Palavras-chave: rbs; Modelos de pré-desenvolvimento; Atividades e técnicas. Abstract

Chart 2. Origin of the analyzed studies.

Author

Institution

Country

Cooper (1988)

Harvard Business School

U.S

Murphy & Kumar (1997) Charleton University

Canada

Khurana & Rosenthal 

(1998)

Boston University

U.S

Koen et al. (2001)

Stevens Institute of Technology

U.S

Flynn et al. (2003)

National University of Ireland/ University of Dundee

Ireland

Scotland

Boeddrich (2004)

Wilhelm Büchner Hochschule

Germany

Reid & Brentani (2004, 

2012)

Bishop`s University

Concordia University

U.S

Canada

Whitney (2007)

Aerojet Technology Council

U.S

Brem & Voigt (2009)

Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

Germany

Kurkkio (2011)

Lulea University of Technology

Sweden

Source: The author.

Costa, M. A. B. et al.

8

Gest. Prod.

,  São  Carlos     

The funnel-shaped model begins with the stage 

of collecting and creating ideas, which develops 

according to the level of creativity and innovative 

culture of the organization.

The created and collected ideas are compared to 

those in the database of ideas. Later, these ideas go 

through the first review, where some may be rejected 

and postponed other then being stored in the bank 

of ideas for future contributions. The ideas that are 

still in the process are classified and enriched, then 

by passing a new revision, where more ideas may 

be rejected or delayed. After this process the ideas 

are prepared for implementation.

Finally, the model Kurkkio et al. (2011) is the 

latest found through systematic bibliographic review 

and focuses on innovations in processes rather than 

products. It is the result of a multiple case study 

conducted through 28 interviews and semi-structured 

in four companies being them two metallurgical and 

two mining. The model has four stages: informal 

start-up; formal study of ideas; formal pre-study; 

formal pre-project. For each of the phases activities 

have been identified. The generation of ideas and 

discussion of ideas for innovation start at start-up 

phase. This phase is often unclear and informal. 

Many ideas may originate from senior management 

suggestions, or conversations between managers 

and co-workers in informal situations. In the next 

phase, formal idea study, a little idea is specified 

and a clearer conception of the problem is defined. 

The result of this phase serves as input for the 

pre-formal study. In this phase the solution begins to 

be considered in the implementation point of view and 

is characterized by conducting empirical tests to the 

solution. The formal pre-project is where are carried 

out large-scale experiments and feasibility analyzes 

(Kurkkio et al., 2011). It is possible to perceive that 

although proposed by different authors at different 

times, these models have similarities and are in 

some cases changes from previous models. Whitney 

model (2007), for example, is strongly influenced by 

the work of Koen et al. (2001), especially regarding 

the  consideration  of  “influencing  factors”  in  the 

pre-development performance, on which companies 

do  not  have  full  control. Whitney  model  is  also 

presented in a circular format comprises three main 

interfaces that resemble the three-dimensional model 

of Koen et al. (2001).

The Voigt and Brem model (2009) resembles in 

theoretical contribution to the Cooper (1988) and 

the Koen et al. (2001). For being the latest model 

Brem & Voigt (2009) adds aspects not covered in 

the reference work (Cooper, 1988), for example, the 

study of market dynamics and technology.

Models of Murphy & Kumar (1997) and Khurana 

& Rosenthal (1998) are clearly based on the model 

of  Cooper  (1988),  resembling  the  activities  and 

information flow. The Cooper models (1988), Murphy 

& Kumar (1997) and Boeddrich (2004) gives the 

impression of linearity, i.e., the pre-development 

activities occur in defined time sequence, not being 

explicitly the effect of feedback or feedback that 

occur in the process.

As to the models Khurana & Rosenthal (1998), 

Koen et al. (2001), Flynn et al. (2003), Whitney (2007), 

Reid & Brentani (2004), Brem & Voigt (2009) and 

Kurkkio (2011) suggest the existence of interaction 

between the activities and among those involved in 

the pre-development.

As shown in Chart 3, most models emphasizes the 

pre-development of new products with the exception 

of Whitney models (2007) and Brem & Voigt (2009) 

that deal with the development of new technologies 

that support new products.

