Reflection – Learning Launch in the Battery Operated Tools Industry

Challenge: I was a research member of a research project in my organization with the

objective to understand and identify the main end user requirements of battery-operated

tools for indoor wireline applications inside commercial and residential buildings. The

research objective was to understand the user requirements of these battery operated

tools to improve their usage and design and how to boost their sales. The project was

focused on understanding some of the key specific needs of end users towards the merit

of using battery operated tools over manual tools from a product standpoint. The project

product scope includes battery powered crimping and cutting tools focused on 1-6 tons

tools During 3 months, we focused on testing our assumptions across the entire value

chain of the industry having a number of strategic conversations and primary research

with all stakeholders including end users, leading original equipment manufacturers,

distributors, sales representatives and contractors associations.

Selection: The research team has implemented several design thinking tools. However,

we particularly focused on the learning launch tool with the objective to learn from

stakeholders and principally to test  in the real industry and inexpensively our key

assumptions developed during the prototyping stage. The main reason of selecting this

tool was to test, receive feedback from stakeholders and learn before having a direct

product roll out.

Application: For our learning launch, we focused on setting clear limits in our research

such as 3 months project, geography coverage including Eastern Region, Pacific Region,

Central region and Mountain region and 35 interviews with key stakeholders. We

focused on conducting small tests with 5 representatives of original equipment

manufacturers, 5 sales representatives, 20 end users and 5 contract associations. Primary

research included several C level executives and decision makers on the purchase of

tools. We build a diverse team of researchers with different backgrounds (industrial

automation, measurement and instrumentation) to support each of the primary research

with all stakeholders to conduct small tests and determine whether our critical

assumptions were correct or not

We applied the learning launch tool effectively focused on performing a survey based

on the key assumptions that need to be tested. In particular, we wanted to test whether

end users prefer a multipurpose battery operated tool having interchangeable heads by

using one single base tool instead of having a separate crimping and cutting tool

working independently.

The survey with all stakeholders across the value chain including 20 end users tested

our assumption that users prefer a single multipurpose tools in which users can crimp

and cut. Our team went through a number of primary research interviews and tests on

site to determine that a key requirement was to provide end users with interchangeable

heads for multiple applications with one single battery operated tool and provide

flexible tool usage. We made a research document with a clear description of tactical

product design requirements. For a second learning launch, we focused on providing

priorities on the design tactical recommendations with a specific timeline and priority.

Insight: By having the opportunity to apply the learning launch tool, we could learned

that our test assumption should be specific (product details such as range of tons,

interchangeable battery heads tools, etc) to don’t misinterpret our key assumptions

developed during the prototyping stage (What wows?). We had the opportunity to learn

that the usage of a learning launch tool, as it was explained during the course, is not a

go or not go decision. Instead, it was a learning experience to receive feedback from

stakeholders that allow us to improve our product design assumptions. Innovation is

does not mean stopping what you already do to be successful in your existing industry,

it means broaden your horizons and perspectives of the existing business. Innovation

should not be considered at a single point of time. Instead we should look at innovation

considering the evolution of the product across a time frame and understand that

requirements evolves over time.

Approach:  I believe the continuous learning experience at the “what works” stage is

critical instead of assuming our critical assumptions developed in the “what wows”

stage are correct. Next time, one of the main areas to improve is around the key metrics

we should focus on validating each critical assumption. During our survey we asked to

rate each requirement in a scale of 1 to 5 (1 and 2 meaning weak, 3 and 4 medium and 5

strong). The analysis presented was the perception of end users in our assumptions

analysis. However, I believe this kind of rating could be still more specific when we are

designing our learning lunch to don’t misinterpret our assumptions. The success metrics

should be detailed, specific and precise to confirm or not our critical assumptions.

