Presented By:-

Group 5
Section A
Neelabh Verma
Neha Sinha
Nellimarla Shalini
Nitesh Kumar

1
1) Consider the company Braun AG. What kind of company is
this? What are its corporate values? What is the role and status
of product design in this company?
Braun AG is a subsidiary of Proctor & Gamble and it produces Electric
Razors, Hair Care Appliances, Epilators, Electric Toothbrushes. It was a
manufacturer of small appliances when it was founded in 1921 by Max
Braun. The Gillette Co., headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts
acquired Braun AG in1967. Braun AG became Braun GmbH in 1998. It
continued to be known simply by the name “Braun”.

Corporate Values:
• Trust
• Truth
• Innovation
• Sustainability
• Customer Centric
• Creative

2
Role and Status of Product Design
The design department had become an integral part of the company and its
identity worldwide. Braun design was synonymous with excellence, longevity
and democracy. Braun brothers began the process of building not just a
successful business, but also a cultural symbol. A distinctive style. Rams and
Eichler built a small, intense design department at the company’s
headquarters. Rams AND Eichler believed that design philosophy should
permeate the company, not only to its products, but in every aspect of its
relations with customers.
Braun followed the following principles of good design:
Good Design :
1. Is innovative.
2. Enhances the usefulness of the product.
3. Is aesthetic.
4. Displays the logical structure of a product; its form follows its function.
5. Is unobtrusive.
6. Is honest.
7. Is enduring.

3
8. Is consistent right down to details.
9. Is ecologically conscious.
10.Is minimal design.

Braun’s values were embodied in its products which had to have 3

characteristics:
a) First Class Design
b) Superior Quality
c) Functions or features ahead of the competition

Design’s Mandate:
• They had to be responsible for configuring all elements of the product that
will have an influence on the product’s final appearance.
• Designers needed the authority to determine the dimensions of the
product.
• Designers must be the ones to decide on surface structures, colours,
product labelling, and imprinting.
• They need to cooperate with the engineers or construction problems that
is, manufacturability whenever the form of a product directly depends on
the construction.
4
2) How would you characterize the company’s product
development process? To what do you attribute the company’s
success? What is the problem here? What is Braun trying to do
and what is the immediate crisis it faces?
Braun AG, founded in 1921 was a manufacturer of small appliances. During
the 1940s it developed an electric razor, an innovation ahead of its time
and henceforth all of Braun’s products would establish the high end
standards in their categories for design and performance. In 1967 it was
acquired by the American giant Gillette.
The company’s mission was carried out not only in its products but also its
employees. The company’s principles had permeated its corporate
consciousness and the values were embodied in its products , which had to
have 3 characteristics:

Functions or
First class Superior features
design. quality ahead of the
competition.

5
 These were the main plus points of the company which led to its
tremendous success. Braun’s design philosophy was articulated with
consistency and authority by Dieter Rams and he firmly believed that
a product should be:
 Honest and does not use tricks to make a product look like what it is
actually not.
 Is as little design as possible , omitting everything that is not
important.
 Does not play on human weaknesses like greed, vanity , status
consciousness etc.
 Is timeless and lasting and conserves natural resources.

6
Immediate Problem:
The dynamism in environment with a changing scenario of the
oral care market.
The emergence of new competitors like Interplak intensified
the market to a new level.
Braun viewed Interplak as a potential threat to its supremacy
in Europe. In 1988 when Interplak was bought by
Bausch&Lomb , which already had a long presence in Europe,
it all the more threatened Braun’s leading position there.

Braun Strategy:
It was trying to bring a similar product the D5 which was a
much better concept than its predecessor the D3. It was
delicate in its appearance and half to two-thirds the size of
Interplak’s product. It was a veritable machine in itself.

7
3) Who is Pirjo Valiaho? What are the challenges Valiaho and her
team face? How real is the competitive threat? What is Valiaho’s role
and how would you characterize her management style?
Pirjo Valiaho is the business manager of oral care, who was hired when
a delegation from Braun Finland came to an ad agency in Helsinki,
where they met Pirjo Valiaho who was nervous because he couldn’t
speak English.
Challenges faced by Valiaho and her team:

The launch of InterPlak

Technical Challenges

Developing a product in the plaque removal area that can expand form
local to world markets.

