Innov8: The Onion on Product Innovation

At what price our never-ending "forward advancement"? The Onion shows us the future of product innovation: "Domino's Scientists Test Limits Of What Humans Will Eat"


Domino's Scientists Test Limits Of What Humans Will Eat

Green threat: shoeboxes

My second "first day" at Fallon was this past Monday and in preparing for a triumphant return, I felt like I needed some new clothes. In a moment of poor decision making, I drove to the MOA in order to make sure that I would have every option available.

During my shopping extravaganza, I purchased two pairs of shoes from Bostonian, and didn't think much about it until I got home and was unpacking. I took out the shoes, shoved all of the tissue papery stuff back into the two boxes, and brought them downstairs to our recycling center. As I was carrying them, I realized how wasteful shoeboxes are.

Everyday, thousands of pairs of shoes are purchased. As a runner, I have gone through literally dozens of pairs of running shoes over the last 9 years of my running career. Granted, some people save their shoeboxes for other uses (at least I have) but in my closet right now, I can think of only 3 shoeboxes.

Quick calculation:
5 pairs of training shoes/yr
+
2 pairs of racing shoes
+
2 pairs casual shoes
+
2 pairs dress shoes
=
At least 11 pairs of shoes per year x 4 years = 44 shoes boxes during college

41 of these boxes got thrown away/recycled.


I realize that as a runner myself, these numbers are skewed, but think about all of the collegiate/professional teams out there who go through multiple pairs of their own training shoes per year and how many boxes that adds up to. I know that on my team, after a new equipment issue there would be boxes upon boxes stacked next to trashcans (no recycling bins... too inconvenient)

It seems like shoe companies could stand to innovate their packaging from the perspective that boxes are a one time use item. Maybe a re-usable plastic box that consumers can choose to leave with the salesperson at the store to be sent back to company. I don't know enough about the material to know would could be done in terms of compostable material or something, but I see opportunity.

Bed feeling a little empty? How about a virtual girlfriend?

NYU student Drew Barrows recently unveiled a new invention he devised to combat the loneliness he'd been feeling as of late. Called INBED, he brought his idea out at the Interactive Telecommunications Program Spring Show at the Tisch School of the Arts.

A few excerpts on how it works:

"INBED, an “infrared-sensitive” light projected virtual girlfriend"

"So what is it exactly? It’s a single mattress with an attractive brunette who is perfectly quiet. So far sounds like a good girlfriend! Once you sit or lie down on the mattress, she will respond to your every move."

"New York Magazine explains, “Lie on your back, she snuggles up right next to you in a log position. Curl up in the fetal position, she spoons. The only hitch: She’s 2-D."

Odd? No doubt. But I imagine there's a market of lonely guys out there who might get down with something like this. Even though its not real, its the idea itself that I think could find it some success- someone waiting for you to come to bed. It's a comforting thought and helps in part to meet our needs for deep emotional connections with other people. And while this invention can't (nor does its inventor want) to replace the actual thing, the mind has a funny way of believing and seeing what it wants. I bet that if you were that lonely, even the appearance of someone waiting for you could be a soothing thought.

via TrendHunter

Scrubbing Bubbles Hits The Mark On Cool Product...But Misses On Targeting

I'm probably pretty late to the game, but just saw one of these commercials (on late night TV of all times) and felt like posting about it. The Scrubbing Bubbles Automatic Shower Cleaner is quite possibly the coolest innovation in bathtub cleaning I can recall seeing (not that I pay much attention to the category...but still). What has been nagging at me though, is the fact that in their advertising (specifically the target that seems to be depicted in the spots), they position the product toward a familiar audience because it may have seemed to make the most sense or was the safest route at the time (and perhaps it does/is in some way). Check one of the spots here:



I think this is an example of a HUGE missed opportunity in reframing who your target market is. Personally, I think this product is made with- and could have been marketed with- young guys in mind (or, to steal a term from Seth, Gen GuYs). As a member of this group myself- twenty something, still getting used to this idea of being a "professional" and that having clothes strewn about the apartment and dirty bathrooms are no longer socially acceptable as they were in college- a product that allows us to achieve a reasonable level of clean, while requiring the bare minimum of effort, is a god send. Having a clean bathtub and yet not having to spend a minute with a sponge, or can of cleaning solution? Sign me up.

