THE GENERAL PROCEDURE
THE GENERAL PROCEDURE
There are several variations in problem analysis. But the general approach is the following:
Step One: Determine the appropriate product or activity category for exploration. This has already been done if the product innovation charter has a use, user, or product category dimension in the focus statement.
Step Two: Identify a group of heavy product users or activity participants within that category. Heavy users are apt to have a better understanding of the problems, and they represent the bulk of the sales potential in most markets. A variation is to study nonusers to see if a solvable problem is keeping them out of the market.
Step Three: Gather from these heavy users or set of problems associated with product category. Study the entire system product use or activity. This is the inventory phase mentioned earlier, but far more is involved than just asking respondents to list their problems. A good method of doing this is asking respondents to rate (1) the benefits they want from a set of products and (2) the benefits they are getting. The differences indicate problems; complaints are common, and often taken as requests for new products. But they are apt to be just the result of omniscient proximity, meaning that users face a minor problem frequently so it is the first on mentioned. Some firms have had success observing consumers or business firms actually use products in a given category.
Avoid “omniscient proximity” -- rate importance of benefits and levels of satisfaction.
Step Four: Sort and rank the problems according to severity or importance. Various methods can be used for this, but a common one is shown in the figure below. It utilizes (1) the extent of the problems and (2) the frequency of its occurrence. This “bothersomeness” index is then adjusted by users’ awareness of currently available solutions to the problem. This step identifies problems that are important to the user and for which the user sees no current
There are several variations in problem analysis. But the general approach is the following:
Step One: Determine the appropriate product or activity category for exploration. This has already been done if the product innovation charter has a use, user, or product category dimension in the focus statement.
Step Two: Identify a group of heavy product users or activity participants within that category. Heavy users are apt to have a better understanding of the problems, and they represent the bulk of the sales potential in most markets. A variation is to study nonusers to see if a solvable problem is keeping them out of the market.
Step Three: Gather from these heavy users or set of problems associated with product category. Study the entire system product use or activity. This is the inventory phase mentioned earlier, but far more is involved than just asking respondents to list their problems. A good method of doing this is asking respondents to rate (1) the benefits they want from a set of products and (2) the benefits they are getting. The differences indicate problems; complaints are common, and often taken as requests for new products. But they are apt to be just the result of omniscient proximity, meaning that users face a minor problem frequently so it is the first on mentioned. Some firms have had success observing consumers or business firms actually use products in a given category.
Avoid “omniscient proximity” -- rate importance of benefits and levels of satisfaction.
Step Four: Sort and rank the problems according to severity or importance. Various methods can be used for this, but a common one is shown in the figure below. It utilizes (1) the extent of the problems and (2) the frequency of its occurrence. This “bothersomeness” index is then adjusted by users’ awareness of currently available solutions to the problem. This step identifies problems that are important to the user and for which the user sees no current