Guided product idea generation

O~,fEG.4 The Int. JI of Mgmt Sci., Vol. I[, No. 6, pp. 547-557, 1983

0305-0483 ~353.00 ~0.00 Copyright (2 1983 Pergamon Press Ltd

Pnn:ed in Great Britain. All rights reser,,ed

Guided Product Idea Generation STIG

OTTOSSON

Progrator Innovation AB, Floda, Sweden (Received March 1983; in revised form May 1983) This article describes a successful method for getting many good product ideas during a short period of time, which was developed by the patent broker New Products Nordlnvent (NP) to be used instead of the normal method of spontaneous idea generation. The article is based on a project 'Swede Innovation '81' in which 12 large Swedish companies formulated 64 search profiles and asked all Swedish inventors to invent new products with this guide. NP formulated the original model--which has advantages for the companies, the patent broker and the inventors--and carried through the project on commission from these companies. Out of 2710 product idea contributions sent for evaluation, about ten products will go into production. This figure could have been higher if the companies had been better prepared to receive new products and had had a better knowledge of managing innovations.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N ECONOMIC GROWTH presupposes new ideas, development and change. Perhaps the most important source of progress and development is successful innovation, i.e. developing initiatives around new technical ideas and discoveries [1]. The first step in any innovation process is to discover good ideas and inventions--and, of course, the higher the quality and originality of the ideas or inventions, the better their commercial prospects. In many countries, patent brokers have specialised in evaluating inventions and licensing out accepted inventions to companies after patents have been applied for. Generally the inventors contact the patent agents afte~ completing their inventions. Inventions are often motivated by the inventor's own experience of the need for a solution to a technical problem or for a product. However, characteristic of this 'spontaneous generation of ideas' is the difficulty encountered by the inventor or the patent agent in getting the invention accepted by a company. In Sweden, an enterprise--New Products Nordlnvent (NP)---has responded to this situation and developed an interesting new way of generating ideas/inventions in a guided process. 547

NP's working premise is to encourage companies (against payment) to develop various areas of research for new products and then invite inventors to invent products within these areas. The first project conducted by NP was in Sweden in 1981-82, 'Swede Innovation '81' (SI 81), in which 12 large Swedish companies that had formulated 64 search profiles participated. This paper reports on the motives behind SI 81, how the project was conducted, what results were achieved and to what extent these results satisified the model assumptions which were formulated in advance by NP. The knowledge gained and described in the paper should be of value for every company that plans to be active in innovation processes.

2. T H E D R A W B A C K S OF S P O N T A N E O U S IDEA G E N E R A T I O N Since early 1974, NP, as a patent broker, has adopted many new product ideas, applied for patents and then, on a licensed basis, transferred them to companies for production and marketing. These new ideas have come to NP in a random way from many different inventors. One of the problems of the so-called spontane-

548

Ottosson--Guided Product Idea Generation

ous idea generation approach is that for the most part only one product idea is evaluated at a time for each product field. This means that the product idea is either refused or accepted for further evaluation without competition from other product ideas in the same field. Without reference material, ideas with inadequate technical content are often accepted, which is usually very costly and inefficient. Furthermore, inventors who bring their product ideas to patent brokers are mostly inexperienced or less successful inventors. Hence their product ideas are often of a lower quality than those coming from professional inventors. Consequently, since professional inventors have usually established their own channels for transferring their product ideas to companies, patent brokers tend to be left with product ideas of a low quality. When a product idea has been accepted for further evaluation by a broker, he will, usually at his own risk, assume the costs for patent investigations, prototype manufacturing, and testing and patent applications in many countries. All this has to be done without knowing if there is a potential receiving company for the product. Thus the broker has to work a great deal on speculation, which could be hazardous to his existence. Moreover, finding a good receiving company for the product is always difficult, and the result depends upon many factors such as timing, management climate, the company's innovation experience and financial status. The greatest resistance to overcome is often the well-known 'not-invented-here' (NIH) syndrome. Much work has to be done to convince the receiving company that licensing of the invention will be a good investment in the long run. The broker has to present a great deal of background material (e.g. patent situation, market analyses, mechanical test protocols, etc.) in order to persuade the company to acquire the product idea. Down-payment sums and royalty percentages reached are very much dependent upon this work. Thus the path from product evaluation to license agreement is costly--long, hard and economically hazardous. No matter how well the work has been done, the chances of earning money on spontaneously generated ideas have proved to be few and far between for most patent brokers.

