**3. Front End of innovation**

It is important to understand the nature and outcomes of the Front End of Innovation before we can go deeper in the relationship between Sustainable Product Innovation and the early stages of an innovation process. In this section we give a short overview on the different as‐ pects of the front end.

#### **3.1. The Front End of new product development**

aims to contribute to the understanding and implementing of sustainability in the early stages of an innovation process. A short overview of the used research method is presented in the first part. Secondly, the concept of the front-end of new product development is intro‐ duced by its different definitions. The section also describes the importance of the FEI, dif‐ ferent types of innovation processes and the functions, activities and characteristics of the Front End. The third part looks to the concept of Sustainable Product Innovation (SPI) to‐ gether with its drivers and barriers. Furthermore, it reflects on the current practice of the use of Sustainable Product Innovation tools. Next, the importance of integrating environmental considerations in the Front-End stage is presented. Different research results, insights and challenges are discussed in the penultimate part in order to identify successful patterns. At

The represented research in this book chapter reviews the major works on the Front End of Innovation, Sustainable Design and the current state of the art in literature of front-end sustainability. It aims to identify gaps, challenges, issues and opportunities for further study and research. A literature review seems to be a valid approach, as it is a necessary step in structuring an in-depth research field and forms an integral part of any research

The main focus of this book chapter is the Product Innovation Process. Articles focusing on other aspects of an innovation process were not included, e.g. the review does not in‐ cludenew marketing methods, or dimensions on new organizational methods in business practices, workplace organization or external relations. To limit the number of publica‐ tions, papers mainly addressing sustainable design on a macro ecology level were also ex‐ cluded from the review. Similarly, research with a highly craftsmanship rather than an industrial product design perspective were also excluded. Although these variables might be important antecedents to how firms eventually perform their FE activities, they are not

Furthermore, the term denoting 'product' has several meanings frequently used in litera‐ ture. In this book chapter, the term product means either the physical form of an object, a

It is important to understand the nature and outcomes of the Front End of Innovation before we can go deeper in the relationship between Sustainable Product Innovation and the early stages of an innovation process. In this section we give a short overview on the different as‐

the end of this chapter, a summary is presented.

service or otherwise a product-service system.

**3. Front End of innovation**

pects of the front end.

**2. Research method**

140 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

conducted [3].

focused on here.

The Front End (FE) is considered as the first stage of new product development, which roughly concerns the period from the idea generation to its approval for development, or its termination [4].Moenaert et al. [5] define the Front End as the process in which an or‐ ganization formulates a product concept and decides whether or not to invest resources in that concept. Khurana and Rosenthal[6] note that the FE begins when an opportunity is first considered worthy of further ideation, exploration and assessment and ends when a firm decides to invest in the idea, commits significant resources to its development, and launch the project. The FE includes product strategy formulation and communication, op‐ portunity identification and assessment, idea generation, product definition, project plan‐ ning, and early executive reviews, which typically precede detailed design and development of a new product. One of the many other definitions of FE was formulated by Kim and Wilemon [7]; the Fuzzy Front End begins when an opportunity is first consid‐ ered worthy of further ideation, exploration, and assessment and ends when a firm de‐ cides to invest in the idea, commit significant resources to its development, and launch the project' or shortly;the FE is the period between when a opportunity is first considered and when an idea is judged ready for development' [7].

Crawford and Di Benedetto[8] describe that the process in the FEI gives an answer to the primary questions: whether, what, why, who, when and how.

The decision is made whether or not a product innovation project passes to real develop‐ ment.


We can detect some small variations in the above-mentioned explanations of the Front End. The definitions differ from author to author. Similar to Jacoby [9], we define the FE phase as 'all initial innovation activities, prior to development and ends where real new product de‐ velopment (NPD) starts'.

In contrast with new product development, there is no common terminology in academic literature and design practice as how to denote the early stages of an innovation process.

Different synonyms for the Front End can be found in literature; Fuzzy Front End [1], Front End of Innovation [10], pre-development [11], Phase zero, Stage zero, pre phase zero [12] or pre-project activities [13].

Cooper [11] introduced the term "pre-development" in 1988. Smith and Reinertsen first popularized the term "Fuzzy Front End" in 1991 [14]. Later on, in 1997, Verganti [12] descri‐

bed these pre-development activities as "the early stages of development" or the "preproject activities" while Khurana & Rosenthal [13] used the term "pre-phase zero" in 1997.

more information available, but then the cost of change will increase. Decisions made in the front-end influence all subsequent phases of the innovation process. Quality, costs, and tim‐ ings are mostly set during the front-end [18]. The challenge in the FE is created by the low amount of information and certainty. Once the specification for the future product is set at the FE, only relatively minor changes of the products are possible – or they will be very ex‐

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

143

**Figure 1.** Evolution of influence, costs of changes, and information during the innovation process (von Hippel [19],

The reason of existence of the FE can be described through the functions of the FE. Jacoby [9]

The ultimate goal of the FE is to know what kind of product functions, product sub-func‐ tions and product characteristics a future product should have. It is not only about the idea of the new product or service, but also the added value it would represent and the major requirements [9]. As Cooper proposes [20], the desired goal of the FE is the creation of a well-defined product concept. A well defined product concept allows for a clearer under‐ standing of development time, costs, required technical expertise, the right development team, market potential and positioning, risk, and organizational fit [4]. The product defini‐ tion depends to large extend on the understanding of the customer needs, wants and prefer‐

The product definition and the business cases both describe the future business opportunity, but whereas the product definition focuses more on the product or the service itself, the business cases cover the possible benefits against the investments required. From that busi‐ ness point of view, a set of issues has to be addressed in the FEI in order to be able to com‐

pensive and time consuming.

modified by Herstatt & Verworn [18])

defines 6 crucial functions of the FE:

*3.3.2. To define new business cases*

**3.3. Front End functions**

*3.3.1. Product definition*

ences [21].

