Recently I saw a case study about how a very large consumer packaged goods company “improved” their product development process. I put “improved” in quotes for reasons explained below.
The study identified a important insight about the company’s stage gate type process. Project teams were doing insufficient definition work at each stage, especially early stages. This caused poor decisions that:
- continued projects that should be canceled,
- delayed projects that would actually provide a positive impact, and
- overburdened teams with too much work in process, reducing productivity.
The company’s solution? Do what was obvious on the surface: more definition work on deliverables in each stage.
The insights about the effects of an ineffective process were good as a start. It increased the efficiency of each stage, reducing rework and the need to revisit earlier stages.
There are, however, two flaws in the solution:
- The solution focused on improving each stage individually and perfecting the stage “deliverables.”
- The solution was really more about vanity metrics, instead of a root cause in not meeting customer and company needs.