Blue Sky design contests

I was recently very derogatory about the latest Electrolux design lab finalists who submit blue sky design concepts under themed categories.  The concepts selected this year do not seem to be as strong as previous years.  I cannot understand why they were presented (without a reality check from tutors and peers prior to submission) and why the judges decided that they should be selected.  This is not me trying to knock student work, I only want to support students, but I believe you never learn as much from positive comments as you will from constrictive criticism.  

For this years competition, Students could submit work under three categories, one of which was air purification.   I do not wish to single anyone out as I think they were all bad, but as an example, no matter how far into the future you go, I cannot see how an air purifier the size of a match box worn on the wrist outdoors, can work.  Just mathematically, anything that small could not shift the volume of air necessary to improve air quality in an outside environment effected by wind especially when you factor in the distance it will normally be from your face.

I have strong views about blue sky work, I did a lot of it when I was in university and I enjoyed it, but now I question how much value it has.  Blue sky as I know it, is looking at what scientists and engineers predict will be the future in 10-20 years time and designing objects that take these things into consideration.  Looking back at the work I produced, most of the technology that 15 years ago it was predicted we'd have today, has either not come to pass, has been superseded, or just wasn't adopted by the public.  What I'd designed would have been difficult or impossible to manufacture and is still worthless 15 years later.  Whilst I had fun, I didn't really learn as much as i would have trying to design objects that could be manufactured.   I was not trying to be practical, that's not what blue sky is about. So, foolishly I adopted a blinkered approach, which I fear anyone designing objects with Blue Sky thinking is prone to do. As as soon as you hit a design barrier it is all to tempting to get around the problem by assuming, that in the future batteries will be as thin as a human hair with enough power to last a life time and motors the size of a fingernail will have enough torque to drive a car. Lights will be infinitely bright and everything will posess the ability to hover and think for itself.  Now I think the term blue sky is used as a way of covering up bad design and its lazy.   The blue sky pieces I designed were not really good for my portfolio.  What did they tell prospective employers? This designer has no idea how to package existing technology into something feasible- if you employ him, you will have to retrain him to produce things that can be made.

I'm not saying designers should not design for the future.  Most designers are designing for the near future, because it takes months to finalise tooling, approve 1st off production samples, manufacture stock, ship that stock to a store and put it on shelf.  Six months or more could have elapsed from the concept to selling the first product and in that time fashions change, tastes swing.  A designer is not designing for now, they are designing a little way into the future, but not the future in 10 or 20 years time, what would be the point.  I remember watching old episodes of Star Trek in which the set designers tried to make a version of the future, how dated it looks now and how irrelevant.  Even the films today with all their special effects in 15 years time will be inaccurate.  You cannot predict the future, it's impossible and so, in my opinion, unless you are a set designer on the next sci fi epic, blue sky design and the concepts selected for this years Electrolux design lab contest are largely a waste of time.

Advice to product design students - you won't realise how lucky you are.

The university I went to had a fantastic wood working machine shop, with table saws, lathes, bandsaws, thickness planers, mortisers, circular sanders, routers etc you name it, it had it.  There was a metal working shop with 3 different types of welders, various saws and tube benders, metal cutters and metal lathes. A huge ceramics area with everything for slip casting, throwing and glazing, with a kiln our tutor rather worryingly told us could fit the body of a large man standing up! It had vacuum forming machines, an enormous ply laminating machine, a spray booth with water wall (that I managed to flood on 3 occasions). The list could go on and then, I graduated.  I was fortunate enough to get 3 months in Italy working for a design consultancy as part of an exchange scheme.  Their office was in an apartment block and they didn't have a workshop.  In stark contrast to university, cardboard, wire and a pair of scissors was about as good as it got.  Then I worked in a consultancy in the uk and was lucky that they had a work bench and a bandsaw in a garage.  

My point is, if you are in university and like making models, make the most of your time there as unless you are very lucky, you will probably never be able to get your hands on as good or varied equipment again.  Also, what I didn't appreciate whilst I was at university was the amount of time I had to use and gain experience on these tools.  The majority of students in university have soo much time to focus on design, even if they think they don't.  What a luxury having the amount of time I had then would be today.  The older you get the less time you have, even if you are employed in design there isn't the time to spend days playing around making models.  I don't yet have a wife, kids or a dog and finding any time is still a struggle.