Koen et al. [10] were the first to use the term Front End of Innovation in 2002, with the pur‐ pose of replacing the "Fuzzy Front End". The reasoning behind the wish to abandon the term Fuzzy Front End is that the word ''fuzzy'' implies that the Front End is mysterious, lacks accountability, and cannot be critically evaluated [15]. In this book chapter, we will re‐ fer to these early stages as the Front End of Innovation (FEI).

#### **3.2. The importance of the Front End of innovation**

The outcome of the FE process is of great importance on the innovation phases that come after the FEI. A variety of authors have recommended to focus/focusing on these early stages of NPD [16] [14] [9] [4] [13] [2] [15] [17]. This section gives an overview of different insights found in literature.

The complexity and cost of the complete innovation process depend to a large extent on the input: ideas for new products, user needs that have been detected, technological opportuni‐ ties that have been scouted, choices that have been made between different options, and so on. Product success and firm success are to a large extent depending on decisions made in the FEI. The impact decisions can have on the final product result decreases along with the project evolution: whereas FEI decisions can impact the product as a whole, NPD decision have to take into account earlier decisions and can only have an impact on partial aspects of products [9].

Prior research by Khurana and Rosenthal [6] has pointed the importance of the early stages of the innovation process. Although an innovative company must be proficient in all phases of the new product development process, the most significant benefits can be achieved through improvements in the performance of the FE activities [6]. Also a study by Koen et al. [1] identified the front end as the key-contributing factor for new products. The FE presents one of the greatest opportunities for improving the overall innovation process [1]. Reid &Brentani focus on the roots of success; The FFE is the breeding ground for all new goods and services. Activities in the FFE are the root of success for any com‐ pany hoping to compete on the basis of innovations [2]. Verworn [17] state that the best opportunities for improvement of the innovation process lie in the front-end activities. She suggests that a better understanding of the FEI, leads to a higher success rate in the over‐ all new product development process. Koen and Bertels [15] highlight the importance of the path-dependency in an innovation process; the front end is very important because the product-development process is path dependent. This means that choices made in the front end lead to options as well as limitations regarding which products a company will ultimately be able to develop [15].

In Figure 1 the relationship is shown between influence, cost of change, and available infor‐ mation during the innovation process. At the beginning of the process, i.e. during the frontend, the degree of freedom and influence on the project outcome is high, while little information is available and the cost of changes is low. At later stages in the process one has more information available, but then the cost of change will increase. Decisions made in the front-end influence all subsequent phases of the innovation process. Quality, costs, and tim‐ ings are mostly set during the front-end [18]. The challenge in the FE is created by the low amount of information and certainty. Once the specification for the future product is set at the FE, only relatively minor changes of the products are possible – or they will be very ex‐ pensive and time consuming.

**Figure 1.** Evolution of influence, costs of changes, and information during the innovation process (von Hippel [19], modified by Herstatt & Verworn [18])

#### **3.3. Front End functions**

bed these pre-development activities as "the early stages of development" or the "preproject activities" while Khurana & Rosenthal [13] used the term "pre-phase zero" in 1997.

Koen et al. [10] were the first to use the term Front End of Innovation in 2002, with the pur‐ pose of replacing the "Fuzzy Front End". The reasoning behind the wish to abandon the term Fuzzy Front End is that the word ''fuzzy'' implies that the Front End is mysterious, lacks accountability, and cannot be critically evaluated [15]. In this book chapter, we will re‐

The outcome of the FE process is of great importance on the innovation phases that come after the FEI. A variety of authors have recommended to focus/focusing on these early stages of NPD [16] [14] [9] [4] [13] [2] [15] [17]. This section gives an overview of different

The complexity and cost of the complete innovation process depend to a large extent on the input: ideas for new products, user needs that have been detected, technological opportuni‐ ties that have been scouted, choices that have been made between different options, and so on. Product success and firm success are to a large extent depending on decisions made in the FEI. The impact decisions can have on the final product result decreases along with the project evolution: whereas FEI decisions can impact the product as a whole, NPD decision have to take into account earlier decisions and can only have an impact on partial aspects of

Prior research by Khurana and Rosenthal [6] has pointed the importance of the early stages of the innovation process. Although an innovative company must be proficient in all phases of the new product development process, the most significant benefits can be achieved through improvements in the performance of the FE activities [6]. Also a study by Koen et al. [1] identified the front end as the key-contributing factor for new products. The FE presents one of the greatest opportunities for improving the overall innovation process [1]. Reid &Brentani focus on the roots of success; The FFE is the breeding ground for all new goods and services. Activities in the FFE are the root of success for any com‐ pany hoping to compete on the basis of innovations [2]. Verworn [17] state that the best opportunities for improvement of the innovation process lie in the front-end activities. She suggests that a better understanding of the FEI, leads to a higher success rate in the over‐ all new product development process. Koen and Bertels [15] highlight the importance of the path-dependency in an innovation process; the front end is very important because the product-development process is path dependent. This means that choices made in the front end lead to options as well as limitations regarding which products a company will

In Figure 1 the relationship is shown between influence, cost of change, and available infor‐ mation during the innovation process. At the beginning of the process, i.e. during the frontend, the degree of freedom and influence on the project outcome is high, while little information is available and the cost of changes is low. At later stages in the process one has

fer to these early stages as the Front End of Innovation (FEI).

