Projects
From concept to market: anatomy of a launch
A children’s care product, from the first note to the first country opened. Anonymised case, without the inner workings: what was decided, in what order, and what would have cost dearly had it been decided later.
The following case is real and anonymised. It concerns a care product for children, carried by a proprietary brand, with a usage innovation we will not describe here. What interests us is not the product but the sequence: the order of decisions, and what each one made possible for the next.
Weeks 1 to 4. Framing: the need before the formula
The project was born from a field observation, not a technology. The first four weeks served to verify it: interviews with parents, pharmacists and two travel retail buyers, review of existing products, reading of the EU cosmetics regulation and the lists of authorised filters. At the end of framing, three decisions had been taken: the age segment, the launch channel, and what the product would not do. That last list prevented more drift than the first two.
Weeks 5 to 10. Protect before showing
Before any detailed exchange with a laboratory, two things were in place: a non-disclosure agreement and an intellectual property strategy. The name was checked in the relevant classes then filed. The technical brief sent to formulation partners described the expected result, not the mechanism producing it. This split made it possible to consult several laboratories without exposing the project’s differentiation to the supply chain.
Weeks 8 to 20. Delivering: brand, product, packaging, in parallel
Three workstreams moved forward together, with a single counterpart to arbitrate between them. The brand: platform, identity, tone, suited to an audience of parents who read labels. The product: formula specification, texture and safety requirements, planned tests. The packaging: functional specification, since the packaging here carried part of the innovation. The classic risk in this type of project is that each workstream optimises for itself. A shared timeline and shared milestones avoided it.
Weeks 16 to 24. The market before the stock
The launch channel had been chosen at framing: direct sales, a single country, then selected pharmacies. The first conversations with distributors took place before development was complete, prototype in hand. They changed two points of the packaging and confirmed the price positioning. The distribution plan was written from this feedback, not from assumptions. The first country opened with stock sized on commitments, not on hopes.
24
weeks from framing to the first country opening
3
decisions taken at framing that never moved again
1
named counterpart, from the first interview to delivery
What would have cost dearly later
- Filing the trademark after showing the product: one competing filing would have been enough to rename everything.
- Choosing the channel after the formula: travel retail constraints would have forced a packaging redo.
- Describing the mechanism in the laboratory brief: the differentiation would now be in a supplier’s catalogue.
None of this is spectacular. That is precisely the point: a launch that holds is a sequence of ordinary decisions taken in the right order, by someone who carries responsibility for them to the end.
This article was written with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed under Aegryn editorial responsibility. In accordance with Article 50 of the EU AI Act, we assume editorial responsibility for this content.
Newsletter
Never miss an analysis.
Receive Aegryn market reports and guides directly in your inbox.