Technology Stage Gate - Stevens Institute of Technology · 3 Technology Stage Gate...

33
Technology Stage Gate Peter A. Koen, Ph.D. School of Technology Management Stevens Institute of Technology

Transcript of Technology Stage Gate - Stevens Institute of Technology · 3 Technology Stage Gate...

Technology Stage Gate

Peter A. Koen, Ph.D.School of Technology ManagementStevens Institute of Technology

2

Outline

Technology Stage GateOutcomeWhat Technology Stage Gate Can and Can’tAccomplishPrinciples behind Technology Stage GateComparison with Traditional Stage Gate

What is it?

Critical Success Factors

3

Technology Stage Gate Outcomes

Technology planning and review process highlightsbusiness, process and investment issues very early in theproject

Technology goals are well understood and aligned withbusiness strategy

Business leadership engaged and supportiveTechnology development projects linked to the businessplansTechnologies leveraged across platforms and products

Assist Company in becoming a world classtechnology developer

An effective technology development process withmanagement overview and scientific rigor which

creates and environment of fast failures.

4

Technology Stage Gate Outcomes

Risks and outcomes are reevaluated stage-by-stage

Creates collaborative alignment between technical andbusiness communities

Reduces technology (and product) development cycletime

Assist company in becoming a world classtechnology developer

An effective technology development process withmanagement overview and scientific rigor which

creates an environment of fast failures.

5

What Technology Stage Gate Can’t Do

New Breakthrough ProjectsTechnology Stage Gate is an enabler for

high risk technology projects

New Product DevelopmentStage

Commercialization

Front End ofInnovation

Traditional Stage Gate

Idea Selection Processfor Incremental Products

Platform Strategies LeveragingExisting Customer Value Chain

Highly Innovative and ProfitablePlatform Strategies Leveraging

Core Competencies/ Capabilities(Market Attack Teams)

Size of Bubbleis related to

Profit Potential

Technology Stage Gate

6

Technology Stage Gate Principles

Early Senior Business and TechnologyManagement Involvement

Early Up-Front Planning

Voice of the Customer

Empowered Communicating Teams

Scientific Rigor and Peer Review

7

Early Senior Management Involvement

KnowledgeAcquisition

ConceptInvestigation

TechnologyExperiments Protocept Technology

Transfer

Actual ManagementActivity in Old Paradigm

Activity Phases

Mea

sure

of

Att

enti

on o

r In

flu

ence

Low

High

Time

Ability to influenceOutcome

8

Early Up-front Planning

9

Voice of the Customer

EthnographyFocus Groups

10

Empowered Communicating Teams

11

Scientific Rigor and Peer Review

12

Traditional Stage Gate

Repeatable ProcessLeverage from past experiences

Predictable proceduresCan estimate cycle time

Structure and discipline are criticalCreativity is less important

Project management skills arerequired

Product Development StageGates are “transparent”

13

Technology Stage Gate

Difficult to capture and leverage pastexperiences for future efforts

Cycle time difficult to estimateRange of experimental outcomes is vast

Detailed overall project plan is impracticalGates are opaque

Do not know how many gatesCan’t schedule invention

Difficult to determine when technology isready for product development

Can be very subjectiveToo much structure can inhibit creativityProject leaders need ability to manageuncertainty while focusing on projectgoals

Technology Stage Gates are“opaque”

TRTR00

TRTR11

TRTRN-1N-1

TRTRNN

14

Outline

Stage GateObjectiveWhat Technology Stage Gate Can and Can’tAccomplishPrinciples behind Stage GateComparison with Traditional Stage Gate

What is it?

Critical Success Factors

Review ProcessTechnology Review CommitteeCharterStructured MethodologyProcess OwnerDesign TeamCore Team

15

Technology Stage Gate

Review Process

PAC Chair

Mkt

Technology Review Committee

Core TeamStructured Planning

Charter ProcessOwner

R&D Finan Manuf

0 1 2 N-1 N

16

Technology Review Process

Pre-agreed reviews and dates at the end of each gate(Agreed to by TRC and team)

Each gate represents a significant and measurablemilestone

Number of stages and length between stages will vary

TR0TR1

TR2

TR TRN-1

TRN

17

Technology Review Process

This stage defines the overall technologydevelopment plan including:

Overall technology strategy and approachProgram team structureResourcesDetailed plan included measurable deliverables to TR1Risk analysis with agreed "kill" points

Plan to be developed by Technology DevelopmentTeam

TR0 TR0TR1

TR2

TR TRN-1

TRN

18

TR0 Business Plan

20Total

2Risk Assessment

1Financials

1Operational Plan

1Project Organization

1Technology Project Plan

4Technology Plan

1Market Entry Strategy

1Why this project will win?

