Integrating Building Science into New Product Development (NPD) for Building Product Manufacturers

By John Peavey, PE
Published Monday, November 10, 2025

When talking with building product manufacturers about New Product Development (NPD) processes, the two most common questions are: 

1. Is building science fully integrated into standard NPD processes?

2. If not, how should manufacturers adapt their NPD approach to better account for real-world building performance?

To answer these questions, it is important to first define what an NPD process entails and where building science naturally fits within it.

We often reference The Stage-Gate® (or Phase-Gate) NPD process that was originally developed by Dr. Robert G. Cooper and has been widely adapted or customized by many Fortune 500 companies. The diagram below illustrates Robert G. Cooper’s framework from Winning with New Products[i], 2^nd Edition.

Is Building Science Considered in the NPD Process?

Every well-executed NPD process already considers product design, engineering, manufacturing, and technical performance of the product. To integrate building science, the NPD process must consider how a single product or component integrates with other products or works together as a system. Building science specifically considers how multiple products work together and ensures that the performance of the new building component does not compromise the performance of an existing building component. While they may not specifically refer to building science, many companies do consider these factors in some capacity; however, to effectively integrate building science into the process, specific questions must be answered.

What Building Science Factors Must Be Considered in NPD?

A product manufacturer can integrate building science without making big changes to the NPD process. Rather than adding new stages or gates to the workflow, the product manufacturer must simply consider key questions at critical stages. To develop a successful product, manufacturers need to understand how the product component integrates into the existing building system, fully understand the mode of failure, and gather long-term performance data.

Stage 1: Ideation and Preliminary Investigation

When developing new building products, manufacturers should raise questions about how the new product integrates into the existing building system at the earliest stage of the NPD process. These questions should not curtail or limit the brainstorming or ideation, but they should drive the technical assessment of the preliminary investigation.

For example, if the manufacturer is developing a new cladding product, then during the preliminary investigation stage, the technical team should evaluate how the product will be installed and whether it has features for drainage and drying of the wall behind the new cladding product. Techniques like hygrothermal modeling (such as WUFI software) are appropriate to use at this early stage and can be an effective means of screening out certain materials or limiting where specific materials can be used (i.e., based on the climate zone).

The manufacturer can also use the preliminary investigation to identify attributes needed in the new product, and those attributes can be the focus of the subsequent research and development stages. 

Stage 4: Testing & Validation

Generally, when a manufacturer considers the testing and validation stage, they are focused on the building code requirements and specific product testing standards. Nonetheless, this is also when testing beyond the building code and standards should be explored. Specifically, failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and technical assessment of the value proposition are critical to providing proof of concept and informing marketing and warranty claims.

Testing to the point of failure rather than to the baseline requirements of the building code is critical to estimating long-term performance and developing product warranties. In addition, an effects analysis will demonstrate how the new product interacts within the system of products. For example, if you have a new cladding product that retains moisture but has no means of drying and poor drainage, it could (over time) accelerate damage to other building components within the wall system.

In some cases, customers have product expectations that are not related to the structural performance or durability of the product. In the example of cladding, customers place high value on color fastness, which requires accelerated weather testing. While such testing is not required by the building code, it could provide data that would differentiate the product from competitors if the color is resistant to fading under various climate conditions.

This stage also presents an opportunity for manufacturers to invest in advanced product testing beyond code requirements, allowing teams to better understand failure thresholds, system interactions, and long-term durability before products reach the market.

 Final Stage: Post Implementation Review

As defined by Dr. Cooper, the post-implementation review is an audit of the process itself and a determination of whether the new product launch was successful (i.e., did the new product meet revenue and profitability goals). This post-implementation review is should happen within 6-18 months after product commercialization. The team will identify improvements that can be made to the process and implement those improvements with the next project.

For an effective and comprehensive review, manufacturers must also evaluate how well the product has performed in the field. Do you have product complaints? Is the product being installed correctly? Are the same errors repeated? Does the manufacturer have information from contractors and building owners? Can errors be reduced with better instruction? In the absence of direct feedback, site visits and in-field interviews can be conducted to gather information that will help manufacturers to understand performance and improve the product going forward. If the manufacturer can capture real field data from long-term monitoring, then the next generation of the product will be better, and the manufacturer can improve their performance models and simulations.

Conclusion

 

Integrating building science into New Product Development is not about adding complexity to existing workflows, it's about improving decision-making at the moments that matter most. By evaluating how products perform within complete building systems, testing beyond minimum code requirements, and incorporating real-world field feedback, manufacturers can reduce risk, improve durability, and bring more reliable products to market. Leveraging product testing and consulting services that support system-level analysis, failure investigation, and long-term performance evaluation allows manufacturers to strengthen their NPD process while accelerating innovation with confidence.