Because of the complexity of the pre-development 

phase the described models suggest, in some way, 

means to become their management more efficient and 

effective, either through the establishment of activities, 

organization, development of common nomenclature, 

establishing tools, gathering management information 

for the stage or the listing of best practices.

However, it is observed in all the models some 

limitation concerning to its applicability, as shown 

in Chart 3. These limitations are not exhibited by the 

authors of the works giving the idea that the models 

are generic and applicable to any kind of company.

Only the works of Brem & Voigt (2009) and Kurkkio 

(2011) mention the impossibility of generalization 

because they are models developed having as object 

of study very specific sector companies, such as 

technology and metallurgy respectively. It is importante 

to highlight that the models presented are based on 

literature reviews or developed through case study. 

Those derived from literature reviews are based on the 

best practices cited in the literature and therefore they 

do not present the results of its practical application, 

but only cite the benefits that can be expected from 

its application.

The models developed from review and case study 

were not practiced in the surveyed companies, ie 

companies were used only as a source of information 

for its elaboration and again the authors only cite the 

expected benefits from the adoption of these models. 

Thus, it is not possible to identify and analyze the 

actual effectiveness of the models proposed by the 

authors.

3.3.2 Correspondence between the 

activities of pre-development 

models

The number of stages or phases in those models 

does not vary much from one to another (Chart 4), 

however it is known that for each activity there is a 

Analisis of predevelopment models and activities...

9

set of other necessary sub-activities for its realization. 

The complexity and the number of these sub-activities 

may be significantly different depending on the kind 

of project that is being developed, the urgency of 

the project, the company’s objectives among others.

However, some activities appear recurrent in all 

models, as Chart 4 shows.

Although occur at different times, the phases 

(1) and (2) the models of Cooper (1988); Murphy & 

Kumar (1997); Khurana & Rosenthal (1998); Brem 

& Voigt (2009); Kurkkio (2011), Boeddrich (2004); 

(2) Whitney (2007), (3) Koen et al. (2002) and (3) and 

(4) Flynn et al. (2003) represent the moment in which 

ideas  should  be  generated,  refined,  selected  and 

improved. In the model of Reid & Brentani (2004, 

2012) ideas are built along its three interfaces.

Other  activities  present  in  almost  all  models 

are: the identification, analysis and opportunities 

selection, or verification by techniques and tools to 

support management of internal or external factors 

to the company and may result in amelioration or 

creation of a new product. These activities can be 

Chart 3. Comparison of the models for pre-development.

Author

Emphasis

Number of 

steps

Goals

Limitations

Cooper (1988) Consumer 

goods

4

Propose model that helps in better 

management of the initial PDP 

activities aimed at reducing failures 

in new products development.

Requires relatively large 

time, money and people with 

specific skills.

Murphy & 

Kumar (1997) Capital goods

3

Gather and provide information to 

companies working on the steps 

and activities undertaken prior to 

the development of the product.

The model was developed 

considering observations in a 

small sample of companies.

Khurana & 

Rosenthal 

(1998)

Consumer 

goods and 

Capital goods

3

List activities, problems and 

success factors in the pre-

development

Few details on how to 

operationalize the activities.

Koen et al. 

(2001)

Consumer 

goods and 

Capital goods

5

Consolidate best practices and 

establish a common language for 

the activities of pre-development.

Few details on how to 

operationalize the activities.

Flynn et al. 

(2003)

Consumer 

goods and 

Capital goods

4

Propose a model for improving 

the ability to “ideas management” 

for new products with support to 

computational tool.

It takes time, resources and 

skills. It depends on team 

cooperation.

Boeddrich 

(2004)

Consumer 

goods

4

Propose systematization of part of 

the pre-development. It also lists 

requirements for an efficient flow 

of ideas in the pre-development.

Absence of details on the 

practical implementation of 

the model.

Whitney 

(2007)

Technology

5

Establishes activities for the 

pre-development and list tools to 

operationalize these activities.

It does not address or show 

practical outcomes or benefits 

of adopting the suggested 

tools.

Reid & 

Brentani 

(2004, 2012)

Consumer 

goods and 

Capital goods

3

Propose a model for management 

of the pre-development radical 

products, based on the flow of 

information and in the decision 

making.

