TY - GEN
T1 - Using innovation games to assess mass customisation potential from the fuzzy front-end
AU - O'Sullivan, Michael
AU - Sheahan, Con
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2019. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - The buzz surrounding mass customisation technologies like 3D printing and artificial intelligence has many startups hoping to capitalise on this dream of creating personalised products at an affordable price, and well established companies scrambling to innovate and maintain their market share. However, the majority of them are failing as they struggle to answer one key question - where does customisation make sense? It only makes sense where people will pay for it. For products like prosthetics, mass customisation technologies can be highly beneficial. However, for products that already sell without a custom element, customisation is not a necessary feature, and so the product development team must figure out if the customers' perception of the added value of this feature will outweigh its premium price tag. This can be done through the use of a 'serious game,' whereby potential customers are given a limited budget to collaboratively buy and bid on potential features of the product, before it is developed. If the group choose to buy customisation over other features, then the product development team should implement it into their design. If not, the team should prioritise the features on which the customers have spent their budget. The level of customisation purchased can also be translated to an appropriate production method, for example, the most expensive type of customisation would likely be free-form design and could be achieved through digital fabrication, while a lower level could be achieved through short batch production. Twenty-eight teams of final year new product development students tested this methodology when bringing a product from concept through to prototype stage, and found that it allowed them to confidently prioritise their features based on how customers would likely spend their money. Where customers were likely to pay for customisation, the team could decide what level of customisation should be implemented and how it might be produced. A team using this methodology could easily replace mass customisation with another technology or theme that they would like to consider, like the sharing economy or the use of certain materials, to see how it would influence customers' spending. Finally, the results of the methodology can be aligned with the business goals of the company and even integrated into other lean and agile management concepts like the minimum viable product and product roadmaps.
AB - The buzz surrounding mass customisation technologies like 3D printing and artificial intelligence has many startups hoping to capitalise on this dream of creating personalised products at an affordable price, and well established companies scrambling to innovate and maintain their market share. However, the majority of them are failing as they struggle to answer one key question - where does customisation make sense? It only makes sense where people will pay for it. For products like prosthetics, mass customisation technologies can be highly beneficial. However, for products that already sell without a custom element, customisation is not a necessary feature, and so the product development team must figure out if the customers' perception of the added value of this feature will outweigh its premium price tag. This can be done through the use of a 'serious game,' whereby potential customers are given a limited budget to collaboratively buy and bid on potential features of the product, before it is developed. If the group choose to buy customisation over other features, then the product development team should implement it into their design. If not, the team should prioritise the features on which the customers have spent their budget. The level of customisation purchased can also be translated to an appropriate production method, for example, the most expensive type of customisation would likely be free-form design and could be achieved through digital fabrication, while a lower level could be achieved through short batch production. Twenty-eight teams of final year new product development students tested this methodology when bringing a product from concept through to prototype stage, and found that it allowed them to confidently prioritise their features based on how customers would likely spend their money. Where customers were likely to pay for customisation, the team could decide what level of customisation should be implemented and how it might be produced. A team using this methodology could easily replace mass customisation with another technology or theme that they would like to consider, like the sharing economy or the use of certain materials, to see how it would influence customers' spending. Finally, the results of the methodology can be aligned with the business goals of the company and even integrated into other lean and agile management concepts like the minimum viable product and product roadmaps.
KW - Fuzzy front-end
KW - Innovation game
KW - Innovation management
KW - Mass customisation
KW - New product development
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073372083&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.34190/ECIE.19.001
DO - 10.34190/ECIE.19.001
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85073372083
T3 - Proceedings of the European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE
SP - 749
EP - 758
BT - Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2019
A2 - Liargovas, Panagiotis
A2 - Kakouris, Alexandros
PB - Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited
T2 - 14th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2019
Y2 - 19 September 2019 through 20 September 2019
ER -