**3.2. The importance of the Front End of innovation**

insights found in literature.

142 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

ultimately be able to develop [15].

products [9].

The reason of existence of the FE can be described through the functions of the FE. Jacoby [9] defines 6 crucial functions of the FE:

### *3.3.1. Product definition*

The ultimate goal of the FE is to know what kind of product functions, product sub-func‐ tions and product characteristics a future product should have. It is not only about the idea of the new product or service, but also the added value it would represent and the major requirements [9]. As Cooper proposes [20], the desired goal of the FE is the creation of a well-defined product concept. A well defined product concept allows for a clearer under‐ standing of development time, costs, required technical expertise, the right development team, market potential and positioning, risk, and organizational fit [4]. The product defini‐ tion depends to large extend on the understanding of the customer needs, wants and prefer‐ ences [21].

#### *3.3.2. To define new business cases*

The product definition and the business cases both describe the future business opportunity, but whereas the product definition focuses more on the product or the service itself, the business cases cover the possible benefits against the investments required. From that busi‐ ness point of view, a set of issues has to be addressed in the FEI in order to be able to com‐ plete a business case, such as business and product strategy, target market, product positioning, competition, marketing and finance [9].

Innovation can occur in many different areas of an organization. The 'Oslo Manual' pro‐ duced by the OECD [25] defines innovation as: *'The implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization or external relations'.* We will focus in this

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

145

Two notable pieces of work that have emerged from the FEI research are the New Concept Development Model (NCD) developed by Koen et al. [1] and Cooper's Stage-Gate process. The original Stage-Gate framework uses a sequential process with specified steps and tim‐ ing, while Koen et al. presents a non-sequential relationship model. Both approaches and

Innovation projects in industry generally move along three major activity domains as shown

The Front End of Innovation (FEI) or pre-development activities where future products are

The launching or commercialization activities where these newly developed products are

The NCD model shown in Figure 3 provides a good summary of the main FEI activities that occur prior to the Product Development Stage and consist of three parts: the relatively un‐ controllable influencing factors, the engine that drives the activities of the FEI, and the five

The New Product Development (NPD) where the products are actually developed.

activity elements. These three key parts are explained more in detail below.

there relation to the FE will be explained more in detail in this section.

section on the product development process.

*3.4.1. The new concept development model*

**Figure 2.** The innovation process. Adapted from Koen et al. [1]

defined and decided on.

brought to the market.

in Figure 2.

#### *3.3.3. Lower possible risks and reduce uncertainty*

Uncovering possible pitfalls and reducing uncertainty is a crucial function of the FE. When a product or service is considered ready to enter the stage of NPD, it is important to know that this development project can be carried out with controllable risks and technological and market uncertainties [9]. Uncertainties also refer to the freedom of operations relating to existing patents and regulatory requirements [8] [22].

#### *3.3.4. To decide on projects and products*

Bringing a new product or service into development, means to make choices, to deter‐ mine priorities and to allocate resources. Decision-making also refers to prioritizing be‐ tween different products or projects. Go/no-go and prioritizing decisions not only takes place at the end of the entire FEI process but also during the different sub-phases within the FEI based on specific evaluation criteria [9]. Many of the tools used in FEI have the purpose to force decisions. Carbonell-Foulquié et al. [23] categorize the different criteria in five dimensions: strategic fit, technical feasibility, customer acceptance, market opportuni‐ ty and financial performance.

#### *3.3.5. To plan projects*

Project planning frames a project in a certain time, usually with defined stages, objectives, deliverables and designated human and financial resources, next to all the other defining and decision activities.

#### *3.3.6. To process and communicate information*

Gathering & processing information or informing the organization is a key element in the FEI [9]. Processing information is a necessary condition for many of the other process func‐ tions described [4]. Moenaert et al. [5] give evidence of the fact that communication flows between organizational functions contribute to innovation success. In general terms, every analysis or synthesis in the FEI, one way or another, is based on processed information. These information flows could be very informal and tacit.

#### **3.4. The Front End in an innovation process**

Over the last two decades, several researchers and companies have suggested different ap‐ proaches to innovation in the context of new product development. Many models can be found in literature and practice [24]. This section offers some background in product inno‐ vation models, with special attention to the Front End of the Innovation Process and the ac‐ tivities that occur/involved within these early stages.

Innovation can occur in many different areas of an organization. The 'Oslo Manual' pro‐ duced by the OECD [25] defines innovation as: *'The implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service), or process, a new marketing method, or a new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization or external relations'.* We will focus in this section on the product development process.

Two notable pieces of work that have emerged from the FEI research are the New Concept Development Model (NCD) developed by Koen et al. [1] and Cooper's Stage-Gate process. The original Stage-Gate framework uses a sequential process with specified steps and tim‐ ing, while Koen et al. presents a non-sequential relationship model. Both approaches and there relation to the FE will be explained more in detail in this section.