Strictly theoretical. Does not 

have practical results.

Brem & Voigt 

(2009)

Software and 

Information 

Technology

3

Model with pre-development bank 

for storage ideas.

Based on a single case, 

precluding generalization.

Kurkkio 

(2011)

Capital goods

4

Propose a model for development 

processes.

The model was developed 

from a field research in 

metallurgical and mining 

industries, making it difficult 

to generalize their application. 

Focus in the continuous 

processes.

Costa, M. A. B. et al.

10

Gest. Prod.

,  São  Carlos     

Chart 4.

 Comparison of activities / sub-phases of the pre-development of the models analyzed.

Cooper

 (1988)

Murphy &

 

Kumar

 (1997)

Khurana &

 

Rosenthal

 

(1998)

Koen

 et

 al.

 

(2002)

Flynn

 et

 al.

 

(2003)

Boeddrich

 

(2004)

Whitney (2007)

Interfaces

Reid &

 

Br

entani (2004) Interfaces

Br

em 

& V

oigt

 

(2009)

Kurkkio (201

1)

Ideas generation (1)

Ideas generation

 

(1)

Pre-phase zero (1)

Opportunities

 

Identification (1)

Strategic

 

direction (1)

Strategic

 

direction for

 

innovation (1)

Opportunities

 

identification

 

and selection (1)

Boundary

 

interface (1)

Pre- development (1)

Informal startup (1)

Preliminary

 

evaluation (2)

Product

 

definition (2)

Phase Zero (2)

Opportunity

 

Analysis (2)

Environmental

 

scanning (2)

Generation and

 

adoption of

 

ideas (2)

Generation and

 

selection of

 

ideas (2)

Gatekeeping

 

interface (2)

Ideas bank (2)

Formal study of

 

ideas (2)

Concept

 

definition (3)

Project analysis (3)

Phase one (3)

Ideas generation

 

(3)

Opportunities

 

Identification (3)

Execution

 

and screening

 

ideas and

 

development

 

concept (3)

Research and

 

Development

 

(3)

Project interface (3)

Implementation (3)

Formal pre- study (3)

Development (4)

Selection of

 

ideas (4)

Ideas generation

 

(4)

Preliminary

 

design (4)

Concept

 

Summary (4)

Formal pre- project (4)

Concept

 

Development

 

(5)

Analysis and

 

control (5)

Source: 

The author

.

Analisis of predevelopment models and activities...

11

seen in (1) and (2) from Cooper (1988); Murphy & 

Kumar (1997); Raid & Brentani of (2004/2012), 

step (1) and (4) Koen et al (2002), (1) Khurana & 

Rosenthal  (1998); Whitney  (2007),  (2)  Kurkkio 

(2011), and (3) Flynn et al. (2003). The model of 

Boeddrich (2004) does not identify when to take place 

the identification of opportunities, but cites the need 

for innovative companies analyze the opportunities 

contained in the generated ideas, however abstract 

they may be, if well used may result in successful 

projects. The model of Brem & Voigt (2009) is also 

not clear as to the identification of opportunities, on 

the other hand, analyzing more carefully it can be seen 

that the activities of stage (1) refer the possibilities 

of identifying opportunities through the creativity 

and the company’s innovation culture.

All authors mention the need for financial and 

commercial viability analysis, and analyzing the 

organizational capacity and alignment between the 

new product and the company’s strategy. Yet, not 

all models bring this account explicitly in the form 

of stages or phases. It is more evident in the models 

of Cooper (1988), Khurana & Rosenthal (1998), 

Koen et al. (2001), Flynn et al. (2003).

From the ten cited models, seven mention the 

definition and concept test as an important activity 

for the pre-development. This can be seen in stages 

(3) from Cooper (1988) & Boeddrich (2004), (2) Murphy 

& Kumar (1997) and Khurana & Rosenthal (1998), 

(4) Whitney (2007), (5) Koen et al. (2002) and in 

stages (2), (3) and (4) Kurkkio (2011). The models 

of Flynn et al. (2003) and of Brem & Voigt (2009) 

comprise only the management of ideas, not applying, 

therefore, the concept definition. The model of Reid 

& Brentani (2004, 2012) focuses on the flow of 

information and decision making, not directly addressing 

the concept definition. However, it is important to 

consider that the management of information flow 

and decision-making in pre-development guides the 

definition of new concepts.