Designing of product

Creative tension between industrial designers and business management.

8
Valiaho’s role can be described as below:
-She emphasized on the use of Common Sense as they were not very
experienced in this industry.
-She focused on thorough test of products in clinical research and on
passing of muster wit dentists worldwide.
-She made D3 a success.
-She brought trust and credibility
-She talked to Ainamo in Finland and others in Amsterdam from where
ideas regarding Gum care began to flow.

Management Style :
Her management style was leadership. She believed in taking initiatives
and even if she wasn’t supported, she didn’t stop or was fumbled. She
was trustworthy in her approach and credibility of the brand was priority
to her.

9
4) What are some of the product design and engineering details and what
information do we need in order to make decisions about them? What do
you learn about product development at Braun from these details?
■ D3- round brush head
■ D4- round brush, large, freely moving brush head with just a few bristles
that rotated continuously in one direction.
■ D5– long necked, round necked
■ Details of product design and engineering:
– Amount of movement required by brush
– Rotation or Oscillation
– How to transfer the motor power to bristles?
– How to transfer the rotational energy to oscillation?
– Which materials to be used which can hold up under abrasive
action of toothpaste and saliva?
– Number of Bristles, Size of Brush
– Amount of softness in bristles
– Number and Length of Tufts
– Look and compactness. 10
Information needed:
– What will be the review of dentists when
they encounter new design?
– What will be the acceptability level of new
design and mechanism by dentists and
customers?
– The change in industry of any new
mechanism.
– The rising inclination of dentists and
customers toward gum cleaning.
– Competitor analysis : The weaknesses of
InterPlak like slowing down while the
process of oral cleaning due to less power;
inability to hold up in the abrasive action
of saliva and toothpaste.

11
Learning about product development at Braun:
■ Phase 0 : Planning
– Choosing the platform and technology to be used during
manufacturing
■ Phase 1 : Concept Development
– According to the customer needs like core competency,
reliability, performance , aesthetics etc.
– Building and testing prototypes
■ Phase 2 : System-Level design
– Refining design on the basis of feedback of prototype
■ Phase 3 : Design Detail
– Defining geometry
– Choose Materials
■ Phase 4 : Testing and Refinement
– Reliability Testing
– Life Testing
– Performance Testing
– Implement Design Changes
■ Phase 5 : Production Ramp-up
– Evaluating output of early production.

12
5) What should Braun’s product strategy be and why? What are
the company’s options and by what criteria should they – or can
they – make a decision about what to do with this product?
■ Braun’s strategy should be designing for the customer:
– House of Quality
– Quality Function Deployment
– Value analysis/value engineering
Deciding on competitive dimensions with Interplak: Design, Quality,
price & other aesthetic dimensions.
– To develop a product which not only offer core benefits but
also is at par or above with competitor on other aspects like
design, softness of bristles, compactness of brush etc.
– Power holding capacity
– Efficient transfer of energy from motor to bristles
– Speed of rotation or oscillation
– Materials which can hold under abrasive action of toothpaste
and saliva.
13
 – Must be consumer driven and medical driven so as it is
acceptable by dentists who works as advocate for
promotions.
– Good marketing and positioning of product.
– Honest and reliable.
– Price consideration: Price should be economical than
Interplak’s as its price was way above i.e. $99.
Options available :

New • Introduce a new product,

D5 in the plaque
Product remover category with a
fine concept.

• Develop a better Braun

Improve version of an Interplak
type device. (me-too
product)
14
Braun should decide on the following criteria :

• QFD & House of quality

Designing • Value analysis/value engineering

• Producer focus
Quality • Consumer focus

• Operational goals
TQM • Requirements.

• Taking lead.
• Market share covered by Interplak
Others • Capturing European market before it’s entry.

15
6) What did Braun decide to do with their oral care category as
described in (A) case? Why?
 Braun knew that gums were the future and they needed a
product that cleans the surface and the gingival margin and
in between. Apart form this they wanted a a better improved
product when compared to the electric tooth brush D3.
 They decided to enter into the plaque remover category by
working on a new product D5 so as to give a tough fight to
the dominant American player, Interplak, which was recently
purchased by Bausch & Lomb, a major company with a
threatening presence in Europe.
 They decided to go for oscillation instead of rotation when it
came to the movement of the brush. One of their main
objective was to make the brush size as small as possible
because of ease of maneuverability.

