Working in the aircraft industry it is always about space/cost/weight so not a lot of opportunity to explore when designing standard items. We were once asked to do a concept galley, the one you see as you walk into the airplane. The only constraint was that we had to build a working prototype. Anyways, we ended designing a modular galley with a monitor as you walk in. Not very functional for the staff but eye-catchy for everybody else.
Long story short, it is now at the Boeing Supplier Center next to the other suppliers, and according to our client, it is the project/product that motivates airlines to contact them & ultimately lands them production contracts.
We’ve tried implementing the monitor for a few airlines but after everybody’s input and requirements are taken into account, it ends up looking like the “after construction” sketch.
In my last job we used to call the CES innovation award “The Kiss of Death”… it was a pretty good indicator of what would be our flops. One year we won 4 or 5 and all those products bombed. My last year there we won none of them… strongest sales year 
Being an in-house designer, these higher ups would be my boss’ boss (and his boss, etc.), so ignoring could be dangerous. When you get cut off in a presentation by an Exec. VP of Product, you have to be careful how you handle the next few moves. Last year I was stopped in a well thought out concept that used existing tubing that is sourced, but because this pricepoint was very sensitive, I was forced to re-think it use tubing we roll inhouse, changing the look considerably. It then became a capacity issue at plant level and created new challenges and battles.
This is exactly why our salesforce is “banned” from NPD. It isn’t so much they promise something to the customer, it is the fact they look the fool when they cannot deliver on their promise. They then wanted to blame NPD for their foolishness. Our VP put the kibosh on that practice years ago, and it has stuck since.
Nobody has raised the inherent problem of “pushing through” the first image. It is the very definition of a pet project, whether it be the designer or the boss. Pet projects advance on the salesmanship of the person pushing the pet project. I consider that a toxic work environment. But as yo pointed out, if that “pet project” is customer driven and not designer/boss driven, I’m good. When the designer/boss starts talking about their opinion, I always follow up with the question, “How many are you going to buy?”
It is so awesome that your organization has been able to eliminate this through process. I’ve never worked at a company that has done that. I have been in a position where someone in sales overcommits and says “You have to do this or we look like idiots”… which my response is “no, we don’t look like idiots, you personally do, and you need to make it clear to the customer that this was your personal mistake and not the failing of the company to deliver”
I say the same. Or sometimes I’ll point out the persona. A few years back we were designing a product for 14 year olds, predominantly girls. The 60+ year old white male CEO looked at the prototypes and said “I just like it better this way”… my reply was “are you a girl in middle school? No? Then we won’t be making what you or I like, we will be making what she likes and finds useful because she is going to buy the product, not us.”
It is a little easier when you (or the execs) are clearly not the target user. It can become difficult when the execs think of themselves as the end user. I’ve experienced that a few times and have never found a way to effectively deal with it outside of focus groups (which have their own problems).
Awesome to hear that some companies have this in place. Was it a hard transition? I imagine that sales put up a fight.
I’ve also seen the “can’t deliver” scenario, and it’s just a crap situation for everyone. The customer gets a worse off product and, in my experience, the company makes less or loses money to rush it through to meet the deadline.
Not really. NPD VP said to CEO, “Salespeople look like idiots, you should stop that.” CEO, not being an idiot, did.
Not to say that downstream doesn’t have a say in project selection. We divide NPD projects into 3 categories - Core, Adjacent and Game Changer. Cores just fill the product line. Adjacent expand the product line to a new market. Game changers are a new product line.
Typically we allocate 50% of the projects to core, 25% to adjacent, 25% to game changer. Downstream has say on those core projects and can prioritize them, but get no additional NPD resources. The largest hurdle with core is new leadership will have new priorities and create new “pet” projects. We try to keep that to a minimum and good leadership understands only to do it with customer support, not sales support.
Adjacent and game changer are visible to downstream leadership, but they get no say. Salespeople haven’t a single clue about customer’s problems, they only want to close.
Thank you guys for that one.
I actually did a presentation on the hurdles in our NPD process this summer using a simular cartoon. (Not the Swings.)
This lead to a profound discussion and unearthing of unbelievable flaws in the process, that a well paid „lean“ specialist team had just implemented.
Ongoing fight with unhappy bosses.
Pondering to leave and start something completely new.
mo-i
(Nearly no wifi on this location in Spain, today. (Cadaqués))
iab: what kind of industry are you in at the moment?
Also: Has any one of you ever had the responsibility to educate fellow executives (like VP Level) on design criteria to find a better understanding of esthetic decisions than “I like black better.”?
Surely there must be established books and practices on that, which I should look into before writing something based on my own but sole experience.
mo-i