Yet the ads depict the type of out of touch, 1950s style, women who are oh so happy that cleaning is a part of their day that is so typical of commercials in the cleaning product category (always makes me think of the Swiffer campaign...another missed opportunity to go after young guys who would never "dust", but find no issue with grabbing a swiffer cloth and wiping down the TV).

I'd be curious to understand better what the client/agency thought process was. I really think there are plenty of guys that would go for this easy fix cleaning solution, but the company isn't trying to get to them (to my knowledge), maybe out of fear of alienating what they see as their base. Anyone else have thoughts on this (even if it is just to call me a bum for not commenting on these spots sooner)?

Radiohead Did It Again

I thought about disclaiming off the bat that I am a diehard Radiohead fan, but then realized that's like saying I have two arms and two legs--describes nearly everyone.

Radiohead has built itself into a category of untouchables through decades of unbelievable work. It's one of the few bands ever to evolve with changing times and produce drastic evolutions from album to album.

Now, Radiohead has turned the inner workings of the music industry on its ear. Today, Radiohead released an album that you can buy for whatever price you like. On its own site--not through a record label. Name the amount and you will own a digital version of the new album. By cutting out the middleman and eliminating physical products to distribute, Radiohead keeps most of the money. In theory--the site is so overwhelmed with traffic that I can't get it to load.

Maybe the real disclosure should have been that I am predisposed to thinking anything Radiohead does is awesome. In reality, it's probably not a sustainable business model for anyone but the top artists who have a devout following of millions, but it is a signal that there are ways to distribute music outside of EMI and iTunes.

Everything Counts

I took this photo to document a brand that doesn't get it. I was annoyed that the label kept falling off of this bottle of water, and the more I thought about it, the more I realized that Aquafina still treats its packaging as a disposable throw-away. Aside from the crappy glue that turned their brand into an irritant, the bottle could be for Diet Coke, A&W root beer or practically anything else. Compare to Perrier.

Then Eric Ryan, founder of method, hopped on stage and showed us how he turned the household cleaning product category on its side. He talked a lot about the effort they put into packaging and it really struck me. Part of method's birth came from the insight that people are crammed on space and are trying to get a little cleaning done in between everything else in their lives. So they're not going to be patient with digging through the closet for some detergent. He realized that, if you design it right, people will leave their cleaning supplies out by the sink, on the counter, or in the bathroom. For method, the package is part of the product, not just the container around it.

Beyond Eric and method, the idea that "everything counts" rose to the top as a key theme of this year's conference. What's inside, how it's presented outside, and where it fits into our individual and collective lives. We heard it in the stringent efficiency of XS Energy Drink, and in Bruce Mau's compelling narration of the purpose behind Massive Change. This is inspiring as a subtext to the conference's theme of Creating Possibilities; we as planners are peering toward a future of opportunities that is only limited by our own ingenuity and inventiveness.

Prediction of social networking doom and gloom

Lance Ulanoff of PC Magazine writes an opinion piece on the inevitable death of MySpace, Second Life, Twitter, and the whole lot of social networking sites.

Some highlights:

"MySpace could be the first to collapse. It has now suffered the same fate as the millions of personal Web sites that sprang up in the mid 1990s: It's huge, ugly, unmonitored, unrestrained, and pointless."

I take issue with his proclamation that MySpace is pointless; I would equate that to the idea that letter writing or putting my photos in an album are both pointless, too. Not buying it.

More...

