The seven elements of eco-action

Here we are approaching the big conference day. I have been looking over my past presentations and all the work I’ve been doing in the past months. I have found a way to express the knowledge I have gathered while working with companies dealing with their eco-action. These are the 7 elements that I have found in each one of them. Of course, no company is exactly like the other. They all have their own culture and history. But these seven elements find their way into the company’s shift in some way, shape or form.

 

1) Formation. This is the first touchpoint. Somehow, somewhere, someone got some knowledge. Formation includes all forms of learning, wether from experts giving out their point of view, or from the employe’s findings in the field, or from outsides sources all ready conscientious of the issues at hand. Simply put, someone is spreading the knowledge of what has, is and will happen to the earth. Formation also includes the idea that knowledge is power to change. Knowing what you don’t know is the first step.

2) Interested parties. Why o why would anyone want to change if things aren’t broken? Here’s the new reality. Things are always changing. It’s not a question of don’t change… It’s a question of when are you going to fix it. All companies are in uncertain, changing seas. The wave will hit you at some point. We’re all connected. If one your clients has chosen to be responsible of the environment, that same responsibility will be extended to you. Sometimes, you will have the choice not to follow suit. But at some time, earlier or later, that responsibility will be imposed to you. Getting to know the interested parties around you will allow your company to react appropriately to this wave. Who knows you might be able to surf on it.

3) Life Cycle. This is the life of the output of your company. Whether it be a product, a service or a process, there is a life cycle. It has been born and it will reach an end. The important goal is the cycle of this life. The idea that what what ever has a life will remain invested in the future of its self. From the extraction of the materials, to the production, to the logistics, to the use and the end of life, the impacts of a product’s life cycle can be calculated. This life cycle element is the most objective part of the eco-action. Science is behind the judgement of what is better or worse.

4) Company strategy. Setting goals and ways to fulfill them. To measure indicators and track their evolution. This is the most simple yet most elusive aspect of the process. The company needs to incorporate these elements of environmental successes into its founding mission and vision. Subsequently, the values that will drive these eco-actions towards the sustainable development of the company must figure within the culture of the company. Everyone is inherently implicated in this process. It can be the biggest of team builders because everyone wins when taking care of the environment.

5) Formalization of the process. For eco-projects to take place on a regular basis, a formal integration of the process must take form. In the case of product development, the stage-gate process of a PDP is a great place to establish the role of environmental requirements and to address preoccupations for futur projects. Formalization can also be understood at a human ressources level whereby founding a committee or simply creating a time and space to have a regular conversations will keep the environmental agenda moving around the table.

6) Communication. A company needs to take advantage of the possibilities of communication to show the world their efforts. Also, communication is the only vehicle for information as to what the company has been doing in terms of the environment. A project that has given birth to a more ecologically sound product will never been seen as such if the clients aren’t informed of such. Communication is the window of exchange that needs to be open for people to understand what it is that they are looking at.

7) Resource People. The most valuable asset of any company is the people working within. Without them, there is no company. Without resource people, there is no eco-action. It is the resource people that make it happen. Let it be know that resource people can be found inside and outside the company. Resource people are the ones that bring the expertise required in the formation element, the are the ones listening and interacting with the interested parties, they are the ones studying and reinventing the lifecycle, they are the ones who link the project to the company strategy, they are the ones making sure the process continues, they are the ones communicating the progess.

Those are the seven elements that make ideals a reality. Seven elements that bring on eco-actions.

Filed under: 1

Keep it simple.

It’s been a long day. I’ve been preparing a conference we’ve given twice. I’m looking to tweak it a bit so that the poeple attending will get a different message. At first they were going home with the idea that eco-designing products was simple. Just add water. It’s so far from the truth. Nothing is that simple. There’s an underlying complexity to the simplest of things. And there’s even an overlying (if that’s a word) complexity to the simplest of things. The movie by the Charles and Ray Eames elegantly exposed this idea in the 70’s. My point is that keeping it simple isn’t the best understanding of the task at hand. There I’ve said it. Eco-design is a project. Ecoconception is about getting things done : better.

It’s not because some companies, and more every day, are doing a better job that it will be too for your organization. It’s a tough job already that you’ve got. You have to manage the budget, manage your team, manage your project developement, manage your ressources, manage the message, manage your will to keep on working day in and day out. That is NOT a simple task. Adding the environment to the load of preoccupations is often seen as just that another load. But it isn’t.

