Let’s face it; engaging a product development firm these days can seem daunting. On the surface, things seem simple. You’ve got a schedule to keep, you compare it to your available resources and the math doesn’t add up.
One of the cooler things about my job at M3 is that I get to spend time evaluating “what’s next” in technology. Today, I’d like to share five innovations that have the potential to generate some pretty serious disruption over the next decade or so.
Your company has been quite successful for a long time now. You created both the product category, and the market it serves. You are the clear leader. Life is good.
In a follow-up to Design Language 101, Part 1″, we provide information that executives responsible for product development can use to better understand how Design Language benefits engineers.
If you’ve been paying any kind of attention to the news over the past few months, you will almost certainly have heard about Nest, a new kind of thermostat from former Apple veteran Tony Fadell and his team.
In my 15-year career working as a researcher, designer, and strategist, my focus has been on helping business leaders break new ground. I have worked with the full spectrum of technology-based companies, ranging from Silicon Valley to Wall Street, and while I have been part of some true breakthroughs, I have also witnessed my fair share of failed innovation.
Let’s get this out of the way right now: I am an engineer. I’m also going to admit that for many years, my understanding and appreciation of the value of Industrial Design and Design Language was minimal.
When choosing between product directions, should you choose the simplest, the cheapest, the most reliable, or the one the CEO likes the best? If you picked any of these you might as well have chosen blindfolded.
In recent years there have been a few TV shows that focus on outdoor survival. During these shows the star, a survival expert, is dropped off in some remote region of the world with three items: a camera, his survival skills, and a trusty multi-tool.
The odds of a major league baseball game ending with a "walk-off" are about 1 in 11. So why is it that most development schedules expect a game ending home run to succeed?