3. MODEL FOR GUIDED PRODUCT IDEA GENERATION During the winter of 1979-80, NP examined a number of ways to overcome the problems encountered in spontaneous product idea generation. This examination resulted in the following method: (1) Consult companies about their need for new products.

(2) Formulate search profiles together with the companies which have joined the campaign.

(3) Publicize the search profiles and try to incite interest among inventors through, for example, a competition. (4) Evaluate the inventions submitted with the help of a neutral group of experts. (5) Present the inventions to the appropriate company/ies. (6) Negotiate a license agreement with the company/ies for the inventions selected. This method would offer advantages to all three parties involved--the participating companies, the patent brokers and the inventors. The following model assumptions were formulated as numbered advantages.

Advantages for the participating companies (1) A large number of creative minds would work simultaneously on each defined problem. (2) Many professional inventors would contribute.

(3) A large sample of ideas concentrating on a specific profile would result in a substantially better choice of product as well as offering the possibility of combining product ideas. (4) The idea market would be 'vacuum cleaned', i.e. both old and new ideas would

Omega, Vol. I1, No. 6

come forward and thus provide the participating companies with a survey of the ideas in their respective fields.

Advantages Jor the project leader (NP)

(5) The companies would pay a participation fee in advance for the search and evaluation work. (6) General license terms could be established in advance between NP and the companies. (7) License terms between the inventor and NP could be established in advance.

(8) As there is a specific need for new ideas, the participating companies would probably show more interest than they would do otherwise. (9) It is likely that the companies would take over patent costs from NP earlier than they would for spontaneously generated product ideas.

(~o) As the companies know the market, no market research by NP would be necessary.

(Ii) NP would not need to make prototypes and test them. If a company requests NP to do this sort of work, the company should bear the costs.

Advantages for the inventors (12) The inventors could invent items which are requested, for which there is a need. (13) The inventors would have no evaluation and patent costs. (14) The inventors would receive an evaluation of the quality and commerical possibilities of their inventions quickly. 4. APPLICATION OF T H E M O D E L

Investigation stage A working model of SI 81 following the assumptions listed in Section 3 was developed.

549

To secure the invention rights for the inventors, it was decided that all contributions should be sent to and registered with a patent agency with a reliable record of confidentiality. Until presentable and feasible inventions had been extracted by NP, interaction would take place only between the inventors and the patent agency. The whole chain from the inventors to an evaluation by the participating companies is shown in Fig. 1. It should be noted that no contributions were to be shown to the participating companies before patents had been applied for. To attract inventors to participate in the campaign, it was decided to sponsor an invention competition with prizes totalling $35,000. The first prize would amount to $15,000. The working model was presented to 15 companies in Sweden, and the response was so enthusiastic that the management of NP decided to initiate the SI 81 project. Twelve companies were chosen to participate in the project at a standard fee of $25,000, which included five product search profiles, the costs for the campaign, evaluation of incoming inventions, patent fees, etc. The companies are listed below: AB Custos, Eldon AB, AB Electrolux, ESAB AB, Gr/inges Weda A B, Sandvik AB, AB SKF, SkS.ne Gripen AB, Stiga AB, Swedish Match AB, Svenska Utvecklings AB, AB VOLVO. Electrolux, ESAB, Sandvik, SKF, Swedish Match and VOLVO are multinational corporations, with a turnover of more than $1.2 bn. The remaining companies have a turnover in the range of $12m-1.2 bn and are well known in Sweden. They are all manufacturing companies in the fields of mechanical and electrical engineering, building components and computers, and they are established in both the industrial and consumer sectors of the market. Ten of the corporations are listed on the Swedish Stock Exchange and four are also listed on foreign stock exchanges.