The environment isn’t another piece of the puzzle, it is the piece that will help you bring the puzzle together. In fact, the environment isn’t really what I’m defending here. The environment is the vehicle for change. Change that balances budgets. Change that brings the team together. Change that helps foster innovation. Change that protects the earth’s inherit natural prosperity. Change that shows that you are listening and responding. The environment is the cause behind a change for the better.

But we all know that change isn’t easy and it isn’t simple. The road towards a common good and a better world is steap. The challenges will be many. But you and I, we will get there. In the end, things won’t have changed by themselves, it is us, the eco conscious minded who will have united to make the world better, one project at a time.

So simple isn’t the message I want to send out anymore. Getting your organization to change isn’t simple. It wasn’t for all the ones that we have shown in examples. Doing better for the environment is not simple. It’s a responsibility that must be matched with fair amounts of determination and knowledge. That is what my future conferences will be about. Creating a sense of responsibility in the people attending, like you. Letting the determination you grow towards action. And this action must come from informed experience. I plan to offer you a way to see a clear image of your present situation. As I show you my open hand inviting you to collaborate in further changing your world.

Filed under: 1

Just Playnovate

I was reading a rather interesting article on Wired today. It’s about anthropologists studying chimpanzees. Biologists and anthropologists have been known to study the chimps in the past as if they took a time machine and they were watching humans 35 millions years ago. (Sidebar: most interesting research is done when you can find something that by analogy gives you access to what you’re actually studying. Take the works of Garret Lisi and the theory of everything studying the foundations of physics thanks to a geometrical framework.) Where were we? Oh yes, studying chimps like they were humans in their early years. In this case, the italian scientist were able to prove that the chimps were consciously choosing their stones for performance factors when looking to crack open some nuts. What’s special about this?

The interesting part comes when they allude to the fact that the chimps were finding uses for the objects around them after playing around with them for so long. In the words of the scientist: “You do a behavior in your free time, you play with objects, and by doing it over and over, discover something that turns out to be useful”. I see two really interesting points here. Time and space.

Firstly, it’s important to have spare time and fun. Even this blog is about my spare time and my fun of sharing thoughts. You never know where it will bring you. Back to the chimps, they found innovative uses to their everyday stones. It’s important to have a time for fun. And that also raises the question of oriented fun. Can your fun time also have a little opening for innovation. Taking time to have fun is just as important as time for work. They interconnect. You might have heard the story of the employee at 3M who invented the post-it. In short, he developed the post-it in his spare time at the company. This has been acclaimed as a practice for innovation. Google offers their employes 20% or one day a week for their own personal projects. That’s how gmail came alive. In the end, the chimps are proving that taking the time to play leads to new understandings of situations.

The second thing that this study on chimps can show us is the importance of space in their evolution. If the chimps were in a place with sedimentary rocks that would shatter on impact, they couldn’t think of cracking their nuts. But these same sedimentary rocks might lead them to create sparks from the shattering of the rocks. In such a case, they might learn to create fire instead. What’s most interesting about this is that we humans are both conscious and unconscious of the environment that surrounds us. Just by choosing the newspaper we read in the morning, we choose how we wish to be influenced. It’s easy to agree that the choice of radio channel influences your mood. With this choice comes also the types of commercials and conversations. Choose wisely. What I’m trying to say is that the environment and the elements with which we play daily influences our potential findings. Choose the right place with the right rocks and you could create fire.

By the way, a theory of time and space is exactly what Garret Lisi has been pointing too. And by playing around with the equations he found particles that don’t even exist yet ! That would mean that by playing with fire at the right time and place could create rocks that we’ve never seen before. Like volcanos?

Filed under: 1

Going to the big game

It’s Christmas today. Well not exactly. But here’s one of the best gift’s I’ve ever gotten. A pair of tickets for the Montreal Canadiens game. I’ve been wearing my jersey all day. Yes, that jersey I’ve had since I was 12 on which I glued on myself the name of the captain of the team. Why talk about this game? Two reasons.

Firstly, events are the new gift. I can’t feel bad about my own footprint because I’m not consuming anything directly*. Instead of giving me a new blender when the old one still does the job, I get to live an experience. One that so far in my life I can remember each game I’ve been too. *I’m aware that some events are more responsible than others.

Secondly, there’s something to be said about waiting. Hoping. Not expectations, but the active state of expecting. The day has come and I’m extremely happy. This process make the gift even bigger.

Oh and there’s a third element I just though about. The fact of sharing the moment with someone. You have a common memory that created in real time. Maybe that’s the most important aspect of a gift. The whole point was to unite the two people through the gift in the first place wasn’t it.

So next time you have the chance, give the gift that creates a bonding experience. If not for the other, do it for yourself !

