Introduction
New product development is said to be the lifeblood of a company. This is especially true
today than ever before in history. Today's economic environment doesn't lend itself well
to trying to sell more of the same (Hill, 2009). Companies that hope to exist must now
evolve new products at an increasing rate to enhance their competitive posture or even to
survive. There are no sacred niches that can be harvested for long periods of time
(Annachino, 2003: xvii). Consumers demand innovation even more in the toughest of
time. New product innovation or development thus has the potential to mitigate economic
downturns and position manufacturers for the upswing with increased market share and an
innovative product line. It also gives distributors a viable, cost-saving product to pass on
to end-users (Hill, 2009). As a result, this study aims to investigate the new product
development process to understand how new products are created in a methodological
manner to help companies improve its performance in the current business environment.
An interesting and controversial case is chosen for this study, namely the Segway case.
Through dissecting the new product development process of Segway, problems are
identified and recommendations on how management can get involved in the production
process are also provided. This study is immensely useful because of the phenomenal
nature of how the idea of Segway came about and how it was created. From analyzing
Segway, many lessons can be learnt and applied to new product development in future.
Problem
The failure of Segway, as a new product, to live up to its expectations in terms of sales in
units and revenue, profit level, and public perception and acceptance after its launch
presents the main problem for this study. The solutions are believed to stem from
improvements and recommendations that can be made from the new product development
process of Segway, which will be subsequently analysed. Throughout the study,
secondary data is mostly utilized. Hence this poses a limitation to the objectivity and
timeliness of the study due to the fact that most information sources are written by non-
Segway personnel and ranging from 2001 to date.
1 | P a g e
Theory
The importance of new product development (NPD) has grown dramatically over the last
few decades, and is now the dominant driver of competition in many industries. In
industries such as automobiles, biotechnology, consumer and industrial electronics,
computer software and pharmaceuticals, companies often depend on products introduced
within the last five years for more than 50 percent of their annual sales. However, new
product failure rates are still very high. Many R&D projects never result in a commercial
product, and between 33 and 60% of all new products that reach the market place fail to
generate an economic return (Blagoevski-Trazof, 2007: 195).
In order to recoup investment in NPD and make an economic return in an environment
characterized by rapid product obsolescence and market fragmentation, a company’s new
product must meet the following two basic objectives: 1) minimize time-to-market and 2)
maximize the fit between customer requirements and product characteristics (Blagoevski-
Trazof, 2007: 197).
Minimizing time-to-market is necessary for several reasons. A company that is slow to
market with a particular product or technology is unlikely to fully amortize the costs of
development before that product or technology generation becomes obsolete. Companies
with compressed NPD cycle time are more likely to be the first to introduce products that
embody new technologies. As such, they are better positioned to capture the advantages
of a leader of a market segment. These companies can build brand loyalty, attract clients
in a number of stages of new product acceptance way before the competitors, use scarce
assets, and create switching costs that tie consumers to the company. In many industries,
issues of dominant design are paramount. When a new technology is being introduced in
the market competing products and technologies are often based on different standards.
Different companies will promote different technological standards, and the company that
establishes its particular design as the dominant standard can expect enormous financial
rewards, while those that fail may be locked out (Blagoevski-Trazof, 2007: 198).
For a new product to achieve significant and rapid market penetration, it must match such
customer requirements as new features, superior quality and attractive pricing. Despite the
obvious importance of this imperative, numerous studies have documented the lack of fit
2 | P a g e
between new product attributes and customer requirements. This is the major cause of
declines in a new product sales and adoption (Blagoevski-Trazof, 2007: 198).
According to Crawford and Benedetto (2009: 24), the new product development process
consists of five stages:
Phase 1: Opportunity identification and selection
This phase entails generating new products opportunities as spinouts of the ongoing
business operation, new products suggestions, changes in marketing plan, resource
changes, and new needs/wants in the market place. Research, evaluation, validation and
ranking of these opportunities are needed. Major ones should be given a preliminary
strategic statement to guide further work on them.
