How to improve the pace of your new product development process
Launching new products is both exciting and stressful. It can also be costly, labor intensive, time consuming, and data complex. In other words, deeply painful. The assessment guide presented here can help companies quickly determine what they can do to improve the process.
William Crane is the CEO of IndustryStar, an on-demand supply chain services and software technology company. He can be reached at william.crane@industrystar.com.
The new product and service development (NPSD) process is a major endeavor for any firm. (For a quick review of the components and outcomes of the process, see the sidebar, “New Product and Service Development 101”.) Recently, in an effort to reduce new product lead times and costs while improving quality, the NPSD process has undergone extensive revision and rethinking to become more collaborative.
NEW PRODUCT AND SERVICE DEVELOPMENT 101
The new product and service development (NPSD) process embodies all the steps necessary to take a product and/or service from concept to full production. One can envision NPSD as consisting of several linked stages such as:
advanced research,
product/service concept,
specification development,
product development,
pilot,
operations, and
reincarnation/disposal
Sometimes referred to by such names as “simultaneous engineering” and “concurrent engineering,” the collaborative NPSD process typically involves multifunctional teams made up of both internal and external stakeholders. These teams work closely together and consider all stages of the product’s life cycle. For example, the development process will consider not just the initial design of the product but also issues relating to operations planning and execution, such as the ideal manufacturing processes and potential product cost. Furthermore, one function or group no longer manages each activity of the development process in isolation.
Research shows that such a collaborative NPSD process can provide a competitive advantage. My company IndustryStar Solutions LLC, which provides on-demand supply chain services and software that empower teams to bring new products to market faster, recently partnered with Dr. Sime Curkovic of the Haworth College of Business at Western Michigan University on a series of in-depth interviews about NPSD with 126 professionals across 25 industries. Participating companies included: Whirlpool Corp., Toyota Motor Corp., Stryker Corp., Deere and Company, Coca-Cola Co., General Dynamics Corp., and Parker-Hannifin Corp, among many others. Our research produced the following findings:
80% of companies surveyed said collaborative NPSD has helped optimize development cost, ongoing production cost, quality, performance, and customer satisfaction.
75% said that collaborative NPSD has resulted in a competitive advantage.
82% planned to increase collaborative NPSD in the future.
85% wanted to start collaboration earlier in the NPSD process.
However, the survey also revealed that companies face many obstacles in the way of conducting an effective NPSD process. For example:
Only 50% of the surveyed companies said they were currently satisfied with their NPSD results.
70% claimed they lacked a process to integrate suppliers into NPSD.
50% of respondents said their technical staffs were unwilling to share designs with suppliers. This finding contradicted most respondents’ belief that there was trust between their company and their suppliers.
In the interviews, the three most cited obstacles for NPSD were: 1) talent, 2) communication, and 3) alignment of stakeholders.1
To help companies address these three main challenges, we developed the PACE assessment tool. The PACE method is meant to help leaders determine the baseline performance of their company’s current NPSD process and what specific actions could help generate greater NPSD results. The assessments are not meant to provide definitive scores, rather they are intended to be viewed as a guide to best practices. The acronym “PACE” comes from the first four steps of what the five-step assessment covers: 1) people; 2) automation; 3) collaboration; 4) empowerment; and 5) realization. We highly encourage companies to do the assessments in this order.
Step 1: Assess your people
The single biggest key to the success of a new product launch is having amazing people. No process or software technology can add as much as people with clear roles, documented processes, and standardized training. If you want to enhance your new product launches, then it is critical that you first conduct a thorough assessment of the current state of your people, roles, processes, and training.
One thing that is particularly important to assess is how well your team understands the company’s new product focus. The natural impulse that many of us have is to jump right into coaching our teams, but we need to outline our business “game plan” first. Our teams need clarification on what business we are in and what products to focus on. This might seem simplistic, but verbalizing what the company’s focus is can sometimes be more difficult than it first appears. For example, is General Motors in the automotive market or the mobility market? Should the company be focusing on developing electric vehicles or mobility services?
As leaders, we need to communicate a clear vision for where we are headed before striving to align our people for the road ahead. Once our people are onboard with our vision, we need to ensure our team members are in roles that maximize their current skill sets and the value that they add to the company. Further, we need to document our processes, which is typically an area that we can all get better on. Additionally, it is necessary to provide forums for consistent training and enhancements to our processes.
It may seem appealing to assume you are fine in the people department, but you skip this step in the assessment at your own peril. Have your leadership teams and your extended new product and service development team complete the survey in Figure 1 to conduct an honest assessment of the current state of your people. Remember, every company can get better, no one is perfect.
You can also accelerate the speed of product launches by automating repetitive tasks. When it comes to the supply chain part of new product development—sourcing the materials and services needed—many companies have invested heavily in software productivity tools, such as e-sourcing and enterprise resource planning (ERP), to successfully automate many of their repetitive tasks. Still, many find themselves relying upon more manual tools such as Microsoft Excel early in the product ideation stage to organize a product’s commercial bill of material (BOM) for potential suppliers, directional quotes, and estimated lead times. Yes, Excel is a fine product, but it’s built for flexible one-off analysis, not for repeatedly developing and launching new products with large BOMs. It’s simply not the right tool for the job.
