Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (16)
- Journal article (1)
Language
- English (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (17)
Institute
- Informatik (17) (remove)
Publisher
- Springer (8)
- IEEE (3)
- Association for Computing Machinery (2)
- Elsevier (1)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V (1)
- Johannes Kepler University Linz (1)
- RWTH Aachen (1)
Context: Currently, most companies apply approaches for product roadmapping that are based on the assumption that the future is highly predicable. However, nowadays companies are facing the challenge of increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies, and shifting user expectations. Together with the adaption of lean and agile practices it makes it increasingly difficult to plan and predict upfront which products, services or features will satisfy the needs of the customers. Therefore, they are struggling with their ability to provide product roadmaps that fit into dynamic and uncertain market environments and that can be used together with lean and agile software development practices.
Objective: To gain a better understanding of modern product roadmapping processes, this paper aims to identify suitable processes for the creation and evolution of product roadmaps in dynamic and uncertain market environments.
Method: We performed a Grey Literature Review (GLR) according to the guidelines from Garousi et al.
Results: 32 approaches to product roadmapping were identified. Typical characteristics of these processes are the strong connection between the product roadmap and the product vision, an emphasis on stakeholder alignment, the definition of business and customer goals as part of the roadmapping process, a high degree of flexibility with respect to reaching these goals, and the inclusion of validation activities in the roadmapping process. An overall goal of nearly all approaches is to avoid waste by early reducing development and business risks. From the list of the 32 approaches found, four representative roadmapping processes are described in detail.
Context: Organizations are increasingly challenged by dynamic and technical market environments. Traditional product roadmapping practices such as detailed and fixed long-term planning typically fail in such environments. Therefore, companies are actively seeking ways to improve their product roadmapping approach.
Goal: This paper aims at identifying problems and challenges with respect to product roadmapping. In addition, it aims at understanding how companies succeed in improving their roadmapping practices in their respective company contexts.
Method: We conducted semi-structured expert interviews with 15 experts from 13 German companies and conducted athematic data analysis.
Results: The analysis showed that a significant number of companies is still struggling with traditional feature-based product-roadmapping and opinion-based prioritization of features. The most promising areas for improvement are stating the outcomes a company is trying to achieve and making them part of the roadmap, sharing or co-developing the roadmap with stakeholders, and establishing discovery activities.
Context: Agile practices as well as UX methods are nowadays well-known and often adopted to develop complex software and products more efficiently and effectively. However, in the so called VUCA environment, which many companies are confronted with, the sole use of UX research is not sufficient to find the best solutions for customers. The implementation of Design Thinking can support this process. But many companies and their product owners don’t know how much resources they should spend for conducting Design Thinking.
Objective: This paper aims at suggesting a supportive tool, the “Discovery Effort Worthiness (DEW) Index”, for product owners and agile teams to determine a suitable amount of effort that should be spent for Design Thinking activities.
Method: A case study was conducted for the development of the DEW index. Design Thinking was introduced into the regular development cycle of an industry Scrum team. With the support of UX and Design Thinking experts, a formula was developed to determine the appropriate effort for Design Thinking.
Results: The developed “Discovery Effort Worthiness Index” provides an easy-to-use tool for companies and their product owners to determine how much effort they should spend on Design Thinking methods to discover and validate requirements. A company can map the corresponding Design Thinking methods to the results of the DEW Index calculation, and product owners can select the appropriate measures from this mapping. Therefore, they can optimize the effort spent for discovery and validation.
Context: Nowadays the market environment is characterized by high uncertainties due to high market dynamics, confronting companies with new challenges in creating and updating product roadmaps. Most companies are still using traditional approaches which typically fail in such environments. Therefore, companies are seeking opportunities for new product roadmapping approaches.
Objective: This paper presents good practices to support companies better understand what factors are required to conduct a successful product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment.