Phase 2: Concept generation
A high potential or urgent opportunity is selected and customer involvement begins.
Available new product concepts that fit the opportunity are collected and new ones are
generated as well.
Phase 3: Concept evaluation
New products concepts are evaluated on technical, marketing and financial criteria. The
best two or three are chosen from ranking.
Phase 4: Development
In terms of technical tasks, the full development process and its deliverables are specified
including designing prototypes, testing and validating prototypes, scaling up production
and market testing. In terms of marketing tasks, preparation for strategy, tactics, launch
details for marketing plan, business plan and product augmentation are needed.
Phase 5: Launch
Commercialization of the development is executed by beginning distribution and sale of
the new product. The launch programme must also be managed to achieve the goals and
objectives set in the product innovation charter (PIC).
Typically, R&D and marketing departments provide input into the opportunity
identification and concept generation stages; R&D takes the lead in concept design, and
3 | P a g e
manufacturing takes the lead in development. According to critics, one problem with such
system emerges at the concept design stage, when R&D engineers fail to communicate
directly with manufacturing engineers. As a result, development proceeds without
manufacturing requirements in mind. A sequential process has no early warning system to
indicate that planned features are not manufacturable (Blagoevski-Trazof, 2007: 201).To
rectify this problem and compress NPD time, a company should use a partly parallel
process. The development, for example, should start long before concept evaluation is
finalized, thereby establishing closer coordination between these different stages and
minimizing the chances that R&D will design products difficult or costly to manufacture.
This should shorten the NPD cycle time (Blagoevski-Trazof, 2007: 202) to save cost and
ensure the products are created as intended.
Presentation of the firm
Segway Inc., a US-based international company, is named after its flagship product, the
Segway Personal Transporter (PT), the first self-balancing transportation device in the world.
The company was founded by Dean Kamen in 1999 with the vision to develop highly-
efficient, zero-emission transportation solutions using “dynamic stabilization” technology.
Segway went on sale for the first time to the public on Amazon.com in 2002. As of 2007,
Segway had a worldwide distribution presence in 60 countries, including South Africa. As of
2008, over 1,000 police and security agencies are using Segway PT’s in their patrolling
operations worldwide (Segway 1, 2009).
Current revenue figures for Segway is unavailable, however, in 2003, the company’s revenue
was about US $25 million and the sales volume was 6,000 units, falling short of the 50,000 to
100,000 expected unit sales from management (Amstrong, 2006). In September 2006, the
company had to recall 23,500 units sold to date due to a software flaw that could cause the
scooters’ wheels to instantly reverse direction and potentially injure riders (CIO, 2006). More
recently, according to CEO Jim Norrod, sales have risen to an all-time high in 2008 due to the
rising fuel cost prompting corporate consumers such as universities, police force, security
companies, and large retailers to switch from cars and scooters to Segway to save on fuel. Mr.
Norrod said he expected sales of the second quarter of 2008 to jump 50% from a year earlier,
versus a 25% year-over-year increase in the first quarter (The Wall Street Journal, 2008).
4 | P a g e
Empirical study
Opportunity identification and Selection
The concept of Segway as a human transporter came to Dean Kamen when he saw a
special opportunity to create a new discovery to replace the car and solve the problem of
congestion, air pollution and dependency on fuel in urban living. "Cars are great for going
long distances," Kamen said, "but it makes no sense at all for people in cities to use a
4,000-lb. piece of metal to haul their 150-lb. bodies around town." In the future he
envisions, cars will be banished from urban centers to make room for millions of
"empowered pedestrians" (Heilemann, 2001: 1). That led him and his company to focus
on creating devices that took up a minimal amount of space, were extremely
maneuverable and could operate on pedestrian sidewalks and pathways (Segway 1, 2009).
