Events

Search Blog


  • web
    Search this blog

Copyright & Syndication

Feeds from other blogs

MC News from MadeForOne.com

Outside Innovation

Customer Innovation

May 17, 2008

Conference invitation: 3rd International Conference on Rapid Manufacturing (RM) to be held at Loughborough University on July 9 and 10

RM-ConferenceRapid Manufacturing, also know as direct, digital, generative manufacture or additive fabrication, is one of the most exciting emergent technologies available to mass customize today. RM uses 3D Computer Aided Design (CAD) data to directly 'print' or 'grow' parts in a variety of polymeric, metallic, ceramic and organic materials. When fully implemented, it allows almost unlimited variety at no extra variable cost. Old paradigms of optimizing between switching and inventory cost will go away. While the potential of these technologies have been discussed since years, only very recently a larger scale of commercial application has begun.

The most exciting application of rapid manufacturing, in my perspective, is its enabling role for user manufacturing (previous postings on the topic). A new generation of rather cheap machines is coming to the market now promise to replicate the development we had in the printing industry: Form large printing presses to large laser printing systems to the desktop printer. The same may happen to manufacturing. From large centralized factories to decentralized plants to a factory on your desk.

The International Conference on Rapid Manufacturing (RM) is the world's only conferences focused on this trend. Organized by some core members of our mass customization community, the Rapid Manufacturing Group at Loughborough University in the UK, the conference focuses solely on the application of 'end use parts', made using additive layer manufacturing technologies.

The past events have been attended by over 150 delegates and speakers from around the world. The event provides a two day showcase of invited speakers, including the very best in both academic RM research activity and commercial RM applications. The event also plays host to a parallel technology and materials exhibition supported by leading RM systems vendors exclusively for conference delegates.

The program is divided in an academic and a business stream. Topics presented in the business track include:

- Developing a business case for customized RM
- RM for the home based market
- Ultrasonic Consolidation
- Developing intellectual property in RM product
- Pushing the boundaries of RM consumer products
- The socio-economic benefits of RM
- DMLS for high performance RM applications
- Quality management in RM using non destructive testing

The conference further will cover process and materials issues, design opportunities, management and organizational issues and industrial applications, making the conference of relevance to engineers, designers and business managers, as well as academics and researchers and RM materials and system developers.

For more information, registration, and the full program, please go to http://www.rm-conference.com/index.htm

May 15, 2008

Update: Fashion Crowdsourcing Project Nvohk Set to Launch on June 5, 2008

Nvohk_badge_150x225Some weeks ago, I reported about nvohk (pronounced ‘invoke’), a company that puts our "collective customer commitment" model into action: Get 5000 members who pay 50$ each of funding, use the money to create an eco-friendly line of clothes, and then sell the clothes to a wider public and share the profits with the original members. Members, as part of their pre-payment, get the right to vote on new designs and co-manage some of nvohk's business decisions.

In a press release today, the company reported that since December 4, 2007, nvohk could recruit 2,800 members worldwide – enough that the company will officially activate membership and launch its brand on June 5, 2008.

I am curious to see how the project will develop and if it reaches its threshold of 5000 members. It seems a bit more difficult then the founders officially expected. In January they were talking about 20,000 people to be recruited. to start the project. Now they are down to 5000, and still 40% away from this target.

Perhaps the founders should just position nvohk in the "pimp my C.V." domain. For just 50$ investment, you honestly can say you run your own eco-business and are investing in the sustainability revolution ...

Context:
- Website: www.projectnvohk.com
- My previous posting about the company

May 07, 2008

Mass Customization in Clothing & Fashion: Annual Conference of the European Technology Platform

EuratexconferenceThursday May 29th 2008, 9.30 – 14.30 in Brussels, Belgium.
Pre-Conference on May 28th, 9.20 - 17.00 h

EURATEX, the European Association of the Textile Industries, is running its third conference on mass customization in the textile and clothing industry. It is the main European networking meeting for this sector and presents an excellent opportunity to connect with industry, technology providers, and EU policy makers.

More than 200 participants from industry, academia, public authorities and the media attended last year’s Technology Platform conference and the organizers expect at least a similar attendance this year.

A range of industry speakers are scheduled to describe their own experiences and business cases in the field of Mass Customization. The European Commission will present its policies and programs to support more Research & Innovation in the industrial sector in general and the textile and clothing sector in particular.

This event will be preceded on May 28th by a full-day pre-conference which provides an overview of recent mass customization related projects funded by the EU.

For the full program and more information, please download this PDF.

Attendance of the conference including lunch and cocktail is free of charge. Registrations are handled on a first come, first served basis.

A registration form is here, and more information on accommodation in the conference hotel can be found here.


Contact for organizational & logistical questions
Paulette De Wilde, Euratex (Ph : +32-2-285.48.83, paulette.de.wilde@euratex.org)

April 28, 2008

Interview: Rickshaw Bagworks' Co-Founder Rob Honeycutt on Mass Customization of Bags and More

HoneycuttRob Honeycutt is one of the most experienced entrepreneurs in the mass customization domain. Being a devoted biker and working as a bike messenger in San Francisco, he founded the Timbuk2, the messenger bag company, in 1989. Timbuk2 was one of the first companies to implement mass customization in the consumer market with its 3 panel bag, launched 1995. In 2001, he implemented the “Build Your Own Bag” e-commerce website for Timbuk2, garnering awards from Communication Arts Magazine and Macromedia. This offering still is today one of the main examples of customization. In 2005, Rob sold his shares in Timbuk2 to venture capital group and partnered with Mark Dwight ,the former Timbuk2 CEO, to start Rickshaw Bagworks. Rickshaw will be a new kind of custom bad provider, mixing mass customization with community co-design. First products shall ship in May 2008. In this exclusive interview, he talks about Rickshaw, his experiences with Timbuk2, and what is coming next in mass customization. Rob was born in Knoxville, Tennessee, in 1959. He attended art school at the University of Tennessee and toured the United States and Alaska on bicycles with friend Tim Evans.

Frank Piller: Rob, your company Rickshaw recently landed a great scoop that brought mass customization on the radar of the participants of the famous TED Conference, when you provided a custom bag to all 1600 participants. Can tell us some more about this project and the feedback you received?

RickshawRob Honeycutt: My partner and the founder of Rickshaw, Mark Dwight, has been a long time TED attendee. Mark had done the TED bags in 2006 when he was CEO of Timbuk2. When Mark and I started working together the TED bags came up again and we jumped at the opportunity. We didn’t actually do 1600 unique bags. We did 800 sets of twins. This came out of trying to figure out the number of different customizable features we could offer and in how many variations. As we were working out the numbers for 1600 bags we hit on the fact that 32x5x5 is 800 and came up with the idea of twins. So we turned it into a game. “Find your twin at TED.”

What is the idea behind your new venture, Rickshaw Bagworks?