From this analysis it was observed that regardless 

of the type, the emphasis, the number of stages or 

runtime major pre-development components activities 

can be grouped into: identification of opportunities; 

opportunities selection; idea generation or ideation; 

selection of ideas; concept development; concepts 

selections and project planning. These activities, 

even with different names, are present in all models.

Performing these activities requires a set of 

techniques or tools that can operationalize them and 

make the pre-development more efficient and effective.

Chart 5 shows the list of techniques and tools 

cited in the analyzed models and, according to the 

authors, can be adopted for the implementation of 

the pre-development activities.

According to Project Management Body of 

Knowledge (PMI, 2008), technique is a systematic 

procedure used to perform an activity to produce 

a product or result or provide a service, and may 

employ one or more tools for its execution. Since 

tool is defined as a template or a software program 

used in performing an activity to produce a product 

or a result.

It is noteworthy, however, that frame neither intends 

to group different nature techniques and nor limit the 

operation of the activities only to these techniques.

4 Final considerations

The  analysis  of  the Works  collected  by  BSR 

showed that pre-development is not a well established 

theme indicating, therefore, the need and possibility 

of various related studies.

It was observed the presence of 10 different models 

for the stage of pre-development. These models were 

published between 1988 and 2013 and seek, where 

possible, organize the pre-development and guide 

managers in conducting phase.

It is important to note that each model analyzed 

has a different purpose and proposes solutions for the 

pre-development companies belonging to different 

sectors, but all were, somehow, developed based on 

the pioneering work of Cooper published in 1988. 

While these models refer to the work of Cooper 

(1988), they diverge from each other in several aspects. 

Each model is composed of a number of different 

activities and each author presents a diverse set of 

techniques and tools to assist in the implementation 

of these activities.

It was observed that some activities are recurring 

in all the models. Such activities, in some cases are 

given different names, but basically refers to activities 

of  identification  of  opportunities;  opportunities 

selection; idea generation; selection of ideas; concept 

development; concepts selection and project planning.

We conclude, therefore, based on the bibliographic 

review, these activities are essential and must be 

present in the pre-development phase, regardless of 

the kind of product or industry in which the company 

operates.

Were also identified, as shown in Chart 5, 57 different 

techniques, according to the authors, may be effective 

for the conduction of the pre-development activities. 

According to the authors the same technique can be 

adopted in different activities of the pre-development 

to achieve different goals, nonetheless, it was not 

mentioned in the Works any reference indicating the 

real effectiveness of the application of such techniques. 

It was also observed that the analyzed models do not 

mention the practical results of their application, setting 

up a limitation to this research and reinforcing the 

Costa, M. A. B. et al.

12

Gest. Prod.

,  São  Carlos     

Chart 5. Techniques and tools for pre-development.

Activities

Techniques

Tools

Authors

Opportunities 

identification

Market research; direct contact with consumers; systematic 

collection of market information.

Spreadsheets, visual 

panels.

Cooper 

(1988)

Formal techniques (techniques of creativity, problem-

solving techniques, brainstorming); Informal techniques 

(discussions in cyberspace, ad hoc sections, individual 

perceptions).

Fishbone; mental 

maps; mapping 

process.

Koen et al. 

(2002)

Environmental factors / benchmarking; insights of 

employees; creativity techniques.

Mental maps; 

software for cross-

checking.

Flynn et al. 

(2003)

Market research; analysis of market segments; 

technological forecasting (trend analysis); trend analysis 

of consumers, consumers’ assessment; scenario planning; 

tecnology roadmapping; SWOT analysis; Relevance tree, 

implications wheel.

Software; 

spreadsheets; graphics

Whitney 

(2007)

Opportunities 

selection

Focus groups; market research; technical “what-if”; 

competitive intelligence; trend analysis.

Fishbone; mental 

maps; mapping 

process.

Koen et al. 

(2002)

Peer review; Scoring review; economic models; decision 

analysis; interactive methods; artificial intelligence; 

portfolio optimization.

Software 

mathematical 

programming 

(optimization and 

simulation).

Whitney 

(2007)