Refine
Document Type
Language
- English (16)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (16)
Institute
- Informatik (16)
Publisher
- Springer (8)
- IEEE (3)
- ACM (2)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik (1)
- Johannes Kepler University Linz (1)
- RWTH Aachen (1)
Context: The software-intensive business is characterized by increasing market dynamics, rapid technological changes, and fast-changing customer behaviors. Organizations face the challenge of moving away from traditional roadmap formats to an outcome-oriented approach that focuses on delivering value to the customer and the business. An important starting point and a prerequisite for creating such outcome-oriented roadmaps is the development of a product vision to which internal and external stakeholders can be aligned. However, the process of creating a product vision is little researched and understood.
Objective: The goal of this paper is to identify lessons-learned from product vision workshops, which were conducted to develop outcome-oriented product roadmaps.
Method: We conducted a multiple-case study consisting of two different product vision workshops in two different corporate contexts.
Results: Our results show that conducting product vision workshops helps to create a common understanding among all stakeholders about the future direction of the products. In addition, we identified key organizational aspects that contribute to the success of product vision workshops, including the participation of employees from functionally different departments.
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.
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.
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: 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: Companies in highly dynamic markets increasingly struggle with their ability to plan product development and to create reliable roadmaps. A main reason is the decreasing lack of predictability of markets, technologies, and customer behaviors. New approaches for product roadmapping seem to be necessary in order to cope with today's highly dynamic conditions. Little research is available with respect to such new approaches. Objective: In order to better understand the state of the art and to identify research gaps, this article presents a review of the scientific literature with respect to product roadmapping. Method: We performed a systematic literature review (SLR) with respect to identify papers in the field of computer science. Results: After filtering, the search resulted in a set of 23 relevant papers. The identified papers focus on different aspects such as roadmap types, processes for creating and updating roadmaps, problems and challenges with roadmapping, approaches to visualize roadmaps, generic frameworks and specific aspects such as the combination of roadmaps with business modeling. Overall, the scientific literature covers many important aspects of roadmapping but does provide only little knowledge on how to create product roadmaps under highly dynamic conditions. Research gaps address, for instance, the inclusion of goals or outcomes into product roadmaps, the alignment of a roadmap with a product vision, and the inclusion of product discovery activities in product roadmaps. In addition, the transformation from traditional roadmapping processes to new ways of roadmapping is not sufficiently addressed in the scientific literature.
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. The study focuses on mid-sized and large companies developing software-intensive products in dynamic and technical market environments. Method: We conducted semi structured expert interviews with 15 experts from 13 German companies and conducted a thematic 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 the establishing discovery activities.
Context: Organizations are increasingly challenged by high market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations. In consequence, many organizations are struggling with their ability to provide reliable product roadmaps by applying traditional roadmapping approaches. Currently, many companies are seeking opportunities to improve their product roadmapping practices and strive for new roadmapping approaches. A typical first step towards advancing the roadmapping capabilities of an organization is to assess the current situation. Therefore, the so-called maturity model DEEP for assessing the product roadmapping capabilities of companies operating in dynamic and uncertain environments has been developed and published by the authors.
Objective: The aim of this article is to conduct an initial validation of the DEEP model in order to understand its applicability better and to see if important concepts are missing. In addition, the aim of this article is to evolve the model based on the findings from the initial validation.
Method: The model has been given to practitioners such as product managers with the request to perform a self-assessment of the current product roadmapping practices in their company. Afterwards, interviews with each participant have been conducted in order to gain insights.
Results: The initial validation revealed that some of the stages of the model need to be rearranged and minor usability issues were found. The overall structure of the model was well received. The study resulted in the development of the version 1.1 of the DEEP product roadmap maturity model which is also presented in this article.
Through increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations coupled with the adoption of lean and agile practices, companies are struggling with their ability to provide reliable product roadmaps by applying traditional approaches. Currently, most companies are seeking opportunities to improve their product roadmapping practices. As a first challenge they have to assess their current product roadmapping capabilities in order to better understand how to improve their practices and how to switch to a new approach. The aim of this article is to provide an initial maturity model for product roadmapping practices that is especially suited for assessing the roadmapping capabilities of companies operating in dynamic and uncertain market environments. Based on interviews with 15 experts from 13 various companies the current state of practice regarding product roadmapping was identified. Afterwards, the model development was conducted in the context of expert workshops with the Robert Bosch GmbH and researchers. The study results in the so-called DEEP 1.0 product roadmap maturity model which allows companies to conduct a self assessment of their product roadmapping practice.
Nowadays companies are facing increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations. Together with the adoption of lean and agile practices this situation makes it increasingly difficult to plan and predict upfront which products, services or features should be developed in the future. Consequently, many organizations are struggling with their ability to provide reliable and stable product roadmaps by applying traditional approaches. This paper aims at identifying and getting a better understanding of which measures companies have taken to transform their current product roadmapping practices to the requirements of a dynamic and uncertain market environment. This also includes challenges and success factors within this transformation process as well as measures that companies have planned for the future. We conducted 18 semi-structured expert interviews with practitioners of different companies and performed a thematic data analysis. The study shows that the participating companies are aware that the transformation of traditional product roadmapping practices to fulfill the requirements of a dynamic and uncertain market environment is necessary. The most important measures that the participating companies have taken are 1) adequate item planning concerning the timeline, 2) the replacement of a fixed time-based chart by a more flexible structure, 3) the use of outcomes to determine the items (such as features) on the a roadmap, 4) the creation of a central roadmap which allows deriving different representation for each stakeholder and department.