At Issue

$15 bucks a pop? No thanks, I’m stocking tampons.

By David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

Professionally, I’ve always considered myself a fairly progressive and forward-looking individual.

Not the smoke and mirrors forward-looking that you can find at the bottom of nine out of 10 “news stories” that cross the wires, but the type that looks at something new and either sees value or, I see it as a potentially never-ending crevasse into which we will always be able to dive, but no amount of money will ever cushion the fall.

I imagine a real life enactment of Scrooge McDuck (Uncle Scrooge, if you will) diving into the pile of gold. But when we jump into the gold-filled sink hole, we splatter on the coins or, in the event that they have yet to settle firmly into place, we fly through them into the beyond (it just seemed easier on the imagination than alluding to additional splatter imagery).

You want spatter, read the Times – enough for semi-political conversation and more violence than anything produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. If I think the fashionably new toy could add value, I follow up with ‘let’s give it a shot’ or ‘Yes, but how?’ (And sometimes, Why?)

Twitter? Let’s try it.

Facebook? Why not (a work in progress).

LinkedIn? Individually, yes.

Reddit, Delicious, Digg, Slashdot? Yes, yes, yes. Subscribe, post, vote, share, blog. Jump on the bandwagon, or depending on the vehicle, let it pass (MySpace). PD&D is not a band with a playlist, so I don’t see a need for another MySpace deluge. What would be on the Engineer Rock playlist other than the Matrix soundtrack?

I’d ask when enough is enough, but if you or I haven’t realized that the answer is ‘never’ well, let’s just say that the pasture won’t be a lonely place.

In a matter of time, I’ll be wandering out there with many of you after I simply run out of time to post, or my hands close and refuse to ever open again after years of repeated key-pounding Carpal Tunnel-inducing abuse. I helped my brother paint a single room this weekend and my hand remained locked as though I was clutching the Holy Grail for the following hour. Since when did I need a cool down after the remedial task?

After 350 words of head-scratching babble, you may be asking yourself what set me off on a rant spiraling into the nonsensical. It was just that, junk content. I just read an article on Wired.com (via Folio) regarding a content generation company that is flooding the internet with content that is in demand.

An algorithm mines keywords to see what people are searching, and another refines it into something that won’t land on the fifth Google page. I believe the article quoted one of the most valuable phrases as “How to Donate a Car in Dallas.” Really gripping stuff.

However, instead of using this info to develop something of more use than a top 10 or a quick one minute how-to video, Demand Media pays an army of freelance videographers and writers to shoot or write the piece as fast as possible and submit it for a nominal fee - $15 for an article, $20 for a video. And you thought the internet lacked credibility before?

That’s right, even the written word can be manufactured. Sure, it’s a step above the poem generators some of my peers attempted to use in college (tell me more about the chrome spider mosque), but as we have seen in new product development, volume is not the answer. Just because the customer finds you first, doesn’t mean you’re giving them what they need. If I’m in the online market for a DVD player, I’m not sure that “Free DVD Player Software: audio, video, DVD player for free” is going to have what I am looking for. 

I find it similar to the dollar and how one of our new national pastimes is printing money. When I was a kid and the family was strapped, I would ask, “Well Ma, why don’t we just print more money?”

She replied, “Well, then it wouldn’t have any value, would it?”

I didn’t understand and went to my doodle pad with a crumpled dollar to begin my own Crayola-sponsored illegal printing press. I soon understood once it was legal for me to stock toothpaste and deodorant for minimum wage.

I wasn’t in a sweatshop at 14, but try to keep your middle school cool when your friends visit you while you’re stocking the feminine hygiene section. Slick the hair back as far as it can go, there is no such thing as James Dean cool when you smell like baby powder.

Look Ma, my box of 50 wax colors and I apparently could have had a role in the past two administrations. No money? Print it. 

And $15 an article? I’ll pass, I can make that stocking tampons for two hours at the local grocer, and somehow I’ll actually feel as though I’m doing the world a service — at least making the community a better place.

Volume may seem to be a present solution, but if oversaturated new product development – and the growing junk piles of techno garbage – have taught us anything, it is that volume is not the long term answer.

Do you agree? Or am I nuts? Either way, I’ll take a pill and set down the coffee while I await your response. As always, the inbox punching bag can be found by clicking david.mantey@advantagemedia.com. Also jab by commenting below. If only I had one more sport-related cliché, that would really knock it out of the park. Yeah, I did.

Long before Al Gore invented Power Point presentations or President Obama campaigned on a pledge to overhaul our national grid

by Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&D

It’s not a new problem, per se. The need to improve energy usage trends and implement more efficient approaches has been a relevant topic long before Al Gore invented Power Point presentations or President Obama campaigned on a pledge to overhaul our national grid.

What is new is the debate surrounding the slew of potential solutions. What priority should they be given? What approach is deserving of government subsidies? Should supply and demand be the ultimate weapon on choice in thinning out this herd of options?

All of these alternative technologies and the collective abundance of questions they generate lead me to wonder if it would be better to try and unite on one front in developing an energy approach for the future, instead of siphoning billions of dollars towards a slurry of new waste-composed biofuel methodologies for producing ethanol and methanol, or wind power, or solar power, or electric transportation vehicles, or …

Granted, I have my opinions on which methodologies I think will work the best, but let’s put that aside for right now, and for those of you knee-deep in a response championing your “obvious” choice, I’d ask for the same courtesy. The bottom line is that each approach has it positives and negatives – all of which are worthy of debate, but that type of dialogue is what I perceive as the biggest potential issue.

Using the capitalist approach of social acceptance and wide-spread buy-in as the ultimate metric in determining the winning methodology is fine, provided we’re willing to accept that winner even if it does pose longer-term issues. After all, the ugly truth is that we’re a society driven by price and convenience. So in the face of initially higher prices for these alternative energy sources, the majority of consumers will gravitate towards the cheapest and easiest methodology – that’s why we still burn coal and have a limited number of E85 gas pumps.