550

Ottosson--Guided Product Idea Generation

inventors[ Inventions

i

Return Of

\,

inventions

Patent agency,~ registration

f

\

Return

Patent authority, patentability investigations

[

Pateniapp;icLo s

Patented or patent applied contributions

• Competition board,

prize winners

J

1 Participating Companies, eva]uation

FIG. I. Participants in the campaign and the different steps from invention to invention evaluation.

Preparation stage

paid to the inventor; 20% remains with NP and In November and December 1980, idea 50% goes to the patent right investors, a condisearch profiles were produced by the companies tion peculiar to Sweden. in conjunction with NP. The search profiles A basic license agreement was signed between NP and each participating company before the were matched together by NP in order to avoid commencement of the campaign. This license any overlaps between the companies. In all, 64 idea search profiles for the different search areas agreement stated for each invention accepted by the company a low down-payment of $35,000, were set up (see Appendix). During the preparation stage, much effort or what the inventor could prove he had inwas exerted to cover all the legal aspects of the vested in prototypes, etc. Royalties were to be in project, i.e. to clarify the process of transferring the range of 3 to 6%. The company had an inventions from an inventor to a receiving com- option on all inventions received within their pany, giving both parties confidence in NP as a /search profile for six months after the closing middleman. The legal chain as well as the cash date of the campaign. After the option had flow is shown in Fig. 2. As can be seen in the expired or after rejection by the company, NP figure, only a fraction (30%) of the royalty is was free to find other licensees.

30%of royalty

Royalty

Assignment of

License agreement

patent rights

of patent rights to produce and market

I

FIG. 2. L ~ a l a ~ e c t s ~ t h e c h a m ~ o m ~ v e n t o r

torecew~compa~.

Omega, Vol. 11, No. 6

The assignment of patent rights between the inventors and NP gave NP exclusive rights to the ideas during the six months the companies had an option on them from NP. During this period NP had to bear all patent or patent application costs. If a license agreement was closed, the inventor would receive the whole down-payment plus 3030 of all other royalties. The preparation stage was concluded by the printing of a special publication called The Innocator, which contained a presentation of all the participating companies and the 64 idea search profiles. For reasons of company secrecy, the reader could not, with a few exceptions, connect the search profiles to the companies. [n the publication were also a number of short articles on inventions and the rules of the special invention competition. Campaign stage

The SI 81 project was launched at a ceremony in Stockholm. A large number of guests were invited, including representatives from the press, radio and television. The speakers included the Swedish Minister of Industry, the head of the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences, a representative of NP and representatives from the participating companies. The event was extremely well received by the mass media, and several articles and reports were written, which, together with advertisements in 60 newspapers and magazines in Sweden, had a great impact. In the first two weeks after the launching of the project, 7000 copies of The Innovator were ordered and, during the following eight weeks, another 5000 copies were requested. A continuous flow of ideas arrived at the patent agent hired for the purpose of receiving contributions. By the end of the campaign, which lasted from February until the end of September 1981, a total of 2710 product idea contributions had been received, of which 2247 could be coupled to a search profile. Distribution according to product area is shown in the Appendix. Selection stage

In order to select product ideas for further development, NP set up a selection board consisting of a PhD in Physics, an inventor and a patent engineer. All three members of the board were creative and had considerable experience in innovatory services.

55t

In the first selection round. 463 contributions were returned to the originators as they were either of the perpetuum mobile type. or could not be associated with any of the search profiles--even if they were good ideas. In the second round, 322 contributions were returned on the grounds that they were already known or considered to have inadequate technical content for the participating companies. In the third round, 1751 contributions were returned after considerable research because they were either not of an innovative nature or had doubtful technical or commercial features. Of the remaining contributions, l0 had already been patented, and the other 164 still unpatented were sent to the Swedish Patent Office for analysis. Of this latter group, 44 proved to be suitable for patent applications, which were then made for these contributions. The selection process is summarized in Table 1. Of the 92 contributions remaining after round 4, 10 were already patented, 44 had patent applications in process and 38 were regarded as 'know-how" contributions. "Know-how' contributions were those that could not be patented, but considered to be of economic interest to the participating companies. Presentation stage

Between November 1981 and February 1982, the remaining 92 contributions were further developed and presented to the participating companies. The description of each contribution was made as succinct as possible in order to facilitate decisions and ensure that the details did not conceal the main principles. Each contribution was documented under the following headings: --present state of the art; --technical description; - - p a t e n t situation; --illustrations; --proposal for development project; --summary. The contributions presented are listed in the Appendix. which also includes the classifications used by NP in The Innovator.