#### *3.4.1. The new concept development model*

plete a business case, such as business and product strategy, target market, product

Uncovering possible pitfalls and reducing uncertainty is a crucial function of the FE. When a product or service is considered ready to enter the stage of NPD, it is important to know that this development project can be carried out with controllable risks and technological and market uncertainties [9]. Uncertainties also refer to the freedom of operations relating to

Bringing a new product or service into development, means to make choices, to deter‐ mine priorities and to allocate resources. Decision-making also refers to prioritizing be‐ tween different products or projects. Go/no-go and prioritizing decisions not only takes place at the end of the entire FEI process but also during the different sub-phases within the FEI based on specific evaluation criteria [9]. Many of the tools used in FEI have the purpose to force decisions. Carbonell-Foulquié et al. [23] categorize the different criteria in five dimensions: strategic fit, technical feasibility, customer acceptance, market opportuni‐

Project planning frames a project in a certain time, usually with defined stages, objectives, deliverables and designated human and financial resources, next to all the other defining

Gathering & processing information or informing the organization is a key element in the FEI [9]. Processing information is a necessary condition for many of the other process func‐ tions described [4]. Moenaert et al. [5] give evidence of the fact that communication flows between organizational functions contribute to innovation success. In general terms, every analysis or synthesis in the FEI, one way or another, is based on processed information.

Over the last two decades, several researchers and companies have suggested different ap‐ proaches to innovation in the context of new product development. Many models can be found in literature and practice [24]. This section offers some background in product inno‐ vation models, with special attention to the Front End of the Innovation Process and the ac‐

positioning, competition, marketing and finance [9].

existing patents and regulatory requirements [8] [22].

*3.3.3. Lower possible risks and reduce uncertainty*

144 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

*3.3.4. To decide on projects and products*

ty and financial performance.

*3.3.6. To process and communicate information*

**3.4. The Front End in an innovation process**

These information flows could be very informal and tacit.

tivities that occur/involved within these early stages.

*3.3.5. To plan projects*

and decision activities.

Innovation projects in industry generally move along three major activity domains as shown in Figure 2.

**Figure 2.** The innovation process. Adapted from Koen et al. [1]

The Front End of Innovation (FEI) or pre-development activities where future products are defined and decided on.

The New Product Development (NPD) where the products are actually developed.

The launching or commercialization activities where these newly developed products are brought to the market.

The NCD model shown in Figure 3 provides a good summary of the main FEI activities that occur prior to the Product Development Stage and consist of three parts: the relatively un‐ controllable influencing factors, the engine that drives the activities of the FEI, and the five activity elements. These three key parts are explained more in detail below.

tive process, including brainstorming sessions and idea banks, in which ideas are built upon, torn down, combined, reshaped, modified and upgraded. A new idea may emerge in‐ ternally or come from outside inputs, e.g. a supplier offering a new material/technology or

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

147

Normally there are more opportunities and ideas than can be supported with the funding and time available within the company. The critical activity is to choose which ideas to pur‐ sue in order to achieve the most business and consumer value. The activity of prioritizing and selecting ideas may be based on an individual's choice or a comprehensive portfolio planning approach. Project selection, financial return and resource allocation in the FE is of‐

Within this activity of the FE, the business case is developed, based on estimates of the other activities; market potential, customer needs, investment requirements, competition analysis

The relatively uncontrollable **'Influencing Factors'** consist of organizational capabilities, the outside world (distribution channels, law, government policy, customers, competitors, and political and economic climate) and the enabling sciences (internal and external) that may be

The NCP model is a relationship model, not a linear process. The circular shape is meant to suggest that ideas are expected to flow and iterate between the five elements. Iteration and loop-backs are part of FE activities. The key elements of the FE are expected to proceed none-sequentially, as shown by the looping arrows between the elements. Interactions and intermingling between the influencing factors, the five key elements, and the engine are ex‐

Product innovation is a dynamic process; it begins with the discovery of new opportunities and product ideas and ends with the successful launch of a new product. Stage-Gate sys‐ tems divide the steps between these point into a series of stages (=activities) and manage‐ ment decision gates. The original Stage-Gate model, introduced in the mid-1980s by Cooper, was based on research that focused on what successful project teams and businesses did

A Stage-Gate System provides a conceptual and operational road map to facilitate a project for moving a new-product project from idea to launch. It is a blueprint to improve effective‐ ness and efficiency [26]. The stages are where the work is done. Each gate serves as a Go/ Kill/Hold/Recycle and prioritization decision point. Stage-Gate systems should provide a clear idea of where the project stands, where it is going, and what needs to be done next.

The typical Stage-Gate system is explained below and shown in Figure 4 [26].

ten just a wild guess, due to the limited information and understanding at this point.

and project uncertainty. This element is often seen as the final output of the FEI.

involved. The 'influencing factors affect the decisions of the two inner parts.

from a customer or user with a request.

*Concept and technology development*

pected to occur continuously.

when they developed wining products.

*3.4.2. Stage-gate systems*

*Idea selection*

**Figure 3.** The New Concept Development (NCD) Model according to Koen et al. [1] (Image reproduced by the author)

The **'Engine'** represents the leadership, culture and business strategy of the organization that drives the five key elements.

The inner spoke area of the NCD model defines the **'Five Activity Elements'**:

#### *Opportunity identification*

In this element, large or incremental business and technological chances and opportunities are identified, by design or default, in a more or less structured way. According to Koen et al. [10], the sources and methods employed by the company can range from formal, system‐ atic tools such as future scenario mapping or problem-solving methods such as the fishbone diagram as well as less formal, ad hoc approaches such as water-cooler conversations or in‐ dividual insights.