One of the resources that was considered was the IBOT wheelchair, a six-wheel machine
that goes up and down curbs, cruises effortlessly through sand or gravel, and even climbs
stairs to help improve mobility for the disabled. More amazing still, the IBOT features
something called standing mode, in which it rises up on its wheels and lifts its occupant to
eye level while maintaining balance with such stability that it can't be knocked over even
by a violent shove. While working on this invention, it dawned on Kamen that it was
possible to put a human being into the same system where the machine acts as an
extension of your body. Exactly how the Segway achieves this effect isn't easy to explain,
but Kamen offers one: "When you walk, you're really in what's called a controlled fall.
You off-balance yourself, putting one foot in front of the other and falling onto them over
and over again. In the same way, when you use a Segway, there's a gyroscope that acts
like your inner ear, a computer that acts like your brain, motors that act like your muscles,
wheels that act like your feet. Suddenly, you feel like you have on a pair of magic
sneakers, and instead of falling forward, you go sailing across the room." (Heilemann,
2001: 2)
Concept Generation
To generate the concept for Segway, the company must identify the consumer problems
and try to solve them.
5 | P a g e
The first problem is of Segway not being taken seriously by consumers who regard this
invention as simply a high-end toy, a jet ski on wheels for the riches with money to
splurge on. Thus the team decides to concentrate at first on major corporations,
universities and government agencies--large, solid, established institutions--rather than
dive straight into the consumer marketplace (Heilemann, 2001: 3).
The second problem is that consumers need a vehicle that does not take up space like a car
to in order to reduce congestion. Thus Segway has to be designed to occupy minimal
space, slightly larger than a person, to solve this problem. Also, Segway needs to be small
enough to get around crowded warehouses where tight corridors make it difficult to use
bulkier vehicles or crowed pedestrian areas such as airports or amusement parks where
larger vehicles are not allowed in. Additionally, consumers want to minimize the hassle in
parking large vehicles such as cars in crowed public places, hence Segway must be light
weight and small so that consumers can carry with them inside the destination (Harris,
2008: 3).
The third problem is that consumers being environmentally conscious want a vehicle that
does not consume fuel like the bicycle. Also, by not consuming gasoline, consumers can
save on additional expenses caused by the rising fuel costs. Thus Segway must be
designed not to run on fuel, but rather on electricity (Harris, 2008: 3).
The last problem is that of safety whereby traffic regulators question the level of safety of
this new vehicle in terms of its accident probability, driver protection measures, and
chances of vehicle breakdown and collision. Thus Segway must be equipped with three
computerized keys that set speed and performance limits to ensure safety on pedestrian
pavements (Heilemann, 2001: 4).
Concept Evaluation
In order to evaluate the concept, a scoring model for full screen of the Segway concept
must be created.
Category Factor Scale Score
Weight (1-5)
Weighted score
Technical accomplishment
Technical task difficulty 1: difficult 5: easy
4 4 16
Research skills required 1: none 5 3 15
6 | P a g e
5: perfect fitDevelopment skills required
1: none5: perfect fit
4 2 8
Technical equipment/processes
1: none5: have them
5 3 15
Rate of technological change
1: high5: stable
5 2 10
Designing superiority assurance
1: none5: high
5 2 10
Security of design 1: none5: have patent
5 2 10
Technical services required 1: none5: have it all
2 3 6
Manufacturing equipment/processes
1: none5: have them
3 5 15
Vendor cooperation 1: none5: have them
2 3 6
Likelihood of competitive cost
1: above competition5: 20% less
1 2 2
Likelihood of quality product
1: below current levels 5: leadership
5 5 25
Likelihood speed of to market
1: 2 years or more5: under 6 months
1 5 5
Team people available 1: none5: have them
3 3 9
Dollar investments required
1: over 20 million5: under 1 million
1 2 2
Legal issues 1: major5: minor
2 3 6
Total 160Commercial accomplishment
Market volatility 1: high5: stable
2 4 8
Probable market share 1: low5: high
5 4 20
Probable product life 1: short5: long
4 2 8
Sales force requirements 1: no experience5: very familiar
1 4 4
Promotion requirements 1: no experience5: very familiar
2 4 8
Target customer 1: strangers 2 3 6
7 | P a g e
5: closeDistributors 1: no
relationship5: current/strong
4 4 16
Retailers 1: no relationship5: current/strong
2 4 8
Importance of task to user 1: trivial 5: critical
5 3 15
Degree of unmet need 1: none5: totally
5 4 20
Likelihood of filling need 1: low5: high
5 3 15
Competition to be faced 1: tough5: weak
4 3 12
Environmental effects 1: negative5: positive
5 3 15
Global applications 1: none5: fits global
5 3 15
Probable profit 1: low5: high
2 4 8
Total 178
From the full screen, it is understood that the Segway concept should be developed
because of its high scores in potential technical accomplishment and commercial
accomplishment.
