ideo product development case

5/21/2018 ideo product development case

1/5

Maggie Jones1

IDEO Product Development

Executive Summary

IDEO is a design and innovation consulting firm founded in 1991 with the merger of ID Two,

Matrix, and David Kelly Design whose, founder, David Kelly, became CEO. The resulting company had

the ability to design, develop, and manufacture new products and thus pioneered the design version of

concurrent engineering combining art and engineering to produce products that were both

aesthetically pleasing and technically competent. IDEO established itself as a leader in the field and

consistent recipient of industry awards.

IDEOs culture could be described as eccentric, fun, creative, and innovative. The outside-the-

box working styles and shifting of working groups help to keep thinkers fresh and constantly on their

toes. In the early 1990s, the organization was flat to the point of creating occasional ambiguity for staff

and management, but this was seen as providing fertile conditions for the generation of innovative

thinking and ideas. By the late 1990s, IDEOs culture had become slightly more bureaucratic, to the

chagrin of the executives and founders.

IDEOs innovation process was also unique. Prototyping and brainstorming were both central to

the product development process which followed several phases. Phase 0, the Understand/ Observe

phase sought to develop a comprehensive understanding of the clients business and product feasibility.

The closely related Phase I, Visualize/ Realize focused on choosing a product direction based on

ideas, technologies, and market perceptions and culminated in a rough three-dimensional model of the

product and a general idea of the manufacturing strategy that would be used. During Phase II,

Evaluating/ Refining, the focus shifted to engineering and the team enhanced the design prototypes

through testing functional prototypes. At the end of this phase the team had a functional model as well


2/5

IDEO Product Development Maggie Jones2

as a look alike design model.The team completed product design and verified the feasibility of

manufacturing during Phase III, Implement/ Detailed Engineering.In the final phase, Phase IV,

Implement/ Manufacturing Liaison, the team ensured a smooth product release to manufacturing.

In 1996, IDEO was hired to work on the design of Palm V for 3Com. Senior project leader

Dennis Boyle was chosen to lead development for IDEO with the goal of creating a slim, more

sophisticated, colorful and sleek design that would appeal to customers emotions more than their desire

for cutting edge technology. Phase 0 began at the end of 1996 and the Palm V was released to market in

February 1999.

In 1998, concurrent with the design of the Palm V, Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky from

3Com created a company called Handspring with the intent to create lower-cost, more user-friendly, and

colorful PDAs with expansion ports and the ability to synchronize with personal computers. The

company wanted to launch its first product, the Visor, in late 1999, before the holiday shopping season.

Because of time pressures and cost goals, Handspring wanted to truncate the early phases of IDEOs

development process and rely on market research that had already been conducted for the Palm V.

Dennis Boyle was called in to submit a proposal for the project, although because of the close ties to the

competitor Palm, details of the project would have to be kept relatively secret and he would have to

develop the product nearly twice as quickly as the Palm V.i

Analysis

David Boyle must decidewhether or not to put aside his companys tradition of spending

substantial amounts of time and energy on the design phase of a product in order to rush the Visor

PDA to market. Visor would meet Handsprings requirement of being less expensive than the Palm


3/5


V and would have more potential for expanding functionality, but would lack the trade mark high-

quality and well-researched design that had made IDEOsinnovation legendary in the industry.

In many ways, the priorities of IDEO and Handspring were at odds with each other. IDEOs

focus was on creating innovative, high-quality products that were successful and effective due to

thoughtful, creative design. The rigorous, customer-centered development, design, and refining stages,

as well as the comprehensive use of creativity in the office and in team development underscore IDEOs

commitment to creating the best design possible. Deadlines were not a primary concern, as the company

had a good track record for delivering their world-class designs under tight schedules. Handspring,

despite being consumer-focused and according to Hawkins, wanting to make this work well for the

consumer,felt it unnecessary to engage in market research or time-intensive experimentation in a

fundamental departure from IDEOs process.

IDEO had worked long and hard to create a supportive culture for creativity and innovation, one

that was continually rewarded with recognition for its cutting edge products and design. There was

potential that their reputation could be damaged by taking on a product that has such tight cost and time

constraints. Boyle knew that more development time would translate into a superior product but one

which would not meet one of his clients primary requirements of time to market.

Evaluation of Alternatives

Boyle has three alternatives for approaching the Visor project: he can decline the project, he can

move forward with the project without a thorough Phase 0 and Phase I as requested by Handspring, or

he can request additional time to complete the project using IDEOs established design process.The

advantages of the first option are that IDEO would not risk being associated with a sub-par design.

However, they would also lose the opportunity to spearhead an exciting new project and would lose the


4/5


revenue associated with that project. Additionally, theres the possibility that declining to work on the

project would jeopardize the close relationship between the IDEO and Handspring teams and prevent

future collaboration.

Boyle also has the option of accepting Handsprings timelineand constraints and moving

forward with a modified product development process. The advantages of this alternative are that

they would be satisfying one of their clients primary requirements.Also, the early release may

help position Handspring as a leader in the PDA industry with opportunities for future product

development. The main disadvantage to following this course of action is associating the IDEO

brand with a possibly inferior product. Boyle already noted that that Visor would have to sacrifice

style and settle on an inexpensive plastic housing, and on AAA batteries instead of the

rechargeable lithium-ion battery found in the Palm V.ii

The third alternative would be to ask Handspring management to delay the release so that more

time could be spent indulging in experimentation and the early phases of IDEOs legendary

development process. These processes were designed to encourage creativity and Boyle was confident

that they could create a superior product under these conditions. The disadvantage of this option is

missing the window for optimum market entry which could cut into profits or allow competitors

time to gain control of the market.

Recommendation

I would recommend that Boyle pursue the third option and request additional time to fully

engage in Phases 0 and I of IDEOs product development process.Because the price point for the Visor

is less than half that of the Palm V, the target market and use cases are likely to be significantly different

such that the research conducted as part of the Palm V development may not be relevant. Similarly, the


5/5


Springboard functionality of the proposed device was completely new and the potential uses were

unexplored. New research and customer modeling should be done to understand the opportunities and

pitfalls of this new audience and new technology.

If Handspring is unwilling to delay release until after the holidays, Boyle should nevertheless

accept the project. Although the first release of Visor may not showcase IDEOs trademark superior

design, the relationship with Handspring will provide future opportunities for innovation in the PDA

industry.

Case Update

The Visor was released in September 1999 as desired by Handspring. While the release date was

met, critics noted that the lack of rubber between the buttons and metal contacts made the buttons harder

to press. There were also complaints that the screen cover was not connected, making it easy to lose,

despite its ability to attach onto the back of the Visor exactly as it attached to the front.iii

One cant help

but wonder if these design flaws could have been avoided if IDEO had been able to spend more time on

the early phases of product development.

iThomke, Stefan and Nimgade, Ashok.IDEO Product Development. Boston: Harvard Business School, 16 April 2007.

iiIbid. p. 13.

iiiHandspring Visor Deluxe.The Center for Computing History. n.d. Retrieved 23 October 2011 from

http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/5781/Handspring-Visor-deluxe/.
http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/5781/Handspring-Visor-deluxe/http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/5781/Handspring-Visor-deluxe/http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/5781/Handspring-Visor-deluxe/

ideo product development case

Documents

Transcript of ideo product development case