#### *Opportunity analysis*

The second activity involves gathering together the additional information required in order to translate the identified opportunities into specific business and technology opportunities for the company. This may involve focus groups, market studies and/or scientific experi‐ ments. The level of effort put into these activities is dependent upon the attractiveness of the opportunity, the size of the future development effort, the fit with the business strategy and culture, and the risk tolerance of the decision makers.

#### *Idea genesis*

The third element is the idea genesis, which is described as the birth, development and ma‐ turation of the opportunity into a concrete idea. This represents an evolutionary and itera‐ tive process, including brainstorming sessions and idea banks, in which ideas are built upon, torn down, combined, reshaped, modified and upgraded. A new idea may emerge in‐ ternally or come from outside inputs, e.g. a supplier offering a new material/technology or from a customer or user with a request.

#### *Idea selection*

**Figure 3.** The New Concept Development (NCD) Model according to Koen et al. [1] (Image reproduced by the author)

The **'Engine'** represents the leadership, culture and business strategy of the organization

In this element, large or incremental business and technological chances and opportunities are identified, by design or default, in a more or less structured way. According to Koen et al. [10], the sources and methods employed by the company can range from formal, system‐ atic tools such as future scenario mapping or problem-solving methods such as the fishbone diagram as well as less formal, ad hoc approaches such as water-cooler conversations or in‐

The second activity involves gathering together the additional information required in order to translate the identified opportunities into specific business and technology opportunities for the company. This may involve focus groups, market studies and/or scientific experi‐ ments. The level of effort put into these activities is dependent upon the attractiveness of the opportunity, the size of the future development effort, the fit with the business strategy and

The third element is the idea genesis, which is described as the birth, development and ma‐ turation of the opportunity into a concrete idea. This represents an evolutionary and itera‐

The inner spoke area of the NCD model defines the **'Five Activity Elements'**:

that drives the five key elements.

146 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

culture, and the risk tolerance of the decision makers.

*Opportunity identification*

dividual insights. *Opportunity analysis*

*Idea genesis*

Normally there are more opportunities and ideas than can be supported with the funding and time available within the company. The critical activity is to choose which ideas to pur‐ sue in order to achieve the most business and consumer value. The activity of prioritizing and selecting ideas may be based on an individual's choice or a comprehensive portfolio planning approach. Project selection, financial return and resource allocation in the FE is of‐ ten just a wild guess, due to the limited information and understanding at this point.

#### *Concept and technology development*

Within this activity of the FE, the business case is developed, based on estimates of the other activities; market potential, customer needs, investment requirements, competition analysis and project uncertainty. This element is often seen as the final output of the FEI.

The relatively uncontrollable **'Influencing Factors'** consist of organizational capabilities, the outside world (distribution channels, law, government policy, customers, competitors, and political and economic climate) and the enabling sciences (internal and external) that may be involved. The 'influencing factors affect the decisions of the two inner parts.

The NCP model is a relationship model, not a linear process. The circular shape is meant to suggest that ideas are expected to flow and iterate between the five elements. Iteration and loop-backs are part of FE activities. The key elements of the FE are expected to proceed none-sequentially, as shown by the looping arrows between the elements. Interactions and intermingling between the influencing factors, the five key elements, and the engine are ex‐ pected to occur continuously.

#### *3.4.2. Stage-gate systems*

Product innovation is a dynamic process; it begins with the discovery of new opportunities and product ideas and ends with the successful launch of a new product. Stage-Gate sys‐ tems divide the steps between these point into a series of stages (=activities) and manage‐ ment decision gates. The original Stage-Gate model, introduced in the mid-1980s by Cooper, was based on research that focused on what successful project teams and businesses did when they developed wining products.

A Stage-Gate System provides a conceptual and operational road map to facilitate a project for moving a new-product project from idea to launch. It is a blueprint to improve effective‐ ness and efficiency [26]. The stages are where the work is done. Each gate serves as a Go/ Kill/Hold/Recycle and prioritization decision point. Stage-Gate systems should provide a clear idea of where the project stands, where it is going, and what needs to be done next.

The typical Stage-Gate system is explained below and shown in Figure 4 [26].

the gatekeepers is to take a Go/Kill/Hold/Recycle decision and to review and approve the action plan for the next gate. Deliverables for the next gate must be clearly specified [26].

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

149

The standard 5-Stage, 5-Gate Stage-Gate New Product Process shown in Figure x is fairly generic. It serves as a sample or skeleton from which to develop a custom-tailored model. Not all projects pass through every stage of the model. Stage-gate processes are not rigid process steps and should be adapted to the context they are used in. None of the activities is mandatory – each project is unique [26]. The project leader considers what activities seem reasonable for the next stage. According to Jacoby, specific activities could belong both to the FEI and the NPD [9]. Also parallel processing is an important feature of stage-gate sys‐ tems. Activities are parallel rather than sequential. Parallel processing compresses the devel‐ opment cycle without sacrificing quality [26]. Note that today's Stage-Gate processes are flexible, adaptive and scalable: they are iterative and features loops within these stages and

Alignment of project with our business's strategy.

Product delivers unique customer or user benefits.

Differentiated product in eyes of customer/user.

Product offers customer/user excellent value for money (compelling value

Positive customer/user feedback on product concept (concept test results).