Hybrid cars are neither cheap or easy to maintain and repair – which, along with performance sacrifices, is probably why less than one percent of vehicles on the road today are of the hybrid variety. Coal is cheap and easier to burn in generating power than sorting through food scraps, growing algae or developing some other feedstock to run through a special digester in order to produce electricity. Hydrogen, believe it or not, is still a viable option in many people’s minds as a transportation fuel source.

Seemingly unlimited funds are being thrown at all of these energy answers, which leads me to an unyielding belief that we’ve already found the solution to our problems. But is this on-going debate over the best approach hindering its implementation and doing more to preserve the status quo? It reminds me of a “new” technology on its way towards mobile and commercial cooling environments.

In the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, refrigerant use has changed a number of times in these applications over the course of the last 20 years. This has lead to wider spread use of carbon-dioxide as an alternative to chemical refrigerants like Freon, as it is able to perform even more efficiently and without the harmful emissions. It’s facing some resistance because of the higher operating pressures it demands, but it seems to be more about when, as opposed to if CO2 will replace R-134a in a number of cooling applications.

The kicker here is that CO2 had been used in this manner at the beginning of the 20^th century – it’s far from a new technology or application. Yet think of all the development dollars and negative environmental impact that was registered over the past 100 years in order to come full circle.

We live in a time of great potential and promise in answering our energy concerns. The question that remains is if a divided approach will deliver the most powerful solution.

What are your thoughts? Share your comments and opinions below or send them to jeff.reinke@advatnagemedia.com.

Sometimes coming up with a new idea can be a difficult and annoying task.

by Meaghan Ziemba, Associate Editor, PD&D

Personally, when I try to think of something to write for blogs, editorials, homework assignments or even a simple errand list, I catch myself in a blank stare trying to remember what I was thinking about in the first place.

To add another obstacle in my composition process, I have a 5-year-old daughter who constantly wants me to watch her newest dance, look at her new piece of art, swimming or whatever else she has discovered on her own. When I return to my work I have to start completely over.

Distractions constantly haunt the creative minds trying to think of innovational ideas, and when they grab hold, it can be quite an obstacle to overcome.

I can only imagine the sort of obstacles engineers and manufacturers face when trying to think of the next “big thing.” Whether in electronics, automotive or the mechanical industries, engineers and manufacturers have the stress of satisfying customers on a daily basis. If they disappoint, it could affect their reputation as whole, and send companies into a downward spiral of never ending ridicule and criticism.

What’s the solution? A recent visit to Waukesha, WI for a National Instruments (NI) preview of their newest products provided a simple answer, teamwork; but not in the sense that would be the typical assumption of teamwork.

During the keynote, Jonathan Hillayard, area sales manager for NI, discussed the challenges of innovation. He discussed how some believed that the reasons for the economic woes were believed to be caused by the slow down of innovation. He also talked about how National Instruments set a goal to release a new version of their LabVIEW software every year to help incorporate feedback faster from their customers. With scheduled launch releases, customers had a chance to increase innovational materials.

I sat in a couple other sessions at NI Technical Symposium, and the same idea of customer feedback was stressed throughout. At demonstration the presenter specified the importance of customer comments, complaints and/or suggestions. If there was something missing, buyers had a chance to speak their mind and offer ideas to increase quality and operational success.

Of course this is a common practice, but it was reassuring to see it first hand. Sometimes a lot of customers ignore the suggestion box offered by certain companies, missing out on the planning process to possibly improve our favorite designs.

Innovation seems to be hindered by the intimidation of failure, but if more of us are willing to raise our hands and offer our constructive criticisms and appreciative applause, we create a stronger team and become that much closer to the next “big thing.”

Do you have an idea that could make heads turn, or a suggestion to make a current idea more phenomenal? Share it with the rest of us. Post your innovational thoughts below or send them to me at meaghan.ziemba@advantagemedia.com.

by Anna Wells, Editor, IMPO

My friends and I like to play a lot of off-the-cuff word games. For example, my friend posed this question to the group last night:

If you were able to ride any animal, real or fictional, into battle, which would it be? The eventual winner, by group vote, was Falkor—the giant flying dog from The NeverEnding Story. The games are certainly without limits:

• Refrigerated condiments you’d use in a fight? Ketchup or barbecue sauce? Maybe Tabasco?
• Weapon you’d use when fighting zombies?
• Top 3 athletes you’d banish from professional sports if you could?
• Lifetime access to only the radio or only your five favorite albums?

Sometimes our games are simply diversions with no outcome other than laughter or breathless defenses on whether or not a crocodile could beat a lion in a duel (on land, of course). Other times, our open-ended question and answer sessions actually digress into something constructive where we generate ideas and share opinions on topics of actual importance to our lives and the greater good. The important part is not where the conversation begins, but where it ends. My friends are a quick-witted talented bunch, and I like witnessing their brains in action.

In my office, the editors have the good fortune of having adjacent offices, meaning we have the opportunity to engage one another in dialogue throughout the day. It’s these spur-of-the-moment jam sessions that oftentimes generate the seedlings of future successful endeavors. It’s also interesting to see the perspectives of people who don’t think the same way as you do.

I have never worked for a company where we didn’t make fun of the company newsletter. That said, we all read it. Why? Because part of the fun of the work environment is camaraderie and (sorry HR) a mutual scorn for the funny photo contest. But lucky for me, the company I work for is used to our odd-ball digressions—in fact, they encourage us to break out into small discussions throughout the day, and provide feedback on the progress of our own projects, and the projects of others. It stands to reason that if something is working well in one area of the company, it has a shot at working elsewhere. Oftentimes we just need to hammer out the specifics and decide, through our sometimes meandering dialogue, whether or not it’s worth a shot.

