Page 1

Strategic Creativity series

SUPER– MAKER The Readership in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven

Karianne Rygh

Collaborating with: Delft University of Technology and Océ – A Canon Company In the CRISP projects PSS101 and CASD

Research period December 2013 – June 2015


SUPER– MAKER Karianne Rygh




Orchestrating Innovation 5 Danielle Arets

Super-Maker – Expertise in the making


A Skype with vHM Design Futures


Karianne Rygh

Clive van Heerden and Jack Mama with Karianne Rygh

Making Research Tangible 19 Karianne Rygh

Prototyping with Experts 27 Clemens Weijkamp and Karianne Rygh

Super-Making 31 Karianne Rygh

A Design-Driven Approach to Innovation


Orchestration in Design


A radio conversation led by Bas Raijmakers Bas Raijmakers

Challenging the Machine 53 Report of an intense Design Research Space, Allard Roeterink

Design Thinking and Super-Making


Karianne Rygh

Super-Maker Implementation 66 Diagram, Karianne Rygh

The Contribution of Super-Maker to CRISP


Bas Raijmakers

Contributor Biographies 72 Glossary 76 Colophon 78



Orchestrating Innovation Danielle Arets

Involving designers more in business innovation: that is what we had in mind when we began the Creative Industry Scientific Programme (CRISP) four years ago. By putting designers and design-thinking on a more strategic level, we envisioned fostering innovation, and more generally enhancing the Dutch creative economy. The project Super-Maker demonstrates that this was not wishful thinking, which is not to say that it is ever an easy ride to work in a strategic position as a designer. For two and a half years design researcher Karianne Rygh explored the strategic position of designers at our Readership in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven, as a Research Associate. She started at the CRISP project PSS 101, where she designed a workshop tool (Value Pursuit, Strategic Creativity Publication Series #7) to foster understanding and maintain trust in networked collaboration. Over a period of 18 months Karianne was asked to explore new possibilities for the innovative elevated printing technology – a way to make full-colour and high resolution elevated prints – of printing company Océ – A Canon Company. Together with the expertise of Delft University of Technology and the Research and Development department at Océ, she explored business opportunities for this new technology, for which a profitable application hadn’t yet been found. Where to start with a technique that delivers output which hasn’t been seen before? Karianne Rygh chose for a ‘thinking-through-making’ approach mastering the basics of the technique and tinkering with it. With the help of research assistant Mikaela Steby Stenfalk, student at Design Academy Eindhoven, this resulted in a wide range of material explorations, which they published in an online sample book. Instead of primarily using the new technology to print beautiful samples, Karianne shifted her focus to the process of developing the function and the purpose of such samples. She initiated a series of multi-stakeholder co-creation workshops, inviting architects and students to come up with new applications for the technology. She initially 5

organised these sessions with Cynthia Hathaway (research associate at Design Academy Eindhoven). Océ actively took part to introduce the participants to the elevated printing technology, training and equipping them  with the necessary skills to design and produce elevated prints, and at the same time co-create the possible outcomes.  This workshop approach was named the Super-Maker, since it was not the printing technology, nor the designer, nor the company experts involved, but all the ‘makers’ together that could bring ‘super power’ to the project, by bridging the innovation gaps between the new technology and the client paying for its application or the person operating the technology. In fact the Super-Maker could be seen an ultimate maker space (fablab environment) where professional amateurs, designers and business co-create innovative ideas and close such gaps together. The Super-Maker concept fits really well with the networked collaborations that are set up in all the CRISP projects. To align the different disciplines, working processes and languages of the people involved, a certain form of what we call ‘orchestration’ is needed. The Super-Maker demonstrated that designers like Karianne Rygh are very well equipped to orchestrate. Her decision to embody the explorations in tangible objects and her collaborative approach to research has helped trigger discussions and a dialogue between relevant stakeholders within Océ, allowing them to communicate with one another in new ways and explore new innovation opportunities. This is a clear example of two principles of orchestration: creating common ground and building relationships in the network (see Orchestration section in CRISP ­magazine #5, 2015). But what is it exactly about design and its practitioners that is so ­ valuable for strategic innovation? The open and collaborative approach of the Super-Maker represents a great example of what ­ can happen when industry meets design research, and how design research can help demonstrate a technology’s relevance. This is ­ what assistant professor Giulia Calabretta of Delft University of ­Technology came to understand while interviewing various people within Océ about their ideas around the strategic value of designers. Companies want strategic designers to think long-term, to grasp the essence of the technology for the user, and to cut across company departments for a common goal. 6