"Second Life could just as easily be the first to go. No one believes its reported participation numbers anymore, even though big companies, such as Circuit City and IBM, have built virtual stores (and Playboy is jumping in with both, er, feet this month). Some individuals are even claiming to make real-world money in there, but are they really?"

There might be some validity in the flaws Ulanoff highlights, but I think he neglected to take into account one important variable: innovation. If they sit, at stasis, until the end of the decade, these sites and utilities will probably lose their luster. But they're ever-evolving. The Facebook, for example, is shooting out new applications left and right. They're not solving global warming or emptying our prisons, but they are adding dimension to relationships. The new variety of closeness that we collectively have developed online won't go away, even if it does evolve into something different. But way to go for it on the prediction, Lance. I appreciate it.

Full article here

Innov8 (or Die): Skunkworking the Motorola Razr

CNN/Money recounts the story behind how a team of engineers and designers defied Motorola's own rules to create the cellphone that revived their company.

The RAZR - a play on a code name the engineering geeks dreamed up - was hatched in colorless cubicles in exurban Libertyville, an hour's drive north of Chicago. It was a skunkworks project whose tight-knit team repeatedly flouted Motorola's own rules for developing new products.

They kept the project top-secret, even from their colleagues. They used materials and techniques Motorola had never tried before. After contentious internal battles, they threw out accepted models of what a mobile telephone should look and feel like.

The "thin clam" project became a rebel outpost and a talent magnet within the company, and the team grew to as many as 20 engineers who met daily at 4 P.M. in a conference room in Libertyville to hash over the previous day's progress.

"Anytime you've got something radically different, there will be people who feel that we should be putting our resources on other stuff," says Roger Jellicoe, team leader on the project. "It was a kind of lock-the-door-and-put-the-key-beneath-it approach to product development." Digital pictures of the project were prohibited, so nothing could be inadvertently disseminated by e-mail. Models of the phone could leave the premises only when physically accompanied by a team member.

With an ambitious deadline of completion within the year, Jellicoe relied on non-standard methods to drive morale and speed ideation. For example, he set up a competition among five of his engineers to see who could come up with the best design. And engineering and design teams began combining their work, a back-and-forth process that became known as the "dance."


Lessons from MOTO RAZR:

1. Secrecy limits distractions.
By insulating its RAZR development team from the influence of corporate groupthink, Motorola got an innovative product that wowed the industry and consumers.

2. Research isn't everything.
Motorola's "human factors" unit dictated that phones more than 49 millimeters wide would be deemed uncomfortable by consumers. The RAZR team concluded otherwise. Their only data points: their own instincts.

3. Niche products can have mass appeal.
The RAZR wasn't designed to be a blockbuster. It was supposed to be a high-priced, high-end jewel to regain luster for Motorola. Yet with high demand, unit costs plunged along with the price for consumers - to as low as $99.

4. Missing deadlines doesn't mean failure.
The RAZR team was supposed to be done by February 2004; they weren't until summer. But getting it right meant a whole lot more than getting it done on time.

Innov8 (or Die): What Banks Can Learn from Geek Squad

The Geek Squad seems an unlikely model for banks to emulate, but founder and "chief inspector" (read, CEO) Robert Stephens has a lot to say about how banks can improve their customer experience. Interviewed in the March/April 2007 issue of BAI's Banking Strategies, Stephens says banks should strive to make the routine activities of banking fun, such as waiting in line at the branch or at the drive-thru. He also calls for innovative business cultures able to nurture small, inexpensive experiments that could later on have a big impact.

Some excerpted mindbombs to consider:

ON THE CULTURE OF INNOVATION
•Think of every company not as a company but as a software program—as a system you're buying into. Customers, either consciously or unconsciously, choose companies based on their interface.

•There are endless ways to innovate. We need cultures inside companies that are constantly turning out these ideas.

•What makes the Geek Squad unique is that we are defined by the employee. Labor is our biggest expense, as it is with most other service businesses, so we define ourselves by our relationship with our employees. The technology will change, but how we deliver service and what people expect from good service, those things won't change.

