7. Full Screen and Product Testing
-
Upload
aastha-vyas -
Category
Documents
-
view
17 -
download
0
description
Transcript of 7. Full Screen and Product Testing
Full screen and Product testing
The Full ScreenA step often seen as a necessary
evil, yet very powerful and with long-lasting effects.
Forces pre-technical evaluation, and summarizes what must be done.
Methods range from simple checklists to complex mathematical models.
Most professional firms undertake, last low-risk evaluation
Purposes of the Full Screen
To decide whether technical resources should be devoted to the project.◦ Feasibility of technical accomplishment -- can we do it?◦ Feasibility of commercial accomplishment -- do we want
to do it?To help manage the process.
◦ Recycle and rework concepts◦ Rank order good concepts◦ Track appraisals of failed concepts
To encourage cross-functional communicationAvoid potholes
10-3
Screening Alternatives
Judgment/Managerial OpinionConcept Test followed by Sales
Forecast(if only issue is whether consumers
will like it)
Scoring Models
10-4
A Simple Scoring Model
ValuesFactors: 4 Points 3 Points 2 Points 1 PointDegree of FunNumber of PeopleAffordabilityCapability
MuchOver 5EasilyVery
Some4 to 5ProbablyGood
Little2 to 3MaybeSome
NoneUnder 2NoLittle
Student's Scores: Skiing Boating HikingFun 4 3 4People 4 4 2Affordability 2 4 4Capability 1 4 3 Totals 11 15 13
Answer: Go boating.
Figure 10.2
10-5
Source of Scoring Factor ModelsFigure 10.3
10-6
A Scoring Model for Full Screen
Note: this model only shows a few sample screening factors.
Factor Score (1-5) Weight Weighted Score
Technical Accomplishment:
Technical task difficulty
Research skills required
Rate of technological change
Design superiority assurance
Manufacturing equipment...
Commercial Accomplishment:
Market volatility
Probable market share
Sales force requirements
Competition to be faced
Degree of unmet need...
Figure 10.4
10-7
The Scorers
Scoring Team: Major Functions (marketing, technical, operations, finance)
New Products Managers
Staff Specialists (IT, distribution, procurement, PR, HR)
Problems with Scorers: May be always optimistic/pessimistic
May be "moody" (alternately optimistic and pessimistic)
May always score neutral
May be less reliable or accurate
May be easily swayed by the group
May be erratic
10-8
Industrial Research Institute Scoring ModelTechnical success
factors:
Proprietary Position
Competencies/Skills
Technical Complexity
Access to and Effective Use of External Technology
Manufacturing Capability
Commercial success factors:
Customer/Market Need
Market/Brand Recognition
Channels to MarketCustomer StrengthRaw
Materials/Components Supply
Safety, Health and Environmental Risks
Source: John Davis, Alan Fusfield, Eric Scriven, and Gary Tritle, “Determining a Project’s Probability of Success,” Research-Technology Management, May-June 2001, pp. 51-57.
Figure 10.5
10-9
Alternatives to the Full Screen
Profile SheetEmpirical ModelExpert SystemsAnalytic Hierarchy Process
10-10
A Profile Sheet Figure 10.6
10-11
Criteria Based on the NewProd Studies
Must-Meet Criteria (rated yes/no):◦Strategic alignment◦Existence of market need◦Likelihood of technical feasibility◦Product advantage◦Environmental health and safety
policies◦Return versus risk◦Show stoppers (“killer” variables)
10-12
Criteria Based on the NewProd Studies(continued)
Should-Meet Criteria (rated on scales):◦Strategic (alignment and
importance)◦Product advantage (unique benefits,
meets customer needs, provides value for money)
◦Market attractiveness (size, growth rate)
◦Synergies (marketing, distribution, technical, manufacturing expertise)
◦Technical feasibility (complexity, uncertainty)
◦Risk vs. return (NPV, IRR, ROI, payback)
10-13
Products 1, 2, 3, and 4
Goal: Select Best NPD Project
Market Fit Tech. Fit Dollar Risk Uncertainty
Product Line
Channel
Logistics
Tim ing
Price
Sal es Force
Desi gn
Materials
Suppl y
Mfg. Tech.
