Written in the front: recently for some reason to think about new products, or large companies in the development of new products, some not too shaped but also try to think of the whole idea, tentatively listed below. The whole industry and the product background have been removed, a bit dry.
Decision paths for >>>> products
-Product Strategy
Why do you want to develop this product, that is, whether you need this product?
Can the company's resources support the development and operation of this product?
What is the product?
-Product decision
When is the decision to be developed?
When will the development be completed?
-Product decision
is the product design right?
is the product design good?
-Resource utilization
How to make use of internal resources?
How to use external resources?
-Operational Strategy
How to operate, including team, rhythm, means and so on?
How to get "profit" through the product to obtain the set profit?
More generally, this is about how to develop and operate a product in a large company, including at least three aspects: the good of the product itself, the strength of the performer's "knock", and how to use the resources.
More macro, is the product of the macro-technology and social atmosphere, the big trend, a specific company, are only part of the trend, or at most to promote the trend.
specifically to product strategy and decision, Steve Jobs is worth remembering that innovation is not about saying yes to everything. But to say no to everything except the vital features.
Decision makers of >>>> products and thinking of decision making behind them
Who makes the final decision? -Usually the company's core.
Who is the executive level decision? -Project Responsible person
How to motivate people with related resources? -Why do they support it? Why don't you support it?
From the point of view of the specific leader, is it deep dive into development and operation? This means that it is not actually taking responsibility for the failure of the product. From a higher leader's point of view, only the top leader (the one who is ultimately responsible) will be able to think through the whole thing from beginning to end.
Large companies in the development of products, two kinds of statements are very interesting: one is "grass under the tree", one is "back to the tree good shade." As a result, it is necessary to have nothing to "knock" the momentum of opening all doors, but also to take advantage of the resources of large companies.
The stimulation of related resources is quite important and varies by degree: spontaneous support and support, strong demands, superficial, absent-minded support, responded-style objections, total opposition and resistance.
New product decision, not necessarily everyone can understand, perhaps because of the height and breadth of vision, may also be because of the egotistical. On the strategic level, you may have to understand, do not change the idea of substitution. Recently, Huawei's approach to learning IBM's Integrated Product Development (IPD) at the end of the last century was fit and totally acceptable. I always believe that this is the key step in the history of Huawei.
Outside, the big company's new product ideas, I actually quite agree with Tom Peters years ago the whole group of views, I read this: to the next push on the product, in the product itself does not get the real kinetic energy, not to win the support of the Big Boss. In fact, whether it is a large company, or the entire industrial system, innovative products are not relying on the endorsement of predecessors.
The last thing to say is that the person who is ultimately responsible for this is going to think through the whole idea. (I look at products, one like to see product design itself is not good, this is the location of interest and limitations; the second is to see who the person is, see the role of this person is vague or clear, this is in the system of many necessary decisions of the main reference basis. ）
Written in the back: scholars should have more routine analysis, when there is time to look for information to see, but I wrote this afternoon in the notebook of this thinking and analysis, the value of my own, after all, is based on the actual experience.