The sales forecast method done by Segway is unavailable; however, according to the
founder Dean Kamen, before selling a single Segway, he predicted that his company
would sell 10,000 units per week, or 50,000 units a year (Rivlin, 2003).
Development
An important part of concept development is design. Segway’s design centers mostly on
technology as the company claims that it develops systems, not individual components
(Segway 2, 2009). The technology is all designed for ease of manufacture, differentiation,
meeting customer needs, and the environment. The different design functions that Segway
has include:
8 | P a g e
Dynamic stabilization
That's fancy speak for the technology that enables balancing. It's proprietary and full of
benefits such as incredible maneuverability (true zero turning radius), a small footprint
and providing a fantastically unique riding experience (Segway 2, 2009).
Electric propulsion
Besides being clean and extremely efficient, electric propulsion enables fine adjustments
to be made to each wheel (for turning and smoothing out the ride), and a precise,
software-based approach to traction control and braking (Segway 2, 2009).
Smart battery management
Segway is one of the world's largest customers of large format batteries, and was at the
forefront of the development of Lithium Ion batteries for transportation. Advanced
sensing is applied to allow for more efficient energy use that leads to a longer battery life.
Also, Segway adds in regenerative braking capability (being able to recharge while
decelerating) through smart battery technology (Segway 2, 2009).
Intuitive user interfaces
Segway's approach to user control is that of minimalism and a natural connection between
man and machine. The innovative sensing technologies allow for more than traditional
controls that haven't changed dramatically since the introduction of the automatic
transmission (Segway 2, 2009).
Digital dashboard
Speed, battery life, and other connectivity information are all conveyed over a secure
wireless connection to a handheld device that can be mounted on the dash (Segway 2,
2009).
Launch
In 2000, for almost a full year before it was revealed to the public, Segway was one of the
most eagerly anticipated pieces of new technology in history. Shrouded in secrecy, known
only by the codenames 'Ginger' or 'IT', the device was the subject of unprecedented
9 | P a g e
speculation about what it might be, or do (Telegraph, 2008). Statements from business
and technical luminaries who were among the privileged few to have actually seen Ginger
fuelled wildly imaginative conjecture about a technological miracle from the pages of
science fiction. It was a hydrogen-powered hovercraft; a magnetic anti-gravity device; a
time-travel machine; a mind-reading robot (Telegraph, 2008). Thus when Segway was
revealed to the US, it was an anti-climax. Coupled with the high price, Segway never got
a chance with consumers afterwards.
'I think that the hype it got was going to doom it... nothing in the world could ever meet
the expectations that people had for it.” said Dean Kamen in defending the subsequent
under performance of Segway (Telegraph, 2008).
Kamen later described the information leak about Segway as 'the single worst thing that
has ever happened to me in business'. Marketing studies conducted for Segway before the
launch estimated that the device would sell 31 million units during its first 10 to 15 years;
six years later, just 23,500 machines had been sold worldwide (Telegraph, 2008).