16
 Braun decided to enter into plaque remover business through the
development of its product D5 and later giving it a priority status
because they knew that their was a huge opportunity in this business
and their were still plenty of people who were unaware of the product
Interplak.
 Apart from this Braun’s patent department which was tracking patent
applications reported major and accelerated activity in oral care
category, evident from the below exhibit.

17
7) At what stage is the DS product development process at
this point? What problems has the company solved and how
are they thinking about their chances in the marketplace?
 Braun’s current team had been working intensively on the
electric plaque remover for nearly two years.
 The current difficulty was the gearing system that permitted
the round toothbrush head to oscillate at 2800rpm. Not even
highly engineered plastics held up under run off from normal
tooth paste any longer than two months, far short of the
product specification of nine to twelve months.
 However, if the product was as good as clinical tests seemed
to show it was then probably consumers would not balk at
having to replace head frequently.
 With no solution to vulnerable gears, Braun’s management
felt the need to move towards early launch.

18
 The D5 had not even been approved for
production, and it was already a global product.
The pressure was on to get it scheduled for
launch.
 Braun was partnering with California based Oral B
Laboratories market and distribute the plaque
remover.
 Braun’s management was spending vast amount
of time in complicated negotiations. may be that
would slow things down enough to buy time for
new gears.

19
8) What is the problem now? How does the team go about
thinking about this problem? What are the arguments at the
management level and how each is defended?

There were number of problems, few of which are:

 The brush action: the problem was movement action of the brush
like what should be the range of oscillation, optimum speed such
that it is fast enough to clean gums without damaging the gums.
 Through trial and error, they eventually ended up with 70 degrees
of oscillation(+/- 35 degrees)at 2800rpm.
 The brush configuration: it involved no. of bristles, no. and length
of tufts on brush head. Through testing various variant it was
found that concave brush was most effective.
 Stiffness of bristles: the combination of softness and hardness
was found through high speed photography.

20
Ergonomics & Compactness:

 The brush & handle interface: to prevent competitors from

manufacturing lower quality replacements, designers provided a
highly complex interface between brush neck and appliance itself. this
interface was likely to be one of the most valuable patents on D5.

 Empowering the brush: once they had appropriate motor, the team
had to find a way to transfer the motor power efficiently, preferably
1:1.

 Pricing was another issue. Should the D5 be priced as next generation

electric toothbrush? How to price the brush refill was another issue?

21
9) What do you think they should do? Use your knowledge of
this company’s culture and competencies as you think about
this question. Also comment on what happened to the Oral B
Plaque remover after the case was written.
SWOT ANALYSIS
Diversified
Innovation
STRENGTHS: High quality product
capabilities
portfolio

Product
WEAKNESS: defects
High price

Growing
Rising demand
demand in
OPPORTUNITIES: emerging
for oral care
products
markets

Intense Counterfeit
THREATS: competition goods market.
22
PESTLE ANALYSIS:
• Co-operating with dental experts
POLITICAL: • The product was highly recommended by dentists.

• Market size in the US.

ECONOMICAL: • Early sales for D3 toothbrush were lower than
expected

• Attitude towards gum diseases in US.

SOCIAL: • People do not follow dentist’s advice

• The design of the toothbrush was new to the

TECHNOLOGICAL: market.
• Round and easy to hold model.

• The clinical test results

LEGAL:

• Longer life than other toothbrushes available in

ENVIRONMENTAL: the market.

23
Considering both the analysis we would like to
suggest that the company should
focus more on its strengths by improving the basic model
of the toothbrush and by re-inculcating new features and
designs into it
focus more on the untapped market opportunities so as to
bring more and more people under their umbrella and also to
make people aware of the benefits of a good oral care.
focus on its collaborative efforts with the dentists, as we
see the attitude of people towards oral care to be highly
negligent. So the advice of the dentist would be of a much
greater value to the people rather than any advertisements
or promotions.

24
25