Unabashed Gearhead Gnarlyness

Robotfly

The Harvard Robotic Fly

(click thru to witness an amazing video)

Here’s an excerpt from the accompanying article:

Designing an automated fly implied having the ability to make
lightweight, miniature working parts, a process that Wood says took up
the bulk of his doctoral study, because of the lack of any previous
research on which to draw. “For years, the thrust of our work was ‘How
do we do this?’” says Wood. “There was no existing fabrication
paradigm, given the scale we were operating on, the speed we wanted to
operate with, and things like cost, turnaround, and robustness.” His
research group developed and fabricated a laser carving system that
could meticulously cut, shape, and bend sheets of carbon fiber and
polymer—both strong but lightweight materials—into the necessary
microparts.

And how to power those wings to beat 120 times
per second? To keep this 60-milligram robot (the weight of a few grains
of rice) with a 3-centimeter wingspan to a minimal size and weight,
Wood says, you can’t simply use a shrunken version of the heavy DC
(direct current) motors used in most robots. So he and his team settled
on a simple actuator: in this case, a layered composite that bends when
electricity is applied, thereby powering a micro-scale gearbox hooked
up to the wings. Wood says the actuator works even better than its
biological inspiration. The power density—a measure of power output as
a function of mass—of a fly’s wing muscles is around 80 watts per
kilogram; Wood’s wing design produces more than 400 watts per kilogram.

That’s some kick-ass engineering at work.  Professor Wood, you are one gnarly dude.

Many thanks to the folks at Telstar Logistics, a key member of the metacool horizontal keiretsu, for bringing this innovation to the attention of our R&D group.

Another stab at defining marketing

A few weeks ago I asked for some help in whipping up a definition of marketing.  What ensued was a good online brainstorm.  That discussion helped me formulate this working definition of marketing, which I used for my MSI talk (a copy of which will be posted here soon):

identifying desirable experiences, then delivering them

It’s not a bad definition, but not as good as the one I found recently at the HBS Marketing Unit department page:

Marketers concern themselves with acquiring and retaining customers,
who are the lifeblood of an organization. They attract customers by
learning about potential needs, helping to develop products that
customers want, creating awareness, and communicating benefits; they
retain them by ensuring that they get good value, appropriate service,
and a stream of future products. The marketing function not only
communicates to the customer, but also communicates the needs of the
customer to the company. In addition, it arranges and monitors the
distribution of products and/or services from company to customer.

I think that’s it.  Should have started there.

Why modern racing sucks compared to LeMons

What appears to be footage from the taxi ride in from Logan is actually racing action from a recent round of The 24 Hours of LeMons.

Seriously folks, the racing featured in this not-so-serious contest for under-$500 racing "machines" beats the pants off of anything I’ve seen in my last two decades of 4am Formula 1 gazing.  The 24 Hours of LeMons works because it is designed to be fun for drivers, teams, and spectators.  Simple.  I imagine the design principles behind the series look something like this:

  1. Make it fun for drivers
  2. Make it wild and outrageous for spectators
  3. Keep the cars simple and brutally cheap so that teams can have a good time at the race, too

What an indictment of the state of modern motorsports that, when it comes to creating an arena where the simple joys of competition can flourish, a hipster-doofus series administered by ace scribe Jay Lamm puts almost any professionally-managed racing series to shame.  Modern race series are deep-yawn, drool-running-down-your chin boring.  Boring boring boring.  I don’t know about you, but the only in-car footage that compares to the stuff above would be something out of a WRC car.  Modern racing series can learn a lot from Lemons.

As a case in point, look what happens to cheaters at The 24 Hours of Lemons:

There are three main points to take away from this video:

  1. That backhoe operator is an artist
  2. The structural integrity of a BMW is not to be underestimated (how about those door hinges?!!!)
  3. Any experience, be it a call to an airline reservation center or an ER admitting line or a trip to the DMV, can be and should be designed to be meaningful.  Look at the creativity that went in to making the act of disqualifying an entrant something worth talking about.  If you wanted a customer to feel good about interacting with your brand, you could do worse than to digest what Jay Lamm has done with Lemons and then reassess every point of interaction in the customer journey through your organization’s presence in the world.

For example, consider the hum-drum treatment of cheaters in modern sports.  When McLaren was caught cheating in Formula 1 earlier this year, they were forced to pay a $100,000,000 fine.  Yes, 100 million dollars.  That’s a steep fine, but the boys at McLaren were allowed to keep racing for the entire season.  It was all about the lawyers, not the fans.  If we learning from LeMons, a much more appropriate penalty would have been a hydraulic-clawed machine of some sort munching dainty MP4-22 carbon monocoques by the harbor at Monaco.  And then no more racing.  That would be a truly priceless penalty, and a crowd-pleaser at that.

The next running of The 24 Hours of LeMons will be next week on the 28th and 29th of December. 
 

Halloween and the weird and wonderful workplace

Moonwalking designers in a Halloween parade featured prominently in my earlier post about the weird and wonderful culture of my own innovative workplace.  I recently learned about a similar Halloween parade at Zappos, a significant sponging agent for my disposable income, and a remarkably innovative retailer in its own right.

Might there be a causal link between putting on killer Halloween parties and forging corporate cultures capable of innovation on a routine basis?  Or does the causality flow in the other direction?  Or both ways?  Or is this merely correlation, and not causation?

No matter.  I really dig the Poltergeist reference at the end of the Zappos video.  Very nice.

Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and Organizations of the Future

Tomorrow I’ll be part of a panel discussion at Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and Organizations of the Future, a conference presented by Harvard Business School.

Professor Jim Heskett will be moderating our panel.  He’s written a provocative post on the HBS Working Knowledge website about tomorrow’s discussion.  There’s on open invitation there to leave your comments, ideas, and thoughts on the subject.  Please do so, as we’ll be tackling at least some of them in the time we have tomorrow together, and the discussion will continue online through December 18.

The agenda of speakers at the conference is simply mind-blowing.  I expect to walk away with more than a few new ideas and insights, all of which will no doubt make their way in to metacool.  The entire conference is being held in honor of Professor Thomas K. McCraw, author of my favorite book of the year, Prophet of Innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction.

My time at Harvard Business School changed my view of the world in many ways, and as a result fundamentally changed my life.  It is very meaningful to me to be back on campus exploring design, innovation, technology, business, and life.