portfolio planning dos and dont's
DESCRIPTION
Product portfolios and their design are critical to business success. Find the key portfolio structures and learn how to trim and focus a portfolio. A model for general portfolio structures and persistent management tensions will be presented along with a case study to illustrate the core portfolio planning issues. Presented at a Northern California PDMA chapter meeting July 22, 2009. For more Information please visit http://www.norcalpdma.org/.TRANSCRIPT
1
Portfolio Planning Dos and Don’tsHow to launch a successful product
Presented to the Northern California Chapter of PDMA
July 22, 2009
by Anthony Reese
2
© Anthony Reese 2009
Portfolio Elements
• Customer Needs
• Organizational Capabilities
• Channel and Market Cadence
• Organizational Capacity
3
© Anthony Reese 2009
Customer Needs
• Core problems to solve
• What does the customer want now
• What will the customer want in the future
• The 2-4X factor
• The right mix of exciters or “Wow” features
• Identifying and focusing on the top priorities
4
© Anthony Reese 2009
Org. Capabilities
• Strategic Vision
• Brand History
• Organization Structure
• Special Knowledge & Skills
• Core Competencies vs Differentiated Competencies
5
© Anthony Reese 2009
Market & Channel Cadence
• Major players
• Number of Channels
• Reset/Planning Windows
• Competitive Presence & Movement
• Breadth of offering
6
© Anthony Reese 2009
Org. Capacity
• Development Methodology
• Development Capacity
• Development Cycle-time
• Functional Equivalence (Bottlenecks)
• Technology Development
7
© Anthony Reese 2009
Portfolio Elements
Customer Needs
Organizational Capabilities
Channel and Market Cadence
Organizational Capacity
8
Build Alignments
Sort problems to solve
Find efficient solutions
Look for the 80/20
Company
Customer
© Anthony Reese 2009
9
Synch Pace
Customer and Channel Cycles
Development Cycles
Established Cadence
Capacity Market
© Anthony Reese 2009
10
Strike a Balance
Capacity
Market
Company
Customer
© Anthony Reese 2009
11
© Anthony Reese 2009
Case Study: Voyager Pro
Customer Needs
Organizational Capabilities
Channel and Market Cadence
Organizational Capacity
12
Case Study: Voyager Pro
© Anthony Reese 2009
13
© Anthony Reese 2009
Customer Needs
Core problems to solve
What does the customer want now
What will the customer want in the future
The 2-4X factor
The right mix of exciters or “Wow” features
Identifying and focusing on the top priorities
14
© Anthony Reese 2009
Org. Capabilities
Strategic Vision
Brand History
Organization Structure
Special Knowledge & Skills
Core Competencies vs Differentiated Competencies
15
© Anthony Reese 2009
Market & Channel Cadence
Major players
Number of Channels
Reset/Planning Windows
Competitive Presence & Movement
Breadth of offering
16
© Anthony Reese 2009
Org. Capacity
Development Methodology
Development Capacity
Development Cycle-time
Functional Equivalence (Bottlenecks)
Technology Development
17
© Anthony Reese 2009
Strike a Balance
Capacity
Market
Company
Customer
18
© Anthony Reese 2009
Case Study: Voyager Pro
Customer Needs
Organizational Capabilities
Channel and Market Cadence
Organizational Capacity
19
Questions
20
Kano Diagram
PerformanceSatisfaction
Basic
Performance
Exciters
© Anthony Reese 2009
21
Success
© Anthony Reese 2009
22
Voyager Prowww.plantronics.com/voyagerpro
© Anthony Reese 2009
23
© Anthony Reese 2009
Team Decision Making
• Symptoms of poor decision practice are:
Decisions take too long – some are discussed, shelved, discussed again a year later, with no resolution
Meetings end with no clear direction forward – decisions aren’t made and actions not taken
Firefighting dominates useful work – with some fires clearly caused by poor earlier decisions
Projects championed by the strong dominate what is best for the organization
Decisions come unstuck – you decide what to do next, everyone agrees, and then something different happens
Decisions are made without using all of available information and you know it
Risk is ignored or padded over – all decisions are based on uncertain information and thus are risky
www.robustdecisions.com