Filed under: 1

The success of the system

Yesterday at lunch we had an interesting topic: the new printer. Yes, it’s true our lovely machine now pokes holes automatically and insures that even though it’s printing copy number 10 568 the color will be exactly the same as on copy number one. That’s why we upgraded. Interestingly enough, we didn’t just upgrade. We kept the old one too. So then I asked why is it that we used to be able to fold the paper in the old one and that we can’t in the new one? How did the old one loose a function? And does the new one fold ?

The answer is not simple, it’s smart. Sneeky smart almost. The new printer took on the folding module of the old one. The modularity or communalization of the printer made it possible to keep the important pieces of the old and put them into the new. This isn’t new. Cars are quite well made in that sense. You can find a brake system on a car that could fit onto a newer model. But it made me question why is it that printers are so good for the product service system business model?

Xerox has long been the example of the best practice when it comes to thinking their product in terms of service. They put forward the idea since 1992 and have been in transition ever since.Oh and they’ve saved millions in the making. In fact, in 2000, Xerox saved 27 Millions $USD by reducing the material input by 72 000 tons. They are now a document company. They now sell a copy not a printer.

So what can we extract from the printers as a good example of a product fit for systems thinking?

1) High Cost. First of all the fact that the initial investment is large. A professional printer could cost about 30 thousand dollars. That’s a lot when you can find some rather efficient personal printers for 500 dollars. There’s a great gap there to be vanquished by productivity features.

2) High Tech. The printers are obviously out of the handyman’s range of fixing possibilities. The knowledge barrier to fixing the machine is very very high. They have custom pieces that can be found in a hardware store. This means that there a whole market for printer servicing.

3) Low Cost per Use. Sure 2 cents a copy sounds great. It’s very intuitive for the user to understand his consumption and equally to modulate his own demand and financial means with a constant offer. What if you print 15 000 pages? Boom! That’s the original 30 000 price set for the printer.

3) Mature Tech. The printer hasn’t changed so much in the last 10 years. Not like other technology. It still prints on… paper. The point is that because the requirements have been laid out by years of office worker’s misery, the printer has attained a critical plateau of answering the user’s needs. This therefore allows for further communality with older models. (If we look at cars, they are in the midst of a big change in their propulsion system: gas. They have been rolling on with the mature technology of the gas engine for long enough. Someday printers won’t print on paper.)

4) Short cycle, long lifetime. This might seem contradictory to the previous stable tech argument. But some little changes have made the printer’s upgrading important. Take the emailing function. Great for insure purposes. So the base technology is stable but some innovation does find its way into new products. (This is why it was possible to use the existing folding module in the newer printer. This module had to do with a mature tech element pertaining to paper.) Nonetheless, a printer has a rather long lifetime possibility. The parts aren’t under large stress nor use constraints so they can be remanufactured and reused in subsequent models.

5) Not about style. No one shows off their printer to clients. It’s the document that’s in the client’s hands. Xerox got that.

I wonder what are the untapped products that fit this bill? Any ideas?

Filed under: 1

My bio – Who Am I ?

I’m giving a presentation-training on the 24th of February for a group of industrials joined through the Small Medium Buisness Development center of the Chaudières Appalaches region. (a.k.a.: Développement PME Chaudières-Appalaches). They asked for my Bio. So I brushed it up and here’s I came up with.

Today, Alexandre Joyce works as a consultant in sustainable development for the Institute of product development (IPD). In concert with the actors of the Quebec industry, he fights for environmental impacts to be taken into account during the conception phase. Before being a part of the IPD team, Alexandre did research in eco-design with the Metamorphose and Metacycle groups to give a second life to everyday objects. At that time, he developed new eco-design strategies with advanced technologies of product development such as rapid prototyping. It was in Milan with the internation design firm TotalTools that he integrated the eco-design criteria in the design process for multinational clients like IKEA. Alexandre Joyce has a masters in Design and Complexity from the Industrial Design School of the University of Montreal and is a member of the board of the non-profit Materials for the Arts.

Filed under: Alexandre Joyce, Institute of Product Development, Materials for the Arts

micro design process

It’s was a small day at the office. The kind of day that goes by in a flash. A few emails and few administrative tasks. Why small?  Because small is beautiful.

I had the chance to work on a little graphic design project today. Its a little pet project I like to turn to when I need to get my creative juices flowing. And because my mind was in a very expansive form, I don’t have much hard facts or crunchy opinions for you today. I decided to show this micro design process I went through today to ameliorate the images of the promotional materials I was designing. Here’s how this little exercise started.

