音声ブラウザご使用の方向け: SKIP NAVI GOTO NAVI

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER: THE VIRTUAL PRODUCT MODEL

Stephen M. Bauer, Vallish Shankar, Joseph P. Lane Center for Assistive Technology, University at Buffalo Buffalo, NY, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT

We present a methodology for the transformation of a device concept into a market product guided by prioritized customer requirements, market and technical constraints. Our methodology seeks to best meet the customer's needs while maximizing a device's market . The methodology is well suited for use within a small company framework.

INTRODUCTION

The RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer is supported by the NIDRR to transform inventions into useful new assistive products. The transformation process is a collaborative effort between consumer, marketing and technical teams.[1] The consumer team defines the function and performance characteristics necessary to optimize a device's value.[2] These characteristics are developed by examining existing products, and by comparing the prototype device to consumer expectations. These characteristics, organized under eleven consumer criteria, represent the consumer's version of the ideal device.[3]

The RERC-TET offers promising inventions for license or sale to manufacturers. However, at this early stage of evaluation, no ideal device actually exists and it is premature to develop one. We have the prototype invention, any relevant products, and the consumer's additional criteria. We needed to know if any company is interested in the device before investing additional resources. In response, the technical team developed the "Virtual Product Model." This is a method for translating the consumer criteria into device attributes, and presenting those attributes in a matrix. The matrix compares the features of the ideal device and of all existing products, to the set of consumer criteria. The Virtual Product Model provides companies with a snapshot of the prototypes potential value, in relation to both user expectations and less optimal products.

BACKGROUND

Quality Function Deployment

Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a planning tool that was developed by the Mitsubishi Heavy Industry in Japan to translate customer needs and expectations into design specifications. QFD results in shorter product development time, and reduction of problems during actual production. Although QFD offers several benefits, it is more suitable to large and medium-sized companies than to small companies. A survey was carried out by [4], and the results indicate that QFD helps break down department and organizational barriers in large companies. Some important issues such as how new technology is incorporated in the effort, dynamics of product team selection, and integrating functions such as purchasing into the QFD model are yet to be addressed.

The Small Company Model

The development of new products requires technical and market expertise, knowledge of customer requirements, infrastructure, capital, and established methodology, including timelines, and a statement of problem definition, and deliverables. Medium to large companies are generally rich in technical and market expertise, have good plant infrastructure and are well capitalized. In the event that a new product is not successful in the market, these companies are often not much affected by the financial setback.

In contrast, small companies often operate on tight budgets and are under constant pressure to "be right the first time" when they design and develop a new product. They are usually deficient in technical and market expertise, lack plant infrastructure and are under-capitalized. The time from concept to market has to be minimized due to the fact that larger competitors generally require a shorter lead times for product development. A large portion of the market is often captured by the company that introduces the new product. The failure of a new product often constitutes a major financial setback.

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AT THE RERC-TET

The RERC-TET has many constraints similar to those of a small company. The crucial task for both is the application of a methodology by which target product specifications are derived from the initial device concept, customer requirements, technical input and knowledge of the product market.

The Quality Function Deployment model is similar in many respects to the methodology developed at the RERC-TET. Our methodology differs from the traditional QFD method in that very few new product attributes are known before-hand, and most of the features are customer driven. This issue was explored and a case study was presented by [6].

Assumptions underlying the QFD model include: Use of a multi-disciplinary product team approach Customer needs and expectations are well understood Product market is well understood Device concept is well understood from a technical perspective A majority of product specifications are static while customer needs and expectations are drive a minority of the device specifications.

A close inspection of these assumptions is warranted. The first assumption requires product teams rich in expertise and personnel. The RERC-TET, like small companies in general, cannot easily and efficiently muster these kind of resources. The second assumption requires access to a large, well characterized customer population. Characteristics within a disability population are notoriously non-uniform. The problem is exacerbated when a device concept addresses needs across disability populations. The third assumption is problematic in that the initial device concept often lacks significantly in its ability to meet customer needs and therefore serves as an unsure probe of the competing product market. The fourth assumption implies that product specifications are being refined rather than "discovered." In general, for the RERC-TET, the opposite is true. The fifth assumption implies that a large market exists for a product if only "it better met customer needs than competing products." The QFD methodology is not generally used to steer a product to a niche market. In contrast, the market for assistive devices is generally a niche, and successful transformation of a device concept into a market product is necessarily steered by this recognition.