Competitiveness - how tough and intense competition is (negative).

Project leverages our core competencies and strengths in: technology, production/operations, marketing, and distribution/sales force.

Importance of project to the strategy.

Market growth and future potential. Margins earned by players in this market.

Size of technical gap (straightforward to do).

Familiarity of technology to our business. Technical results to date (proof of concept).

Size of financial opportunity. Financial return (NPV, ECV, IRR).

Productivity Index (PI). Certainty of financial estimates. Level of risk and ability to address risks.

Technical complexity (few barriers, solution envisioned).

Impact on the business.

proposition).

Market size.

potentially to previous stages [27].

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Factor 5

Factor 6

Market Attractiveness

Technical Feasibility

Core Competencies Leverage

Financial Reward versus Risk

**Table 1.** Typical scorecard for Gate 3 [27]

Strategic Fit and Importance

Product and Competitive Advantage

**Factors Content**

**Figure 4.** Overview of a Stage-Gate System. Adapted from [26]

#### *Stage 0 – Idea / Discovery*

Activities designed to discover opportunities and to generate new product ideas.

#### *Stage 1- Scoping / Preliminary Assessment*

A first quick and inexpensive assessment of the technical & marketplace merits of the project, so the project can be reevaluated more thoroughly at gate 2.

#### *Stage 2 – Build Business Case*

This is the final stage prior to product development. It is the stage that must verify the at‐ tractiveness of the project prior to heavy spending. And it is the stage where the project and product must be clearly defined. Here, market research, a detailed technical appraisal and a detailed financial analysis are undertaken.

#### *Stage 3 – Development*

Stage 3 involves the development of the product and of detailed test, marketing and opera‐ tions plans. An updated financial analysis is prepared, and legal/patent/copyright issues are resolved.

#### *Stage 4 – Testing & Validation*

The purpose of this stage is to test the entire viability of the project: the product itself, the production/manufacturing process, customer acceptance, and the economics of the project.

#### *Stage 5 – Launch*

The final stage involves the full commercialization of the product; the implementation of both the marketing launch plan and the operations plan.

#### *Post Launch Review / Post-Implementation Review*

At some point, the product becomes a 'regular' product in the firm's line. This is the point where the project and product's performance is reviewed. A post-audit is carried out; the latest data on revenues, cost, expenditures, profits are analyzed together with a critical as‐ sessment of the project strengths and weaknesses, what we can learn from this project, and how we can do the next one better.

Preceding each stage is a decision point or gate. Gates are characterized by a list of pre-es‐ tablished criteria, ensuring that all projects are evaluated consistently and fairly. The role of the gatekeepers is to take a Go/Kill/Hold/Recycle decision and to review and approve the action plan for the next gate. Deliverables for the next gate must be clearly specified [26].

The standard 5-Stage, 5-Gate Stage-Gate New Product Process shown in Figure x is fairly generic. It serves as a sample or skeleton from which to develop a custom-tailored model. Not all projects pass through every stage of the model. Stage-gate processes are not rigid process steps and should be adapted to the context they are used in. None of the activities is mandatory – each project is unique [26]. The project leader considers what activities seem reasonable for the next stage. According to Jacoby, specific activities could belong both to the FEI and the NPD [9]. Also parallel processing is an important feature of stage-gate sys‐ tems. Activities are parallel rather than sequential. Parallel processing compresses the devel‐ opment cycle without sacrificing quality [26]. Note that today's Stage-Gate processes are flexible, adaptive and scalable: they are iterative and features loops within these stages and potentially to previous stages [27].


**Table 1.** Typical scorecard for Gate 3 [27]

**Figure 4.** Overview of a Stage-Gate System. Adapted from [26]

*Stage 1- Scoping / Preliminary Assessment*

detailed financial analysis are undertaken.

both the marketing launch plan and the operations plan.

*Post Launch Review / Post-Implementation Review*

how we can do the next one better.

Activities designed to discover opportunities and to generate new product ideas.

project, so the project can be reevaluated more thoroughly at gate 2.

A first quick and inexpensive assessment of the technical & marketplace merits of the

This is the final stage prior to product development. It is the stage that must verify the at‐ tractiveness of the project prior to heavy spending. And it is the stage where the project and product must be clearly defined. Here, market research, a detailed technical appraisal and a

Stage 3 involves the development of the product and of detailed test, marketing and opera‐ tions plans. An updated financial analysis is prepared, and legal/patent/copyright issues are

The purpose of this stage is to test the entire viability of the project: the product itself, the production/manufacturing process, customer acceptance, and the economics of the project.

The final stage involves the full commercialization of the product; the implementation of

At some point, the product becomes a 'regular' product in the firm's line. This is the point where the project and product's performance is reviewed. A post-audit is carried out; the latest data on revenues, cost, expenditures, profits are analyzed together with a critical as‐ sessment of the project strengths and weaknesses, what we can learn from this project, and

Preceding each stage is a decision point or gate. Gates are characterized by a list of pre-es‐ tablished criteria, ensuring that all projects are evaluated consistently and fairly. The role of

*Stage 0 – Idea / Discovery*

148 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

*Stage 2 – Build Business Case*

*Stage 3 – Development*

*Stage 4 – Testing & Validation*

resolved.

*Stage 5 – Launch*

In the next paragraph we will give some insights in the different activities and sub-phases of the FEI in the Stage-Gate model. A project cannot pass into the next stage until the evalua‐ tion is done and the gate is opened.

