A while back I mused that "Nano is the new Turbo".
I was wrong: Zepto is the new Nano.
My wish for 2006 is that some marketer, somewhere, brands something "Zepto", and that a competitor quickly ups the ante to "Yocto". I really want to own something called "Yocto". Yocto Yocto Yocto
Here’s an article about the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (a.k.a. "the d.school) from the India Times.
Though it quickly ventures off into a discussion about more traditional approaches to design education, I like the article because of what it represents: it’s very much an example of Thomas Friedman’s belief that ever-increasing flatness will, and it’s also about the emergence of Dan Pink’s view that R-directed thinking will be what enables one makes a good living in the 21st century.
Most of all, it affirms my belief that the d.school isn’t so much a place as a state of mind.
Following my post last week about the meaning of Ducati, here’s some breaking news on Ducati: a majority stake has been sold by Texas Pacific Group (an American firm) to Investindustrial Holdings (an Italian firm).
What’s interesting about this from a meaning point of view is that Ducati is now owned by an Italian corporate entity, rather than by an American corporate entity. Does it matter that the firm is now in Italian hands? On the one hand, Ducati has certainly thrived for the past decade under American ownership. On the other, the Ducatisti seem to think so — they’re already saying something along the lines of "Finally, Ducati is Italian".
I’m not so sure the nationality of ownership really matters to the meaning of a very nationality-centric brand like Ducati, so long as its deep roots in Borgo Panigale continue to be celebrated. Mini, the quintessential British car, is owned and produced by a very Bavarian company called BMW. Nor do I think it’s really important where the nationality-centric object gets made. For example, the BMW M Coupe, perhaps the most radical expression of BMW brand values ever produced, was made in the United States. But critically, it was designed in Germany, by German Engineers.
So what matters? I think what matters is that the people designing the offering really "get" — and have control over — all the tacit cultural markers that end up embedded in any designed object. To the extent that one needs to live in a culture to really understand it, designers should probably live there if they are engaged in creating offerings that are largely differentiated on the basis of meaning, rather than functionality.
What do you think?
As usual, Seth and I are in violent agreement. Substitute "design thinker" for "architect", and you’ve got the blueprint for the stuff that creates good, generative marketing: Great Marketers are Architects
Yesterday in the class I teach at the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (aka "the d.school") we had a fascinating discussion about how Ducati creates meaning in the marketplace. The starting point for the discussion is a Harvard Business School case by Giovanni Gavetti which asks the question "to cruise, or not to cruise?" In other words, should Ducati enter the lucrative market for cruiser motorcycles at the risk of diluting an intensely meaningful brand built up over 60 years?
For me, the best part of running this class is the support I get from the folks at Ducati North America and some local owner’s clubs. Not only did we have a wide variety of Ducati motorcycles on display for the class, we also had the pleasure of having Ducati North America CEO Michael Lock provide us with his thoughts and insights about the process of creating and celebrating meaning. If the measure of a good teaching experience is the learning you glean from the process, then for me this session was a bumper crop.
And the roar of those Desmos wasn’t half bad, either!
Here’s hoping that the new Ducati Hypermotard concept (above) makes it to market. It’s a stunning, gutsy, and… wow!
Here’s a cool idea: hold an eight-hour hackathon for your offering or business. Get a lot done. Innovate. Hackathoninnovation, in other words.
The people over at FeedBurner did this recently, and got a whole bunch of stuff done. Sure, this is easier done if your offering is a piece of web software, but I’d argue that the spirit of a hackathon can be applied to everything from your corner Dairy Queen to the Pentagon. It’s the innovation equivalent of working an extra weekend shift on the manufacturing line to get it cleared of WIP. It’s all about turning off the WiFi, switching off Outlook, closing the meeting calendar, and getting stuff done. It’s about really focusing on the important stuff, rather than on the urgent or routine.
Racers get the idea of a hackathoninnovation — they have to do it all the time.
What could you hack today?
I’m starting to write another column for BusinessWeek Online, this time on something around the subject of happiness and innovative behavior.
I need your help.
What are your thoughts on this subject? What stories do you have for or against? Please comment below or drop me a line.
Many thanks. Mahalo.
It’s always interesting to see the kinds of complementary products that spring up and form the ecosystem around successful offerings such as the iPod Shuffle.
Here’s one you probably didn’t expect: iBelieve
"For the longest time ideation was about throwing out as many ideas as
you can. We’ve realized pretty quickly that it’s really not about a
bunch of ideas, it’s about really good strategy, alignment and
business, diagnostics, and deep customer understanding… the ideas are
no longer just about the product, they’re about new business models and
how you go to market, and what’s your supply chain like."
A few weeks back I posited that the key to being a successful innovator is having the mindset of a racer, which is some mix of foolish optimism, self-confidence, humility, and above all, persistence.
Here’s a fun story of persistence and why you shouldn’t believe the naysayers who say it can’t be done.