Ottosson--Guided Product Idea Generation

552

Invenrl vness

TABLE I. RESULTS OF THE SELECTION OF CONTRIBUTIONS TO S[ 81 Total n u m b e r of contributions August Round Round Round Round

1981 1: J u n e - A u g 2: July-Sept 3: Sept-Oct 4: O c t - N o v

Contributions returned

Contributions remaining

-463 322 1751 82

2710 2247 1925 174 92

1981 1981 1981 1981

O/o /

i0 L 5~

w

I.,,/,

e

~ d

,

tO 20 30 40

l

s

,

POOul~t ion curve h men

,

50 60

70 BO 90

I00

Age FiG. 3. Incentiveness curve for Swedish men in 1981 compared with the population curve Jor Swedish men in 1981. Source: [3].

Competition procedure In march 1982 an independent jury consisting of two professors, both with thorough knowledge and experience of technology, and a well known television producer who specializes in programs on new technology subjects, compared the 44 patent applications and 10 patented contributions shown in Table 1. The jury then produced a list of the six best contributions whose level of technology, marketing prospects etc. were ranked, and an honorary list of I1 other contributions. Finally, the jury selected six from the 38 'know-how' contributions for a special honors list..The prizes were awarded at a large ceremony, with the same speakers as those present at the commencement of the campaign. 5. E V A L U A T I O N

Inventor response SI 81 attracted 1270 inventors (of whom only 12 were women), which must be regarded as a very high figure for a country with such a small population--the total population of Sweden is 8 million. This amount of interest was also far greater than NP had expected.

Many of the inventors offered several contributions in response to different search profiles. The highest number was 47 contributions from one inventor. A clear spread in creativity for different ages of contributors was found in SI 81, as is shown in Fig. 3. The low contribution rate for men under 30 was somewhat unexpected by NP, especially since considerable efforts had been made to reach young inventors. However, similar experiences have been reported before [2]. A more thorough investigation of the material reveals a preference of different age categories to invent in different technological fields (see Table 2). Another interesting finding from the SI 81 campaign is that people from the three largest cities in Sweden encompassing 20% of the country's total population, produced 61% of the total contributions. This information is consistent with the findings from another investigation [3] which revealed that 54% of all the inventors came from these three cities. In general, model assumption no. 1 (see Section 3) seemed to be valid.

TABLE 2. INVENTIVENESSOF SWEDISH MEN FOR DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGY FIELDS AND INVENTOR'S AGE GROUPS(PERCENTAGE) Technology field (see Appendix)

19 and under

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15

t 0 0 4 I 2 0 3 [ 1 0 I 0 0 0

3 2 0 1 6 3 0 8 2 2 2 [ 0 0 8

6 4 3 6 8 6 7 11 7 6 6 9 2 2 I1

6 14 6 13 [5 13 9 II 15 14 9 16 3 3 25

12 17 12 29 16 16 24 11 16 15 19 22 14 14 7

14 14 17 22 13 16 21 4 12 II 14 l0 [9 25 13

16 16 13 4 12 13 16 2 12 15 10 8 12 6 4

Tota[ idea contribution (",;;)

0.6

[.9

4.9

[ 1.2

17.5

14.5

12.9

Age range 45-49 50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75 and over

