17
Conjoint Analysis: Graphical Output
Figure 7.3
Thickness
Spiciness
Color
2
1
0
-1
-2
Regular
0.161
Thick
0.913
Ex-Thick
Mild
-1.074 1.667
Medium-Hot
0.105
Ex-Hot Red
Green
-1.774 -0.161
0.161
Conjoint Analysis:
Relative Importance of Attributes
Figure 7.3
(cont’d.)
0
20
40
Spiciness
80
59.8%
Thickness
Color
60
34.6%
5.6%
100 %
Some Qualitative Attribute Analysis
Techniques



Dimensional Analysis
Checklists
Relationships Analysis

There are many others.
A Dimensional Attribute List
Figure 7.4










Weight
Rust resistance
Length
Color
Water resistance
Materials
Style
Durability
Shock resistance
Heat tolerance










Explosiveness
Flammability
Aroma
Translucence
Buoyancy
Hangability
Rechargeability
Flexibility
Malleability
Compressibility
An Idea Stimulator Checklist for
Industrial Products










Figure 7.5
Can we change the physical/chemical properties
of the material?
Are each of the functions really necessary?
Can we construct a new model of this?
Can we change the form of power to make it work
better?
Can standard components be substituted?
What if the order of the process were changed?
How might it be made more compact?
What if it were heat-treated/hardened/cured/plated?
Who else could use this operation or its output?
Has every step been computerized as much as possible?
Templates for Creativity




Attribute Dependency: Find a functional dependency
Figure 7.6
between two attributes. Ex.: color of ink on coffee
cup is sensitive to heat and can reveal message if
coffee is too hot.
Replacement: Remove a component and replace
with one from another environment. Ex.: antenna is
replaced by headphone cord on Walkman.
Displacement: Remove a component and its
function to change the product. Ex.: Removing
floppy drives resulted in ultra-thin PCs.
Component Control: Find a new connection between
a component internal to the product and one
external to the product. Ex.: Toothpastes with
whiteners, suntan lotions with skin moisturizers.
Source: Jacob Goldenberg and David Mazursky, Creativity in Product Innovation, Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Relationships Analysis


Force combinations of dimensions (features,
functions, and benefits) together.
Techniques:




Two-dimensional matrix
Multidimensional (morphological) matrix
Two-dimensional example: person/animal insured
and event insured against.
Household cleaning products example used six
dimensions:

Instrument used, ingredients used, objects cleaned,
type of container, substances removed, texture or form
of cleaner
Another Form of Dimensional Analysis
 Two key dimensions for winning new
product ideas:

Figure 7.8
Utility lever: How the product will affect
the customer’s life (such as simplicity,
fun/image, environmental friendliness,
reduced risk, convenience, and productivity).
 Buyer’s experience cycle: The stage
when/where the product will affect the
customer (purchase, delivery, use,
supplements, maintenance, disposal).
Source: W. C. Kim and R. Mauborgne, “Knowing a Winning Business Idea When You See One,” Harvard Business Review, Sept.-Oct. 2000, pp. 129-138.
Other Methods:
Lateral Search Techniques







Free association
Stereotype activity
Lateral thinking -- avoidance
Creative stimuli words
Studying “big winners”
Use of the ridiculous
Forced relationships
Lateral Thinking -- Avoidance
 Keep an idea from dominating thinking as it
always has in the past by asking avoiding
questions.





Ask “Is there another way of looking at this?”
Ask “Why?”
Focus on an aspect of the problem other than
the “logical” one.
List all possible alternatives to every aspect of
the analysis.
Break apart aspects (concepts) of the problem,
or combine them to create even more concepts.
Some Creative Stimuli Words










Guest stars
Alphabet
Truth
Outer space
Charity
His and hers
Style
Nation
Family
Videotape










Photography
Testimonials
Decorate
Fantasy
Hobbies
Holidays
Weather
Calendar
Push button
Snob appeal
Use of the Ridiculous

How can you join two wires together?




Hold them with your teeth.
Use chewing gum.
Can you think of others?
Do any of these ridiculous ideas
suggest a not-so-ridiculous solution?
Review and Preview…



Margaret Mellinger
Lecture on Chapters 4-7
Midterm One


Distribution
Group Discussion
Midterm One Discussion


Questions
Comments