Yesterday morning 9 am. A fellow Co-worker came to my desk and offered me a suggestion. She had been thinking about the mock-ups I had been leaving around the office and she had a thought she wanted to share. Notice that she asked me if I was interested in her feedback. I accepted and she said the following:

“You know the four different services we have in sustainable development should each have their own image. They’re disctinct products so they should be distinct.”

It’s always difficult to receive pure, reasonable constructive criticism. It’s much more difficult than opinionated non-sense. She was right. And I knew it. I just hadn’t had the time and creative flow to adjust. I was aware of the problem. So I acquiesced  her idea and thanked her for sharing. But in my defence almost, I said to her that we’re trying to keep the man holding the kite as our visual identification. And that was that.

Interestingly enough her suggestion began working in the back of my head. I got in today and I knew that I had to make the different products distinct and at the same time keep the little man holding the kite. Here’s what happened. I didn’t negate her idea and I didn’t negate the importance of keeping the visual repetition. Those two ideas didn’t necessarily have to exclude one and another. I simply changed the background concept of each service keeping the visual identity. This is what Roger Martin calls intergrative thinking. 

It’s one of the most powerful tools of the designer. It’s to look at a situation with the mindset that it’s not about adding and subtracting but multiplying the strengths of each side. Sometimes to do this one must find a third option not present in the first seemingly black and white situations. In other words, situations aren’t so black and white. Here I go again in analogies. Again with colors. Where was I? Oh yes, not so black and white.  The design process itself is not just a specific recipe or a step by step process. It takes a little sensitivity to understand how things relate to one and another. Here’s a few quick images that show the process I went through.

 

So here’s the play by play of this little gallery of design process images. 

First comes the initial brainstorm where I’m thinking about other things with lines in them. It a list of words with quick image reminders of what it could look like. In fact just that little effort of drawing the idea in a mini icon gives me a feel for how difficult that line concept is to illustrate. The next thing after that was a little more sketching on what were the first good ideas. The horses that ran fast out of the gates. The mondrian idea, the topography idea and the networking ideas were quite inspiring. So a little more drawing untill the initial sprint falls short. That’s when I turn to the internet to give a second juice to the brainstorming. I found this great little plug-in for my browser called CoolIris that allows to flip through the loads of images on many different sites with an open architecture. I’m trying hard not to name drop or go into technical detail. The point is that this image searching plug-in does a great job at letting me sift throught the database for quick ideas. Some of the best ones are shown: the electrical lines, the electric circuit and so on. The point is that the internet is becoming a partner in expanding my brainstorm activity. I do this process so often that I even studied it in my masters in design and complexity. So once I’ve found enough interesting images on the internet, I go back to paper and begin sketching again. Refining some ideas that have come from the internet search. The heart rate monitor was so perfect that it didn’t take more than a few minutes for me to completely integrate it into the diagnostic concept. The network idea was a little more difficult. I turned to a 3D software to help randomize the links. I drew a quick sphere and reduced the mesh count. Then flatened it onto a 2D surface. Here what interesting is the use of a powerful software to do something so simple in terms of its graphic ability. The next step was to go back to the drawing board and find how to set the piece. To make sure that the visual identification i.e. the man, was well showcased. There. Then the collaboration with the idea of the orbit.

Now I know it’s not perfect. I walked over to a co-worker’s desk and showed him the 4 ideas. The diagnostic is pretty solid. The context and image match. The networking still needs tweaking and the collaboration doesn’t match with the idea of orbits. My college was quick to point out that the interesting aspect of the kite is that it brings you to new heights. In the case of the diagnostic, it’s not so clear semanticly. And we’re completely lost with the orbit. More to come in the future. Divergence. Convergence. Analysis. Synthesis. That’s the design process.

Filed under: Materials for the Arts

Sustainable change

Not many people can be more inspiring than Barack Obama. His journey is as incredible as the destination he is heading for. It has always impressed me the way a single person can epitomize the values and will of thousands. On the other hand, my brain is reminding me the very book I’m reading right now which states that individual greatness isn’t all about the individual. The environment and the way the system is decided is also tributary of the outcome of who becomes who. How quickly I fall into analogies. There’s more to a soup than just the ingredients. Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell is the book I’m talking about. But I digress. I wanted to talk about the environment and moreover I wanted to introduce the subject of sustainability. I have a feeling though that this introduction using Barack Obama as an example of change will become the very epitomy of the next century. When in fact as a society, we have created the right environment for great change. Here’s an example.

 In Obama’s speech to present the coming measures in readjusting the economy, the most striking element to me came with the concluding words referencing sustainable development into his vision for the country. This sentence is a play on John F. Kennedy’s famous words, with a twist for the next century. Here is this clin d’oeil to sustainable development.
 