I truly believe that it’s this type an open forum that breeds initiative. Make sure your team knows the lines of communication are open. Sometimes a manager’s “open door policy” is too intimidating; maybe you need something more low key. Raising your hand in a structured meeting, or seeking out your boss behind his or her desk, is not always the easiest way to convey ideas—in fact, it sometimes seems too formal for the “little things.” Try anonymous suggestion boxes in the break room. Even better—go into the break room once in a while and ask questions. Does the new layout work well for the folks on the line? Are there hang-ups that seem too small to warrant asking for a formal fix? You might be surprised what you find out.

And if you run out of things to talk about, here’s a good one: Would you rather be able to fly, or breathe underwater?

I still haven’t made up my mind on this one.

Have you made up your mind? Would Tabasco make for the best condiment weapon? And is communication too often forgotten in the workplace? Let me know your thoughts: anna.wells@advantagemedia.com.

Availability options for ethanol are spinning the wheels of the industry.

by Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&D

At the risk of losing my membership card in the middle class, white republican club, I’m going to go out on a limb and admit that I like the technology and environmental benefits of E85, as well as its soon to be developed ethanol brethren, as a fuel source for my vehicle. However (cue the Evil Galactic Empire music that marks Darth Vader’s entrance), I rarely use it because of the cost disadvantages, and I’m not alone.

Although I may be one of the few to vocalize my stance, I’m confident of my presence in the silent majority after both a conversation with Luke and Carrie following their attendance at the opening of Coskata’s new cellulosic ethanol facility, and in reading a post on www.biofuelsdigest.com regarding a study that compared an E85 flex fuel vehicle with the all-electric Tesla Roadster.

Coskata feels their plant and proprietary process will result in lower processing costs and higher fuel octane levels, but unfortunately this still doesn’t solve the distribution and accessibility roadblocks associated with ethanol—which is why the dark side of the force still drives my purchasing rationale.

Then there’s the Biofuels Digest study. According to which, a vehicle running on E85 corn-based ethanol generates 30 percent fewer CO2 emissions over its lifetime when compared to the Tesla all-electric sports car. This is based on the amount of coal that needs to be burned in order to generate the electricity coming via the plug.

Using this same logic, the Tesla will also create 21 percent more CO2 emissions than a car running on conventional gasoline. Additionally, other ownership issues, like a higher initial cost and having to replace a $12,000 lithium-ion battery, would seem to make a vehicle using E85 or any other variation of ethanol, a better option.

So armed with this type of knowledge, why did the U.S. Department of Energy provide Tesla with a $465 million low-interest loan, and offer potential buyers with tax credit incentives of up to $7,500?

Simple. The Tesla has a better chance for greater public acceptance.

Even though it strains the national grid and complicates environmental controls, electrical outlets are everywhere. There’s no issue with plugging in/refueling the Tesla. I have to go out of my way to fill up on E85, and then I know that I’d have to go back to re-fill sooner because of the lower energy density. So the cost savings are mitigated because I’m buying more fuel, simply at a lower price.

At the end of the day a cool looking sports car that I can plug in to an outlet in the garage is going to get more momentum and change more attitudes than hunting and searching for an ethanol pump that I’ll have to frequent more often with basically the same, old boring vehicle I’m driving now.

I like the cleaner element of ethanol. I like the fact that more feedstocks based on current waste products can be used to produce it. I even like the fact that it makes a hardcore conservative like me think a little greener. However, until the availability options for ethanol are solved, I’m afraid this segment of our industry is simply spinning its wheels.

Is ethanol-blended fuel just an inconvenient stepping stone on the path to electic vehicles? Drop me a line at jeff.reinke@advantagemedia.com.

There is nothing wrong taking advantage of all the things a bad economy has to offer.

by Karen Langhauser, Editor-in-Chief, Food

I'm currently house hunting. In the brief few months I've been searching, I have seen everything from shiny new condos to 150-year old Victorians that come without seemingly important amenities such as walls and kitchens, and yet are not short on bonuses like litter box and cigarette odors. What all these properties have in common, however, is that they have dropped their asking prices significantly in the course of just a few months. Bad news for sellers and the economy overall, but excellent news for someone looking to buy a house.

While it might seem unwise to ignore the big picture, there is nothing wrong with taking advantage of all the things a bad economy has to offer.

During a recession, it seems that people are more receptive to new ideas. Perhaps a lack of disposable income has forced them to closely analyze their options, or perhaps they are simply looking for an escape from economic worries.

The candy industry has definitely capitalized on this. Besides the sugar-pick-me-up, traditional candy carries with it a taste of nostalgia – an instant reminder of happy times. While it seems that every other industry is reporting a drop in sales, the confectionary industry is not only stable, but profitable. Candy manufacturers are taking advantage of recessionary bonuses like cheaper, more available retail space as well as consumers' insatiable appetite for sweets.

The industry is making sure that consumers everywhere can capitalize on this inexpensive, accessible luxury.

Candy's sweet success is no secret, and the evidence is all over the news, as we read about how global food giant Kraft is pursuing a billion dollar takeover of Cadbury and how Dubai is now home to a new, 10,000 square foot candy store, being billed as the largest confectioner in the world.

The news is littered with recessionary success stories, and it's uplifting to see that many manufacturers have found a sweet spot in an otherwise sour economy. And while it may not be the best time to put your house on the market, at least you can wait it out with a bag of M&M's.

By David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

Of course, as I write this, I’m ripping music, cloning my desktop and leering, through the darkened rooms of our office for documents to scan, save and sell to the highest bidder.

Who wants the folder with abandoned columns? Anyone? I’ll give you a great rate on archived notes and interviews. Isn’t that how they pinched Nixon? Granted, these may not be anything to compare to The Clinton Tapes, but I have a hot unreleased Q&A in which a well-known CEO discusses how his company is the greatest company in the world.

The company not only manufactures robust, rugged and innovative products – a juicy quote I noticed during transcription – but they also do proprietary work that no one else on the planet is privy too. No takers? I’ll keep shopping.

