Ralf Woll

Stages, Gates, and Conflicts in New Product Development : a Classification Approach

Formal management processes for new product development (NPD) make use of multi-functional integration with cross-functional team meetings at socalled communication points. These meetings are of different type and reach from information exchange up to choice decisions or “sign offs” of concepts, products, or production processes. For the outcome of the NPD the recognition and adequate management of conflicts play an important role. We concentrate on information exchange and choice decisions in cross-functional integration using stage-gate approaches. Communication points and conflict potentials are identified. Finally, a conflict classification is derived.

Application of analytical hierarchy process to support selection of difficult-to-quantify characteristics in new product development

In most cases, consumers evaluate products based on first impressions. These impressions are subjective, difficult to describe and difficult to handle. Technical specifications are often not considered during the first analysis of a product. In connection with leisure products, e.g. motorcycles, subjective factors have a stronger influence. Therefore, these products are suitable to consider difficult-to-quantify characteristics. Examples of the following approaches are motorcycles. For motorcycles, subjective and difficult-to-quantify characteristics include, for example, the design of the motorcycle, the dynamics of the engine or the perceived quality of the product. The following approach shows how the analytical hierarchy process can support the selection of three different motorcycle chassis. These are analysed based on the directional stability (DS). The DS of a motorcycle is a special example in this evaluation and is analysed in detail. For clarification, additional criteria are considered in the analysis, but not evaluated in detail. The result of the analysis produces a ranking of three different motorcycle chassis in relation to criteria derived from a motorcycle journal. Therefore, different expert opinions are incorporated into the analytical hierarchy process. The analytical hierarchy process helps to identify, structure and evaluate the criteria and the different options to support the decision process.

A first step towards engineer-oriented adaption of the Repertory Grid Technique

Different approaches and methods exist to determine product perceptions from the perspective of the customer. These are more or less suitable to provide specific product requirements for product development. Specifically in the area of quality perception, it is difficult to determine target-oriented and product-improvement requirements. One possible approach is the Repertory Grid Technique, which originates from psychology and was developed in 1955 by George A. Kelly. Today, it is applied in market research and provides important suggestions for determining the perception and positioning of products. Equally, initial studies have shown the applicability of the Repertory Grid Technique in the area of quality management. The results are sometimes difficult to interpret, and only provide limited constructive information to support product development. In this paper, various Repertory Grid studies are presented and compared with regard to the quality of their results. Through feedback loops, the technique is gradually modified and improved based on the quality of their results.

I Spy, with My Little Eye: Quality Standards of Different Target Groups

According to the Kano model, companies would be required to use a continuous adaptation of audit criteria. If the ever-changing customer necessities are not neglected, the relevancy of defined audit criteria and the framework conditions of the production start for product audits cannot be permanently ensured. For this reason, companies should compare and adjust the quality standards of all concerning employees with that of the customer, so that the audit criteria can also be reconciled and adjusted accordingly. In this respect, a procedure for matching quality standards has been developed together with a vehicle manufacturer and a feasibility study has been carried out. The focus of the study was on possible differences regarding the detection of defects between the employees, dealers, and customers, as well as the recording and analysis of the visual focus areas. For the study, the participants had to complete a written questionnaire and make a practical defect detection directly on the vehicle. The study results have shown a variety of potentials for action that can be applied at other companies. These include the regular internal matching of the quality standards, the continuous training of the employees as well as the integration of the customers and their changing product requirements after the start of product production.

Analysing the Meaning of Quality Management in Cross-border Business Cooperations by using Benchmarking Methodology

Benchmarking is more than just a comparison of measures about different company’s performance in a wider sense. It is a methodology of learning‐comparing‐learning, at least within small and medium sized enterprises. This learning is not just limited to learn by copying successful concepts from other enterprises or competitors. It starts in learning more about the own company, about its structure and processes causing its own success or its failure. This kind of learning is necessary before the enterprise starts watching for a suitable Benchmarking partner. Learning from each other’s strengths and weaknesses is the main goal of the European research project Quality beyond Borders! By using the Benchmarking methodology, small and medium sized enterprises get the opportunity to take part in a Benchmarking study and can learn more about the different strengths and weaknesses of other enterprises on both sides of the border. The results of such a Benchmarking can help to identify potentials for future cooperations among German and Polish enterprises in the same market or business. These potentials can lie in different ways of realising the same success or top‐position. The Benchmarking study is not focused on an special business or region. That helps to find out trends for different kinds of top‐positions, which can be claimed in all markets within a country. Every trend is characterised by different success factors which are responsible for the success in this top‐position. In a first overview, the results of the Benchmarking study show 5 different groups of top‐positions within a market which all have different profiles regarding to the importance of their success factors. By the end of the Benchmarking study it will be possible, to give answer about the special reasons for different kind of successes of these groups. These answers can be related to a special region within a country, a special business or of course related to possible differences in the expression of the group success factors in comparison of both countries.