Again, Rickshaw is the brainchild of Mark Dwight. Mark became the CEO after the departure of my old partner Brennan Mulligan. Mark took Timbuk2 from a $4M company to a $15M in 4 years and orchestrated a venture capital buyout. By any measure a very successful reign. When Mark left after the buyout he had a one year non-compete after which he decided to start a new brand of his own. Mark and I had become good friends during his time at Timbuk2 and was a big fan of the manufacturing I’d set up there. One of his first calls when starting up this new company was to contact me to partner up with him for manufacturing.

Rickshaw is going to be a great bag company. We’re driven to create value in new and unique ways. We’re definitely bringing in a new form of customization for the bags. We’re taking all the lessons learned at Timbuk2 and taking it to a new level. Both Mark and I have a long history in the bag business. It’s the business we love and I think that is going to express itself is some really really cool products.

But your roots in mass customization are much older. You are the founder of Timbuk2, the original custom messenger bag company and one of the earliest case studies in modern mass customization. What did you learn during your time at Timbuk2, and what is happening there now?

I can’t speak much about what Timbum2 is doing now. I’m completely out of the company and, worse, I’m going to be a competitor of my old company. Needless to say, they don’t tell me the details of what’s going on now. The one bit of data that I have heard is that the standard three panel Timbuk2 bag that I created so many years ago still accounts for 70% of the company’s sales, which warms my heart when I hear it.

I can tell you a great deal about what I learned from founding Timbuk2 and applying mass customization to messenger bags but you have to promise to tell me to shut up if I go too long. I can get carried away on this topic.

For us, in the early days of Timbuk2, doing mass customization was a total fluke. My old business partner, Brennan Mulligan, had turned me onto Joe Pine’s book “Mass Customization” and everything sounded really cool. Great, but what to do? I’d also been reading a ton about Toyota’s manufacturing systems. Great, but how do you do that with sewing? I also had a sales guy for my bags in London who was hounding me to make three panel “rasta bags” but another messenger bag company was already doing that, so I was hesitant. Then I went to a sewing industry trade show called the Bobbin show where I saw two different consulting companies making t-shirts in modular “stand up” production cells.

That was a EUREKA moment for me. I instantly understood how I could create a racking system for cut panels of fabric, combine that with modular Toyota style sewing and make three panel mass customized bags. I just knew that people would find it totally cool and unique. It was a way to differentiate my company from all the other MUCH larger and well entrenched bag companies in the market. I didn’t have big money to compete but I had an idea that no one else could or would touch.

In fact, in hindsight, I think it was probably a good thing that there wasn’t a lot of money available. We would have wasted it trying to do too much. We inadvertently, just as a function of our limited resources, created a very simple mass customization scheme that resonated with our customers.

There has been such a long talk about mass customization, but not really much large scale applications from large companies. What is the reason for this?

For the most part the decision-makers in companies don’t understand mass customization as anything more than a hat trick of colors and features. The companies who do implement mass customization generally take it way too far. Suddenly you’ve got people making really ugly NIKE shoes because there are too many choices. I learned in art school that when you mix too many colors you just get mud. That’s what you get with too many customization options. There’s this notion that you pick up significant revenue dollars by allow infinite variations of a product, and I can draw you a clever graph to prove it, but I believe the result is the opposite. People have a limited natural attention span. When you offer up too many permutations you lose people. I always say that, on the web, the number of clicks it takes to get to the buy button is inversely proportionate to the number of customers that actually get to the buy button. With each click comes a diminishing return.

More than that many companies don’t seem to get how mass customization works with Lean manufacturing. They are two mutually supportive systems. You can literally create extremely broad line of products where the magic is in never having close outs. That is what’s truly exciting about this work! If you look at almost any company’s blended margin there are huge losses (or worse, completely unpredictable losses) in over stocks and stock-outs. Mass customization and Lean is all too often overlooked as a solution to this problem. Again, companies see it as hat trick and not a serious strategy.

No one ever seems to talk about this in relation to what I did at Timbuk2 but while I managed production we never once had a close out sale. We never once had a stock-out on any product we produced. And, I was turning the inventory over 40 times a year. Not only all that but I was shipping custom bags usually the same day they were ordered. People always talk about being able to “build your own bag” online and how interesting and unique that is but rarely does anyone realize the power of the activity behind that.

I believe it was the synergies of all these, and some good branding, that made Timbuk2 successful. But it’s also turned into a hardship for the company moving forward. All the follow on products that came out after I left were produced off shore, but the company had a brand based on supplying a wide variety of colors. Suddenly Timbuk2 started bloating up on off shore inventory, started having close outs, started pushing product onto dealers that they didn’t necessary want or need. The top line grew dramatically but they became operationally no different that any other bag maker. They didn’t apply any of the manufacturing skills I’d developed to new product. I think that has been an ongoing challenge for the company.

There is nothing inherent to the way we made bags in the early days that doesn’t scale to larger companies. In fact, economies of scale help tremendously for mass customization! I think the reason that companies don’t do what I did at Timbuk2 is that everyone is afraid to run manufacturing locally in a high wage country. The prevailing notion is that you make stuff in low wage countries. I personally don’t believe it’s necessary. I wouldn’t produce low cost commodity products locally but the hurdle for producing domestically, for almost any size company, I think is far lower than what people seem to believe.

What would be your main advice for a manager who wants to lead a mass customization implementation?

Keep it simple. Don’t get overly enamored with what is possible. Focus on your customer. Sometimes the very best applications of mass customization are almost invisible to the end user. It can just a way of providing a broad selection of products to the end customer without needing to hold a burdensome level of inventory. Sometime giving the customer a “build your own” option is great, but not in all circumstances. You really have to get to know your customer and find out what will be most meaningful to them.

To conclude: What is, in general and beyond your industry, the greatest mass customization offering ever – either one that is already existing or that you would like to get in the future?

I don’t see this as a one best application of mass customization. I see mass customization as a broad solution for what ails most industries. I think mass customization can be applied to virtually any product, or family of products, and be used to reduce waste, improve quality, increase variety and vastly improve overall manufacturing productivity. Mass customization is so much more than just “build your own.” When you get the right manufacturing systems coupled in behind the product offering, that is when you see the true power of mass customization.

I think the door is just starting to open for mass customization. There’s a brave new world out there just waiting to be customized.


You can reach Rob Honeycutt at rob@rickshawbags.com

April 27, 2008

Ultimate Customization: Design and Deliver - a new project that examines the next era of mass customization

CardiffpicA guest article by Daniel Eyers from the Cardiff University Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre (CUIMRC). CUIMRC is a new center at Cardiff University in the UK. In this post, Daniel describes about the mission and research at this center.

