cpd reply 1

Reply to these two other posts with at least 3-4 sentences of constructive feedback and new information/ideas.


Apple innovates through a set process. The process itself could be considered innovative, because it has been adopted by a wide variety of companies because of the success of Apple, other companies try to duplicate the process. Apple’s design process is unmatched because of the funding available for their technology. The cost of creating a new apple product is very high due to their design process. The designers of their products are told to design with no limit. Apple’s design team is not allowed to talk to the finance department because due to the good human being in everyone they might cut costs in order to make products more affordable. Apple and Kelley processes are not that different overall. They both have the same objective in mind and that is to develop a product to the best of its ability. They both include understanding the consumer and listening to their thought. The evaluation part is key because it shows that the product has been tested and reviews have come back. The implementation is stated a little differently in the two processes. Apple’s process has more to it than the Kelley process because of the popularity of their products. The last step of apple is boxing and unboxing to feel the excitement and joy of each step of receiving the product. The Kelley innovation process consists of 5 steps and they are understand, observe, visualize and predict, evaluate and refine, and implement. Company’s need to understand their market. They need to take the time to observe real people in real situations using their product for example the TV remote situation mentioned. They have to visualize their customers and how their product will impact the world. The prototypes that were sent out and tested should now be evaluated and the revisions should be considered and made if considered optimal. Then the last step is to bring it to the market. Apple should definitely consider this process. Even if they don’t adopt it completely there is a possibility that it could improve their ways even more. The more that goes into each and every detail the better the outcome will be. There is good to take from both processes and they should all be used to some extent. Absolutely they will be in effect for my final project. They can help me set up and bring my project to life.


Apple has long been known for its industry shaping innovations. Until the release of Adam Lashinsky’s book in 2012, Inside Apple: How America’s Most Admired-and-Secretive Company Really Works, the processes associated with their innovations were cloaked in secrecy (Panzarino, 2012). Though Apple’s products have long be regarded as groundbreaking, the book tells of how Apple’s innovation starts as all do- with a design. Though Apple’s designers have seemingly unlimited authority of the products design free of financial and manufacturing restraints, the process of design is still the first step of development (Panzarino, 2012). After the product’s design is completed, a team is formed and is removed from the other Apples staff, essentially creating a “start-up” who answers exclusively to the executive team. Apple continues the development process by outlining the Apple New Product Process (ANPP), with details every step in the products development process including the stages of development, who will be working in the different stages, and the expected completion date (Panzarino, 2012). This is what David Kelley describes in his talk on the NPD process as using language to create cycles of production. By having the process written down, it can be easily referenced to effect changes or even spin to create related products. The process Kelley referenced has states for understanding, observing, visualizing and predicting, evaluating and refining, and, finally, implementation (Kelley, 2001). Though the article does not discuss the steps associated with the design process, one would assume understanding and observation are involved. Apple also evaluates its new products during the weekly Executive Team review of all in process products (Panzarino, 2012). With the Executive Team’s evaluations, any final refinements are made and the product’s implementation begins. The launch process for Apple is one of its unique defining characteristics. Careful detail is paid to preserving the products secrecy prior to its formal release. Apple also puts serious thought into the vessels of the products delivery- packaging (Panzarino, 2012). This process has a process of its own where package prototypes are created and tested until the perfect combination of utility and design is found. In the final steps of the products launch, yet another process is initiated. This launch action plan is known as the Rules of the Road. This is a highly confidential document which contains all pertinent information relating to the products launch (Panzarino, 2012). Finally, the world is graced with the release of Apple’s newest product whose elegant simplistic design shows no sign of the multiple carefully administered processes needed to get it to this point and tech fans rejoice world over. When considering Kelley’s processes, it seems greater detail is paid in the observation phase. For example, when designing children’s toothbrushes, Kelley’s team watched children in their natural tooth brushing habit to find how they were using the product in order to design one which best meets needs (Kelley, 2001). Kelley urges the importance of viewing the children as users rather than customers to best understand how the product should be designed. This process is one which would be extremely useful to Apple. Specifically, in the case of the iPhone’s need for a headphone jack adapter to allow the use of corded headphones. Additionally, another adapter is needed if you would like to charge your phone and listen to music via corded headphone simultaneously (Spence, 2018). Perhaps, if Apple paid more attention to their customers’ use of its products, this design could have properly allowed for the interaction desired. When considering my own product development process, I will consider the user and perhaps even observe the user’s interaction with multiple prototypes to find the best utilization of design. Any product development need an accompanying process if there is any hope of lasting success promoting cost efficiency and error correction. The processes will vary greatly from product to product just as products differ from industry to industry. Ultimately, there is no better way to find success than to write the process for getting there.