Guiding the new ideas that emerged from thinking-through-making and collaborative innovation practices through the organisation proved to be the most difficult part. As Klaas Jan Wierda of Océ stated it: “In large organisations (…) collaboration between departments is often based on tried and tested procedures (…) documented in manuals and templates. However, when trying to develop something that is new to the organisation that requires new ways of working, the existing ways of working efficiently may actually ­hinder evolution.” From the Super-Maker project, we learned that prototyping can offer a way out of this problem. As Giulia Calabretta put it in the closing ­magazine of CRISP: “When prototypes are used as a probe, as a means to harvest inspirational data about people’s lives, values, and thoughts, the design professional could facilitate rich design conversations about the probe, leading to new value propositions.” Karianne Rygh’s Super-Maker project could be seen not only as a workshop tool to support open, co-created business innovation, but also as a new way of working for strategic designers working at Product Service Systems which by nature are complex issues that do not have a neat one-to-one solution. The Super-Maker orchestrates the process and offers tangible procedures to connect the various stakeholders involved while giving them the opportunity to create their own value with the new technology. This aligning of collaborators and making sure that they operate in harmony is crucial to achieving satisfying results. The Super-Maker proves that designers have an important role in such orchestrations. Typical design techniques, like visualising and prototyping were used to build a common understanding. And of course we shouldn’t underestimate the role of designer Karianne Rygh, who conducted this whole process as a sounding harmony.

Happy reading. Danielle Arets



Super-Maker Expertise in the making Karianne Rygh

We are living in a time where the development of technology is happening at a faster rate than end users can often keep up with. Companies are faced with the challenge of redeveloping their organisational structures in order to accommodate new services, to keep up with the shifts within our economy. Innovation is something each and every company aims for, but innovation does not simply ‘happen’ by itself. The definition of innovation by the Innovation Network (as Littman refers to it in The Ten Faces of Innovation) “People creating value through the implementation of new ideas”, clearly indicates that it’s the individual people who drive innovation, not necessarily the companies they work for, and that chimes with our experience. However, its not enough to only have a good idea, it’s only when you act – when you implement – that you truly innovate[3]. In order to guide new ideas through a large organisation, it is therefore crucial to inspire, engage and get the commitment of all relevant stakeholders, both internally within a company and externally. Super-Maker questions how designers can support such complex networks of stakeholders based on the research conducted as a part of the Super-Maker project, a joint initiative between the PSS101 and CASD research teams, under the Creative Industry Scientific Programme (CRISP). CRISP is a Dutch national research programme spanning eight research projects, in which Design Academy Eindhoven collaborates with three technical universities, two universities of Amsterdam and over fifty industry partners, design companies and service ­providers in the Netherlands. PSS101 and CASD are two such p ­ rojects, where its researchers (from Delft University of Technology and Design Academy Eindhoven) and partner companies (Océ - A Canon Company, ZuidZorg, Exact, Connect and Innovate and STBY) provided the ­context for Super-Maker. The PSS101 project has been developing a framework of methods and tools that will improve networked collaboration across industries, 9