Imagine the opportunities that exist when the freedom of design opportunities afforded by Mass Customisation can be realised using innovative Rapid Manufacturing technologies, where one-off custom manufacturing is the norm, not the exception. As these technologies mature and become increasingly accessible to end-users, will this enablement of Mass Customisation be achievable? If so, what will be the effects of customised demand for business when compared to traditional Mass Production?

Cardiff University Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre (CUIMRC), funded by the Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council, is the UK’s leading research centre in the field of sustainable manufacturing R&D. Ultimate Customisation: Design & Deliver is a new project that examines the concept of Ultimate Customisation, the next era of Mass Customisation. Ultimate Customisation will involve much greater personalisation, where customers actively take part as co-designers and thus contribute to the value creation. The project aims to understand the viability of Ultimate Customisation using advanced manufacturing technologies such as those associated with Rapid Manufacturing. In this project we explore the possible implications of Rapid Manufacturing within a consumer facing environment, challenging traditional mass customisation production economics and disrupting existing commercial logistics, distribution and marketing paradigms.

Our previous consideration for Mass Customisation of logistics (through the McCLOSM study) demonstrated the implications for businesses in customising both logistics and manufacturing, and now that this project approaches its conclusion, the Ultimate Customisation: Design & Deliver project will continue to examine the implications of Rapid Manufacturing technology.

Considering the current status of knowledge, we have found that extensive literature exists for Mass Customisation, and separately, Rapid Manufacturing. However, as a result of rising individualism of consumer demand together with the technological improvement of Rapid Manufacturing, we believe these concepts will increasingly be implemented together in the short term. Despite numerous companies actively engaged in this field, as yet the body of knowledge analysing the overall topic has as yet received little research attention.

As a research centre, CUIMRC aims to help industry through creating greater understanding of the complex interrelationship between economics and environmental and social factors in developing a truly sustainable business. Our approach to research is to actively engage closely with our research partners and their associated supply chains in order to get an impartial, first hand viewpoint of their particular situation, while also allowing us to maximise the relevance and usefulness of our research outputs. Industrial secondments in which our researchers spend time embedded within host organisations have proven an extremely useful mechanism in this respect. We engage with stakeholders on several other levels, ranging from their participation in surveys and focus groups through to collaborative partnerships on individual projects and strategic input to the consortium through representation on our Steering Group.

The Ultimate Customisation project involves a number of collaborative industrial partners embarking on Rapid Manufacturing-Enabled Mass Customised production and through case studies and modelling approaches, we are exploring both demand and supply management implications arising from Mass Customisation. For the organisations involved in the project, our research aims to provide a clear understanding of both their present and prospective supply chains through ‘what-if’ simulations of futuristic business models for Ultimate Customisation. Additionally, from these assessments we can also assist in the optimisation of processes to directly benefit their business. The collaborative partners represent a cross section of industry, including highly experienced designers and manufacturers with capabilities both for rapid manufacture of customised products and traditional mass production.

During our research we anticipate making a number of Ultimate Customisation publications based on our research findings, many of which will be linked to our industrial collaboration. A warm invitation is extended to any individuals or organisations wishing to become involved with the research or receive project updates/dissemination information to register their interest with us.

Contact for more information Daniel Eyers (eyersDR@cf.ac.uk) or Hartanto Wong (wongH@cf.ac.uk).

New Open Innovation Marketplace Connects Connects Inventors With the Problems They Can Solve

Planet_eurekaPlanet Eureka started its beta test. Free open innovation service for SMEs.

In its upcoming issue, Information Week reports about a new online marketplace for open innovation. The site is devoted to helping people with solutions find problems. As Marianne Kolbasuk McGee reports in her article, Planet Eureka lets an inventor post an idea in hopes of finding a company interested in using it to solve its own problem or in bringing it to market to solve others' problems. The new site aims to match inventors with small and midsize businesses.

Thus, Planet Eureka turns the idea of Innocentive upside-down (Innocentive posts problems) and is much closer to the conventional patent / invention databases.

"There are thousands of inventors wanting to commercialize their ideas, but it's hard to get a potential manufacturer," says Ken Bloemer, president of Eureka's innovation group.

Many small and midsize businesses also lack deep R&D resources but are looking for great new ideas, he says. Those companies will get first dibs at Planet Eureka. Only small and midsize companies can view ideas during their first 100 days posted on the site. But after that, any company can access them.

Access is free to sellers and buyers. But the company charges for services it provides inventors, such as workshops on how to write descriptions of ideas that tell potential investors quickly what the invention is about without forcing them to trudge through patent abstracts. Inventors can also use Planet Eureka's Merwyn software, which Bloemer says can assess the probability of an invention or idea's success based on its written description.

Planet Eureka isn't the first Web site to traffic in ideas. Open innovation marketplaces have been matching businesses that have problems with people who have promising solutions for several years. Similar services are:

INNOCENTIVE: Connects companies, nonprofits, and government agencies looking for solutions to problems with people and organizations that have answers. Charges $15,000 to post a problem as well as 40% commission on amount paid to the solution provider.

NINE SIGMA: Prepares and posts RFPs for companies and others seeking solutions to problems. Charges fees for all services.

Context: Read the full Information week article here.

April 24, 2008

Fujitsu Siemens Computers Goes Open Innovation: User Innovation Contest Started

FSC Innovation ContestYou create the next IT Services for Tomorrow’s Data Center

Fujitsu Siemens Computers (FSC), a large IT infrastructure provider, just started their first community-based innovation contest this week. The contest asks everyone with a clever idea to develop ideas around the Data Center of the future.

They ask the questions how data centers will work in the future, what services will be required by users, and which topics will be of strategic importance for their business.

The contest has been created by a business team within FSC with the help of HYVE AG, a Munich based open innovation accelerator. On the platform, users not just become a source of ideas, but a member of an Innovation Community. This shall enhance their ideas with the help of other contest participants and the internal experts from Fujitsu Siemens Computers.

Every idea can be evaluated and commented by every contestant. As a consequence, ideas become vital elements which can be formed and developed by many spirits and thereby have the chance to gain excellence. While the original spin doctor competes for one of the prizes for one specific idea, the contestant’s activity within the community is rewarded as well.

In order to enable the contestants to actively interact beside the discussions on ideas, several additional functions are available to the participants. Weekly chats with other participants and Fujitsu Siemens Computers Professionals are dedicated to specific topics which are defined according to eminent issues within the pool of ideas. Not to mention the forum and other features.

Every contestant can contribute several ideas. The essence of the ideas is described through a handful of uniform parameters such as target group and basic functionality. The idea can also be enriched by any attachment such as diagrams or mind maps. In order to compare and rank the ideas, the contributions are evaluated along some criteria such as market potential, value to the customer or novelty to the market. Contestants evaluate their own as well as any other idea by these criteria.