Maybe I just don’t understand the allure of the white-collar crime. I get the excitement. I understand why an engineer copied thousands of electronic documents and stole trade secrets before quitting Ford Motor Co. for a new job in China.

Be it nationalism or contempt, all you need to do is witness or participate in a bitter divorce and you understand the lengths people will go to in order to, um, tarnish one another. I’m watching the diction; I don’t want to offend anyone with one of the seven words you can’t say in grade school.

In Xiang Dong Yu’s case (a.k.a. Mike Yu), he even made it to China with his loot, landed a job with a competitor, and then was foolish enough to come back and get pinched at O’Hare. (Read: China-bound ex-Ford engineer charged with stealing.)

Smart criminals, the recession is rife with them. Whom am I kidding? We have plenty of people committing everything from petty theft to grandiose pyramid schemes during healthy times as well.

Perhaps I’m more jaded than usual. Last month, some victim of inbreeding smashed in my back door and rifled through my belongs looking for anything of value. Hey buddy, next time you plan to rob someone, make sure they don’t shop at the Frugal Muse or Goodwill. And I have a feeling local law enforcement isn’t exactly in hot pursuit. Especially given the, “Eh, it was probably just some kids looking for a cheap thrill,” I was given from the Fargo understudy. I have a feeling that they’re not exactly pressing on criminal informants to track down the digital camcorder.

Xiang Dong — err, I mean Mike — enjoy your 10 years. You sold out an American staple, so prepare for a decade of government-prepared meals.

As for me, I’m going back on Craigslist to see if anyone is hawking an antique jewelry box or the camera.

The trend towards positive thinking is dangerous and, more importantly, delusional.   

by Anna Wells, Editor, IMPO

Before I decided to study literature in college, I took the typical freshman approach: I changed my major again and again, based on the whims of my current fascinations, causes and favorite professors. It’s scary looking back, considering I could have based my life’s career goals around an affinity for a class that happenstance scheduled following my afternoon latte boost.

One of my favorite diversions was a foray into sociology. My alma mater, UW-Madison, had a very interesting program full of fascinating idealists, which coincided nicely with my 18-year-old optimism and tattered thrift store clothes. Together we would change the world, one faded ironic T-shirt and clipboard at a time.

I’ve never lost my interest in this field, and I’ve found as I’ve gotten older, my interest in reading novels is oftentimes trumped by an interest in sociological discourse. I read a fascinating book a few years back called Nickle & Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich, which chronicled the author’s one-year experiment of trying to live off low-skill, minimum wage jobs in America, including services like waitressing and housekeeping. The book was a sad and telling sign of the state of the less fortunate end of the American workforce and I found it incredibly moving. When I stumbled upon a recent interview with Ms. Ehrenreich on her newest book, I was both amused and surprised. Here’s the basic overview:

Bright-Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America tackles the topic of our shared cultural fascination with the “power” of positive thinking.  Ehrenreich recently wrote a column on the topic in TIME and I have to admit, it was both fascinating and disheartening.

The author’s argument is based on the thesis that the trend towards positive thinking—reinforced by our Oprah-like “me power” culture, not to mention novels like The Secret, which suggest you can have everything if you simply optimize your mental powers to “attract it”—is dangerous and, more importantly, delusional.

Ehrenreich argues:

“Optimism wasn't just a psycho-spiritual lifestyle option; by the mid-'00s it had become increasingly mandatory… In the workplace, employers culled "negative" people, like those in the finance industry who had the temerity to suggest that their company's subprime exposure might be too high. No one dared be the bearer of bad news. The purpose of work, at least in white-collar settings, was to flatter and reassure the boss, who had in turn probably read enough of the business self-help literature to believe that his job was to motivate others with his own relentless and radiant optimism.”

Her argument is in favor of “reality,” a “stuff happens” approach. It has a clean, non-stardusted feel to it. I’m all in favor of pragmatic, justified thinking, but I wonder if the optimists are doing as much damage as she suggests. Delusion is one thing, but is it so bad to be a cheerful face in a tough business environment?

“The threats that we face, individually and collectively,” says Ehrenreich, “won't be solved by wishful thinking, but by a clear-eyed commitment to taking action in the world.” That’s hard to argue with, although I wouldn’t necessarily classify optimism and wishful thinking into synonymous categories. Don’t we have the capacity to combine hard numbers, useful steps towards success, and—gasp—a leadership position of positivity that encourages our employees to look towards a better future for the industry and the company?

Looking back on college, I don’t think it was optimism that nurtured my success, but I do think the optimism helped build the confidence that allowed me to go after things I wanted.

I understand Ehrenreich’s fear of a dangerous precedent in a business environment—that positive thinking replace more tangible elements—lest we freefall into a bed of pillowy language and platitudes. Pats on the back do not a business plan make. But I wouldn’t blame you if you smiled once in a while…

What are your thoughts? Is optimism over-rated—even dangerous? Email me at anna.wells@advantagemedia.com.

Positive action is needed and forward thinking is critical.

by David Duncan, President of IDWS.ca, helping companies develop Form with Function.

Businesses that are struggling from the financial problems in the current economic slow down are under pressure to evaluate daily operations for new cost efficiencies. Particularly in the manufacturing sectors were profitability has been hit hard, companies that produce consumer products, commercial products, vehicle products, and even capital equipment have had to cut jobs and cut unnecessary costs to stay alive let alone competitive.

With all of this; the monetary policy news of ‘quantitative’ or ‘credit easing’ measures that are being initiated to jump start this downturn are slow to gain ground. However one thing seems consistent from the market analysts — positive action is needed and forward thinking is critical. 

Complacency can start to creep into a company and mediocrity can allow competitors to take away market share if nothing is initiated. Most corporations know relatively well how to house clean and manage the cost and expense side of the business, but generating future products and innovations will be the challenge for going forward.