12 7 12 9 10 6 3 7 7 11 11 7 17 12 7

8 6 10 7 7 9 6 20 10 7 11 5 9 14 9

9 8 15 2 5 6 11 9 7 8 8 4 7 11 8

7 6 7 0 3 5 0 2 4 7 5 7 7 0 0

5 3 2 t 2 3 0 0 4 2 3 7 7 0 0

I 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 I 2 3 3 3 3

8.7

8.0

7.7

5.1

3.8

2.7

Omega. Val. 11. No. 6

Inventor categories Three inventor categories have recently been proposed [4]: technological, professional and traditional inventors. Technological inventors represent a technically ~lite segment of society, mainly working with high technology products. The category of technological inventor is composed of creative scientists, engineers and other individuals who invent within their professions and have been successful in having one or more products go through the innovation processes. Professional inventors are creative individuals with no special education, who earn a living from or supplement their income with royalties from inventions they have made. Traditional or "need' inventors are individuals who are creative, but who have not yet proved that their ideas can succeed in the innovation process, i.e. become new products on the market. Need inventors constitute the majority. This group comprised 76% of the total number of inventors in SI 81, or 965 out of 1270 inventors, and produced 2382 product ideas. The quality of the contributions from this group was, however, very low. Only 1.5~,'o or 35 contributions survived round 4 in Table 1. In the data on SI 81, no separation between professional and technological inventors was possible. About 17% of the contributions from professional and technological inventors passed round 4. The number of professional and technological inventors contributing to S! 81 was large (205). Thus assumption no. 2 in the model proved to be correct. Q,mlity of ideas The formulation of the text of the search profile had a great influence on the number of contributions received and the quality of the ideas. Very narrow search profiles on a specific problem generally gave few and low-quality ideas. Broad search profiles containing few limitations tended to give many and high-quality ideas. Model assumption no. 3 therefore depends on the formulation of the search profile as well as the product field. Also the technological level affects the inflow of ideas. However, since each search profile, with a few exceptions (c.f. Appendix), resulted in many contributions, and since many professional and technological inventors participated in SI 81, model assumption no. 3 is probably valid.

o~E 1 1 6 ~ c

553

Model assumption no. 4 proved to be correct since 482/~, of the contributions go to SI 81 were old inventions. The remaining 52~ o were invented after the inventors had received the search profile formulations.

Economic terms All the participating companies had to pay the fee at the start of the project, which provided NP with a good economic base from which to work. Model assumption no. 5 was thus easy to fulfil. In fact, the fee seems to have been too low for such an elaborate project; it did not even exceed the yearly salary and social costs of one patent engineer in Sweden. License terms between NP and the companies were easy to establish in advance as ordinary standard contracts could be used. Royalties of 3 to 6~o on sales prices from licensees met with no objections. Small down-payments are always desirable for licensees, since the licensee will always have large developing and marketing costs in the beginning before the product starts to generate income. Thus model assumption no. 6 holds well in practice. Model assumption no. 7 was easy to fulfil as NP set the rules for the inventors' participation. Each inventor had to sign the rules in order to be able to participate. Some inventors have told representatives of NP that they did not wish to participate because they thought that the economic terms were not good enough, and because they had to wait too long for the inventions to be examined by the companies. In some cases, inventors traced the companies behind the search profiles and offered them their inventions directly; but the companies seem to have requested the inventors to go through NP. Adoption of inventions Although the results of SI 81 are regarded as very good by both NP and the participating companies, only one license had been signed by late January 1983 between NP and one of the smallest companies in the project. At that time discussions were still in progress with six of the participating companies about eight products from SI 81. Model assumptions nos. 8 to 11 have therefore proved difficult to fulfil: the conclusion is perhaps that more work is needed, both with and within the companies, before the presentation of the inventions.

