IDEA SHORTLISTING
THIS PAGE LOOKS AT HOW THE WEALTH OF IDEAS GENERATED WAS CONDENSED TO A HANDFUL.
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It’s easy. Just click “Edit Text” or double click me and you can start adding your own content and make changes to the font. Feel free to drag and drop me anywhere you like on your page. I’m a great place for you to tell a story and let your users know a little more about you.
DE BONO - 6 HATS
Now that lots of ideas had been generated it was a good time to return to the De Bono 6 Hats. This time no ideas would be generated as all of the possible ideas had been exhausted. This was used simply as a shirt listing method. By putting each of the ideas through the 6 hat process it meant that strong, medium and weak ideas started to come out. Of the 35 ideas genrated 13 were taken forward to the next shortlisting process. The ideas that were not taken forward were deemed too weak by a focus group an so were left behind. Concepts: 2, 7, 8, 12, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 34 and 35 were taken forward.
Too see each ideas in detail please click the shortlisting link at the bottom of this page or return to the idea genration page.
NUF Test
The NUF test was particularly useful in this part of the process at it started to bring forward the concept that were truly unique. The NUF test stands for New, Useable and Fesible. Each of the concepts are given a mark out of 10 for each of these factors. For example. If the product is very innovative it may earn 8,9 or 10 out of 10 and if not so it would score possibly 5 and below. The concepts with the highest total at the end were the most likely to impact the market. From the 13 concepts put through the NUF test, 7 were taken forward to the next stage of shortlisting.
All of these ideas were very strong and from here on in it was as much gut feeling to help decide which ideas to develop as it was shortlisting techniques.
WEIGHTED PUGH MATRIX
Next put the remaining 7 concepts through a Weighted Pugh's Matrix. In theory this method is a very good way of getting down to a few gems of ideas. The process took the URS developed from the research and used the points to generated a Critical to Satisfaction or Requirement (CTS) coloumn that would see if the concepts met the necessary requirements. Using a base concept (concept 2) a comparison was done to see how well the other concepts compared to the base on in the way they met the URS.
Unfortunately once the totals had been added together there weren's significant enough differences to completely rule out any of the 7 concepts. Having said that through there were concepts that did do slightly better than others, noteably concept 30. All 7 concepts were taken forward to the next shortlisting method.
WEIGHTED MATRIX
With all 7 concepts still in conention the final shortlisting process was another Weighted Matrix.This was similar to the Pugh Matrix but due to the weighting criteria and the fact that there was no base concept it meant that differences in the total points scored would be significantly different. After completing the matrix, 4 concepts had a greater total than the others and therefore met the URS better. These concepts were concepts 26, 30, 34 and 35.
Briefly summarised these are as follows:
Concept 26 - Steady Hand Game for Legs
Concept 30 - Foot Pedals with Central Hub, Game
Concept 34 - Ballet Bar with Resistance Bands
Concept 35 - Pull apart Garden Game for legs: User Vs. User
Click the link below to see the full Excel document containing all of the shortlisting methods above and concept names/descriptions.