**Activity in the FEI Author**

Cooper (1994), Murphy & Kumar (1997), Khurana& Rosenthal (1998), Montoya-Weiss &O'Driscoll (2000), Koen et al. (2001), Krishnan & Ulrich (2001), Nobelius&Trygg (2002), Langerak et al. (2004), Sandmeier et al. (2004), Buijs&Valkenburg (2005),

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

151

Montoya-Weiss &O'Driscoll (2000), Koen et al. (2001),

(2004), Cooper (2008), Braet&Verhaert (2007)

Koen et al. (2001), Cooper (2008)

Buijs&Valkenburg (2005), Cooper (2008)

Nobelius&Trygg (2002), Langerak et al. (2004), Sandmeier et al.

Cooper (1988), Murphy & Kumar (1997), Khurana& Rosenthal (1998), Nobelius&Trygg (2002), Buijs&Valkenburg (2005),

Verganti (1997), Khurana& Rosenthal (1998), Langerak et al.

Cooper (1994), Hughes & Chaffin (1996), Sandmeier et al.

Hughes & Chaffin (1996), Khurana& Rosenthal (1998),

Khurana& Rosenthal (1998), Sandmeier et al. (2004)

Braet&Verhaert (2007)

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

Braet&Verhaert (2007)

(2004), Crawford (2006)

(2004), Cooper (2008)

Sandmeier et al.(2004)

Nobelius&Trygg(2002)

**Project evaluation** Cooper (1988), Murphy & Kumar (1997)

**(Preliminary) investigation** Cooper (1994), Verganti (1997)

**Deliver winning solution** Hughes & Chaffin (1996)

**Feasibility** Khurana& Rosenthal (1998)

**Table 2.** Activities in the FEI according to different authors [9]

**Pre-technical evaluation** Cooper (1994)

**Concept generation** Verganti (1997), Koen et al. (2001), Crawford (2006)

**Business analysis** Nobelius&Trygg (2002), Langerak et al. (2004)

**Project & process planning** Hughes & Chaffin (1996), Khurana& Rosenthal (1998),

Idea generation Product concept Idea genesis Business ideas Concept development

Idea qualification Idea selection Idea screening Concept screening

Discovery

Search areas Scoping

Product definition Design brief Concept definition

Product & strategic planning Product & portfolio strategy

Building business case (or value)

Business plan concept

Capture market value Market analysis Market opportunities

Technological analysis Technological opportunities

Opportunity identification & analysis

The front end is typically thought of as consisting of the first three sequential stages of the Stage-Gate process with the remaining stages focusing on the development process: discov‐ ery, scoping and building a business case, as also shown in Figure 4. The decision to "move into a full-scale development project" cannot be taken until the Gate 3 criteria have been met. In the early stages, these criteria tend to be largely qualitative and deal with 'must meet' and 'should meet' criteria [26]. Scorecards are based on the premise that qualitative criteria are often better predictions of success than financial projections. In use, management develops a list of about 6-8 key criteria, know predictors of success, on a scorecard. A typical scorecard for Gate 3 is present in Table 1. Note that different scorecards and criteria are used for different types of projects.

#### *3.4.3. Conclusions*

Two notable pieces of work that have emerged from the FEI research were presented in this section; Cooper's original sequential Stage-Gate process with specified steps and timing, and the non-sequential NCD relationship model from Koen et al. From a sustainable prod‐ uct innovation perspective, the problem with these frameworks is that they do not explicitly explain how sustainable design considerations can be integrated into the front end. None of them mentioned sustainability or provide sustainable design guidelines in the presented methodology.

#### *3.4.4. Front End activities*

There is no such a thing as a universal set of activities necessary to the FEI. The description of the different pre-development activities differs from author to author. The required inno‐ vation level, the context of the company, the available time, resources, strategy and mar‐ kets…will usually determine the set of activities. A summary of the activities found throughout literature was made by Jacoby [9] and is presented in Table 2.

#### **3.5. Front End characteristics**

The FE phase is fundamentally different from the development stage of the innovation proc‐ ess. Characteristics of the FE compared to the traditional development phase is summarized in Table 3. Though all innovation processes does not follow a single pattern, the FE phase is intrinsically non-routine, dynamic and uncertain [7]. Essentially, the front end requires more expansive and divergent thinking [15]. The ambiguity level at the end of the FE can affect the risk related to the identified idea in the development stage [7].


**Table 2.** Activities in the FEI according to different authors [9]

In the next paragraph we will give some insights in the different activities and sub-phases of the FEI in the Stage-Gate model. A project cannot pass into the next stage until the evalua‐

The front end is typically thought of as consisting of the first three sequential stages of the Stage-Gate process with the remaining stages focusing on the development process: discov‐ ery, scoping and building a business case, as also shown in Figure 4. The decision to "move into a full-scale development project" cannot be taken until the Gate 3 criteria have been met. In the early stages, these criteria tend to be largely qualitative and deal with 'must meet' and 'should meet' criteria [26]. Scorecards are based on the premise that qualitative criteria are often better predictions of success than financial projections. In use, management develops a list of about 6-8 key criteria, know predictors of success, on a scorecard. A typical scorecard for Gate 3 is present in Table 1. Note that different scorecards and criteria are used