Method: Based on a grey literature review, essential aspects for conducting product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment were identified. Expert workshops were then held with two researchers and three practitioners to develop best practices and the proposed approach for an outcome-driven roadmap. These results were then given to another set of practitioners and their perceptions were gathered through interviews.
Results: The study results in the development of 9 good practices that provide practitioners with insights into what aspects are crucial for product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. Moreover, we propose an approach to product roadmapping that includes providing a flexible structure and focusing on delivering value to the customer and the business. To ensure the latter, this approach consists of the main items outcome hypothesis, validated outcomes, and discovered outputs.
Today, companies face increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies, and rapid changes in customer behavior. Traditional approaches to product development typically fail in such environments and require companies to transform their often feature-driven mindset into a product-led mindset. A promising first step on the way to a product-led company is a better understanding of how product planning can be adapted to the requirements of an increasingly dynamic and uncertain market environment in the sense of product roadmapping. The authors developed the DEEP product roadmap assessment tool to help companies evaluate their current product roadmap practices and identify appropriate actions to transition to a more product-led company. Objective: The goal of this paper is to gain insight into the applicability and usefulness of version 1.1 of the DEEP model. In addition, the benefits, and implications of using the DEEP model in corporate contexts will be explored. Method: We conducted a multiple case study in which participants were observed using the DEEP model. We then interviewed each participant to understand their perceptions of the DEEP model. In addition, we conducted interviews with each company's product management department to learn how the application of the DEEP model influenced their attitudes toward product roadmapping. Results: The study showed that by applying the DEEP model, participants better understood which artifacts and methods were critical to product roadmapping success in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. In addition, the application of the DEEP model helped convince management and other stakeholders of the need to change current product roadmapping practices. The application also proved to be a suitable starting point for the transformation in the participating companies.
Context: Companies that operate in the software-intensive business are confronted with high market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies as well as fast-changing customer behavior. Traditional product roadmapping practices, such as fixed-time-based charts including detailed planned features, products, or services typically fail in such environments. Until now, the underlying reasons for the failure of product roadmaps in a dynamic and uncertain market environment are not widely analyzed and understood.
Objective: This paper aims to identify current challenges and pitfalls practitioners face when developing and handling product roadmaps in a dynamic and uncertain market environment.
Method: To reach our objective we conducted a grey literature review (GLR).
Results: Overall, we identified 40 relevant papers, from which we could extract 11 challenges of the application of product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. The analysis of the articles showed that the major challenges for practitioners originate from overcoming a feature-driven mindset, not including a lot of details in the product roadmap, and ensuring that the content of the roadmap is not driven by management or expert opinion.
Context
In a world of high dynamics and uncertainties, it is almost impossible to have a long-term prediction of which products, services, or features will satisfy the needs of the customer. To counter this situation, the conduction of Continuous Improvement or Design Thinking for product discovery are common approaches. A major constraint in conducting product discovery activities is the high effort to discover and validate features and requirements. In addition, companies struggle to integrate product discovery activities into their agile processes and iterations.
Objective
This paper aims at suggests a supportive tool, the “Discovery Effort Worthiness (DEW) Index”, for product owners and agile teams to determine a suitable amount of effort that should be spent on Design Thinking activities. To operationalize DEW, proposals for practitioners are presented that can be used to integrate product discovery into product development and delivery.
Method
A case study was conducted for the development of the DEW index. In addition, we conducted an expert workshop to develop proposals for the integration of product discovery activities into the product development and delivery process.
Results
First, we present the "Discovery Effort Worthiness Index" in form of a formula. Second, we identified requirements that must be fulfilled for systematic integration of product discovery activities into product development and delivery. Third, we derived from the requirements proposals for the integration of product discovery activities with a company's product development and delivery.
Conclusion
The developed "Discovery Effort Worthiness Index" provides a tool for companies and their product owners to determine how much effort they should spend on Design Thinking methods to discover and validate requirements. Integrating product discovery with product development and delivery should ensure that the results of product discovery are incorporated into product development. This aims to systematically analyze product risks to increase the chance of product success.