Anne Mulcahy, Chairman  & CEO of Xerox, in an interview with Susie Gharib of Nightly Business Report said “This is a time where you have to be listening to your customers,  …be tough-minded, …but not trade off the future. Don’t mortgage the future for the present … making sure that we are preserving investments particularly in Research and Development (R&D), which will provide the pipeline of innovation in the future.”

What Anne Mulcahy was stating is that for Xerox to be on the forefront at the end of this downturn, executives need to be very mindful of the stability between preserving cash and introducing new products.  It is this kind of corporate drive, to be customer focused that will motivate new ideas and new products for a favorable outcome down the road.

The questions companies need to be asking are varied but some might be the following. Where should we be in one year, three years or five years for competitive advantage?  What internal stimulus plan is in place to motivate our customer base? What products will bring income back into the company at the end of this recession? What will inspire consumer confidence in the future; will it be as simple as having the best-in-class product available? Will we be able to recognize a future need for the end user? Will we be able to differentiate ourselves with the right market trends? 

Knowing what tools to use to facilitate these questions can be beneficial within tightening fiscal budgets.  So how do other companies develop a thought, an inventive idea and turn it into a customer focused profitable product?  Look at MP3 data compression technology, an innovative concept that began back in 1987 at the Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft Institute Research Center, in Germany. 

Now leap ahead about 15 years, what is the first product that comes to mind when you think of an MP3 player?  Knowing that there are a handful of similar products out there, one that might have stood out is the iPod. Incoming CEO of Macintosh, Steve Jobs had to ask some of those key questions in 1997 to help turn the company around and set a course for profitability. 

And writing about this in “Sketching user Experiences” author Bill Buxton notes that the differentiator at Macintosh was that Steve Jobs immediately brought Industrial Design into the executive level of core business planning to implement user based stylish products.  \Identifying that creative design would be the catalyst for the future of Mac products, he realized that if they didn’t design their products with an added value for consumers, it didn’t have a chance to compete for market share, nor get a good return on investment (ROI). 

Steve Jobs knew adding the Industrial Designers touch was about developing a high level of creative inventiveness along side the engineering of the final product. As you might have noted, not all MP3 players are iPods, however all MP3 players have been engineered to play MP3 compressed data. So Macintosh has emerged as a company because they worked hard to develop a user based design strategy with stylish features along side the engineering to attract consumers to the final product.

One of the most difficult parts of being innovative — the doing of new things, is giving that new ‘thing’ a body, a face — the creative style, feel and shape, that ‘wow’ factor to gain market share.  This creative process for marketability is well developed in the automotive industry.

Well before heavy investment is spent on engineering a vehicle, Industrial Designers create multiple concept sketches, 3D computer models and clay models of an idea. These virtual vehicles show the ‘vision’ of the new product, in a format that can be reviewed by management, engineering, marketing and focus groups for feedback. Some prototype models are further developed for release in a hand full of auto shows as future concept vehicles.

These are used to gauge public perception of what shapes and features should be offered up in upcoming production models. For instance take General Motors, they didn’t solely reveal the technology behind their advanced electric-hybrid vehicle; they used a clay prototype presented as the GM Volt. It was a model that helped GM gain international attention and much needed investment for GM’s greener future.

The bottom line for companies will be the need to preserve cash, keep operations fluid, and at the same time develop innovative and stylish products. This might be okay for large corporations to absorb, but what if modifying a product is done only once every couple of years? 

An idea for consideration in this balancing act to keep moving forward with ideas might be to utilize an Open Innovation business model. The general idea behind the concept is to restructure some of the product development overhead, by using external firms with experience in specific areas of the in the R&D process. For example; outsourcing the Industrial Design segment of the product development process means that a company can utilize the same design strategies as seen at Macintosh and General Motors but at a more manageable level. 

Coordinating the in-house process with outsourced knowledge means that a company can decrease the time to market and increase the customer focused value of the end product.  Traditional production methods are changing, and the Open Innovation model has many facets for a company’s product life cycle (PLC).  It is a process that will need to be evaluated and customized as companies try to stay innovative and competitive in this global economy.

Final thought, as coined on the cover of the book by Stephen Bayley and Terence Conran “Design: Intelligence Made Visible”, is accurate to describe the results a customer focused design has on a product. Design can articulate the product value to potential investors and can increase market share, both of which can help a company make it through this current crisis.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 10th, 2009 at 3:49 pm and is filed under Business Strategies for Good Design. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

What are your thoughts? Post comments below.

Dr. Panetta’s Nerd Girls is a group that establishes confidence and helps women understand that being intelligent is the new pretty.

by Meaghan Ziemba, Associate Editor, PD&D

A lot of you read my column from last week on my “eye candy” experience at Design and Manufacturing, and provided some excellent feedback. A few of you agreed with some of the points I made, while others blamed me for victimizing myself and saying, “While men are responsible for their own actions, it is you who control the hormone level in their blood. You can make it very difficult, and that is being a "jerk" too.” Emphasis was placed on the importance of dressing attractively and not provocatively when entering a professional environment.

I had no idea white dress pants with a black dress shirt would cause such a ruckus among certain individual’s hormones — my apologies to any of those who I may have offended by distracting their attention from the trade expo.

However, I’m not going to vent again on the insulting behavior. I’m going to discuss a wonderful program put together by Dr. Karen Panetta, IEEE fellow, chair for the IEEE educational society, central New England, and chair for the IEEE women in engineering committee.

Dr. Panetta is no stranger to stigmas or stereotypes when it comes to the engineering industry. She recalls the looks on some faces when she told certain individuals she was an engineer. “I was never called eye candy, but I was told ‘You don’t belong in engineering; you should stay home and have babies,” Dr. Panetta says.

During her undergraduate studies at Boston University, Dr. Panetta found that the engineering department was lacking in female students. When she was hired as a mentor for women at Tufts University, she was more shocked to find fewer women in the field than when she was in school.