2Competitor Analysis

2Market and Customer Definition

3Scope

1Executive Summary

Pages

An initial frameworkdeveloped by taking the“Best Practices” used inover 100 business plansdeveloped over a 8 year

period

19

TR0 Business Plan

Technology Feasibility Point

A

B

C

DE

F

Technology Factor

Con

fiden

ce L

evel

Ris

k Fa

ctor

Probability of Event 1.00.0

0

10

Pote

ntia

l

Development 101

1

10

Technology

Regulatory

Marketing

Financial

Team/Organization

TechnologyConfidence Plot

TechnologicalEvaluation Plot

Overall RiskAssessment

Technological Score Card

20

Technology Review Process

Revise technology development plan

Review outcomes from previous TR gate

Revise technology development plan

Detailed approach for next stage gate including riskassessment and "kill" points

TRi TR0TR1

TR2

TRTR

N-1

TRN

21

Technology Review Process

Detailed transition plan should be developed

Final stage is focused on technology transfer

Transition team should be involved in the plan

TRN TR0TR1

TR2

TR TRN-1

TRN

22

Technology Review Committee

Decision Making BodyResponsible for making a "go," "no-go" or "redirect" decision atStage GateIncludes the commitment of resources and people to the nextReview Gate

Consists of Division R&D, Marketing (i.e. of affectedtechnology), Scientific Peer(s) and permanent R&D members

Authority to fund and prioritize technology developmentprograms

Chairman

Div R&DDiv MktScientificPeers

TRC is different foreach project

23

Charter Outline1. Initial scope and objectives of work

Fit with the business strategyFit with the product/platform strategy

2. Primary areas of technology improvementBriefly describe the technologies to be investigated /pursued / developed

3. Key Assumptions and RisksWhat are the key assumptions behind this development?What are the key risks associated with this project?

(technical, market, timing, other)4. Recommended Process

Normal (full) process, scaled down process, or other(specify)

5. Proposed ResourcesLead Scientist/EngineerPlanning/Strategy/Marketing representativeTechnical Service / Applications Support personRecommendation for Review Committee advisorsOthers specifically needed

6. Proposed Timing of the First Stage Review

Developed by SeniorExecutives and TRCcommittee before

Technology DevelopmentTeam Effort

24

Structured Methodology

Development PlanDeveloped by core teamPrimary communication vehicle between team and TRC

Contains detailed project flow charts for the next stageAll risks, mitigating plans and key assumptions areidentifiedKey deliverables are highlighted“Kill” points are clearly identified

0 1 2 N-1 N

25

Process Owner

“Owns” the Technology Stage Gate ProcessUnderstands all the details of the processAble to train and advise subsequent teamsFocuses on ProcessActively supported by senior managementFull time position with dotted line to Chairmanof TRC

Successful implementation, with the necessary rigor,cannot be accomplished without a Process Owner

26

Design Team

ObjectiveTo guide and customize the Stage Gate Process

ResponsibilitiesOverall development processBe a supporter of the changeSupport and mentor project teams as they work ontheir projectDevelopment of a guideline document to be used bythe project teams as a basis for project planning andexecution

27

Core Team

Responsible to plan and execute the programResponsible for managing budget and peopleOverall team performance and outcome should berelated to team/individual rewards

28

Schedule

Advise andConsent on TSG

Technology Design TeamDevelops Methodology

Technology Development Team

TeamTraining

TeamTraining

TRCTraining

TR0 Review

TR0 PlanComplete

Begin TRi

“Typical” Roll Out Schedule

Schedule in months

29

Outline

Stage GateObjectiveWhat Technology Stage Gate Can and Can’tAccomplishPrinciples behind Technology Stage GateComparison with Traditional Stage Gate

What is it?

Critical Success Factors

30

Critical Success Factors

Leadership must lead - “walk the talk”Demand high standards for quality of executionMake timely and consistent go/kill decisionsEstablish measurable deliverablesCommit and ensure the necessary resourcesMentor and enable project teamsManage with clear and engaging directionAttend all Gate meetings

Create a “World Class” TechnologyDevelopment Infrastructure

31

Critical Success Factors

Follow the processUse Stage Gate to manage all high risk technologyprojectsIntegrate and consistently apply documents

Empower TeamsShift focus from micro-management to multi-functiondevelopment teams

32

Critical Success Factors

Technology Stage Gate is an enabler NOT thesolution

Excellent leadership, highly motivated teams, buildingcompetitive advantage, leveraging core competenciesand developing products which delight the customer areall needed

Develop a high quality processDesign team needs to develop high quality templatesand work plansFirst project should set a high quality standard forfuture projects

Make Implementation a Kraft/Nabisco OwnedProgram

Use past experiences and procedures as a starting point

33

Conclusions

BenefitsEnsure allocation of resources to “right” projects

Technology planning and review processHighlights business, process and investment issues veryearly

Technology goals and risks are understood by all of thestakeholdersEarly involvement of business leaders from researchand divisionCreates an environment of scientific rigor combinedwith “fast” failures

Increases number of high risk/high profitable projects inthe portfolio