554

Ottosson--Guided Product Idea Generation

One essential reason for this slow and rather up presentation to the companies. It should be poor rate of adoption of inventions by the noted, however, that this conclusion is in concompanies is that substantial changes in person- tradiction with model assumption no. 3. nel and,or strategy shifts have occurred in six of the twelve companies during the project year. 6. CONCLUSIONS Some search profiles were consequently no longer valid for these companies when presented Guided product idea generation conducted in and others had no receiver in the company. the form of a campaign such as SI 81 has proved Another reason for the slow rate of adoption is to be a very powerful method of reaching that none of the companies had been prepared substantial results in a short period of time. All to receive new products, which to some extent of the first seven model assumptions in Section reveals a communication problem between NP 3 have been confirmed. and the companies. However, the receiving partner is, as always, The experience from SI 81 also shows that the crucial for a lasting result in such a campaign. larger and more experienced the company, the This method seems to be best suited for small or lower the likelihood of its adopting an invention diversified organizations that are generally more that fails outside its standard product program. flexible as regards setting up both mandatory Companies that were in some sort of crisis due and feasible conditions for new products than to market or product problems were more re- large or less diversified organizations. Other ceptive to products outside their standard pro- suitable receivers could be innovation engram. trepreneurs, who search for new products. EsDespite the slow adoption of inventions from pecially for investment companies and commuSI 81, eight of the twelve companies have agreed nities, this type of receiver offers interesting to participate in a similar project, 'Nord Inno- possibilities for helping new companies to get vation '83". Nord Innovation was launched by started. NP in November 1982 and encompasses the For attaining satisfactory results as to the Nordic countries--Denmark, Norway, Finland number of products generated, good campaign and Sweden. All inventors in these countries and development work does not suffice. It is also have been invited to submit contributions in necessary for the patent broker to use his own response to 126 search profiles formulated by 70 or hired innovation experts to assist the receiving companies of various sizes based in Scan- companies in making search profiles for suitable dinavia. With this project NP has been devoting products and to help the participating compamuch more energy to preparing the companies nies to prepare for the reception of the for reception of inventions, which should im- inventions--to introduce them on the market prove the rate of adoption in the companies. etc. Thus, the field of competence has to be broader for a patent broker working with Inventor advantages guided product idea generation than for a broModel assumption no. 12 seems to be correct, ker working in a more traditional way. but the result depends very much on the formuThere seem to be no problems in starting new lation of the search profile. Detailed problem campaigns with the same search profiles with descriptions have been found to need more some time lapse in between. Most circumstances information in ways that are difficult to commu- shift rather quickly in the companies and in nicate in a text. Open search profiles without society. One year is often sufficient for discovmany limitations seem to stimulate more unique ering new potential: roughly 50~0 of the ideas in inventions: among the prize winners of the SI 81 were new. competition, the first, second and sixth prizes A rather large number of inventions in SI 81 were inventions based on such search profiles. seems to have been wasted. However, many Model assumptions nos. 13 and 14 are correct inventions that were not close enough to the for new inventions, but not for already patented existing product mix in one company or were ones. For such inventions, this kind of cam- technically inadequate for the large companies paign is costly and the inventors tend to suffer could surely have been of great interest to small from a time lag if short cuts are not made in or medium-sized companies. This would seem evaluation work (c.f. Fig. 1), in order to speed to indicate that there are interesting possibilities

Omega. Vol. I1. No. 6

for reprocessing work for other purposes--a potential which was not tapped in SI 81. Guided product idea generation could be utilized in a modified way directly by companies. organizations etc. as one tool for finding new product ideas. Other tools include, for example, various creative group techniques. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The a u t h o r wishes to t h a n k Mr H Blenner, M r A J 6 n e m a n , Mr M Pettersson and Mr G W e n n e r s t r 6 m at N P for their c o o p e r a t i o n and readiness to provide the necessary material. The a u t h o r is also grateful to M r T N o r t h for e v a l u a t i n g all the statistical data. Special t h a n k s are due to Professor W G o l d b e r g for his constructive c o m m e n t s and fruitful discussions.

555

REFERENCES 1. L1DEN P (1978) R e s u l t a t av STU: u p p f i n n i n g s s t 6 d 1968-1975. Results o f STU: i n v e n t i o n subsidies 1968-1975. Swedish National Board j'or Technical Development (STU). 2. O-rrossoN S (1983) L 6 n s a m i n n o v a t i o n s v e r k s a m h e t Profitable i n n o v a t i o n activities. P r o g r a t o r HB, Floda. Sweden, 3. SWEDISH NATIONAL CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS (SCB) (1982) Private i n f o r m a t i o n from D e m o p a c no. 14. 4. UDELL G. BAKER K & COLTON R (1979) S t i m u l a t i n g and r e w a r d i n g i n v e n t i o n - - t h e i n v e n t i o n center p r o g r a m . Res. ,,~,[gt.

ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Dr Stig Ottosson. Progrator

Innovation AB, Box 134, S-44801, Floda, Sweden.

