Tian Bao Marc, SNG EAS545 Engineering

In October 1993, Mark Holliday and his portable computer product development team are
facing four design options (iMH only, !iOn only, dual path, and over"design#$ If you %ere a
member of that team, %hich option %ould you choose& 'efend your choice in terms of
information provided in the case$
To answer this question satisfactorily, we would need to first evaluate the benefits and
drawbacks of each of the battery options: NiMH only, LiOn only, dual path and over-desin! followed
by the needs of the co"pany#
$n keepin to the tried and tested NiMH battery, we know for certain that the battery will
definitely work# The battery will be able to hold the industry standard chare of % hours and will be
uaranteed to work and would likely be of a quality that is associated with &ell# $f this option is
chosen, there will be no product differentiation between &ell and other "anufacturers, and will
therefore be unlikely for this product to recapture an additional '#() of "arket share because of the
nu"ber of *clones+ available in the "arket# This is a safe bet to take as the risk of failure is virtually
non-e,istent, but the upside is also very li"ited if any at all#

The ne,t option will be the usae of the new LiOn battery# This would ive &ell a product
proposition of a loner battery life, one that business e,ecutives are lookin for and would therefore
enable &ell to easily capture the business "arket# This would also appeal to consu"ers# $f &ell were to
use the LiOn battery, they would likely have a "arket "onopoly on the batteries because of a likely
e,clusive deal with -ony# This would ensure that &ell has a s"all window of opportunity over its
co"petitors to restore its "arket share# However, because of the novelty of the batteries, and unlike the
NiMH batteries, LiOn battery technoloy has yet to be proven to work with proble"s that include
e,plodin batteries# -hould &ell o ahead with this new technoloy, there would be a lower cost
upfront, but a "uch hiher cost later on if it was to fail# The potential loss of reputation and the hih
cost of product rework or recalls would have a disastrous effect on the co"pany, and the co"pany "ay
not recover# $t is obvious fro" the case that &ell has one last chance to prove itself#
&ual develop"ent see"s to be a viable co"pro"ise to the previous two options, allowin &ell
to *straddle+ both technoloy pathways and "ake a decision at a later ti"e, when the tests for the LiOn
.
Tian Bao Marc, SNG EAS545 Engineering
technoloy is co"pleted and has proven /or otherwise0 the usability of the new batteries# This ives
&ell the opportunity to fall back on the NiMH and keep whatever LiOn develop"ents for a later ti"e#
However, utili1in this option would have a hiher cost upfront as a result of duplication of
enineerin activities and the usae of resources that could have been better deployed elsewhere in the
co"pany# Moreover, the tea" workin on the pro2ect that would eventually be scuttled and shelved
would likely be de"orali1ed and that "ay affect the co"pany culture as a whole#
The last option is to over-desin the laptop with sufficient space to acco""odate either of the
batteries, which ever proves to be a "ore viable option# Like the dual-develop"ent option, this would
ive &ell the opportunity to defer the decision to a later ti"e# However, because the different nature of
both batteries, the circuitry of the product bein developed "aybe less co"patible with either and "ay
not function as e,pected# 3ith desinin additional space to acco""odate the larer batteries, it "ay
result in the product bein bulky and aesthetically less pleasin to the consu"er# 4dditionally, there is a
hiher cost of over-desin and "ay not receive the sa"e level of "arket appeal as a less bulky product#
Havin co"pared and evaluated the pros and cons of each of the options, we now need to
consider the co"pany5s require"ents in this decision# 6ro" the case, it is clear that this product would
be the "ake-or-break &ell, thus the stakes are hih# $ believe there are three possible outco"es: first,
assu"in that the LiOn technoloy co"es throuh, &ell would have a first "over advantae and would
capture a sinificant portion of the "arket, profits are up and all is well! second, is that &ell releases a
product that has no apparent differentiation fro" its co"petitors, and as a result, the co"pany would
2ust continue with its current e,istence until it has a breakthrouh in future! third, is that &ell releases a
poor product that fails to "eet needs and e,pectations and this sounds the death knell for the co"pany#
$ believe that we should always ai" hih and "itiate the possible downside# Therefore, it is "y
hu"ble opinion to pursue the option of dual develop"ent that would have the potential upside of
releasin a superior product /with the LiOn batteries0 and yet "itiate the downside that would be to
release an averae NiMH product /should the LiOn technoloy not co"e throuh0 that would allow the
co"pany to carry on until they have a viable superior product#
'