The contest consists of different phases:

First, ideas are contributed and evaluated by the community. After two weeks the contest went on, FSC experts will come into play and start the expert evaluation phase were ideas are evaluated along similar criteria as the community evaluated the ideas. A tag cloud helps to explore the pool of ideas intuitively and your favorite ideas can be added to your personal list in order to keep an eye on their progress. And in the end, the winning idea gets 5000 Euro, plus there are several of the latest FSC laptops to win.

So if you are interested in data centers services, here is the opportunity to shape the future of this industry. http://innovation-contest.fujitsu-siemens.com. I am curiuous to see how this company-driven innovation contest works and which people come up to submit ideas.

April 10, 2008

Aberdeen Group Report Published: Configuring Profits to Order: Best Practices in Mass Customization in Industrial Markets

Aberdeen Report downloadA few weeks ago I offered you the chance to participate in a study by Aberdeen Group, a technology research company. Now, the results of this research have been published. The study focused on the use of configurators and customization strategies in industrial markets (b-to-b). Many manufacturers here are seeking to win business by offering their customers products configured specifically for them.

However, capturing and validating exactly what customers want, accurately quoting orders, and still delivering products quickly is challenging. Companies that are successfully addressing these challenges are able to reap the benefits of higher product profitability. Some are even seeing product profit margins improve by up to 80%, just by using configurator solutions.

The research report found, that:

- Best-in-Class reduce write-offs by 26.2 times by minimizing order errors with sales configurators.
- Best-in-Class are 20% more likely to accurately predict costs used to develop quotes for custom products, allowing them to achieve higher profit margins.
- Best-in-Class are 14% more likely to meet the customer’s promised delivery date with design rules to automate the creation of sales and design deliverables
- Best-in-Class achieve higher customer satisfaction by offering 3.5-times as many customizable product features as Industry Average companies
- Best-in-Class are 18% more likely to hit revenue targets with integrated sales and product configurators.
The research found that the biggest performance differentiator of the companies surveyed is in their ability to predict cost. "The key to being profitable is in knowing what the costs will be and developing an accurate, yet competitive quote," the report states. "To accomplish this, companies must look at the unique challenges of their business and implement the capabilities and enablers that will provide more visibility and predictability to cost.”

Aberdeen Report DataAnother finding also stresses the need of a stringend product configuration system and corresponding product structures. Best-in-Class companies report only US $31,400 in lost revenue due to quote or order errors. In comparison, the Industry Average report write-offs of US $823,900. Best-in-Class companies are better equipped to accurately capture what their customers want and process, engineer, and manufacture the order with far fewer errors. The research concludes:

"Companies who have not deployed a configuration solution will be at a competitive disadvantage and will forego the benefits of higher profit margins. A sales configurator alone can translate to profit margins that are 12% higher. An integrated sales, product and manufacturing configurator solution can mean profit margins that are 21% higher."

Context:
# Download a free copy of the report here.
# Posting about a similar report on the configuration practice of industrial companies.
# Configurator database: Get inspiration by browsing though hundreds of configuration solutions in all industries.

April 03, 2008

Pre-Announcement: The 2009 World Conference on Mass Customization & Personalization Will Take Place in Helsinki, Finland

The 2007 conference just is over, and I am still not done with all follow-up duties, but the next MCPC already is in the making:

Safe the following dates in your agenda!

The 2009 World Conference on Mass Customization & Personalization

Conference Theme:

Mcpc2009theme

Conference Place: Helsinki, Finland
Date: 4-7 Oct 2009 (!) (not 2008!)

Production methods are ready to offer personalized mass customization. The next challenge is to develop means to matchmaking products & services with specific customer demands in a satisfactory way.

The World Conference on Mass Customization & Personalization (MCPC) is the primary event in this domain. Bridging between academic research and management practice, the conference provides an interactive platform to learn about mass customization strategies and to discuss the latest technologies and enablers.

In Oct 2009, the conference will be in Helsinki with an interdisciplinary focus on the new advancements in the field of manufacturing, marketing and communication. The second part will be a business seminar addressing opportunities to bring mass customization and personalization to practice, with a focus on communication and marketing.

An innovative MassMatchMaking platform will enable all participants to experience a matchmaking flow from conference pre-launch to the actual conference and beyond. A highly interactive website will enable pre-matchmaking before conference, used in workshops, sessions, roundtables and dinner tables during the conference.

Stay tuned with MCPC 2009 newsletter and be part of the MassMatchMaking platform launch.


Conference Schedule:

Papers & Speaking proposals will be due on JAN 9th 2009 A call for papers is coming up soon.

Pre-workshop | 4 Oct 2009
Conference | 5-6 Oct 2009
Business seminar | 7 Oct 2009


Conference Organizers:

Helsinki School of Economics
Helsinki University of Technology
Tampere University
Tampere University of Technology
University of Art and Design, Helsinki

For all further information, check at www.mcpc2009.com frequently.

March 31, 2008

New Blog on Mass Customization and Rapid Ranufacturing and how this will influence the design profession

MattWe dont do retro is the personal blog of Matt Sinclair, a designer based in Helsinki. I first met Matt on the MCPC 2007 conference and then again last week on a workshop in Helsinki, and he does REALLY interesting work on user co-design.

His blog mainly concerned with mass customization and rapid manufacturing, which are the areas he researching for his PhD at Loughborough University in the UK. But you’ll also find information about other subjects that interest him - lead user innovation, open source design and industrial design in general (Matt also wrote one of the most extensive MCPC 2007 reviews)!

His Ph.D. is titled "An investigation of the feasibility of product architectures to facilitate consumer-created designs in the consumer electronics industry, using rapid manufacturing technologies as an enabler"

While he expects not to be ready before Summer 2010, his early thoughts already are quite interesting:

"Rapid Manufacturing (RM) is defined as the direct production of finished parts or products, most often utilising one of a number of 3D printing technologies. ... The most important difference between rapid manufacturing technologies and traditional mass manufacturing technologies such as injection moulding is the absence of tooling. This has a number of important implications. One of the common features of mass manufacturing processes is that the means of production require substantial initial investment, however once in place the cost of manufacturing a single part or product (relative to the initial investment) is negligible. It is therefore a basic principle of mass manufacturing that as the number of parts produced increases, the cost of production of each individual part decreases. This inevitably leads to uniformity, since even small design changes require significant reinvestment in tooling.
...

Mass customisation offers the possibility of designing for niche markets, in small production runs, but it will be impossible for a designer, or even a design team, to be an expert in all these niches. Designers will therefore need to accept the necessity of inviting consumers to take part in the design process, even to design their own products. Furthermore, rapid manufacturing reduces the level of technological expertise required to design functioning parts. It is therefore likely that consumers will begin to design and produce their own products whether officially sanctioned by a brand or not.

The purpose of the traditional design process is not just to impose a uniform aesthetic however, it also refines and rejects on the basis of ergonomics, durability, integration with other products and systems, cost etc. These are all areas in which the designer’s expertise is the best tool to resolve the conflicting demands of a product brief. To make sense of the potential for multiple product variants which mass customisation offers, my hypothesis is therefore that the task of the industrial designer will in future be to create modular product architectures which define and limit the parameters of any possible design."