Two notable pieces of work that have emerged from the FEI research were presented in this section; Cooper's original sequential Stage-Gate process with specified steps and timing, and the non-sequential NCD relationship model from Koen et al. From a sustainable prod‐ uct innovation perspective, the problem with these frameworks is that they do not explicitly explain how sustainable design considerations can be integrated into the front end. None of them mentioned sustainability or provide sustainable design guidelines in the presented

There is no such a thing as a universal set of activities necessary to the FEI. The description of the different pre-development activities differs from author to author. The required inno‐ vation level, the context of the company, the available time, resources, strategy and mar‐ kets…will usually determine the set of activities. A summary of the activities found

The FE phase is fundamentally different from the development stage of the innovation proc‐ ess. Characteristics of the FE compared to the traditional development phase is summarized in Table 3. Though all innovation processes does not follow a single pattern, the FE phase is intrinsically non-routine, dynamic and uncertain [7]. Essentially, the front end requires more expansive and divergent thinking [15]. The ambiguity level at the end of the FE can affect

throughout literature was made by Jacoby [9] and is presented in Table 2.

the risk related to the identified idea in the development stage [7].

tion is done and the gate is opened.

150 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

for different types of projects.

*3.4.3. Conclusions*

methodology.

*3.4.4. Front End activities*

**3.5. Front End characteristics**


**Figure 5.** Patterns of the fuzziness level through the New Product Development [7] (Image reproduced by the author)

Sustainable Product Innovation: The Importance of the Front-End Stage in the Innovation Process

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52461

153

High-quality up-front analysis is essential to effective and efficient product development. Various authors have pointed out the importance of the Front End of Innovation. Over de last decade, the number of publications on the Front End has increased, providing more in‐ sights on the characteristics, process, activities, functions, and patterns in the Front End.

However, from a sustainable product innovation perspective, the Front End literature does not explicitly explain how sustainable design considerations can be integrated into these

The World Commission on Environment and Development defined Sustainable Develop‐ ment in 1987 as 'A development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs' [28]. This definition has been taken over, reformulated and evolved over time by many. Other definitions on sustainability focus on the so-called 'triple bottom line': the three dimensions people, planet, and profit, also called so‐ cial equity, economic efficiency and environmental performance.The International Institute for Sustainable Development in conjunction with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development has defined sustainable development from a business perspective view. "Sus‐ tainable development means adopting business strategies and activities that meet the needs of the enterprise and its stakeholders today while protecting, sustaining and enhancing the human and natural resources that will be needed in the future" [29]. The stakeholders include

early stages. This problem is discussed further in Section 5.

**4. Sustainable product design**

*4.1.1. Sustainable development*

**4.1. What is sustainable product design?**

**3.6. Conclusions**

**Table 3.** Difference between Front End of Innovation and the New-Product development process. Based on Koen et al. [10] and Kim & Willemon

Figure 5 below shows that the 'fuzziness level' of an idea gradually diminishes as the NPD process progresses [7]. When the fuzziness level or uncertainty level descends below the 're‐ quired' approval level (a) for a specific firm, the development phase usually begins. The start of development phase is the intersection point (b). The ambiguity level at the end of the FE can affect the risk related to the identified idea in the development phase. The approval decision at the end of the FE is usually the first formal go/no-go decision. It is a critical point, as it determines whether the firm will invest and if so, how much budget, time, people… it is willing to invest.

#### **3.6. Conclusions**

**Front End Product Development**

Disciplined Structured Systematic

Goal-oriented with project plan

development team

Difficult to change More difficult to reject

Determined Clear Specific

Quantitative Formal Precise

Budgeted

date gets closer

Multifunction product and/or process-

Predictable with increasing certainty analysis and documentation as the product release

**Nature of work /**

**State of an idea** Probable

152 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

**Information** Often qualitative

**Funding** Variable.

al. [10] and Kim & Willemon

is willing to invest.

**Revenue expectations** Often uncertain

Experimental Often chaotic 'Eureka' moments Often unstructured

Creative

Often fuzzy Easy to change Easy to reject

Informal Approximate

**Degree of formalization** Low High **Activity** Individuals and team conducting research to

**Degree of formalization** Low High

funding to proceed.

Great deal of speculation

**Damage if abandoned** Usually small Substantial

**Commitment of the CEO** None or small Usually high

**Personnel involvement** Individual or small project team Full development team

In the beginning phases many projects may be 'boot legged', while others will need

**Commercialization date** Uncertain or unpredictable High degree of certainty **Measure of progress** Strengthened concepts Milestone achievement

**Table 3.** Difference between Front End of Innovation and the New-Product development process. Based on Koen et

Figure 5 below shows that the 'fuzziness level' of an idea gradually diminishes as the NPD process progresses [7]. When the fuzziness level or uncertainty level descends below the 're‐ quired' approval level (a) for a specific firm, the development phase usually begins. The start of development phase is the intersection point (b). The ambiguity level at the end of the FE can affect the risk related to the identified idea in the development phase. The approval decision at the end of the FE is usually the first formal go/no-go decision. It is a critical point, as it determines whether the firm will invest and if so, how much budget, time, people… it

minimize risk and optimize potential

**Method**

High-quality up-front analysis is essential to effective and efficient product development. Various authors have pointed out the importance of the Front End of Innovation. Over de last decade, the number of publications on the Front End has increased, providing more in‐ sights on the characteristics, process, activities, functions, and patterns in the Front End.

However, from a sustainable product innovation perspective, the Front End literature does not explicitly explain how sustainable design considerations can be integrated into these early stages. This problem is discussed further in Section 5.