“That’s why I’m calling on all Americans to insist that the first question each of us asks isn’t “What’s good for me?” but “What’s good for the country my children will inherit?”

Lest we forget that sustainable development  has been defined as a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Many (iisd , our common future , fathom , and the Quebec government) like to divide this sentence into two parts: the needs aspect bringing a hierarchy in terms of importance and the capacity with which comes the idea of limits. But here’s what I think is missing from this evaluation. It’s the spirit that comes with development. Development, sustainable or otherwise, comes from people. People looking for change. If it was really up to nature, we’d have balance. Nature seeks balance at such a large scale that we see change. For nature, change comes in order to … provide order. In my humble opinion, what makes Obama’s speech special isn’t even that he’s speaking about sustainable development. The concept has been out there for 20 years. It’s almost vernacular now. But why isn’t put into practice? It’s that we don’t see that people are the ones who needs to change. People are the ones who develop.

The fact that Obama is leading people towards change is what can make sustainable development happen. It’s more than providing for future needs It’s about the very concept of development. What no one sees is that development is another word for change. Sustainable change. Now there’s an oxymoron!

Filed under: sustainable development

And in mind.

I took the time to read the article a friend suggested on Core77. It was interesting indeed. I flew over it first because I often tend underestimate the quality of the thinking on design that can come from the site. My mistake. Nonetheless, moving piece. It’s nice to have a few boxes to put the design efforts into. It’s reassuring to be able to label the design intentions and know where you stand as a designer. There’s a sense of cleaning up the mess, hence the title that is most definitely required for the profession. We all feel it as we get into design school and we have to explain to our mothers what designers are. Worse yet is when our answer hasn’t really changed after 4 years of education. I don’t know about yours, but I hope my mother gets it a little better now. It’s about making a difference. Wether it’s commercial, responsible, discursive or exploratory. We’re looking to change the world.

For me, the most interesting part of this article was the overlap. For me, this is where the most interesting elements really come out. To speak in terms of our old color teacher, I realize today that the hue is not more important than the saturation. It’s not about calling it indigo blue. It’s also about seeing the shade of red and the saturation in the blue that is making the indigo look just a little purple. What I’m trying to illustrate (although clumsily) is that the interesting aspect of design is when we find was to be responsible AND profitable commercially. It’s not about either/or. It’s about the AND. Wouldn’t you agree that the most interesting designs are the ones that are exploratory and discursive at the same time. Isn’t the Guggenheim special because it’s not sure if it was just about making a profitable museum, exploring the use of titanium in building, discursive in asking what shape should a museum take and finally responsible in the sense that it has put a little manufacturing city like Bilbao on the map.

Let me just finish by saying that yes. Yes, this is a great little article. The classifications of the design intensions is required. (In fact, it has given me the idea to do a little exercise with my students to see if they will come up with the same 4 categories.) This article is an important step in understanding ourselves to better communicate what we do. True, some people don’t quite know what we designers are doing. I hope that the message of making the world a better place comes out one day, until then making useful products is ok. Just don’t forget to explore and be responsible too.

Filed under: Materials for the Arts

Becoming a better consultant

Okay. I know yesterday was a bit direct. I really just wanted to start the first work day with a post. I didn’t really take the time to situate who am and why I am blogging. Let alone what I will be blogging about. Oh but I’m still not sure what I’ll be blogging about yet. I’ll figure that one as we go along. The first two questions, I will try to answer now. No wait, now.

I am Alexandre Joyce. With all my strengths and weaknesses. I’m already going into why I’m writing this blog. I want to have a record of all the little things I learn in a day. Because I learn so many. Just in the last two days, I’ve learned so so so much about myself and my work as a consultant. It’s that we’ve been in a workshop on how to be better consultants. I have a feeling this blog will fall quickly into greater issues of design and sustainable development but for now. It’s just about my daily lessons.

Which brings us to today’s lesson. I learned today that a consultant in a role of facilitation is as much about who you are than what you know. It’s about creating a relationship between you and you’re client so that you can transfer your expertise. And the beautiful thing about the Institut of Product Development is our philosophy: Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Show a man how to fish and he will eat forever.

This is really at the core of teaching. What better way to learn than by doing and experiencing for ourselves. Which means that the expertise that all of our team of consultants have at the IDP can be transfered while making the clients aware of their own needs. We might know the problems and the answers. However, if we want to create a change in our client’s ways, we need to help them help themselves towards that change.

I’ve always said: Change comes from those who wish to change.

Filed under: Alexandre Joyce, Design, Institute of Product Development, sustainable development