She created a program called Nerd Girls, to not only help break down some of the traditional barriers, stigmas and stereotypes directed towards women in the field; but to also break down some of the misconceptions and misunderstandings that still surround engineering.

The program not only teaches the importance of teamwork, it teaches how engineering isn’t just math and science, but imagination and creativity as well. It emphasizes the importance of mistakes and how they help us develop and strengthen our skills; and it demonstrates how being intelligent is “the new pretty.”

Within the group, women can build their self-esteem and confidence in their abilities, by working in teams, analyzing the challenges in their projects and finding solutions to those challenges. It also places importance on extracurricular activities, because it is those activities that help strengthen the imagination and creativity needed to be a great engineer.

What caught my attention the most about Nerd Girls was the extended help the program offers to younger girls, K-12. Utilizing arts and crafts, and using materials such as spaghetti, toilet paper rolls, cotton and paper towels; younger kids are able to find solutions to certain problems by tapping into their imagination and using their creative skills. These types of activities at such an early stage can help to eliminate the very misunderstanding and misconception that tends to intimidate those from entering the field.

Nerd Girls is also expected to air a reality show, which I think is wonderful, because now women of all ages can have positive role models to look up to, instead of the typical ‘Britney-Spears, Paris-Hilton, I can get into any club carrying my dog in my purse, and “OMG! Look at my shoes,” ones (too much?).     

Nerd Girls is not only a great way to create a strong community, but it’s an excellent idea to get younger individuals involved with what they want to do for their futures. It was designed mostly for women who had some fear about the engineering industry, whether it was based on not being comfortable with math and science; or surrounded the traditional stereotypes that women should not be engineers. But the concept behind it is one we should all look into. 

Many people have no idea what they should do with their lives once they get out of high-school –if they even get out of high-school. A lot of younger individuals get caught up in the latest fads and hottest materials, which to some, can cause huge self-esteem issues and make them give up at an early stage. Being smart, intelligent, nerdy–whatever you want to call it – just isn’t the in thing at a time when it really counts.

I like Dr. Panetta’s motto “Having a brain is the new pretty,” because there’s nothing ugly about strengthening everyone skills and abilities that will help create stronger communities.

Do you consider yourself a nerd? Why is there so much negativity associated with being “nerdy”? Share your nerdiness with the rest of us by posting your comments below, or sending the really embarrassing ones to me at meaghan.ziemba@advantagemedia.com.

Tragically, I fear that the illustration to the right is not that far from any photo you’ll find of me pre-1995.

by David Mantey, Editor, PD&D

I suppose that the hair would be parted on the other side and I’d be wearing a lavender vest rather than a kindergarten blazer featuring an assortment of arts and crafts, but the photo could just as easily come as the result of an evil motherly plot to sabotage my cool factor (pause for guttural laugh), as it did from a few minutes of Photoshop 101.

I wasn’t the victim of an adolescent prank: I volunteered to enter the nerdification process and must say that I was satisfied with the results – as much as I can with an image manipulated with virtual pomade.

Call it a marketing gimmick if you’d like, but rather than an inkless ballpoint or laminated pocket calendar, Faro Technologies was attracting attention at Quality Expo 2009 (a part of National Manufacturing Week September 22-24 at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, IL) by pulling people into the booth with a digital camera and the eight latest additions to the nerd clan displayed on flat-screen televisions.

An unorthodox ploy, the viral marketing campaign not only had geeks lining up to join the nerd herd, it also drew their eyes to FARO’s products for 3D measurement, inspection, documentation and imaging. It had the allure of the 1980s-themed dance, but with masking tape and pocket protectors rather than big hair and ill-fitting pants.

The campaign reminded me of two things that I will now list in the least creative literary device:

1. Nearly all successful ideas sounded absolutely ludicrous at one time.
2. Embrace your inner nerd, geek or fitting intellectual stereotype with disregard for the negative connotation.

I often like to imagine myself in the think tank or brainstorming session when initially contrived ideas suddenly balled into an avalanche of possibility. I wish I was there when an ad agency sold H&R Block on the lime green square that is now the company’s logo, just so I could stand up and say, “Right, right … well, thank you for your time and effort.”

Of course, I would be quickly followed by a senior member of the company who waited until I finished canning my job to add, “By God, I think he/she/they may be on to something here.” For some reason, the boss’ fictitious voice always takes on a Charlton Heston-like grit when I’m narrating my own career setbacks in my mind.

If only I had the opportunity to sit in the meeting in which a group was “spitballing” and someone jokingly suggested that they nerd everyone at the show. Eyebrows raise, someone snaps their fingers and now you too can nerd yourself at www.nerdyourself.com. I bought in, but if you know me, you understand my love for the absurd. I suppose that you may have caught on when you turned the page and noticed that my wardrobe and personal style choices had changed.

With the success of Best Buy’s Geek Squad (and its fictitious counterpart on the TV show Chuck), embracing the inner intellectual went from taboo to chic in a single selling season. Ignoring the faux uncool, because it’s now in to sport black plastic frames and a neat white shirt, I want to stress the importance of embracing, if not promoting, the oddball inside. As an outed member of those known as weird, I’m typically not one for charades, but day-to-day life was simply easier to lead when I dropped the act and realized that my days as a socially awkward full-time member of the media and part-time word enthusiast were far from numbered.

Similar to an “aha” moment, the “oh” moment stands out in your personal chronicle as the second you stepped back from the façade and celebrated your interests and strengths. I was lucky enough to pair my love for the written word with the cool prestige of the engineering community, saving myself from the deep weird beyond by a single, side-parted hair.  

Sure we’ve been nerded, but we knew that long before we posed in front of a quasars and binary code. Embrace it.

What’s your take? Send you questions, comments or nerded photos to david.mantey@advatagemedia.com.

