logologologo
  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Guide for contributors
  • Themes
    • Technology strategy
    • Open innovation
    • Roadmapping
    • Managing international R&D
    • Managing the R&D pipeline
    • Ideation and creativity in R&D
  • Tools
  • News
  • Resources
  • Papers
  • Case Studies
  • Events
  • R&D Conference
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Guide for contributors
  • Themes
    • Technology strategy
    • Open innovation
    • Roadmapping
    • Managing international R&D
    • Managing the R&D pipeline
    • Ideation and creativity in R&D
  • Tools
  • News
  • Resources
  • Papers
  • Case Studies
  • Events
  • R&D Conference
  • Contact

Good techniques for prioritising projects

Phil Kennedy, 3MGut feeling may be a valid basis for making decisions about your personal life but a more objective and rigorous approach is needed within R&D Management.

In his paper ‘Techniques for Effective Prioritisation’ Phil Kennedy describes some of the tools he has used in his career, particularly at 3M where he headed up a number of strategically important innovation teams.

He comments that in situations where the options are directly comparable then the ‘paired comparison’ technique is a quick and reliable way to gain consensus in a group.

“I have used paired comparison to choose between prototype products,” says Phil. “It is also a good way to gain agreement within a group on the relative importance of criteria. This information can then be fed into a more sophisticated multi-criteria decision analysis.”

Choosing between external technologies

The cause and effect (C&E) matrix, from Six Sigma methodology, that Phil considers in his paper is one of the simplest tools for multi-criteria decision analysis. Its main use in Six Sigma is to identify which of the inputs will have the greatest impact on the process you are trying to improve.

A simple C&E matrix can be built using a spreadsheet

A simple C&E matrix can be built using a spreadsheet

Phil comments: “I have also used the versatile C&E matrix extensively for project prioritisation where the criteria would include cost, development time, risk, financial reward, and competitive differentiation.

“The tool can also be applied to other situations where there are multiple parameters to consider, for example prioritising candidates for a job or for choosing between external technologies from universities. For the latter, I have used criteria such as commercial readiness, fit with company strategy, strength of IP, market opportunity size, competitive advantage, etc.

“In fact it is also good for other, more personal, decisions such as choosing a car or buying a house!”

For business success the overall value to the organisation also needs to be factored into the decision-making.

Is it worth doing?

For this Phil recommends Dominick (Don) Schrello’s Real Win Worth (RWW) matrix. He comments: “This technique asks three basic questions about a company’s new product idea: Is it real? Can we win? Is it worth doing?

“In my experience, the primary use of this tool is to filter and rank new product development project ideas.

“The first thing that comes out of the RWW is a risk assessment as it identifies if there are any critical gaps that might indicate that the project is likely to fail.

“The strategic value of the RWW approach comes from an analysis (historically) of a significant number of projects, both successful and unsuccessful, to identify the failure modes.

“Given this body of knowledge, new projects can be quickly evaluated to identify and rectify (if possible) any similar points of failure.

One other approach that Phil covers in his paper is that of the Risk-adjusted Cost-Benefit Analysis.

“It is an objective technique that is particularly useful when you are defining a strategy for an organisation that cuts across a number of business groups, as it supports prioritization across different portfolios.

“However, one criticism of the technique is that is can lead you to focus on shorter term projects, whereas in the real world you always need a time-balanced portfolio of projects. This can be mitigated if you apply the technique across ‘buckets’ of short, medium, and long term projects.”

Building consensus and buy in

In his position as Head of External & Digital Innovation at 3M, Phil was involved in helping the business to embrace digitisation. This was essentially about IoT: how to make the company’s products connected, data enabled and intelligent.

He comments: “It was quite a daunting task and involved looking at each of the corporate growth platforms and mapping these to 3M centres of excellence in the UK.

“So one of the points that I have stressed in the article is how the use of these structured prioritisation techniques can enable better transparency on decisions and better acceptance by all stakeholders.

“When used in decision conferencing they support consensus building, offering both transparency and the opportunity for stakeholders to participate in setting and rating the criteria and scoring the options.”

For more information: ‘Techniques for Effective Prioritisation’, Phil Kennedy.

3MPhil Kennedyprioritising projectsReal Win WorthRisk-Adjusted Cost Benefit Analysis
Previous PostImproving the assessment of innovation and te...
Next PostPromoting Innovation through Living Labs
Search R&D Today
Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Filter by Article Type
Papers
Events
Tools
Funding Articles
Case Studies
Resources
Opportunities
Theme Editor Blogs
Filter by Categories
Business model innovation
Ideation and creativity in R&D
Latest news
Managing international R&D
Managing technology platforms
Managing the R&D pipeline
Open innovation
Outsourcing R&D
Project valuation and selection
R&D strategy
Roadmapping
Stage gate processes
Technology intelligence
Theme Editor Blogs
  • Digital disruption in the lab: The case for R&D digitalization in chemicals – a review
  • Accelerating product development: the tools you need now – a review
  • Using good practice R&D management to create new innovations in malodour control
Associated Papers
  • Improving objectiveness of idea selection
  • How successful use of Absorptive Capacity adds value
Resources
  • Innovation Management: Learning for the experiences of companies in European countries
  • How to write and publish your research
  • Top 20 Innovation Blogs of 2016
Related Posts
  • Must read papers on aspects of R&D Management
  • Techniques for Effective Prioritisation
  • Structured approach is the secret to successful R&D management
Tools
  • FEMA
    Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
    To fail fast can save enormous waste later in the product lifecycle. Failure Mode...
  • Most useful R&D Management tools survey
    Most useful tools for R&D Management
    Ask which are the most useful tools for R&D Management and you will find...
  • Kano model of product or service features 2
    Improving Product Features: When is More Less?
    Different types of feature have different effects on customer satisfaction - analysis by Quality...
  • Paul Barrett
    Tools support objective discussion of portfolio strategy
    Paul Barrett is part of a RADMA working group providing a selection of recommended...
  • Radar-Roadmap-feat
    The Halo-Effect: Creating Impact Through “Good-looking“ Roadmaps
    Content is the essence of roadmapping. But the impact of impressive, professional visuals that...
Have Your Say…

Have Your Say / Follow Us

R&D Today is the outreach site for the Research and Development Management Association, a charitable organisation that supports research, best practice and innovation.  www.radma.net

Click here to sign up to our newsletter, and click here to view our newsletter archive.

Copyright R&D Today 2020. All rights reserved.