APPENDIX (a) Anah'sis o f contributions to Swede Innovation '81 No. of Total no. of contributions contributions presented Idea search. . .profile for patent . . . . . . . . no. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .received ...................... I. Corrosion resistant 5 0 steels 2. Production methods 14 0 for thin tubes, bands, wires 3. Hardwood 18 0 applications 4. Match-box 50 0 applications 5. Pyrotechnology 14 I 6. Toys 52 I 7. Sports equipment 194 2 8. Hobby equipment 176 1 9. Roof carriers 47 0 for cars 10. Aids for the elderly [04 0 and the handicapped 1 I. Furniture fittings 18 0 12. Butt hinges for 31 I cabinets 13. Butt hinges for 87 2 refrigerators 14. Filing equipment II 1 and systems iS. Dispenser for soap - 29 I powder 16. Bicycle equipment 124 0 17, Water heaters 12 I 18. Couplings 16 5 19. Water pumps 16 I 20. Motor saw brakes 27 3 2t. Equipment for 31 3 rotating shafts 22. Electrical equipment 36 0 23. Parking systems 10 I 24. Ventilation 12 I equipment 25. Transport vans 37 I 26. Mine trucks 2 0 27. Handling of thin 8 0 plates

No. of contributions presented "know-how' 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 I 0 I 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 2

continued

Ottosson--Guided Product Idea Generation

556

Appendix continued

Idea search profile no. 28, 29.

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 5 I.

52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62, 63. 64.

Total

Electrical distribution systems Equipment for institutional kitchens Building components Steel powder production Steel framework Cultivating machines and equipment Electrical tools for gardens Electrical components Weapons fittings Personal safety equipment Hoisting equipment Linear actuator applications Welding ventilators Moving equipment for welding cables Tractor tools Hard metal tools for buildings Heavy material handling equipment Carpet cleaning tools Protective gases for welding Safety belts for vehicles Sintered bearings Steel band cutting Edge sensors for cutting tools Non-destructive material testing methods and equipment Control of vacuum in vacuum cleaners Control technologies Damp materials Leakage control equipment Lake restoration methods Trimming of central heaters Heat pumps Wind generators Solar heaters Energy reservation in houses Energy transfer systems Storing of solar energy Turf energy systems

Total no. of contributions received

No. of contributions presented for patent

No. of contributions presented "know-how"

8

0

I

15

0

0

31 3

4 0

0 0

44 77

0 1

2 1

10

0

I

118 22 100

I 0 3

3 0 0

21 15

2 0

I 0

28 21

4 1

0 0

50 4

3 0

I 2

t3

0

1

21

I

0

3

0

0

69

0

0

8 3 7

0 0 0

0 0 2

3

0

0

16

0

0

30 10 7

2 0 0

I 0 1

28

0

1

12

0

0

13 77 48 60

0 1 2 2

0 0 0 0

37

1

0

16

0

0

18

0

0

2247

54

38

Omega. Vol. 11. No. 6 (b)

Definition of technology fields and search profiles clustered to each search profile Technology field ( l ) Building. construction (2~ Electrotechniques (3) Energy (4) Vehicle (5! Leisure (6) Furniture (7) Instruments ~8) Machine technology (9) Garden tools (10) Tools ( I l ) Material (12) Hospital equipment (13) Gases & liquids / 14) Mechanical production 115) Transport

Search profiles combined 17, 26. 30, 32, 42, 43, 54, 56 8. 16, 17.22, 28, 34, 35, 50.52, 53.58 17, 55, 57, 58, 59.60.61.62.63, 64 9, 16. 23, 38. 42. ~7 6, 7, 8, 36 4, 11, 12, 13, 14 23.5l, 52, 53, 55, 57 18. 19, 20, 21.48 7.8, 13, 15, 17, 33.34,45.52 20, 22, 29, 33, 35, 38, 42, 43.45, 52 I, 3, 4.5.30, 31.46.49.5 I. 54 10, I I, 37.39, 47 19, 24.40.55, 62 2, 5.22.27.31,32, 35.39.40, 41,44.46.49, 50, 51 23, 25, 26.27, 38, 44

557