Hence it can be concluded that Segway had made a mistake in adopting a miscalculated
pre-launch marketing strategy. It did not control the hype built by external parties and did
not have any contingency plan after the launch to change public perceptions. Also,
product failures causing the recall of units sold (CIO, 2006) did not speak well for
Segway’s image even after its launch. The solution of an upgrade campaign whereby
customers can bring their Segways to dealers to get their software updated was useful but
insufficient to reverse public opinions (Saturley, 2006).
The channel of distribution that Segway chose for its launch proved to be a failure too
because by distributing through Amazon.com, the consumers do not get a full experience
of riding a Segway. Moreover, the high cost of shipping forced Segway to rethink its
points of sale to dealership rather than Internet retail (Saturley, 2006).
Analysis
From the empirical study, it can be seen that Segway succeeded in many of its new
product development phases. Analysis of each phase is provided as follows.
10 | P a g e
Phase 1: Opportunity identification and selection
Segway’s founder, Dean Kamen, has been sharp in managing to spin out an opportunity
for a human transporter using the ongoing business operation that he was working on. The
vision he had for a new vehicle that is capable of improving the urban lifestyle by
reducing congestion, pollution and dependence on fuel also helped him to strengthen this
opportunity and increase its credibility in selling the idea. Thus this phase has been
achieved successfully.
Phase 2: Concept generation
In terms of identifying potential problems consumers might face and solving them,
Segway only succeed in the problem of making the vehicle small and fuel independent. It
is still found wanting in the price aspect, as Segway is still too expensive for an
alternative to a car. Also, the safety aspect is significantly lacking because of the many
software glitches causing the recall and its inability to convince authorities of its safety
measures. Thus Segway has performed poorly in this phase.
Phase 3: Concept evaluation
In this phase, the full screen has been useful in analyzing the potential of Segway in the
marketplace. However, when it comes to the sales forecast, it is proven to be too high. It
is not possible to conclude which forecasting method had been used. However, the
company should have been much more thorough and modest in forecasting the demand
for Segway by using appropriate forecasting methods as this is a brand new product type
that had never been introduced before. This phase is therefore poorly executed.
Phase 4: Development
With regards to the technical tasks, Segway has been extremely impressive in its
designing process. Its technologies serve the objectives of the vehicle well and in an
advanced manner. Thus this phase has been a success.
Phase 5: Launch
Segway did not manage its launch properly, reflected by the poorly controlled pre-launch
hype in the media leading to subsequent anti-climax among the public, the wrong choice
of distribution channel to sell the product, and its insufficient advertising during its critical
11 | P a g e
first few years. This phase has brought Segway from the most anticipated idea a few years
back to the laughing stock of the technology community.
Conclusion
From the analysis, a few recommendations are provided on how the company
management can get more involved in the new product development process of Segway.
In terms of concept generation, Segway should have identified more customer problems
and seriously thought about how to address them. The problems of pricing should have
been solved by offering better financing options to purchase the vehicle such as leasing
and installments. Also, better safety measure and testing should have been mandated by
the management team to ensure the product was ready for the market to avoid recall and
public embarrassment. More market research and consumer research would certainly help
the management team to understand the concept more and how to succeed.
With regards to concept evaluation, better forecasting methods should have been used to
realistically predicting the potential sales of Segway in its initial years. The management
team was perhaps over optimistic about the potential sales because of the great hype built
in the media before the launch. However, many other factors must be considered in order
to have an accurate forecast such as consumer perception, willingness to buy, level of
disposable income available, legal restrictions, etc. Thus better market research should
have been executed to ensure the forecast was not far off from reality and also to reduce
waste from over production.
Lastly, in terms of launch, the management needed to be much more involved through
various channels. The secrecy about the invention should not have been kept for such a
long time because the media would blow it out of proportion and shape the public
expectation to an almost insurmountable level. Instead partial preview of the new Segway
should have been offered to the public in several stages to control the excitement and also
to educate the public on what Segway was all about. Much more aggressive marketing in
terms of advertising and promotions should have been enforced by the management team
to prepare for the launch. Also, the choice of distribution channel should have been better
chosen through market research, i.e. asking consumers where they would want to see and
buy Segway, how they perceive Segway as a vehicle, etc. Overall, the management team
12 | P a g e
should have more diverse in expertise and professional background, including sales,
operations, marketing, finance, etc., not just engineering and technology. This surely
would have helped in managing the launch of Segway better.