•The customer experience is a product of your employee experience, especially if you're customer-facing. For banks, the branch is just one part of it. That's why online and phone are probably the most important channels, because even if you come to a branch, you might be calling first to get driving directions, or going online to find out about the hours. So, the online and the phone experiences almost should be taken care of first, since they can be more easily controlled.

ON SAYING "NO"
•For example, we're launching Geek Squad in London early this year. I told the team: "You have no money for public relations—none." I told the marketing team: "You can't do marketing, but I'm going to give you money for creative endeavors. What you're going to do is, you're going to design the call center scripts to make it fun to be on hold."

•The reason they have no money for PR is because I expect them to make that experience of being on hold enjoyable. The experience should be so memorable that the press will line up to call us and ask us to come on their TV or radio show and talk about it. Now, that's public relations. Operations become marketing. They become indistinguishable from each other. That's when you know you have accomplished your mission.

•I ran into our chief financial officer the other day in an elevator and said, "You know, the finance department is the most important catalyst to creativity in the entire company." He looked at me, like, "Really? Why?" I said, "Because you say 'no' more than you say 'yes.' And saying no frustrates people. But the successful people, the persistent people, will always seek to find a way."

ON THE PIRATE MENTALITY
•I learned this from not having the resources, as a small company, to do things. So you tend to do them differently. That's a lesson that I'm learning now, even in a large environment like at Best Buy. The best thing that ever happened to me was not having money when I started my company. That starves the organization, which fosters creativity.

•A large bank may give up on innovation for many reasons, such as we're government regulated, we can't get things through too quickly or there are Wall Street pressures on a quarter-to-quarter basis. But I would argue that those pressures are the source of the creativity; they are not the limiter.

•That's the riddle. We tend to give up too easily and just throw our hands up, saying, "Well, we can't innovate," and then complain. But that's a form of competition because that kind of attitude prevents you from beating your competitors.

ON ASSEMBLY LINING INNOVATION
•It's easy to blame the faceless monolith, but if you're competing for its resources against a peer, well that's different. You can look at which idea contributes to a better customer experience. If you can't measure that, then it's back to the drawing board.

•That criterion creates a Meritocracy; it's one idea versus another. But the ideas should start small. If you ask for a lot of money for a project, you're going to be subject to a lot of restrictions, a lot of barriers. Not spending a lot on a project provides greater creative freedom because there's less risk for the organization.

ON FAST PROTOTYPING
•Tiny experiments can snowball into great revenue producers, and that's what companies need to do. Software is your process in real time. It offers the ability to design, to experiment, at a really low cost. That's where I think banks are specifically missing out on a coming revolution in software development at low cost and high speed.

•Banks should continually set a goal of coming up with one new idea a month, one new little service. They don't have to be large, massive undertakings, but simple, tiny stuff.

•I recently launched a rapid prototyping program at Best Buy called "Two weeks: $500." Basically, if anybody in the organization has an idea and can give us a prototype in two weeks, we'll give them $500 to develop a simple software feature or function to demonstrate it. The feature can be made accessible on the company network so people can check it out. Then, to take it to the next level, we can add a few more zeros, maybe do a $5,000 prototype. When you get to the $50,000 level, maybe you invite your top customers in to beta test it.

•Eventually, you might move to the $5 million implementation, but you start with $500 to force that creativity and de-risk the idea to get it off the ground. You can't even get to the $5,000 level unless you've proven out some kind of working prototype.

via BAI Banking Strategies

Innovation Timeline 1900-2050

Nowandnext.com offers up an Innovation Timeline from 1900 all the way up to 2050 - yes that’s right, 47 years that haven’t happened yet!

The timeline is offered in the same spirit as the 2007 Trendmap - it’s open source so people are encouraged to adapt or play around with it or use it in anyway they like.