Go to Matt's blog here: We dont do retro

March 27, 2008

Last minute: Executive Class at IE - Building the Customer-Centric Organization: Mass Customization, Open Open/User Innovation, and Relationship Marketing

IeclassmadridIE Business School is the best business school worldwide in executive education open programs, according to the 2006 ranking published by The Economist. Now they finally offer a program on mass customization, user innovation, and one-to-one marketing:

Building the Customer-Centric Organization:
Outperform your competition in profitability

Madrid, 2, 3 and 4 of April, 2008
Instituto Impresa Business School, Executive Education

Facilitators:
- Fabrizio Salvador, Frank Piller, and Martin Boehm

PDF Information Brochure: http://www.execed.ie.edu

Sorry for the last min. announcement, but I forgot to post this before. Perhaps you still can make it to Madrid next week!

Customer-centricity is increasingly becoming the key source of competitive advantage in today’s globalizing marketplace. Heightened competition is forcing business leaders to recognize that the new foundation for profitability is establishing loyal, long-term customer relationships; to conceive themselves not as a group of products, services, territories, or functions, but as a portfolio of customers; to know how profitable each of their customers or customer segments are, and to understand why; to continuously innovate in order to improve their customer value propositions. A company’s ability to find, grow, and retain their clientele has increasingly become the key to success.

The challenge arises when trying to manage the organizational complexity that surfaces when trying to implement a truly customer-centric strategy. Organizations must align all aspects of their business with the target customer value proposition. In order to be successful in implementing a sound customer-centric strategy, everyone in the company needs to make decisions consistent with this strategy.

The program features several stimulating modules that address numerous issues of concern.

Strategic capabilities for customer-centricity

Building a customer-centric organization is appealing but also difficult, because it takes profound changes in virtually all the value-adding processes of a firm. Yet the payoff is potentially enormous. This module examines the fundamental capabilities that a company has to develop in order to become more customer-centric and a true mass customizer, giving the 30,000 feet view of the scope and content of the organizational changes associated to customer-centricity. Special attention will be devoted to the issues associated to connecting customer, front-end and back-end of the firm for fast and efficient adaptation to customers’ needs.

Putting the customer at the center of the innovation process

A key challenge in new product and service development (NPSD) is to match new designs to customer preferences. The growing heterogeneity of demand, the advent of “long tail markets”, exploding product and service complexities, and the rise of the creative consumer are making this task more difficult than ever. This module will explore new strategies to navigate NPSD more efficiently by utilizing the firm's periphery for innovation.

Focusing on the relation with each individual customer

Focusing and delivering on what a customer values provides competitive advantage in today’s business arena. No matter what the sector is, each company needs to focus on the customer’s point of view not only to improve the customer’s experience, but also to increase the customer’s contribution to the business. This module will explore how to determine the value of an individual customer for your business and how to retain high value customers. Retaining customers can primarily be achieved by either increasing a customer’s cost of leaving your business or by delighting the customer with superior service. This program will explore how to increase a customer’s switching cost and how to delight and satisfy customers.

IE Business School is a leading international business school oriented at providing top-level training for executives. The recognized prestige of our teaching faculty, the degree of excellence of our academic programs and a clear international focus are the keys behind a learning model that has ranked IE Business School among the best business schools in the world (IE Business School is the best business school worldwide in executive education open programmes, according to the 2006 ranking published by The Economist).

In recognition of the high quality and academic rigour of our programs, Instituto de Empresa is accredited by EQUIS (European Quality Improvement Systems), AACBS International (The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) and AMBA (Association of MBAs).


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION and registration, please contact:

Olga del Ama
International Executive Programs Manager

Tel.: +34 91 782 1715
E-mail: olga.del.Ama@ie.edu
www.execed.ie.edu/internationalprograms

Registration also online here.

Conference on Open Innovation in Munich on April 24, 2008

MuenchenerkreispresentationThe MÜNCHNER KREIS is a prestigious non-profit supranational association working at the interface of public policy, science, business, and the media on issues of technology, societal and business impacts, and regulation of information and communications technologies. The MÜNCHNER KREIS organizes discussion groups, member conferences, symposia, and congresses.

On April 24, it organizes a rather large conference on open innovation in the telecommunication industries in Munich:
Leadership by Open Innovation in the Telecoms, IT and Media Industries
April 24, 2008, Haus der Bayerischen Wirtschaft, Munich

From the conference announcement:

The telecommunications, IT and media industries are simultaneously facing the challenges of globalization (in emerging markets such as China), convergence (through IP networks) and new value chains (through increased customer involvement and competition). Innovation will be the key to lead in these industries. The important question is: How should firms innovate?

Innovation cycles are shorter and costs are increasing. Could Bertelsmann have created a Google without having a garage in Silicon Valley? Will Kodak and Fuji be the leaders of the digital photos and videos? Will Apple take over EMI? How should firms use inventions of their R&D departments, which do not fit into their current business models? How should firms share, save or protect intellectual property? Is Digital Rights Management advantageous or is a free market model better? Should a mobile operator focus on customers or become a utility company to transport bits and bytes?


Perhaps “Open Innovation” is the magic word to answer these challenges and provide a model for innovation in these industries. Open means on the one hand the involvement of customers, users and clients in the innovation process and on the other hand the opening of the innovation process and sharing of intellectual property with third parties and even competitors. The conference is mainly focusing on the latter aspect, but a few speakers, including myself, will also address the former aspect of user innovation.

Open innovation as a methodology has an impact on business models, on corporate culture, on communication processes with users/suppliers, and on the architecture of the value chain. What do firms need to lead in their markets? Certainly they will need the right innovative products/services, the right business model, the right management and team, and the adequate financial backing. But more and more smart people are living and working outside their corporate borders. Will Open Innovation motivate people to team up, to create and to be passionate across borders or will it lead to strengthen competitors? There are no black and white answers to these questions.

The conference "Leadership by Open Innovation in the Telecoms, IT and Media Industries" will examine and discuss the importance of innovation for the commercial success of new inventions including technology, marketing, business models or a mix of all three.

For more information and registration, have a look in this PDF file (the conference will be in English and German with Simultaneous Translation of German-English language).

March 22, 2008

Un-Readymades: From Object to Experience. A study of mass customization from the perspective of industrial design

Interview with Martin Konrad Gloeckle, NYC, on consumer co-design and his series of "un-readymade" designs, a great interpretation of the customization trend

Un-ready mades by Martin Konrad Gloeckle. Pictures courtesy of Mr. Gloeckle.When I saw these pictures, I was fascinated immediately ... Martin Konrad Gloeckle, an Industrial Designer currently based in New York City, created some wonderful designs that are one of the best interpretations of the customization trend I ever saw. His designs are part of a study where he discusses the customization trend from the perspective of industrial design.

