PRODUCT DESIGN + INNOVATION : RING/IN SIDE VIEW
Another
conference on design; May 29-30th,
London. Impressive speakers and generic topic; which allowed everyone to
stretch the content to their own interpretations. This was my first impression in this
conference where I was amongst the speakers. My impression changed.
There was a lot of discussion around Nano car from Tata and its failure to capture the intended rural and poor urban markets. I tried to dispel some myths (as I know of them) around some fantastic frugal innovation platforms from India, like Nano and Chotukool (by Godrej). In my mind, the next round of these products will be the winner round.
The only participant delegate from India was Aparna Piramal, a friend, industrialist (of BP Ergo) and a design journalist (for Mint) bundled in one. Interestingly, nearly 50% participants were direct brand owners in the industries and only 10% from the academia (rare, in such conferences).
I have been
to several design conferences around the globe, speaking sometimes and listening
to others at times. This was rather focused on Product Design with an added
dash of innovation. In the world where ‘design’ is still, by and large,
considered to be equivalent to ‘art’ or ‘good looks’ and when a whole lot of
new streams like ‘interface design’ and ‘gaming design’ has taken birth, it was
rather a classical confluence of minds discussing ‘product design’.
As a design
student seventeen years ago, I had only heard of Seymore Powell as an
international design company and Philips as a grand manufacturer of ‘well
designed objects’. BMW, McLaren etc. were car brands that were registered and
canned in my mind as ‘unapproachable’ since luxury/sports brands guard their
design secrets like crazy. On the other hand British Design was limited in my
awareness as ‘good’ and ‘too many design graduates’, apart from some flickers
of British Airways flat bed design by Tangerine and good signage at London
underground etc. Interacting with and
listening to the design champions like Dick Powell, Sean Carney (Philips), Louis
Kim (HP), Clive Grinyer (Cisco, ex-Tangerine), Sunghan Kim (Samsung),
Allesandro Finetto (Whirlpool) etc. was a positive reinforcement , if not a
knowledge nirvana, of several practices I have developed at Onio in the last
fifteen years. It was interesting to see how Samsung, as a late entrant in the
race which was has been won several times by companies like Whirlpool, Philips
and HP, has really caught up with the game. Samsung’s presentation showed all
signs of a company maturing in its thinking toward handling a large scale and
meaningful innovation. Sunghan Kim’s presentation on how they go from ‘vision
design’ to ‘platform design’ to ‘archetype design’ to ‘range design’ as a
process did point to the direction that Samsung will soon have a strong
semiotic language like Sony (who is losing it to Samsung).
I was the
only speaker from the Indian subcontinent. One could see how an audience of
nearly 240 people relished the change of flavor from ‘International’ to India,
towards the end of the first day. It was surprising to see how my assimilation
on core Indian design traits like ‘Longevity’, ‘Collective Wisdom’, and ‘Value
thinking’ were precisely the same as spelt out by Cathy, my Chinese counterpart
in the panel. I presented the tale of growth of design and innovation in India
through three cases of Onio’s recent work. Several people in the audience later
came up and told me that they were pleasantly surprised that design in India
has reached the level of ‘cultural semiotics’ thinking or ‘global platform
thinking driven by local usability’ as my presentation outlined.
The venue inside the Excel Center |
Another contrast
that struck me was that almost all the speakers mentioned that people, business
and technology were the three pillars for any research on innovation. People
either forgot ‘brand’ as the fourth pillar or simply took it to be ‘a part of
business’. Brand, in the emerging economy is an important lever for innovation.
If properly researched, a brand character combined with cultural semiotics, can
result into multi-fold returns on investment on innovation.
There was a
session dedicated to Trends and David Smith did a great job outlining the
mega-trends impinging on the World. A healthy discussion also ensued post Prof.
James Wodhuysen’s passionate presentation on ‘not design, but innovation led by
technology’ will change the world.
There was a lot of discussion around Nano car from Tata and its failure to capture the intended rural and poor urban markets. I tried to dispel some myths (as I know of them) around some fantastic frugal innovation platforms from India, like Nano and Chotukool (by Godrej). In my mind, the next round of these products will be the winner round.
The only participant delegate from India was Aparna Piramal, a friend, industrialist (of BP Ergo) and a design journalist (for Mint) bundled in one. Interestingly, nearly 50% participants were direct brand owners in the industries and only 10% from the academia (rare, in such conferences).
Is 3D
printing, the technology of future or just another fad which remains on the
fringes of the main stream innovation- this was another question discussed in
the conference. Real implications of ‘sustainable thinking’ with respect to new
polymers, manufacturing practices and product design were discussed as well.
But it was clear that there is a long way to go.
Emergent
note in the conference was surely the focus on emerging markets, emerging
technologies, and emerging methodologies, in that order. It was indeed a well organised conference (by Crain Communications of UK) which generated a lot of traction amongst the industry worldwide. And yes, speakers didn't cross the time limit allotted to them.
Leave a Comment