Class II

2000-2001

Class II completed their Capstone projects in November 2001. Below is a list of titles, authors, and advisors, followed by abstracts:

For a copy of a Capstone report, please e-mail christine.fisher@rit.edu and indicate project title, your organization, and the reason for your interest.

Current students should login.

Application of a Model for Effective Personality Profiling of Key Decision Makers for Use in Competitive Intelligence

Nancy Dibella (Kodak), Bob Gerardi (Xerox), Peter Kelch (Kodak), and Bill Messner (Veeco-CVC); Bob Barbato, faculty advisor; Tim Kindler (Kodak), industry advisor.

Developing models that forecast competitive behavior provides important strategic advantages. Unfortunately, a key decision maker's personality and style of thinking are absent from most competitive intelligence models. This paper builds upon an established model for personality profiling and develops a process for gathering, analyzing, and characterizing the behavioral pattern of key decision makers. A scorecard is proposed and the process validated through case studies.

Methods for Improving the Technology Readiness Assessment Process within New Product Development

Nick Evevsky (Xerox), Tom Maurer (Xerox), and Tom Wright (Kodak); Wayne Walter and Lou Fantozzi, faculty advisors; Alex Horvath and Bill Atkinson (both from Kodak), industry advisors.

Although significant improvements have been made to stage-gate processes and tools, may commercialization projects still fail as a result of inadequate risk assessment and risk management associated with new technologies. The authors identify several opportunities to improve the effectiveness of technology readiness assessment activities. A model is developed to address these opportunities, and a methodology is proposed for applying the decision model to existing stage-gate processes. The model is tested and verified on twenty projects.

The Role of Architecture in Defining the Business Strategy for New Product Development

Jeff Drawe (Xerox), Dave Erdtmann (Kodak), and Mary Roux (Xerox); Paul Stiebitz, faculty advisor; Nancy Rees (Xerox), industry advisor.

In search for sustainable growth, mature companies continually formulate new business strategies. At the same time, these companies are exploring new product architectures and technologies as a source of competitive advantage. Oftentimes, unfortunately, these activities take place independently because companies fail to comprehend the interdependencies. In this paper, a framework is presented that identifies key aspects and architectural decisions needed by firms to develop radically new business concepts. Three case studies are analyzed and were found to support the hypothesis that product architecture decisions play a critical role in building new business concepts. Linking architecture with business concept development allows companies to consider the entire value stream in its NPD strategy.

Technology Clusters - Improving Technology Transfer

Anne Bohan (Kodak), Lisa DeLouise (Xerox), and Paul Wegman (Xerox); Richard DeMartino, faculty advisor; Bud Hippisley (PIANY), industry advisor.

Regional industrial specialization has long been a recognized phenomenon, but the utilization of industrial clusters as a framework for economic development has not been exploited until recently. This paper explores the tenets of industrial cluster theory and applies them to the Rochester regional photonics cluster, to better understand the underpinnings of the cluster and to identify barriers to economic growth. A framework is developed and used to derive recommendations for facilitating growth of the Rochester regional photonics cluster.

Practical Guide to Assessing Organizational Readiness for Capitalizing on Virtual Teams

Joe Hancock (Xerox) and Mark Jankowski (Cliftronics); Sue Hartman, faculty advisor; Mark Kowalski (Cliftronics), industry advisor.

The use of virtual teams in new product development has many established benefits; however, organizations have had difficulty implementing virtual teams with any level of consistency. This paper presents a practical new tool, called the Virtual Teaming Scorecard, to help project managers assess whether their organization is capable of leveraging virtual teams to meet project objectives. Decision criteria are provided, along with decision support and real-world examples for each assessment characteristic. A case study illustrates utilization of the scorecard to predict the likelihood of success in a product development program.

Start-up Acceleration of NPD

Jodi Aboujoudi (Xerox), Joe Rouhana (Xerox), and Mark Muscato (Xerox); Sandra Rothenberg, faculty advisor; Ron Ippolito (Xerox), industry advisor.

Increasingly complex products and shorter product development cycle times impose significant challenges for teams and managers. This Capstone project seeks to better understand root causes associated with sluggish performance early in a project's life cycle. An in-depth examination of a recent project is undertaken along with historical data analysis from 180 other projects. Suggestions are offered for addressing the sources of slow progress during the early stages of NPD.

Selecting Winning Product Ideas in Mature Manufacturing Companies

Mark Amico (Xerox), Sue Burek (Kodak), and Zhenze Hu (Bausch & Lomb); Stelios Zyglidopoulos, faculty advisor; Gary Allen (Kodak), industry advisor.

This project examines the extent to which a popular screening tool can be applied to mature industries, and looks for opportunities to enhance the underlying model. Several hypotheses are developed and tested against data collected on 21 projects from three companies. Results from the study are utilized to adjust the model and provide recommendations for mature companies interested in improving their idea selection processes.

Radical Innovation: An Analysis of Strategy and Capabilities of Corporations in Upstate NY

Nick Ganzon (Goulds Pumps), Mike Moorehead (Bausch & Lomb), and Jack Rieger (Kodak); Bob Boehner, faculty advisor; Gary Einhaus (Kodak), industry advisor.

Established companies are usually successful at incremental innovation but have difficulties with radical innovation characteristic of new or unstable markets. Qualitative research based on interviews and published data were collected from five companies in upstate New York. Based on these studies, the authors describe best practices, and practices to avoid, to help companies create a culture of radical innovation that can coexist with capabilities for incremental innovation. A radical innovation capability model is proposed to enable companies to track progress in capability development.