Fast Track

Is there another name for the "Fast Track?"  I believe there is and that name is "Failure."  Recently I was watching the "60 Minutes" television show, where they were discussing the initiatives of the Department of Energy, especially as it related to timing and quality of execution of projects.  One of the specific examples dealt with the construction of a facility to handle nuclear waste.  It was a fast track project where one team worked on the design of the equipment and another worked on the construction of the facility to house the equipment.  The facility was not just a typical building, it needed very specific safety features.  After all we are dealing with nuclear waste.  They finished the building and the design of the equipment on time.  But one problem, the building was too small to house the equipment.  Advance to Jail, do not collect $200.  The project is still not completed and we now have a very expensive white elephant building in a desolate area, constructed for a specific purpose for which we have no use.

While watching the program, I became irritated.  It seemed at the time that this is the accepted procedure of government projects.  However, after reflecting a little longer on the concept of "Fast Track," I realized it may be the sign of the times.  It wasn't too long ago that we would be happy to get a new product from the idea stage to the market in five years.  I remember spending seven years on one brand.  Was it wasted time?  I don't think so since it was and still is the market leader after over thirty years.  But in the 1980's, management became uncomfortable wit the years of development and started pushing in terms of months instead of years.  One particular project close to my heart involved a product designed for institutionalized patients.  This product involved a new product category.  There was nothing like it on the market.  We were going to be the ground breakers.  During the development of the product, management became aware of the extremely high interest of the professionals in the health trade as well as government agencies.  It was something that had a significance effect on the lifestyle of many people.  Management pushed hard to move forward quickly.  Some cooler heads were saying, "Hold on, if it is that good of an idea for the institutional market, what about the domestic market?"  The cooler heads lost out.  We rushed to the market.  Quickly competition followed suit.  However, we were the first in the institutional market and therefore controlled that market.  Competition, however, looked closely at the domestic market.  They created a product to fit the at-home market.  The result was that in a few years competition was selling far more cases that we were.  The final result is that competition today has a profitable market both in the at-home market and the institutional market with P&G is no longer even in the business.

From my experiences, Fast Track projects never seem to live up to expectations.  Recently a friend called about some help in developing a new product.  As I was laying out a product launch proposal, he said there is no way they could spend the time needed to do the required research for the model.  He was told he had six months to develop the product for market.  Maybe it is this kind of thinking that leads to the 90% failure rate within the first 12 months of new product ventures.  I don't understand why, if you have a good idea, you will not take the time to cultivate it so that it has every chance to succeed, rather than Rush to Failure.

Sponsor:  Sorensen Associates Inc      Portland, OR  800.542.4321        Minneapolis, MN  888.616.0123
The In-Store Research Company