In spite of the fact that all of the QFD assumptions are somewhat challenged, the benefits of a QFD-like approach are obvious and overriding.

Method Device concepts submitted to the RERC-TET are screened to establish whether the device concept meets significant customer needs, is technically feasible and has a significant market. Expert consultants often clarify issues not resolvable by internal expertise [5]. If the device concept is found to have merit, a device prototype is requested from the inventor.

At RERC-TET, product development follows a well-defined process. A multi-disciplinary product team, having at a minimum, customer, technical, commercialization and market expertise, is formed to determine the specific actions needed to transform the device concept into market product. Following an initial study, timelines, deliverables, possible outcomes and individual responsibilities in the team process are established.

Deficiencies of knowledge, expertise and infrastructure have been met by the development of a reference library whose titles cover manufacturers, distributors and standards for assistive and related products, identification and use of expert consultants, sub-contracting difficult fabrication problems, and partnerships with other research centers.

A customer focus group is generally run on the alpha prototype at this point to obtain customer input and direction. Product attributes are captured in a matrix, and Idealized device attributes are determined. This ideal device is then used as a benchmark for competing products existing in the market. Competing products ratings against the ideal device attributes are entered into the matrix. Important attributes missing from these products are identified and define an open target market.

Efforts are started to commercialize the virtual device. The rational for such an early attempt is that a company may have the resources, capital, expert knowledge and wherewithal to expedite the transformation of the virtual device into a market product. In addition, companies provide valuable technical and market knowledge. If at any point hereafter, the product team feels the device to be well characterized, and an interested company is identified, the device and all relevant information is transferred over to this company.

The identified attributes are converted into device specifications that best meet the needs of the customer opulation while establishing a market not met by competing products. Engineering drawings are then generated. Limited technical expertise sometimes forces the RERC-TET to subcontract work out. Constant interaction with the subcontracting company is then essential. The design process is constrained by materials selection, design of appropriate mechanisms, and manufacturability. Beta prototypes are then developed using available materials while adhering as closely as possible to specifications. Limited fabrication infrastructure further challenges the technical ability of design engineers, and impacts the choice of fabrication processes.

Customer focus groups are run on completed beta prototypes to identify and prioritize, general and specific device attributes further prescribing the "idealized device.". Technical and market input contribute focus group questions and subsequently help to interpret focus group outcomes. Competing products are again identified and evaluated against the idealized device attributes. Beta focus groups are conducted and an iterative refinement process established. If at any point the product team believes customer requirements are well met by a product or collection of products already on the market or that a viable market cannot be found, the inventor is informed of all relevant discoveries and the product team for this device is dissolved.

CONCLUSION

The methodology developed at the RERC-TET for transforming device concepts into market products has been successfully applied to a number of devices. Refinement of this methodology is an ongoing area of research.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The RERC-TET is funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education.

REFERENCES

[1] Lane, J. (1994). "RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer: Program Access and Value Added." In M. Binion (Ed.), Proceedings of the RESNA '94 Annual Conference. Washington, DC: RESNA Press. pp. 225-227.

[2] Jain, Usiak, Lane, "Customer Orientation: Key to Delivering Useful Assistive Devices" (1996) [3] Lane, Usiak, Moffat, "Consumer Criteria For Assistive Devices: Operationalizing Generic Criteria For Specific Abledata Categories" (1996)

[4] Ettlie, J.E., (1993) "Revisiting the `House of Quality' Foundations," Production, pp. 26

[5] Leahy JA, Lane JP.(1996), "Technology Transfer via Invention Review: A Progress Report" [6] Jacques, G.E., Ryan, S., Naumann, S., Milner, M., and Cleghorn, W.L.,. (1994), "Application of Quality Function Deployment in Rehabilitation Engineering," IEEE Transactions On Rehabilitation Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 158-164.

Dr. Stephen Bauer University at Buffalo 3435 Main St. 5l5 Kimball Tower Buffalo, NY 14214-3079