I’d like to start this blog with a short story. Some years ago, I was sat in a bar with a colleague. After one too many drinks we came up with a really neat idea for a new analytical instrument. We both knew the idea was a bit whacky, but we were certain there was a market for it. The next day we both rushed into the office and informed the development team. They loved the idea! Without hesitation they jumped into the design process, and within the year we’d launched the product. It was a huge success almost overnight, plugging a gap in the market that nobody ever realized was there.
What’s wrong with this story? Well for a start it clearly never happened! This isn’t, and shouldn’t be the way that new products are created. For every story about an unplanned, overnight product success, there will be ten stories about products that were developed at the wrong time, launched at the wrong price point, aimed at the wrong customer, or simply unfit for purpose. So this is the focus of today’s blog; looking at the product development process from my own perspective as a scientist focused on sales and marketing.
If you’re developing a new product or service, and you work for a large company, it is likely that the entire process is well defined and rigorously controlled. I am way too inexperienced in product development to be able to speak knowledgeably about it, but I can certainly explain how the steps impact the team that is marketing and selling the product.
Several of the companies that I have worked for have a robust process for identifying the potential market for a product. I mean, there is no point developing a new product if nobody buys it! This involves the nebulous term “market research”, a very early part of the product development cycle and the one I have been involved in most of all. This catchall phrase is used to describe a lengthy and complicated process, whereby the sales and marketing team look very hard at competitor solutions, liaise with existing and potential customers, and try and make sense of the data they collect.
I’ve been through this process quite a few times, and whilst I can’t vouch for the absolute value of the collated data, it’s been an enjoyable part of my role to do the leg work. The job of contacting a customer to ask them if they’ll sign a non-disclosure agreement to discuss an exciting new product is not a difficult one. I’ve also generally found people very receptive to the ask, who doesn’t want to know about new technology? They key is to be as impartial as possible when selecting the potential customers to contact, in other words don’t just go to the ones who you know will say “yes, build it!”.
Typically, once the marketing team have collected that customer feedback, it is presented to the development team, and this is where things can come unstuck. Because although you’d imagine the market research is done at the very beginning of the process, it is often done in parallel with some of the early development work. And if you have to stand up in front of the entire development team and let them know that we’ve grossly overestimated the market, or underestimated the competition…. Then it can get ugly. But that’s all part of the “fail early” business mentality and surely it is better to find out beforehand that in fact people don’t buy instruments purely on the resolving power alone.
And when the market research has been done properly? You reap the benefits! I’ve been lucky enough that in several of my previous roles I’ve been involved with product launches that have gone on to become wildly successful product lines, outstripping even the original sales projections. That does make you feel good, even if your part in the product development and launch was a small one.
One aspect of product development that sales and marketing play a key role in is deciding when and how the product is launched. I’ve seen this done many ways; from quiet, virtually unannounced launches (I hear these called “soft” launches) to huge, noisy and glamorous product launches that seem more appropriate for a sports car launch. Which is better? It depends! Big product launches are costly both financially and in time, so need to be carefully justified. If you’re launching a completely new product idea into a market where there is no awareness, then going big makes complete sense. For the launch of an incrementally improved product into a market where you’re an established player, a smaller launch will probably suffice.
Just as important, when should the product be launched? It’s a trickier question. Again, I have experienced both extremes. One large company I worked for would not release information to the market until the product was boxed up and ready to ship, with a wealth of proof data to accompany it. A smaller company I worked for had the tendency to leak information to the market at the product inception stage, long before even an early (alpha) test version was built. Is one right and one wrong? That’s a personal opinion. I’m all for letting the market know a product is coming, but I’m no believer in taking orders before the product is fully developed. In other words I am being very non-committal as this can really polarize people’s opinions.
I’ve talked a bit about how I see the development process from a sales and marketing perspective, but what about for the development teams? I asked a colleague from our very own development team what the challenges are, and this is what I got in response:
Question: What do you find most challenging about developing a new product?
For me, the biggest challenge is managing the hardware development. Once the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) details have been fully described and agreed, the hard work starts. Multi-collector mass spectrometers are inherently complex instruments, and every aspect of their design is technically demanding. Even when you think you’ve accounted for everything, a new challenge often arises that causes you to have to change your planned approach to developing the product.
This, coupled with the long lead times associated with getting complex components manufactured by different third-party suppliers, puts a lot of pressure on the timescale required to successfully bring the instrument to market. One very important thing I’ve learned as a Project Manager at Isotopx is that generating a clear product development roadmap, with timelines that account for component development lead times, allow for unexpected problems, and include contingency for adapting the development plan is essential.
Although I have never been in a product development or project management role, the answer above really resonates with me, and I have a new appreciation for the inherent difficulties in designing and developing a new product.
That’s all for now. Do please let me know if you have your own opinions or anecdotes about product development, or stories about great product successes or disappointing product failures. As always, send your emails direct to me at: Stephen.guilfoyle@isotopx.com. More next time!