while CASD has explored how effective strategic design thinking can be achieved in order to enhance the competitive position of Product Service Systems and industrial design providers. When Roberto Verganti[4] talks about design-driven innovation as an alternative to technology-driven innovation he says designers are often well positioned to make complex and interdisciplinary collaborations work in areas where technology-driven innovation has often failed – because it did not acknowledge the human factor beyond ­ergonomics. Integrating design-thinking among interdisciplinary teams is increasingly a means to innovate in product and service design and in business; however, the actual ways this might be accomplished are more challenging[1]. When attempting to incorporate a larger number of professional disciplines, or share their expertise and guild-knowledge based on many perspectives, we can experience that the design activity becomes a social process where ideas emerge from different people[2]. As a Research Associate at Design Academy Eindhoven, I have contributed two and a half years of research to the PSS101 and ­ CASD projects, where the last 18 months have been focussed on how the c­ reative industries can collaborate with technology companies on defining new ­markets and business opportunities. This case study has centred on the innovative technology from Océ, called elevated printing technology. In collaboration with Research Associate Cynthia Hathaway, the ­project has followed a ‘thinking-through-making’ ­methodology, approaching the subject of business innovation on the level of how designers can intervene in this complex context. One area of investigation has been making research tangible and using the research itself as a tangible tool to inspire and engage stakeholders. The research has ­resulted in a multidisciplinary co-creation workshop methodology called the Super-Maker, explained further on page 19. Throughout this project, I have worked in a diverse research team where team partners and experts I have consulted have contributed a great deal of experience, knowledge and case examples from their own research or from the companies they represent. On page 60 Klaas Jan Wierda, project partner from Océ, and CASD project leader, Giulia Calabretta (assistant professor at Delft University of Technology), give insights into how a designer’s skill of ‘orchestration’ can greatly b ­ enefit larger companies. Their insights were also discussed with Merijn 10

Neeleman (Manager of Design at Océ) and Allard Roeterink (teacher at Design Academy Eindhoven) along with students on how this can be embedded within education, during the radio show hosted as a part of Dutch Design Week 2014, page 37. Daijiro Mizuno, assistant ­professor at Keio University, SFC, complements this debate by elaborating on the role of designers in relation to inclusive 3D fabrication and the ‘Savage Designer’ on page 45. A great value in this project has been that technological experts have gone above and beyond what can reasonably be expected from them to produce complicated and difficult prototypes for both design ­professionals and students, in order to assist them in making abstract design ideas tangible and understandable to all stakeholders involved. Clemens Weijkamp, Senior Technical Specialist in elevated printing at Océ, explains how designers are needed to bridge the gap between new technology and the needs of its (future) users, on page 27. A crucial success factor of a project such as this one is that an environment and culture exists, which welcomes new ideas and new modes of thinking, as Clive Van Heerden and Jack Mama (VHM Design Futures) discuss on page 15. We hope that Super-Maker triggers further interest and engagement in regards to designers taking on more strategic positions within innovation in large corporations. The unique value in this research ­project is embedded in the interactions between diverse and passionate team-members and project participants, and we hope that this value can be experienced through the research, interviews, and developed methodologies and approaches that are presented to you in this ­publication. References [1] [2] [3] [4]

Baha E., Haats T,. Poldma, T., Zahedi, M., “Design Thinking and Aesthetic Meaning-Making: Interlaced Means to Engage in Collaborative Knowledge-Building”, Aalborg, Denmark: Proceedings of NordDesign 2012, the 9th NordDesign conference, Aarlborg University, Denmark. Bucciarelli, L.L “An ethnographic perspective on engineering design”, Design Studies, Vol. 9, No. 3, 159-168, 1988. Littman, J., Kelley, T., The Ten Faces of Innovation: Strategies for Heightening Creativity, Profile Books, London, 2006, p.6.  Verganti. R. Design-driven Innovation: Changing the Rules by Radically Innovating What Things Mean. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA, 2009. 11


A Skype with vHM Design Futures Clive van Heerden and Jack Mama with Karianne Rygh (31 March 2015)

During a Skype conversation I speak to Clive van Heerden and Jack Mama, with whom I used to work at the legendary Philips Design Probes programme, which they used to direct. ‘Probes’ was set up to open up the thinking of designers and engineers at Philips and to expose insights that would inform nearer term product strategy. It stopped shortly after Philips design moved from the city centre of ­Eindhoven and when Stefano Marzano retired from the company. Clive and Jack explain their experience of collaborations between different parts of the company and what the function of their department was on the work floor. After leaving Philips, they still work closely together. Let’s start with how they met. We met at the Royal College of Art (in London), 20 years ago. I came from the social sciences and had no formal design background. Jack was a product designer. While at the RCA we met Professor Ian Shanks, the chief scientist at Thorn EMI — a big technology company at the time with a huge pedigree in old style technology research. Professor Shanks was a very illustrious and brilliant British scientist who stumbled upon design at the Royal College. This sounds ridiculous now, but in those days there were continental divides between technical and creative disciplines and there was absolutely no mixing of people. He saw that there was something interesting in the viewpoint or perspective of designers. My major project at the RCA was on the electronic delivery and compilation of individual tracks of music which he saw as the probable future of the music business which was about selling CDs with 15 pre-selected tracks. Thorn EMI hired me and soon employed Jack, who was a tutor at the RCA. We found ourselves in a technical research laboratory of 250 scientists and 3 designers. We felt like a completely endangered species as the cultural clash was monumental, but we had to learn to communicate and find middle ground, which was an invaluable lesson for later on. Clive van Heerden (CvH):