Universal design process Q and A with Maren Fiorelli

A while ago I responded to a series of questions about my design process with Maren Fiorelli,
a design student at Columbia College, a slightly edited version of some of my responses is here:

1. What is the first thing you think about when beginning a project?

Once I have identified something I’d like to tackle – a product that I think I can improve on or an area that needs improving, I research to see if this hasn’t already been done, as something better may already exist, but it just hasn’t become mainstream enough to hit my radar and there are few things worse than spending lots of time on something only to have someone tell you that they saw the same design idea or product 4 years ago. 

As an example, my Nan struggles to chop vegetables because of weak wrists, as a designer, should I design a better chopping gadget, or order packets of pre-chopped vegetables from the supermarket?  There is always another way around a problem, sometimes this is an advantage as it allows you to break away from the norm, other times it is a disadvantage as it means the problem doesn’t really exist.  So I have to carefully consider if something is worth tackling as it’s quite an investment of time.  I don’t get it right every time either and I do come up with a lot of dead ends. As the image in this post and  this video demonstrates:

2. What are some key elements that you try to emphasize in your products?

It’s all about functionality.  I have my own design style, but looks are not really important to me, which is weird coming from a product designer as of course I don’t want it to look butt ugly, but one man’s duck is another man’s swan – aesthetics are down to individual taste.  If I had to choose between sacrificing looks or functionality, looks would get the chop every time – although I do think the role of the product designer is to balance both.  What I am really looking for is an elegant solution, the solution which performs best in the most economical/simple way in terms of materials, functionality etc.  It’s hard to describe but you know it when you see it.  I will also always try to first solve the problem without using any (electronic) technology as I feel it’s always the most obvious path, too often designers will just stick a motor in something or a bunch of electronics. 

For example, recently my mother was moaning because the battery had died in her electronic weighing scales, so she had to go back to her mechanical ones – they work perfectly and will continue to do so long after the battery in the electronic ones has died – if electronics provide a tangible benefit, then they should be included, but often I feel it’s an example of laziness on the part of the designer/marketing department and a needless use of resources to try and get a sale from a public that have been tricked into thinking they need something new – new is not necessarily better.

3. How do you create your master check list for these key elements?

I always create a list of things that I’d like to include, there’s the ‘nice to haves’ and the ‘must be able to do’s’.  I (sort of) imagine everything it would be good to have, even if they may be currently impossible, but I think through as many scenarios as I can.  Some ideas I put back on the shelf for next time, but all the things that will make the object better, I try to keep.  It’s difficult to put into words quite how it works, but I try to include as much common sense as possible.

I also use a rule of thumb for the size of product I’m designing to try and include as many innovations/USP’s (unique selling points) as possible.  If what I’m designing is simple (1 part) like a bread board, I’m looking for at least 1 USP.  If it’s a complex product then I’m trying to find at least 7 USP’s to make it stand out.  These USP’s should not be bolt-ons, so the thing looks like an extra out of the transformers movies, but must be incorporated into the design to add to the functionality as I believe there is no point in being different just for the sake of it when you can be different to the benefit of the product and the consumer.

4. What do you feel about universal design in relation to products for someone with a disability?

There are certain disabilities that require unique and adapted designs tailor made to the individual.  What I like most about the principles of universal design is that by making an object as easy as possible to use for the people who would find it the hardest, you improve it for everyone, which has to be a good thing.  If everyone is using the same equipment, then it’s one less barrier to being disabled.

5. I see that function is the most important aspect in your designs. How important is it to you to stay within the social norm for products that you create?

There are no revolutions in product design; everything is an evolution on what has gone before.  I want my designs to be easily understood and used.  I do not want to design objects that require massive instruction manuals.  So to a certain extent I am designing things that I hope look familiar, but maybe have an element of surprize, like my pepper mill who’s lid turns into a funnel.  I am not looking for people to buy or use my product designs because they are by me (otherwise I would show my face on my site etc which I never do), I would like what I create to be invisible, which means, I want my products to work so well that people don’t notice them.  The majority of products function to complete a task – I use a can-opener to open a tin of beans, not because I love opening tins, but because I am hungry.  When the can opener doesn’t work I get frustrated, because it becomes a barrier to achieving my goal.  I never want my designs to be barriers.  All products follow some form of social norm, they are styled for which-ever culture will most appeal to the consumer, which is why so many versions of a product exists.  Even something as mundane as a toaster comes in many forms and colours to fit with the styling of your home.