In conclusion, this study has achieved its objective of investigating the new product
development process of Segway and drawing lessons for the management team on how to
improve on its shortfalls. Throughout the study, many secondary data sources were used
as the main source of information. This poses a limitation for the credibility of the study,
as no primary data source from the company itself was available. However, interesting
and useful insights have been obtained from the research to help the management team
improve the performance of Segway moving forward. Specifically given the recent
economic downturn, consumers will be much more cautious in transportation choices as
their amount of disposable income decreases. Hence Segway needs to position itself much
more aggressively as a cost saving, environmentally friendly and convenient alternative to
cars and bicycles in order to attract new customers. More importantly, better financing
options for aspiring consumers must be provided and the number of points of sale must
increase in order to reach the consumers better to push sales and profits.
13 | P a g e
References
Amstrong, D. (2006) Segway: A bright idea but business model wobbles. Available at
http://faculty.msb.edu/homak/homahelpsite/webhelp/Segway_-
_Bright_idea,_Wobbly_Idea_WSJ_2-12-04.htm (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
Annacchino, M.A. (2003) New Product Development: from initial idea to product
management. Elsevier: USA.
Blagoevski-Trazof, A. (2007) Managing New Product Development Process. Available at
http://www.bea.org.mk/Upload/Content/Documents/Report%202007%20MANAGING
%20NEW%20PRODUCT%20DEVELOPMENT%20PROCESS.pdf (Accessed on 10
October 2009)
CIO. (2006) Segway recalls all 23,500 scooters sold to date. Available at
http://www.cio.com/article/24842/Segway_Recalls_All_23_500_Scooters_Sold_to_Date?
taxonomyId=1461 (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
Crawford, M. and Benedetto, A.D. (2009) New Products Management. 9th edition. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Harris, T. (2008) How Segways work. Available at
http://science.howstuffworks.com/ginger2.htm (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
Heilemann, J. (2001) Reinventing the wheel. Available at
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,186660,00.html (Accessed on 10
October 2009)
Hill, J. (2009) Slow economy? Innovate with new products. Available at
http://www.inddist.com/article/316742-
Slow_economy_Innovate_with_new_products.php (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
Rivlin, G. (2003) Segway’s breakdown. Available at
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.03/segway.html (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
14 | P a g e
Saturley, M. (2006) Can Segway fulfill its promise? Available at
http://www.allbusiness.com/sales/customer-service/4058281-1.html (Accessed on 10
October 2009)
Segway 1. (2009) Company Milestones. Available at http://www.segway.com/about-
segway/segway-milestones.php (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
Segway 2. (2009) Segway Technology and Advanced Development. Available at
http://www.segway.com/about-segway/segway-technology.php (Accessed on 10 October
2009)
Telegraph. (2008) Dean Kamen: part man, part machine. Available at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3353906/Dean-Kamen-part-man-part-
machine.html (Accessed on 10 October 2009)
The Wall Street Journal. (2008). Segway slides as gasoline jumps. Available at
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121357738002676071.html (Accessed on 10 October
2009)
15 | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction........................................................................................................................1
Problem................................................................................................................................1
Theory..................................................................................................................................2
Presentation of the firm.....................................................................................................4
Empirical study...................................................................................................................5
Opportunity identification and Selection..........................................................................5
Concept Generation..........................................................................................................5
Concept Evaluation...........................................................................................................6
Development.....................................................................................................................8
Launch...............................................................................................................................9
Analysis..............................................................................................................................10
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................12
References..........................................................................................................................14
16 | P a g e
Top Related