Mfg. Tim ing
DifferentialAdvantage
Payof fs
Losses
Unmit igated
Mi tigated
Product Line
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)Figure 10.9
10-14
15
PRODUCT TESTINGProvides a critical measures of a new
product's market potentialExtremely important in FMCG Cos.Product testing for four purposes
◦ Against competition: which of the alternatives offered is preferred relative to competition
◦ Product improvement: whether an improved formula could replace the current product
◦ Cost saving: whether a less expensive product could replace the current one
◦ Concept fit: whether the product variant resembles the selling message
16
Product testing procedures◦ Blind Vs Branded test - a key issue◦ Blind test - Reactions to "pure" product◦ No brand name as yet◦ Branded test - Difficult to conceal◦ Measurement of effects of brand etc.
Four basic principles◦ Representative of the product that will be in
the market ultimately◦ Name, packaging should be similar ◦ If different formulas are used, size, shape,
colour to be identical◦ Avoid labels that bias (e.g. sequence of
letters etc.)
17
Procedures for product testsMonadic - designs where a consumer
evaluates one product, having no other product for comparison
Comparison - Consumer rates 2 or more products
Sequential monadic - rates one product and then is given a second product (rated) independently then compared
Protomonadic - rates one product, is given a second product and compares both
Paired comparison - directly compares two products
18
Repeat-paired comparison - consumer is given two or more sets of products to compare against each other at two different points of time
Round robin - tests where a series of products is tested against each other
Triangle designs - is given 2 samples of one product and one sample of another to identify the one that differs
Duo-trio - a standard product is given and asked to determine which of the other (two) products are similar
Difference - asked to determine if one product is different from the other
19
In - home testing Vs Central location
(expensive) 1. Unrealistic2. Opinions of other
family members ignoredPeriodicity - usually a week,
depends on the product, purchase cycle
Sales wave extended product test consumers encouraged to buy at intervals coinciding with normal product cycle
20
Advantages: Identification of novelty product wear outs Identification of problems Market share prediction Potential segments
Monadic Vs Paired test Monadic is realistic. Typically a consumer uses
a product at a time and decides Monadic tests are difficult to interpret. (e.g.
80% say "excellent") Comparison tests concentrate on product
differences In certain situations involving sensory
evaluations, comparison tests are impractical.
21
Questions asked - Preference, overall rating attribute rating, likes-dislikes, uniqueness, usage pattern etc.
Sampling ◦ non-probability◦ 100-200 for in-home◦ CLT around 20◦ Cost is a factor
Action standards◦ preference that is statistically significant ◦ Where claims of superiority are made
should have significant preference. Conventions may vary with MR agencies
22
Questions asked - Preference, overall rating attribute rating, likes-dislikes, uniqueness, usage pattern etc.
Sampling ◦ non-probability◦ 100-200 for in-home◦ CLT around 20◦ Cost is a factor
Action standards◦ preference that is statistically significant ◦ Where claims of superiority are made
should have significant preference. Conventions may vary with MR agencies
Product testing in industrial marketsBuyers cannot decide on the
merits and demerits of a new product quickly
Only a few product testers, distinct from/in contrast to from potential buyers
Testers need to adapt products to suit their needs
Buyers have expertise in the product
Purposes of beta testTo check product functioning in situTo confirm selection of features, both core
and optionalTo test accuracy and usefulness of
support materialTo assess level of training requiredTo evaluate perceived strengths and
weaknesses compared to those of competitors
To promote sales with site chosenTo use site as a demo for product benefits
25
A few important aspectsA systems approach needed : Methods
and procedures of product testing should constitute a standardized system for like products
Normative databases need to be built over time for better interpretation
Same research company Real environment testsRelevant variables from consumers'
perspective (particularly while using qualitative methods)
Conservative action while dealing with established products