Born and raised in Germany, Martin relocated to the US in 1996, and recently finished his Master’s Degree in Industrial Design at the Pratt Institute in New York. Martin has additional degrees in Computer Science and Business Administration, and before returning to school had a successful career working for leading web and interactive advertising agencies both in Germany and the US. Martin’s design work has been featured in exhibitions, design blogs and magazines including New York Magazine, his award-winning Bendino lamp is currently produced and distributed in Europe.

Martin is the author of "Un-Readymades: From object to experience" – a study of mass customization from the perspective of industrial design. In this work, Martin has analyzed how consumers are moving away from being passive consumers to actively influencing and shaping their world. Parallel to this, consumers are increasingly looking for improved experiences, involvement, and personal expression. In return, user-generated content or the Do-It-Yourself movement are booming.

But how should product design react on this? Martin finds that up to today, most designers have not reacted on this trend and still are just focusing on providing ready-made, fixed and stable products. He also finds that conventional mass customization systems still do not provide a full user experience or often require advanced knowledge or tools.

In his study, he explores the next levels in this field. Based on research and design explorations, it proposes a framework for product design that engages the user and allows for deeper experience and involvement. It provokes a rethinking of the products we use and interact with on a daily basis, and presents several designs based on this.

Martin Konrad GloeckleIn a recent interview, we spoke about his work and how he developed his design.

Martin, what is the key element of the design framework you propose to engage consumers deeper into experiences?

Well, the proposed framework actually has six major principles. However, these are based on two key points: A) Create design opportunities for the user, and B) Use a low-tech approach.

Let me start with the first point: What we can observe today in the online or two-dimensional world are increasingly active, involved, and creative consumers. This includes things like the so-called ‘user generated content’ of blogs, YouTube, Wikipedia and so on, as well as the whole field of desktop publishing, desktop video, desktop music etc. However, when it comes to the world of three-dimensional products, there is very little happening at this point. There are simply very limited opportunities available to the consumer.
The series of products I created tries to address this. Called ‘Un-readymades’ to express the involvement of the end-users, they provide consumers with opportunities to design, create, and express themselves.

Of course, there are other developments related to this trend. Things like the many online customization tools, the fabber and prototyping tools, and the increasingly available D.I.Y. services like Ponoko or Buglags to name a few. These however generally are very technology driven. And this is where the second point comes in. Technology has opened many areas to the average consumer. But at the same time there still often is the need for certain knowledge and tools, be it of hard- or software. Therefore, this is not accessible to everyone. In addition, the user is physically removed from these products during the design process. Rarely is there any direct interaction between the product and consumer. By using a rather low-tech approach, I am trying to address some of these issues.

Browsing over your web site, I was fascinated by the originality of your designs that incorporate your ideas. Can you illustrate your framework with one of your own designs?

Drawn vase by MK Gloeckle. Pictures courtesy of Mr. Gloeckle.One of my goals was to create a multitude of designs, to explore different areas and address different users as well as to show the flexibility of the framework. To pick one piece out, the ‘drawn’ vase is probably a good example. It is essentially a combination of a dry-erase board with an opening for a flower and a water container mounted behind it. You can use it on the wall or on the table. What the dry-erase board does is to allow the user to redesign its surface and thereby the vase.

So lets go through the six framework principles:

Enable user involvement:
The vase is somewhere between an off-the-shelf product and a D.I.Y. project. While it provides the users with a starting point in form of the vase functionality, it allows them add to this.

Make it interactive: By drawing on the dry-erase board, the user directly and physically interacts with the vase, and thereby develops a closer relationship with it.

Provide room for play: While the vase offers a starting point in terms of functionaly, it otherwise literally provides an empty canvas. Not everything is predetermined, but is left open for playful exploration. Watching people creating all different kinds of designs with this was definitely one of the highlights of this project for me.

Keep it simple: I wanted these pieces to be approachable for everyone, meaning not requiring any extensive tools or knowledge. Everyone knows how to hold a pencil, so everyone can use this product. Of course, people‘s drawing skills differ, but that is were the erasable and forgiving nature of the dry-erase board comes in.

Make it personal: As the vase provides for more than just pick&choose within a predetermined selection, it really allows people to create very personal and unique pieces. No vase will ever look the same as any other.

Small Steps: The piece doesn’t require anybody to suddenly draw like an artist. Rather, the user can start with a very simple drawing. But as his confidence and capabilities grow, so can his created product.

What is the role of companies in your concept? What would you recommend a manager that wants to place your ideas into practice?

In terms of manufacturing, the beauty of these designs is that they do not require any major changes in the manufacturing infrastructure as is usually associated with mass customization. As the customization happens at the end user and not in the factory, the company still only needs to create one fixed product.

In terms of management, it probably more comes down to being open-minded and believing in the creativity of end-users. Basically giving the consumer more credit than most companies currently do.

At the same time, we of course need to realize that while customization is a major trend, it is still to be seen how much of the mainstream it will become. While especially Generations X and Y are increasingly interested in self-expression and involvement, the majority of consumers still prefers buying non-customizable products and maybe express themselves solely through selected purchases.

What did originally motivate your research? How did you choose this topic?

As I was researching potential thesis topics, certain personal interests of mine came up repeatedly. These are areas that I have always been fascinated by, like peoples desire to express themselves, peoples urge to create, the growing D.I.Y. movement, and finally new and evolving production methods. At one point, I realized that there might be a way to bring these different areas together, and to use this combination to enable and encourage creativity and self-expression for the consumer. And to simply provide for more joy and fun as part of a product experience.

Why do most industrial designers neglect the customization and self-impression trend? Do design schools educate your designers in these new topics?

First off, there are of course certain products where customization is not applicable, for example for safety reasons. Besides that, a couple of things come to mind.

For one, designing a product that is customizable means giving away some control of the final product. As a designer, you put a lot of time and thought into determining a very particular look, feel, and functionality to create something that addresses a specific need. While most products usually stay as intended when they leave your hands, with customizable pieces you control them only up to a certain degree. This is something not everyone is comfortable with, especially with more visually driven pieces.

In addition, there is also a school of thought with some designers that only they should be the ones ‘designing’. After all, that is what they went to school for and spent a lot of time on, learning how to do it right. According to them, the general consumer does not know about designing, and should not be allowed to do so.

This whole issue of ‘professional’ versus ‘amateur’ designer, across all areas from web over graphic to industrial design, is something we could easily talk about for hours. I personally do not subscribe to this rather elitist thinking, and believe that there is and always will be a place for both. However, and as in every other profession, we designers need to rethink our roles periodically, and adjust to a changing environment.

In terms of design school education, there is obviously an inherent delay of current trends manifesting themselves in the education curriculum. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. I believe the value of design school, besides teaching basics like form and color, is rather in teaching creative thinking. This together with providing the appropriate environment for exploration is the starting point. The rest is really up to the individual student, to investigate and explore different areas, and push his own limits as well as that of design in general.