Not to mention that an industry best practice for decades has been to essentially expand the commercial BOM and adopt “a plan for every part” (PFEP). A PFEP involves tracking information such as component costs, lead times, and supplier data in one large spreadsheet. This “spreadsheet of all spreadsheets” often includes more than 35 columns of data. Thus, for a 100-line item BOM, one’s PFEP can equate to 3,500 data inputs that need to be manually inputted.Although PFEP is a wonderful tool, it’s often abandoned due to the immense individual maintenance effort required.
Innovative companies, however, are deploying automated PFEP software with application programing interfaces (APIs) to bridge the technology divide between product lifecycle management (PLM) systems and ERP systems. This step up in technology helps to accelerate new product launch speed.
The survey in Figure 2 will help you quickly determine your current level of product development and launch automation. You will also need to review new product key performance indicators (KPIs), data, and information-sharing processes.
The extra work and time spent on the NPSD process is often the result of inefficient collaboration, such as poor communication, data rework, and having “duplicate playbooks.” The good news is that large step changes in productivity—and as a result in speed—can be realized in a surprisingly short amount of time simply by sharing the least amount of right information at the right time. For example, as you move closer to producing a prototype of your product, you will need more information in the product’s PFEP. You should partner with your engineering colleagues to know what specific data they need at each new product development milestone. This ensures that you are not wasting time adding extra data too early in the process. It also ensures that the process is not held up by waiting for a specific piece of information. Improving how you share new information can improve collaboration and increase the speed of the development process.
The questions in Figure 3 will help you quickly determine the level of productive collaboration among your team and the extended enterprise.
When we peel back the onion, we often find companies are doing far too many things themselves, which slows down the new product launch process. Firms should only do the specific tasks that they have a competitive advantage and/or a strategic reason to do. Too often firms do a particular task just because it is what they have always done or because it is what their competitors do. The net result is that companies spend far more money and time completing a task internally when they could easily outsource it to a strategic partner to execute at a lower cost. Outsourcing not only frees up valuable capital, it also frees up valuable time.
We should empower our partners to do the tasks that they excel at, while focusing internally on those tasks where we can provide competitive value. As an example, are we managing prototype-part buying when a supplier could deliver a completed prototype product at lower cost?
Empowerment is more than simply deciding what your company should do and not do. Often, leaders need to delegate more tasks to team members, giving them the chance to develop new skills and responsibilities. For example, is the vice president of procurement approving all commercial request for quote (RFQ) packages when a director could approve them? Is a manager assembling all the logistics routes when a lead logistics coordinator could determine them? If you want to accelerate your NPSD, you need to empower your team to do more.
The questions in Figure 4 will help you quickly determine the level of empowerment of your team, which is critical for speed.
The companies that are the most successful at new product and service development, such as Apple and Tesla, are able to tie the process to realizing the company’s mission. Those leaders who choose to inspire their teams, who craft a noble mission and the core values to support it, and who believe in the mission deep in their souls are near impossible to keep “pace” with. They will realize their mission faster than those who lack that passion. You can assess how well you are performing in this area by taking the survey outlined in Figure 5.
There is an argument for making this assessment process follow (or be combined with) the first assessment area (people), but that’s largely a matter of preference. However, if you find yourself with a low people score and/or in a turnaround situation, consider following improving your people with improving your “vision realization” to accelerate NPSD results.
Interpreting your scores
The score for each step should be viewed as a baseline diagnostic from which to continuously improve upon. Afterall, excellence is a continuous improvement pursuit; there is no end destination for the way in which you develop and launch all new products. Specific solutions to each question in the PACE Method will also vary by industry, company, and product. Tailoring the remedy is the art of maximizing the PACE Method. Your scored self-assessment should act as a starting point, provoking follow-on questions that enable deeper exploration into areas that could improve your new product development process.
We advise supply chain leaders, their teams, and all functions involved in the NPSD process to take the full assessment. The average scores for each step should help you to prioritize what step to focus on first. If a score of 9 or higher is attained for a step (for example, people), then you should focus on the next step in the process that is below 9. Have your whole team repeat the assessment process monthly until scores average 9 or higher for each step. To realize the fastest results, we would advise prioritizing improving one step in the PACE Method at a time. Once scores average 9 or higher for each step, shift your assessment efforts to quarterly.
Pick up the pace
Our experience and research have demonstrated that companies that repeatedly develop and launch innovative products generate outsized profits. Companies that want to be innovation leaders, therefore, need to accelerate their collaborative new product and service development process. The PACE Method can serve as a helpful guide to determining your company’s NPSD baseline performance from which you can then continuously improve upon.
There are no single actions that guarantee new product introduction supply chain success. Insights and tactics from trailblazing leaders simply highlight select actions that organizations can take to accelerate new product launches.
The PACE Method represents a significant opportunity to discover impactful practices that can produce gains in new product development and launch productivity. The key, as with anything new, is to get started.
Notes:
1. It is important to recognize the limitations of our research. The limited sample size and industries involved constrains the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the qualitative approach does not support causality and the ability to empirically test propositions and hypotheses surrounding NPSD and reducing cost, timing, and risk.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.