PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES

Food & Ingredients	\|	Educ. Serv.	\|	Glossary	\|	References	\|	Images	FAQ

Contact Us

There continues to be a change in the processes of product development. This may be due to a wide variety of reasons. One which may be influencial due to a variety of reasons is simply the change in business ownership, i.e. business mergers, acquisitions and diversiture. This generally defaults to a review of a companies organization. It may bring new ideas and ways of doing tasks. Employees may feel an increased imperative to be successful at the development tasks. In many instances, the company has a clearly defined expenditure/capital gains task that tells the developer of new products whether to make remakes, do a me to, line extensions, or a whole new creative product. In reviewing the various processes of new product development, increasingly the importance of the corporate objectives, strategies and operating plans are an integral part of the plan. To some extent this is reviewed by Meyer (1984) where he placed it as the first of eleven stages of successful new product development.

What are the five distinct phases or life cycles to a product. They are: the introductory period, heavily supported by promotions, in-store demonstrations, and couponing; 1 strong growth period, when first-time consumers are repeat-buying and more new consumers are being attracted. There is positive growth in sales. Growth continues as new markets are opened, but promotino and expansion are costly; a beginning decline in the growth of the sales volume. Growth is accelerating negatively; a period of stability, better described as a no-growth period of a stagnating market. However, product development is increasing important to a food company as the product life cycle is shorter. The core of the faster approach is as follows:

Commencing the time-critical new product development activity with optimized specifications that are agreed to by a multifunctional (interdepartmental) team and then cast in concrete.

Separation of feasibility projects and maintenance efforts, both of which can be very important to new product development and both of which often use many of the same human and physical resources, from the time-critical new product developmental activity itself.

Utilizing short, very fast phases, each of which has specific requirements and a clear end point.

Adopting an organizational structure to foster multifunctional teamwork and concentrating your corporation's limited resources on a manageable number of promising new product development efforts.

Using a variety of tools and techniques, such as time efficiency, appropriate project management techniques, installation of productivity enhancements, schedule focus, incentives, and other adaptive methods, to make the entire process as fast as possible.

Rosenau, 1990: p. ix

Rosenau (1990) says the evidence for this shortened life cycle is the actions taken by practitioners; the judgments of knowledgeable preople and research data. The reason for this is likely due to changes in technology and communication.

Rapid development of new technology, agressive marketing, and the willingness of buyers to try new products.

The rapid rate of technological change, plus the easy availability of credit and the power of mass communications and advertising.

The increasing pace of technological innovations and the rapid rate of new product introduction.

The ever-increasing pace of technological change means these "windows [of opportunity]" are opening and closing at a faster rate. Not getting an early jump can mean missing an opportunity.

Technology has forced the pace of change and sharply cut the effective life-times of all kinds of products.

Rosenau, 1990: p. 60

It is important to define the successful processes involved in product development. A defined process should increase the quality and speed of the product development effort and cut down on costs. Also, importantly, a process will permit one to identify potential bottle necks. Just what is the process?

Many authors continue to point to factors that will improve the opportunity for new product success. However, the concept of the actual successful product becomes more difficult to define in specific terms. It is certainly true that the development of a new product is complex and usually requires a team effort. However, the composition and interaction of the team varies considerably within an organization. That appears to be the crux of the difficulty in devising a specific model for all to use in the development of new food products. Important extraneous factors beyond the actual development of a food must be included in the model. This can be somewhat seen in the model reported by Meyer (1984). It includes the first step to be "Develop clear corporate objectives". Poolton and Barclay (1998) indicates the following general key factors in successful product development:

good internal and external communication

innovation as a corporate-wide activity

high quality management and management style

key individuals

good planning and control

efficient development work

marketing and user needs

after-sales service and user education

A review of processes reported for new product development would possibly lead to the following overall scheme for new food product development. Even if a process for new product development is selected and followed, there is still a the potential to have problems with manufacturing. Solving these problems can be achieved by using in the manufacturing process modelling to improve the product development process so as to improve product robustness and esure the correct specifications of materials and in-process controls. Joglekar (1999) discusses the mathematical modelling for this.

Poolton and Barclay (1998) has an excellent summary of the conceptional history of product development. From the discussion, it appears that success in product development is currently an amalogation of the 1950s approach of implementing technological or processing changes from a proactive R&D process to the 1960s and 1970s market driven new product development. This is a dual drive model which is based on core competencies (Katz, 1998) within the industry.

Product development is approached through a process of both recipe development and through an adaptation of a "brand" name recipe . The techniques of product development from both viewpoints is important. Swientek (1997Mid-April) indicates that their product development does not exist in a vacuum. They have three principles of: defend, extend and build. That is product development includes defending a product through brand protection, food safety, scientific and regulatory affairs, environmental management and consumer relations. James R. Behnke (senior vice president technology of Pillsbury) indicates that the "extend" area takes the solid coare and extend out from these core products. From this they can build on the product.

Food Engineering recently indicated the importance of putting together fundamental consumer research, consumer yield analysis and product performance research to make a successful product. Consumer research is a expertise. >Haun Food Design, Inc. shows by their listing of help in food product development. As their index indicates, development of a product to the point at which it is actually sold in the market place requires information on safety, quality control, marketing and a variety of other specialities. How does one maximize each aspect to get the product one wants.
There are many different strategies which have been purported to represent the pathway to a successful product. Some are relative simple such as that put forth by Harry Lawless (Anonymous, 1994) or Cornell. He essentially said that success in product development is simply an integration and overlap of fundamental consumer research, consumer yield analysis and product performance research. However, the proof of success is in the details of these three points. Dr. Lawless indicates that the use of the different aspects must be adjusted for each specific application.

Pillsbury (Swientek, 1997Mid-April) feels that their success rate for products is the result of cross-functional business teams, innovation and diversity. They put different teams together and all work to solve a problem. The discussion of copartnering includes this collaboration of different parts of a company as well with other divisions and companies.

Although there are many other approaches to food product development; however, this particular course will explore the process discussed by Meyer and by Pedi and Moesta(1993) will be initially discussed. Essentially, Kirk (1988) has reported that companies have observed that innovation has become the thrust for success. Those that successfully compete with new products, they have learned four principles

Innovation is technology.
Innovation and bureaucracy don't mix.
Successful innovators regard their customers and distributors as welcome partners.
Creativity is highly valued and effectively promoted in creative companies.

He did feel that technical implmementation was the key for evaluation and development of products.

Each of the processes start out with the idea. Generating ideas is difficult. At a recent workshop, Ann Price discussed processes to generate ideas.

Once an idea is generated, likely ingredients, packaging and even food engineering information and products will be needed to accessed to obtain optimum product quality. Anymore, access to suppliers is an important key to rapid product development. These supplies may have actually functional property information and may have information on market place.

Updated: Friday, July 24, 2009.

OSU Disclaimer.