6. What direction do you think that designers tend to overlook when they are designing products?

Mainly I would surmise that most mistakes that are made are caused by aggressive time constraints. Time is money, so there can be extreme pressure to hit a deadline.

I have direct experience of this.  I once designed a garlic crush as part of a range of kitchen utensils.  I made a solid Bluefoam model that was then realised in CAD and a rapid prototyping model sent back. I, the client and the rest of the office had a look at it and everything seemed ok, but no one tried to crush garlic with it as we would have broken the part.  We pushed on with tooling, but on receiving the first off tool samples, I discovered (to my horror) that when crushing garlic the two handles just slightly pinched the skin in people’s hands when fully closed.  Changing the tool was costly and no one was very happy, but due to aggressive timescales it was a mistake that no one spotted.  I learnt a lot that week;-)

product design advice - test your idea first

The uncle of a friend of mine came up with an idea for a product; what the product was is not important, suffice to say, it was an idea so commercially bad, it was the chocolate tea pot of bad ideas.  He wanted to take the design to market and with no product design experience, conducted a brief internet search and found an experienced Product Design company offering design evaluation services.  From the website they had all the right bells and whistles and offered to evaluate the design free of charge.  He went along to meet them and they reviewed his idea and surprisingly told him it had legs.  The next step would be for their patent team of highly experienced patent experts to do a search to check if the idea had not already been patented.  My friends uncle, parted with the cash (a princely sum) to allow the initial search to be conducted.  The fee seemed steep, but they assured him that there would be a lot of hand holding along the way and their experts were, well… experts.  Unsurprisingly, the initial search came back with articles of a similar nature, but nothing that was close to his idea (with good reason, his idea was a howler).  For the next stage, the company would prepare various sketches to get rough tooling quotes and patent his idea.  The fees were starting to increase, so my friend heard about his uncles’ folly and put him into contact with me.  A few quick questions were enough.  I felt like Simon Cowell on X-Factor.  ‘Haven’t any of your friends or family told you, you can’t sing?’ 

‘No, they all say I have a beautiful voice’

It didn’t feel good. 

'What do your friends and family think of your idea? Have you made a rough model to see if your idea will work?' I asked, he replied he hadn’t made a model, he had never done any of this before and didn’t really have any DIY skills.  He also hadn’t told many people because he was worried about giving his idea away, but his wife thought he had a good idea, because she had experienced the problem.  The idea was a classic combination of two products that worked spectacularly well at the jobs they were intended for separately and would work spectacularly badly when forced together to make a new multi-purpose object.  ‘Go and buy these two items from a hardware store, cut a hole in one and stick the other through it, add a bit of gaffer tape and then go for a walk and try to use it,’ I advised – see what problems this creates and think around how to solve those problems.  He did so and realised that he was potentially being taken for a ride.

Every design consultancy has mouths to feed and there are a lot of people out there with money who are having bad ideas, so sometimes paths may cross.  I’m not condoning this, but there were faults on both sides.  The consultancy should have told him that the idea needed radical development or scrapping and addressing the problem in another way, before taking a fee for a patent search.  Also a few hours on the internet and in the shed would have solved many of his problems and highlighted many new ones.  With a lot of work the design company may have been able to completely change the idea to create a half decent design, but would it ever be marketable and would my friends uncle have enough to invest to not only get it to market, but also market it so that people would invest or buy it, I don’t think so.  With all my experience I could not see a way of making it work.  My friends uncle had identified a problem, it was just the way he went about analyzing and solving it.  You don’t have to be a designer or inventor to come up with good ideas, but there are a few things you have to do to test if they are any good.

Once you have identified the problem, you have to ask yourself does the problem really exist?  Has it been solved in another way?  In the space race, America spent 2 million dollars designing a ball point pen that would write in a zero gravity environment and the Russians just took a pencil (research suggest that this example maybe a myth but it does nicely illustrate a point).  If indeed you have found a problem without a satisfactory solution, then you have to research to see if it hasn’t already been done and you are just not aware of it (the internet is great for this). Then, you don’t need to be good at sketching or making models, but I cannot stress enough, you do need to make rough, quick models to find the faults with your idea.  Use card board, plasticine, even salt dough – anything you can get your hands on and test your ideas on family and friends before approaching a designer – whatever it takes to avoid that chocolate tea pot.  I'm going to blog around this a lot more in the future.