Talk:New product development/Archives/2012

Proposal for a superior Category
The Wikipedia article "New product development" or respectively "Product Development" is completely biased to the business domain (and represent just a small piece of the so called rational-planning school). Therefore, a CATEGORY: "Product Development" may cover Wikipedia articles about:
 * Product Newness, Product Innovativeness (epistimological both are the same)
 * Technical Newness (much more classifications are possible)
 * Market Newness (much more classifications are possible)
 * Product Development Processes
 * Sequential processes (e.g. Royce's Waterfall Model)
 * Parallel processes (e.g. Concurrent engineering)
 * Iterative processes; Iterative and incremental development (e.g. Boehm's V-Model)
 * Decision focused models (e.g. Cooper's Stage-Gate-Model >>> the current article)
 * Activity oriented models
 * Departmental oriented models (the current article)
 * Network models
 * Product Development Strategies
 * Integrated Product Development
 * Dynamic Product Development (that is Swedish thing)
 * Collaborative Product Development (i.e. cross-company, cross-firm, inter-firm, etc.)
 * Distributed Product Devleopemnt (i.e. geographically dispersed vs. collocated)
 * Rapid Product Development (i.e. focused on prototyping techniques)
 * Virtual Product Development (i.e. using ICT and CAD, etc.)
 * Product Development Mechansims
 * Cross-functional team
 * Customer Involvement
 * Supplier Involvement
 * Project Leader
 * Product Development methods
 * Design for X
 * Research on Product Development
 * rational-planning school (the current article)
 * communication school
 * problem-solving school
 * etc
 * communication school
 * problem-solving school
 * etc

Consequently Technology development have to be included because it is practically often part of an R&D effort.

In Product Development...
 * Exisiting technologies are exploited, or
 * Technologies are developed.
 * There two sets of technologies that may be can be subject for development within a product development project:
 * product technologies (that are inside the product), or
 * process technologies (how product are produced).

other comment
I do not understand why this article is under discussion. I found it very useful to prepare an eminent braintorming session. Lot of people mnightr be tempted to believe to know how to organise a brainstormiong session but when it comes to actuially DO IT, you need some resources.

Can Anybody Tell Me Why This Article Shouldn't Be Moved To "new product development"?

By the way, whomever is writing these marketing articles, they're a promising start. --Robert Merkel 04:09 9 Jun 2003 (UTC) _________________________________


 * That should be 'whoever' (subject) rather than whomever (object) :) 58.107.87.183 11:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

You can change it to lower case if you prefer. The only reason The Caps Are There is that I have written more than 30 articles in 4 days and I am getting sloppy

user:mydogategodshat


 * Moved. --mav 04:55 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Can anyone help? I need some answers to a scenario I have to respond to. A company produces a 'bottle belt' for running and has a good business relationship with it's supplier who have invested over £50,000 plus labour costs on the manufacturing machinery. A rival company in the far east are selling a similar product for 0.50 pence cheaper.

Q: How does the company keep it's place in the market and get a financial return on their initial investment? & how can they incorporate added value or increase brand loyalty?

Any comments would be appriciated

With regard to above 'bottle belt' -I am not sure what this is? Is it a conveyor system? If so then your customers may see extra value added in your product by the service or warantee you provide, maybe your product follows some accedition or you have a quality system which gives a lower reject rate. There may also be some point of difference with regard to styling, colours etc. Your product may be more easily used with other products or intergrated  -hope this helps L

The last paragraph of the article ends halfway thr
Can the original author complete the sentence? Or perhaps someone more cleverer than eye could finish the article. --58.107.87.183 11:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Converted original PNG to SVG
I hope no-one minds that I made and implemented a replacement image for the PNG that was in the article. If there is anything wrong with the image, feel free to modify it, as I have released it to the public domain.

KF6KJG 20:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the product manager and the marketing manager has to work on it togather.If we look for the right marketing tool,best is to work on "Ansoff Matrix".The company has to do the robust marketing for the current product and i think price reduction is not always the right solution.The Product has to be rebranded and the company should try this rebranded product in the existing market,however the company has to make sure that the product features are same as before,it just the branding has to be worked on. The company can certainly save the money if they work on their supply chain policy;which can be either warehouse management or in terms of a computer generated systems which makes the whole supply chain process very simple. If you want to know about this more then reply back and i might be helpful to you.Reena Gour

This Needs to Replace or Significantly Change the Existing New Product Development
Entirely agree with the first submission about a "higher-order" item. The cureent New product development wiki entry, although fine for product that don't ouch hardware or software, missies entirely those components, which are such important components of most significsant product undertakings in the current hi tech world.

Within thhis new "higher order" item, there are then two branches that could be considered: 1. branch to "imbedded systems", which would cover hardware and software systems, or components that include these, such as aerospace, telcomminications, even modern-day automobiles, anything without a processor or logic control. 2. move directly to the exiting New product development article, but provide the many "hooks" required to branch to "imbedded systems.

Either way, the existing New product development article, in its current form applies to the small subset of products that do not include imbedded "intelligence" or control. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.249.251 (talk) 01:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC) John frederick wilson 14:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

i need some examples
new product has three main types 1. innovative products 2. repalcement products 3. imitative products

could you please provide me at least 10 example of each one

thank you

productization ≠ commercialization
see

http://www.s4growth.com/publications/columns/12.cfm

http://raven.utc.edu/cgi-bin/WA.EXE?A2=ind9910A&L=HP3000-L&P=28908

Oxford English Dictionary

http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid39_gci1150907,00.html

http://orgs.unca.edu/nemac/opportunities/chocolatefriday/presentations/presentationresources/jan20renci.pdf

Platform Productisation

Integrated circuit development

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/productization

http://www.tekes.fi/berkeleyserviceinnovation/Presentations/Salmi_pres.pdf

http://www.iccadelval.org/pdfs/ICCANewsletter2005Mar.pdf --Espoo 11:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Article works well as is, with some additions to address previous comments
I agree with a previous comment that this is a perfectly fine article. It's fairly short, so most other comments can be addressed with a short paragraph explaining how it applies to things like eg technology; if the article gets too long, it can be broken into "Main article on..." sections. But it stands well as it is. Seanose (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Including new reference
I have included a The reference Life Cycle Cost Model for Acquisition of Automated Systems. It is a very good journal and has a very interesting probabilistic model to evaluate systems life cycle. Hope you all enjoy it. Dejunior13 (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, perhaps we can wait for some people to locate and read it, and actually cite it in the article before it gets cited as a reference. Until then, let's leave it off the page. SteveLoughran (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)