What’s next for you now that you have finished this project?

In terms of the ‘Un-readymades’, I am starting to look into potential options of moving some of them out of the prototype stage and into production. Besides that, as I am done with my Industrial Design degree, I am also currently interviewing for a job. Things are still open though, so I guess I should use this opportunity to invite anybody looking for an Industrial Designer to take a look at my resume and portfolio on my website.

To conclude: What is, in general and beyond your industry, the greatest mass customization offering ever – either one that is already existing or that you would like to get in the future?

Well, this is a pretty grand and open question. Maybe to answer it in a similar open way, I would pick the human mind? It probably does not get much more mass-customized than that. And thinking of it, it actually fits pretty well in my framework. :-)

Contact Martin at martin@martin-konrad.com or http://martin-konrad.com
You can view an illustrated abstract of his work at http://martin-konrad.com/unreadymades

March 15, 2008

Mass Customization Gets Its First Novel: UK author Sean McManus explores personalized music

Interview: Sean McManus on personalized music, customized books, and why he is using on-demand service Lulu -- and the background of his idea to write a novel featuring a mass customized service offering as its key element.

Sean McManusSean McManus is the author of ‘University of Death’, a new novel satirizing the music industry. The book explores what happens when a major record label comes up with software for mass customizing music and uses spyware to sell it to customers, without telling them it’s all computer generated. Sean’s previous books include ‘Small Business Websites That Work’ and ‘The Customer Service Pocketbook’. As a journalist, Sean has written for Making Music, Melody Maker, Internet Magazine, Business 2.0, Internet Works and many more. And he has covered mass customization before: In May 2000 he wrote the mass customization essay ‘As you like itabout for Personal Computer World magazine and in December 2005, he interviewed the company behind Erasure’s customized MP3s for his website at www.sean.co.uk.

Sean, Congratulations! You have written the first novel I know with strong references to personalization and matching-services in the music industry! What's the story?

Sean__uod_front_coverIt's a satire of the music industry, centred around one of the last surviving major record labels, Bigg Records. Clive Bigg is gobbling up independent labels and marketing lowest-common-denominator tosh made by boybands. It’s not enough, though, and like every other label, he’s seeing his business shrink away.

Then one day the solution arrives: a smooth-talking geek called Jonathan Harrington has spent ten years creating the perfect song: moving enough to make you laugh, cry, or dance on the first listen. The catch is that it’s computer generated and tailored for each listener after analysing his or her music collection. Together, Bigg and Harrington conspire to use hidden software to study what fans listen to, and then to automatically concoct and market their dream music to them.

While all this is going on, the story also follows the progress of Dove, who is burned out from touring for decades. He wants to break up his 'creatively bankrupt' band, University of Death, but he couldn't do a proper job. Now Bigg's bought up the indie label the band was on, he's about to make Dove an offer he can't refuse.

And the story also follows two of Dove’s biggest fans: Simon and Fred have a band called Goblin (performing a mix of rock and glam they call 'heavy tinsel'). Like many bands today, they can't get anyone to listen to them, and hope that Bigg will pluck their demo from the pile and launch their careers. As well as doing their own stuff, they cover University of Death in the hope that they'll catch someone's ear. As it turns out, their cover gets them into all kinds of trouble...

Dove, Simon, Fred, Jonathan and Bigg all collide in a finale that threatens the very existence of the music industry.

The story takes a slice through the music business: from the board room to the stage; from the studio to the record fair. It explores how fans relate to their favourite bands, how businesses use technology to manipulate consumers, and what would happen if the music industry disappeared overnight.

Where did you get the idea for this book?

In the 80s I remember typing in a program listing that created music on the Amstrad/Schneider home computer. It sounded a bit foreign and unstructured to me, but it started a fascination with computer generated music that I’ve had ever since.

In recent years, we’ve seen the internet become a channel for both marketing and market research. We’ve seen the rise of technologies that make mass personalisation possible. And we’ve seen record companies backed into a corner and taking desperate measures to prevent piracy, epitomised by Sony BMG putting software on music CDs which was widely considered to be spyware. We’ve seen the start of artificial intelligence as part of our e-commerce applications, with Amazon knowing my taste in books and music better than I do. And we’ve seen the rise of independent bands through communities like MySpace, where high quality music can be shared and sold outside the conventional music industry. All these threads came together in my plot. It’s a timely book. In fact, when the Sony BMG story broke, it felt like my plot was starting to come true!

‘University of Death’ is ultimately about why people love music, and where its soul is. The book explores the extent to which that can be automated or faked. As the story unfolds, it becomes clear that (in my novel at least), music needs to come from people, not machines. I listen to a lot of synthesiser music, but that works because there’s a creative person directing it and the computers are just being used as instruments. Even Brian Eno’s generative music, which is unique each time you listen to it, works because a creative musician has defined its parameters before it runs. The question is whether the software will one day be good enough that you couldn’t tell the difference between a computer inventing and performing a song, and real human creativity.

I know your early essay on mass customization (still a well linked source on the topic on the internet). Have you written any other books in the meantime?

I’ve written ‘Small Business Websites That Work’, published by Prentice Hall, and co-authored ‘The Customer Service Pocketbook’. There are free chapters to download from both at www.sean.co.uk.

Why did you want to write this book?

They say everyone has a novel in them. This is mine: it includes so many of the things I love - music, technology, record collecting, old computer games, jokes. But all of them in service of a story and bound together by a single theme. Everyone has something that they just know they have to do in their life, and writing a novel was one of mine.

It's been a long time since I've devoted that much energy to a single project, and it was extremely satisfying. I really enjoyed the writing sessions.

What are your observations on personalization of music in the real world? How often are you, as a consumer, using these services?

The most exciting thing for me has been Trust Media’s customised MP3s, made on-demand using a Flash interface. Erasure made best use of the concept: you could define what kind of beats, vocals, basslines and synth lines you wanted, as you heard the track looping. When you were done, you paid and downloaded your track. Each combination was limited to a single copy, and had unique artwork. The music industry’s been marketing so-called ‘limited edition’ CDs for years, with serial numbers on them often running into hundreds of thousands. This really subverts that: Having the only copy of my favourite version of a particular song and knowing nobody else can buy it is truly a ‘limited edition’. Erasure really appreciated what they could achieve creatively with this technology, and it would be good to see more musicians adopt it. Trust Media is pushing the antipiracy aspect at the moment: people are less inclined to share something that’s unique to them (and traceable), and others are more likely to want their own unique version than someone else’s copy. When the music industry is suffering a decline, it makes more sense for the company to sell antipiracy software than an experimental music format, even if they’re the same thing.

