IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijpdev/v12y2010i1p67-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the rapid evaluation of innovative ideas in the early stages of design

Author

Listed:
  • Marcelo Ferioli
  • Elies Dekoninck
  • Steve Culley
  • Benoit Roussel
  • Jean Renaud

Abstract

This paper presents a study that analyses the activity of creative idea evaluation in the early stages of the New Product Development (NPD) process. The focus of this study is on the first evaluation of ideas carried out just after the idea generation phase, which means the very rapid preliminary screening of ideas, normally done by experts. This work was undertaken by analysing in detail the activities of professional design experts who evaluate creative design ideas or concepts in a company. The study shows that there are two distinct stages in their evaluation. The first one is based on the underlying judgement, effectively a technical feasibility filter, using criteria of quite an objective nature. The second one is based upon Subjective Criteria (SC) and interestingly on just a basic 'feeling' or instinct. The research also shows that generally experts spend more time with ideas that will be accepted than ones that will end up rejected. In addition the study indicates that long idea-evaluation sessions are not very beneficial. The data shows a distinct difference in the mindset of the participants after an hour and many more ideas were rejected. This research suggests that good ideas may have been excluded or lost due to the duration of the session.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcelo Ferioli & Elies Dekoninck & Steve Culley & Benoit Roussel & Jean Renaud, 2010. "Understanding the rapid evaluation of innovative ideas in the early stages of design," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 67-83.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijpdev:v:12:y:2010:i:1:p:67-83
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=34313
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Görzen & Dennis Kundisch, 2019. "When in Doubt Follow the Crowd: How Idea Quality Moderates the Effect of an Anchor on Idea Evaluation," Working Papers Dissertations 57, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    2. Young In Koh & Sung H. Han & Junseong Park, 2022. "A systematic process for generating new blockchain-service business model ideas," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 16(1), pages 187-209, March.
    3. Chan, Kimmy Wa & Li, Stella Yiyan & Zhu, John Jianjun, 2018. "Good to Be Novel? Understanding How Idea Feasibility Affects Idea Adoption Decision Making in Crowdsourcing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 52-68.
    4. Yuan-Wei Du & Yu-Kun Shan, 2021. "A Dynamic Intelligent Recommendation Method Based on the Analytical ER Rule for Evaluating Product Ideas in Large-Scale Group Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 1373-1393, December.
    5. Mihalis Giannakis & Rameshwar Dubey & Shishi Yan & Konstantina Spanaki & Thanos Papadopoulos, 2022. "Social media and sensemaking patterns in new product development: demystifying the customer sentiment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 145-175, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijpdev:v:12:y:2010:i:1:p:67-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=36 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.