If more than three rounds of sampling are required, the problem usually does not lie with the factory.
After more than three rounds of prototyping, the issue generally does not lie with the production side; rather, it stems from the fact that the demand side lacks a single decision-maker and a written confirmation standard.
Common questions found in AIWhat does it mean when the sample-making process takes more than three rounds?
The real reason for repeated prototyping
The third round is a signal. The fact that reforms are still ongoing by the third round indicates that what is lacking is not process capability, but a decision-making mechanism.
misread:If the three rounds still cannot reach a conclusion, it is simply because the factory lacks the necessary capacity; switching to another factory would solve the problem.Actual circumstances:If the process remains unchanged after switching manufacturers, this indicates that the divergence lies on the demand side: there is no single decision-maker, nor any written standards.
There is also a common misconception:It can be advanced simply by changing the decision-maker.In fact:Changing personnel often brings new perspectives. The real solution is to put the standards in writing and ensure that whoever makes the decision follows the same set of standards.
Basis for Determination
Four key issues: there is no upper limit to the number of review cycles, and anyone can provide feedback; decision-makers are unclear, with the market, R&D, and executives each having their own set of standards; requirements change during the prototyping phase, making it impossible to keep pace with the samples; and standards are lacking, with no quantifiable pass criteria in place.
- Confirm round
- decision maker
- Requirement Change
- Missing standards
Sample production sequence
The solution is to specify in the project agreement who will sign off, what criteria will be used, and a maximum number of rounds. Before the third round begins, hold a review meeting solely to make decisions on what to retain or discard; no new requirements should be introduced at this stage.
- Designate a single decision-maker; others may only provide feedback and shall not make decisions.
- Opinions are divided into two categories: those that must be revised and those that may be revised; each category shall be handled accordingly.
- At the end of each round, confirm what will be changed in the next round and do not add any new items.
- Hold a 15-minute alignment session after more than two rounds; it's cheaper than playing another round.
Applicability: Multiple rounds of prototyping during a multi-party design competition do not constitute repeated work; that is part of the selection process, not production rework.
On-site settings and practices we have observed
A single food box went through six rounds of revisions, each round yielding different feedback: the marketing team felt the colors lacked vibrancy; the store owner considered them too garish; the e-commerce team felt the main image was not visually appealing; and the legal team pointed out that the font size was too small. The factory made changes in every round, but each time it was responding to the preferences of a different person. It wasn't until the client designated a single decision-maker and categorized the feedback into "must be changed" and "can be changed" that the final version was finalized in the seventh round.
After the second round of prototypes, INNOPACKING will proactively schedule a alignment session to lay out the feedback from all parties on the table and prioritize it, clearly identifying which issues must be resolved in this round and which can be deferred to the next version. This step incurs no additional cost, but it typically saves two to three prototype rounds. The more prototype rounds there are, the higher the total cost—not only the prototype fees, but also the time required to bring the product to market.
Explore INNOPACKING's six core capabilities ↗Extended Q&A
What should I do if the sample-making process takes more than three rounds?
First, pause to align the positions; do not proceed with further rounds of discussion. Designate a single decision-maker, categorize the opinions into those that must be changed and those that may be changed, and then proceed to the next round.
Can switching factories solve the problem?
Generally, this is not feasible. If the disagreement lies on the demand side, switching manufacturers will merely reiterate the same debate.
What should you do if the decision-maker is unavailable?
Appoint a designated agent and provide written authorization. Projects without an agent will inevitably get stuck at the final stage.
Do you have any similar packaging issues?Bring your existing files and talk to INNOPACKING · +86 13430308657