Product Development in Large Furniture Companies: A Descriptive Model with Implications for Character-Marked Products
Keywords:Character-marks, hardwood furniture, product development, product design, triangulation
AbstractPrevious research has shown that substantial yield improvements are possible when character-marks are not removed from hardwood furniture parts. Attempts to promote increased use of character-marked wood in furniture should be based on an understanding of how design concepts originate and move through the stages of product development. However, very little has been published concerning the product development process in the furniture industry. This study sought to expand knowledge of the activities involved in furniture product development and to explain character-mark decisions in terms of the product development process. Data gathered from in-depth interviews and a follow-up mail survey of large furniture manufacturers were used to develop a 14-stage product development model. While decisions concerning use of character-marks occurred throughout the development process, such decisions were more common as the process proceeded; few companies considered character-marks in the earliest stages of product development. Certain stages in the model emerged as particularly important to character use, such as those involving mock-ups and evaluation of designer sketches. By identifying the activities that take place in these important stages, barriers to acceptance of character-marked furniture can be better understood and addressed.
Araman, P. A. 1979. To make long character-marked cuttings from low-grade yellow-poplar lumber-rip first. Int J Furniture Res.1(10). 4 pp.nBennington, R. R. 1985. Furniture marketing: From product development to distribution. Fairchild Publications, New York, NY.nBlack C. D., and M. J. Baker. 1987. Success through design. Design Studies8(4):207-216.nBloch, P. H. 1995. Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. J Marketing59(3):16-29.nBuckley, M. J. 1996. Saving the forests. Cabinet Maker June:28-30.nBuehlmann, U., J. K. Wiedenbeck, and D. E. Kline. 1998. Character-marked furniture: Potential for lumber yield increase in rip-first rough mills. Forest Prod J48(4):43-50.nBuehlmann, U., J. K. Wiedenbeck, and D. E. Kline. 1999. Character-marked furniture: Potential for lumber yield increase in crosscut-first rough mills. Forest Prod. J.49(2):65-72.nCalantone, R. J., S. K. Vickery, and C. Droge. 1995. Business performance and strategic new product development activities: An empirical investigation. J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt.12(3):214-223.nCrawford, C. M. 1983. New products management. Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL.nFurniture Design and Manufacturing. 1997. The FDM 300: Still growing.69(2):35.nJick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Admin Sci Quart.24:602-611.nKotler, P., and G. A. Rath. 1984. Design: A powerful but neglected strategic tool. J. Bus. Strategy5(2): 16-21.nKvale, S. 1996. InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.nMichael, J. H., and P. M. Smith. 1996. An analysis of home furnishings retailers' use of furniture markets. Wood Fiber Sci.28(2): 168-177.nMoore, R. A. 1984. Control of new product development in UK companies. J. European Marketing18(6/7):5-13.nNational Hardwood Lumber Association. 1994. Rules for the measurement and inspection of hardwood and cypress. National Hardwood Lumber Association, Memphis, TN.nNussbaum, B. 1990. For Noel Zeller, good design is just the beginning. Business Week November5:104-108.nOakley, M. 1984. Managing product design. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, UK.nNussbaum, B., and K. S. Pawar. 1983. Researching the design/production interface: Product specifications. Design Studies4(1): 13-19.nOzanne, L. K., and P. M. Smith. 1996. Consumer segments for environmentally marketed wooden household furniture. Wood Fiber Sci28(4):461-477.nPage, A. L. 1993. Assessing new product development practices and performance: Establishing crucial norms. J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt.10:273-290.nPatton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.nRochford, L., and W. Rudelius. 1992. How involving more functional areas within a firm affects the new product process. J. Prod. Innov. Mgmt.9:287-299.nSinclair, S. A. 1992. Forest products marketing. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.nSingleton, R. A., B. C. Straits, and M. M. Straits. 1993. Approaches to social research. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.nSkinner, W., and D. C. Rogers. 1968. Manufacturing policy in the furniture industry. 3rd ed. Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL.nSmith, P. M., and C. D. West. 1990. A cross-national investigation of competitive factors affecting the United States wood furniture industry. Forest Prod. J.40(11/12):39-48.nSolomon, M. R. 1988. Building up and breaking down: The impact of cultural sorting on symbolic consumption. Pages 325-351 in E. Hirschman and J. Sheth, eds. Research in Consumer Behavior, vol. 3. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.nSouder, W. E. 1987. Managing new product innovations. D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington, MA.nTierney, L. 1995. The role of design in the furniture industry. AKTRIN Research Institute, High Point, NC.nTopalian, A. 1980. The management of design projects. Associated Business Press, London, UK.nWalsh, V. 1983. Plastics products: Successful firms, innovation and good design. Design Studies4(1):3-12.nWest, C. D. 1999. Market potential for specialty character grade products. In: Proc. International Conference on Global Markets for Value-Added Wood Products; June 1-2; Halifax, Nova Scotia. Centre for Advanced Wood Processing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.nWilhelm, S. 1994. Operating in a high-cost hardwood lumber environment. Wood Wood Prod.99(8):237-238.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.