The frustrations from unexpected delays during traveling seem similar to those when trying to hit product development timelines and keeping pace with time-to-market demands.

by Jeff Reinke, editorial director, PD&D

It’s an interesting dynamic with work and travel. During a fishing trip this past weekend I was commenting on the recent onslaught of car trips and plane rides that had dominated my schedule for the last couple of weeks. My buddy remarked that he was looking forward to doing more travel for work as he wanted to “get out there and see more things”. I wonder if he’ll feel the same way after he gets his share of experiences like the one I had on a recent trip out west. Although this flight offered perspective on some elements relative to the design engineering community, I could have done without the extra two hours in a plane and added quality time with some Denver paramedics to help bring the point home.

It’s not a premise that resonates with everyone, but when asked I try to explain that while I’m not crazy about the travel, I really enjoy what I do once I get to wherever my duties may take me on a given day. I can remember hearing similar comments when I first started out and not understanding them. I relished the opportunity to travel. Unfortunately the perks that come with those silver medallion emerald perks flyer driver mileage programs just can’t keep pace with the known and never-ending surprises associated with navigating the wonderful gauntlet of airports, rental car counters and hotels.

Getting back to my recent flight, its events seemed similar to the frustrations you might experience in hitting product development timelines and keeping pace with time-to-market demands.

First, there was an admittedly negative cloud associated with this four hours of plane time for me because, well, it was four hours on a plane and I would be missing the Packers-Vikings game. Given the result of the game missing it wasn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it didn’t present the best of perspectives as I pulled into the airport parking lot. However, upon checking in I was awarded a first-class upgrade.

My point: We may not always love the project being assigned and it might dictate a less than pleasurable journey, but given the right amount of support and the proper tools, there can be an unexpected upside to the experience.

The second parallel came from a 30-minute delay at the gate. Some of this can be attributed to the simple logistical challenges of getting an oversold crowd of travelers on a plane, in their seats and with their baggage properly stowed. However, my frustrations stemmed from the fact that the delay was also due in part to multiple representatives of the “that guy” clan making their presence known.

Your know him – they’ve got the Bluetooth headset so they can make a call right when the doors shut and then talk above everyone else in order to be heard. After all, he’s a pretty big deal. The only problem is that we can’t take off until Mr. Burgundy shuts down the electronic device and joins the rest of us low lifes simply trying to get from point A to point B as soon as possible.

My point: Some factors delaying product development will simply always be there. They require proper planning to mitigate and must be understood in order to manage expectations in meeting and establishing reasonable timelines. With an over-booked flight, boarding simply should have begun sooner. At the same time, making every effort to work around and avoid those factors that can be controlled, especially when they involve individual behaviors that affect the entire team and project, need to be dealt with immediately.

The final “event” on this trip was an unexpected landing and subsequent two-hour delay in Denver to allow not one, but two individuals off the plane in order to address health concerns. Obviously unforeseen, unpredictable and completely understandable, this delay is something everyone involved can appreciate and respect. At the end of the day it underscores a commitment to passenger care.

In keeping with the product development analogy, the unexpected delay that results from quality concerns should never be sacrificed. The competitive environments we all operate in preach the gospel of being first with innovative products and the benefits of quicker time-to-market goals. However, the lessons learned from various product recalls that might have been avoided if quality was not sacrificed in the name of production timelines speak for themselves.

Do you have any product development timelines stories or travel nightmares to share? Feel free to e-mail me at jeff.reinke@advantagmedia.com or simply register and post your comments below. If the post is good enough, I might just gift you a couple of those precious frequent flyer miles so you catch the upgrade, too.

"Health care is an enormous, overarching issue that I’m afraid only some are interested in enough to do the research, while others rely simply on what is regurgitated through the local evening news."

by Carrie Ellis, Editor, Chem.Info

Appropriately, I write this blog from the comfort of bed — pillows stacked up behind me, tissue on my right, orange juice on the left, laptop whirring on my arched legs in the beautiful Gaylord Hotel in Orlando, FL. Considering that I flew here specifically to be at the Emerson Global Users Exchange (in amazing Floridian weather whilst my native Wisconsin is getting pummeled by rain and even hail), I couldn’t help but think what a waste.

And when I say that, I by no means mean the event itself, which is proving to be quite valuable, but the fact that I’m here and sick, and not operating at 100 percent, but still expected to perform even if it is my own expectation.

It got me thinking about health care, as well as other health-related proposals both politicians and companies are throwing at the wall, much like spaghetti, just hoping that something eventually sticks. Companies seem to be getting more and more involved in such debate as they realize how important employee health is to their productivity and even overhead as far as health insurance.

Politicians also can’t help but be involved, however preposterous their ideas. I recently read that a Republican senator is pushing an amendment to the current health care bill that discounts private health insurance up to 50 percent for people who lead healthy lifestyles. To that I say, what’s the point of having health insurance then? Some people can’t help their health history — what about them?

Another possibility that has been not only lip service, but also put into play is that companies become more involved in your personal health care issues and affect your health resolutions by incentivizing healthy decision making. Other companies are simply just handing their employees access to services and/or equipment that makes healthy living easier, such as smoking cessation support, fitness programs and gym memberships, etc.

One such example is Bison Gear, an Illinois manufacturer that was just recognized as the “Healthiest Company in America,” winning an award that illustrates its commitment to employee health and well-being with innovative health and wellness initiatives that actually yielded measurable employee health improvements.

Health care is an enormous, overarching issue that I’m afraid only some are interested in enough to do the research, while others rely simply on what is regurgitated through the local evening news. Every company and individual will be affected by what is decided upon — even if nothing comes to fruition, it will affect you. If we do nothing, we’ll sink further into complacency, debt and sickness as a nation. If we do something, we just don’t know what will happen, which can be scary in and of itself.

As of now, one American dies every 12 minutes from lack of health care, according to David Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard. And it doesn’t look good for employers either. An article by the Associated Press states, “Costs for employer-provided health plans are expected to rise more than 10 percent within the next 12 months, a jump workers may feel in their paychecks or through changes to their insurance coverage.”