Brian Eno’s done some interesting work with generative music, where he sets the parameters of the work and then each performance is unique. There’s no computer creativity involved in this: it’s still very much his work, with the computer randomly generating each performance of what is essentially one work. His first release of generative music ran on floppy disk and the software is obsolete now, but his 77 Million Paintings software brings the idea up to date and combines it with visuals. It’s not really personalised, though, even though each performance is unique, because I have no control over it.

I enjoyed the music recommendation engine Pandora while that was available [in Europe], but that’s been closed to people outside the US now because they can’t afford to pay international license fees. Last.fm is a nice recommendation engine, but I haven’t used it too much. I still tend to find new music through magazines, reviews online, friends and gigs.

As with publishing, mass customisation has made it viable for bands to sell their own music on CD from the very start. I’ve bought a few CDs by unsigned bands which probably wouldn’t have existed without the mass customisation and ecommerce technology that was used to create and sell them.

And your book is not just on personalization and customization, but I saw on your website that you also are using a print-on-demand service (Lulu.com) to publish it. So why are you self-publishing 'University of Death', and why are you using print-on-demand?

The main reason for using Lulu as my publishing platform is that it enables me to get the book out there much more quickly. I have friends who have written great books and then spent years trying to get interest from a major publisher, while their books have quietly gone stale. I spent two years writing my novel, and I didn’t want to spend another two traipsing it around publishers who are already inundated with other good books. By self-publishing, I can ensure the book reaches readers much more quickly. Because the book deals with many contemporary themes in the music industry and technology, this was important to me.

For a venture like mine, it makes good business sense. There’s no up-front cost working with Lulu, and I don’t have to store hundreds of copies of the book under my bed or in my garage. The downside is that it’s massively more expensive per copy than it would be to do a conventional print run, but it’s an ideal way to test the market for new creative products. I particularly like Lulu because it takes care of the retail side of things too – it handles the credit card or paypal orders, customer service and support. It helps that Lulu tends to rank well in search engines too. Working with Lulu means I don’t have to be involved in handling individual book sales, don’t have to spend up-front, and don’t have to carry stock. It also means customers can have a smooth and fully supported buying experience.

And where can we buy your book?

Thanks for asking! This book is not available in the shops. You can only buy the book at Lulu.com.

When you place your order at Lulu, they'll print your copy, perfect bind it, stick it in a sturdy cardboard wrapper and post it out to you. This book is not available anywhere else because copies don't exist until they're ordered.

You can download the first two chapters for free through www.universityofdeath.co.uk.

To conclude: What is, in general and beyond your industry, the greatest mass customization offering ever – either one that is already existing or that you would like to get in the future?

I’m not sure whether it counts as my industry or not, but I’d like to see more done on books. Wouldn’t it be great if I could instruct an intelligent agent to create a book about ‘Pink Floyd’, or even ‘Dark Side of the Moon’, and have it deliver a unique printed artefact to my door? The software could source newspaper clippings and reviews from leading publishers, maybe some blog posts from well-respected fans too. It could sort them into chronological order, and source images from leading photo libraries. It wouldn’t be easy: there’s a whole rights nightmare to resolve, and the micropayments could prove tricky to administer, particularly once you get down to the level of paying freelance journalists. But if the infrastructure was there, the content would follow. And you could create an interface for narrowing the search to something useful (eg, let users specify publication dates, proportion of blog content to newspaper content, number of images etc). Books are still the best way to communicate and digest large chunks of information, but at the moment, there needs to be a significant market for each book to make it commercially viable. That’s because somebody has to do the leg-work of writing each one, and someone else has to market and distribute it. If you want a book about 90s band ‘Kenickie’ (as I do), you’re probably the only one, so you’re out of luck.

We can already do much of the stuff required: we have good search algorithms, there is a lot of tagged content out there, and there are applications that create PDFs on demand, and others that print them in books. We already trust search engines to decide what content we should see online, so this would be an extension of that and would probably work best if restricted to trusted content providers named up-front. It could be a great way for rights owners to make money from archive material and for researchers or enthusiasts to access original reports from the archives.

This is all probably some way off. Still, I can recommend a nice novel to read in the meantime… ;-)

March 12, 2008

Why Mass Customization Fails: It is the human factor, Ben Moore and Clint Lewis propose in a new book

The Consumer’s WorkshopIn a new book, Ben Moore and Clint Lewis are looking on the success factors of mass customization and customer-centric manufacturing strategies (The Consumer’s Workshop: The Future of American Manufacturing). Their main finding: People matter most for successful mass customization. This may sound like a simple truth, but confirms an understanding I got from working with many companies in the area as well. MC is enabled by technologies, but put in place by dedicated people.

Ben is the President of Agent Technologies, Inc., and Clint the President of Lewis Group Consultants (LGC), two operations and manufacturing consultancies in the United States (a more detailed bio can be found here).

Ben offered to summarize his key findings in a small guest article to my blog, which you find in the previous posting. In an additional interview, I asked him what motivated their research on mass customization and how they did derive their findings.

What did motivate your research on mass customization?

Ben Moore: I've always had an interest in mass customization even before my participating in a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) project entitled Autonomous Agents at Rock Island Arsenal (AARIA) back in 1995; in this project we built a simulation to demonstrate a factory scheduler capable of mass customization based on autonomous agents that actively represent each step of manufacturing a part. Since this project and the growth of personalization tools, I've researched mass customization tools and techniques in an attempt to find the best system for consumers to create unique products and for manufacturers to efficiently manufacture these products.

What is an example of a company "that got it", i.e. that has a sustainable mass customization strategy that is both scalable and build-to-last -- and that understood the HUMAN FACTOR.

BM: I've found the HUMAN FACTOR to be the least understood and valued of companies. John Deere gets mass customization tools and techniques, but their people systems don't compare to the people systems in companies like Procter & Gamble (P&G) and General Electric (GE). P&G and GE don't focus on mass customization, but focus on customization through standardization and systemization that allows the creation of new products and machines; P&G and GE really get it with their people systems.

What would be your main advice for a manager that wants to start a mass customization initiative?

BM: I recommend really looking at the reasons and financials for a mass customization initiative versus some level of customization initiative. In some manufacturing companies, like capital equipment manufacturers, each product/machine is different so it makes sense to create processes and tools to efficiently manage the customer requirements and deliver these unique products/machines profitably. In many other companies, I've found that creating an agile manufacturing system that can be reconfigured / customized to make a wide variety of products to be more profitable.

What is, in general and beyond your industry, the greatest mass customization offering ever - either one that already exists or that you would like to get in the future?

BM: I believe the greatest mass customization offering ever will be health related. People are becoming more health conscious around the globe. Companies that find a way to capitalize on providing a health regiment specifically designed for the individual based on age, weight, diet, family history, lifestyle and behaviors that fits with the delivery system that they are looking for and at a price they find affordable, will win in this space.

Context: Continue reading with an excerpt of Ben's book.