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

John Shave’s “Revenue Replacement Rule”

I’m very intrigued by John Shave’s piece on the Revenue Replacement Rule. I don’t remember seeing anything about this before and yet the more I think about it the more it seems to show a simple and powerful truth.

When I was an R&D manager I often used to face the situation he describes in his introduction when I was asked to approve projects that didn’t seem to be an adequate use of the engineers’ time, and yet I didn’t have a persuasive answer.

The RRR (Shave’s law?) is so simple that it’s easy to dismiss: if a company spends a sum of, say, one twentieth of its sales on R&D per year then the R&D projects must on average generate products whose sales will be twenty times the project cost – a demanding ratio. This has to apply in aggregate but it’s not a bad rule of thumb to apply to all projects.

It comes, I think, from thinking of R&D as the pipeline through which all future products come. If it’s not wide enough there won’t be enough sales in future. Just as a factory has to deliver today’s sales, so R&D has to deliver tomorrow’s. If the factory output is not large enough then you have to give it more resources, or ensure that they are used more effectively; so too with R&D.

Of course, Shave’s Law doesn’t have to apply to every technical project that involves R&D engineers: there will always be a need for other tasks, such as fixing problems or making modifications for particular customers. But there should be a separate budget for these so that the main new product pipeline still has enough capacity to do its job of generating the future business.

Shave’s Law seems to apply straightforwardly to businesses in a competitive market with fairly short product lifetimes.

For commodities such as sugar, or very long-lived products such as chocolate bars, R&D’s role may be only to generate growth. In this case the relevant rule of thumb would be the ratio of R&D cost to the planned growth in sales, a much less stringent requirement.

There must be many complications to John Shave’s thesis but for me it is a new and compelling insight.

Rick Mitchell

John ShaveManaging the R&D pipelineRevenue Replacement Rule
Previous PostA technology skewer is a powerful tool in a c...
Next PostA 360-degree perspective of connected innovat...
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
  • Loading and Turbulence in R&D: Is there a Reynolds Number?
  • How end user focus determines clock speed for R&D programmes
  • Learning from the past: portfolio management in pharma R&D
Resources
  • Portfolio management at GlaxoSmithKline
  • Portfolio Management techniques
Related Posts
  • Techniques for Effective Prioritisation
  • Improving Product Features: When is More Less?
  • Managing the R&D pipeline
Tools
  • 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...
  • FEMA
    Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
    To fail fast can save enormous waste later in the product lifecycle. Failure Mode...
  • TRIZ Toolkit
    The challenge of applying TRIZ tool kit for ideation
    TRIZ (the theory of inventive problem solving) provides a logical approach to developing creativity...
  • 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...
  • Innovation Fitness Test - a tool to help scoring
    John Bessant recommends this tool developed by colleagues in Canada which helps with using...
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.