You see it everywhere, whether for or against or for modification in favor of or opposed to — it’s health care and everyone has an opinion. And each thinks his or her opinion is better than the next. But it’s not important what I think, nor is it important what Republican Joe Wilson thinks. It’s important that you at least think.

Where do you stand on the topic of health care? How involved do you want your employer to be in your health issues? What do you think of preventive medicine? How about incentivized health care?

Sound off by sending me an e-mail at carrie.ellis@advantagemedia.com or post your comments below.

“Now Starbucks is providing instant coffee—the coffee snob’s most degraded form of caffeine next to Mountain Dew.”

by Anna Wells, Editor, IMPO

Perhaps it’s because it’s one of the most visible brands out there, but Starbucks has been all up in my face in this recession.

I remember vividly when I knew this whole economic collapse was real… and it was literally the day last summer I read in the paper that Starbucks—one of the most ubiquitous and iconic brands of my generation—was going to close the doors on several hundred stores.

Soon after this massive shuttering, I walked into my neighborhood “bucks” for a quick cup to go. Upon ordering my usual Venti Iced Americano—extra ice, easy water—the barista gave me my change and asked me for my name. Even though there were only a handful of people in the store, she wrote it on the cup, then called it when my drink was ready.

Within weeks, the morning ladies knew me by name and I realized that Starbucks had gotten strategic. Instead of being known by its yuppy, corporate logo-centric image, Starbucks was trying to become my friend—the neighborhood coffee house where they knew my name.

More changes have elapsed over the past year. One more publicized venture has been Starbucks’ launching of several “European-style” coffee houses under a different brand name: 15th Avenue E Coffee & Tea. These self-proclaimed ‘stealth’ stores are disassociated with the Starbuck’s brand, but serve the corporation’s coffee and teas. The environment in the first (Seattle) location is said to be a rustic and modern mix, vastly different than the coffee giant’s existing spots.

This morning, I came across another new endeavor. Starbucks was launching its own brand of instant coffee.

Instant? This was kind of a record scratch moment for me.

For a company that positioned itself as a high end coffee chain, has Starbucks taken it too far? I’ve been corrected numerous times by the register attendant when I brashly attempted to circumvent using a language I don’t speak. What could be a bigger display of arrogance than forcing your patrons to speak Italian? Now Starbucks is providing instant coffee—the coffee snob’s most degraded form of caffeine next to Mountain Dew.

My concept of the Starbucks brand is starting to get fuzzy, and I’m not sure if this is a good or a bad thing. There’s a danger in trying to be all things to all people, especially when you sell yourselves on being a premium brand. Is now the time to stick to these guns, assuming your customer base—to use a tired phrase of defeat—is what it is? Perhaps it’s most imperative now that you not lose focus in a desperate attempt to diversify.

But at the same time, maybe Starbucks has it right. The company took a hit last summer: its aggressive attempt to open thousands of new stores in a short period of time backfired with the economy. So what now? So they get aggressive again. This time it’s in the form of marketing strategies, and penetrating markets it perhaps never would have touched before the downturn.

My speculation here is simply food (or caffeine?) for thought. Do you think Starbucks will see success in this aggressive diversification? Or do they have their coffee in too many pots? Do you have a story to tell about your own brand diversification? Email me your thoughts at anna.wells@advantagemedia.com or post your comments below.

It's not about the tools, but how you use them and customize them to make them your own.

by Jeff Reinke, Editorial Director, PD&D

Today is my first day in the office this week, as the first two allowed for a dynamic range of visits that ran the gamut from medical equipment firms to a private label chocolate processor. No offense to the good people at the surgical device companies, but the tempting smells and allure of the subject matter (along with a couple of sweet samples that were so graciously provided) made the chocolate company portion of the trip a definite highlight of this sabbatical from the office environment.

However, despite what the headline might suggest, the ability to gorge myself on free chocolate during the three-hour drive home was not the greatest takeaway from this stop. Rather, it was what Richard Gordon, the president of Chocolate Potpourri, said to me about his approach to product flow and innovation.

At one point our conversation turned to how he deals with competing in a marketplace populated by a number of very large competitors. This dynamic, combined with current economic conditions, offers a number of inherent challenges – many with which I’m sure we can all commiserate. He indicated that despite their size, his company strives to be very progressive in the way they tackle these potential obstacles. In particular, he referenced his experiences with Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing. This alone is far from new, but his manner of implementing what he was exposed to offered some great perspective, whether you’re making chocolate or embedding new micro-fuel cells.

“It’s not the tools that these strategies give you,” stated Gordon, “but the way you use them. You can’t copycat the Toyota Production System and expect it to work at your facility. That goes against what a continuous improvement strategy is all about. You need to take bits and pieces of what you learn and customize it for your facility and work environment.”

Basically, it’s not about the tools, but how you use them. It was a mantra that was well impressed upon me throughout our time together. And while the size and scope of his operation is dramatically different from yours as a design engineer, his perspective on implementing best practices and striving for greater innovation underscores a common need.

The clichés regarding greater functional efficiencies, during both the design and production steps of product development, are well ingrained in our heads. We continue to embrace the charge of DFMA best practices and white papers. We acknowledge the potential impacts of Lean Design and an overall Six Sigma approach to our projects.

It’s easy to get on the bandwagon and laud their implementation. However, at the end of the day it’s not about what these practices can do, but how we make them our own in realizing what they will do.

The products that a company like Apple puts out are great. However, despite his success I don’t think Steve Jobs’ approach to product development is the right fit for every design engineering environment. That said, there are a number of principles, like Apple’s focus on innovation, ability to look beyond just the product in creating new markets around their products, and an overall drive to be first to market, that are worthy of closer looks.

We live in an age dominated by personalized consumer demands, regardless of whether we’re talking about specialized machining centers or customized iPhone apps. So in developing such offerings, I think it’s going to be more and more important to personalize the approach as well.