Jack Mama (JM): “At Thorn EMI there was complete unfamiliarity with what we were trying to do, but there was a need for them to display or 13

communicate the technology they were producing. There’s a basic level of engagement when it comes to packaging so that it looks more like a product. Some of our early work was very much about that. This was important because our colleagues were able to see the value of design, which built trust between us. Only then could you start to think about other cases that they had not thought about, and start to innovate in a more symbiotic way. If you start too big, you’ll lose people in the process; so it’s better to start simple and gain trust. At that point several organisations around the world were experimenting with bringing so-called ‘non-technical disciplines’ into technology and research. Xerox had a very experimental approach to technology innovation in Palo Alto. I think that Thorn EMI was one of the first companies to hire designers into research in Europe. When we were in the position to put a new team together, we ­concentrated heavily on artistic collaborations and artistically m ­ inded­ designers. We were looking for the least fettered, in many cases the least skilled designers; people that could communicate and who were not intimidated in rooms full of physicists. And then we would leave people in the same environment. You would very often get the best results from the most unlikely combinations. Later, after years in ­ Philips Design, when we set up the programme, we turned this into a core method of design research – bringing very unlikely combinations of people ­together, not as multi-disciplinary teams, but rather as a group of creative people with a common focus. It was about turning the methodological differences between skills into creative tension between individuals. People were not involved in a team to simply carry out their functions in their specific area of skill or experience. We forced scientists to look at the world through the eyes of a ­fashion ­designers and architects, choreographers, writers and product ­designers to see things from the perspective of the other disciplines represented at the table. Getting designers to overcome their prejudice towards so-called ‘non-creatives’ is as difficult as getting scientists to take designers ­seriously because of their inability to understand mathematics. Slowly the groups would start to understand the creativity in all of the different disciplines and when this would happen we had magic. When it didn’t happen we ended up with hell! We always made sure not to have too many of the same kind of people in a team. And we were very strict on gender balance!



Probes projects never started with a brief – rather we defined a ’space’ to look at – the future of food, transformable space, emotional sensing, bio-remediation, future cities etc. Not having a brief helped generate conversation, argument and discussion and gradually a lot of questions started to emerge. For us, any subject that has a prescribed solution before you start is a waste of time, as answering a brief in design research results in the elimination of huge swathes of possible solutions. Design processes are often about problem-solving and that’s the beginning and end of it, because the minute you start with that, everybody has the route to the solution. But if you want to work on innovation and come up with new systems and new approaches, new genres, we first and foremost have to say, okay, we will deal with the problem later on. Half the time the focus in innovation is on making a product more powerful, or cheaper, or more robust every time, but then you’re never going to stop and think “is there another way to do this, can we actually dispense with this thing altogether’? In a big company where there’s innovation going on, there’s often a lot of different departments looking at the issues in different ways. For example we’d be looking at health, and would create a set of concepts. The very notion of the technique in which this is done is to provoke the business department to think about business areas to grow and also to provoke the design group to think about new ideas. That is where your likely to hit a barrier, this because the business was not involved in the concept creation process. Another way of thinking about ways to overcome this is to engage the business group, R&D, marketing and design so everybody is aligned... but you run the risk of too many cooks and the whole thing being flattened, because you don’t have that fresh perspective. That wasn’t the way we used to work. We were given the space where we could really just provoke. We did, however, always keep in mind a line of sight to the business department.


You mentioned you were given room to do what you did. Do you have any guidelines or points of what needs to be in place, of what a company needs to offer the designer? Karianne Rygh (KR):

Like I mentioned first and foremost, always keep in mind a line of sight to the business; secondly, we always want the design language to be ‘not contemporary’ in anyway. We also aimed to demonstrate



‘thought leadership’ and to experiment in with the design process itself. Lastly, all the work should be based on what was possible technically in the future, so in other words no ‘science fiction’. One of the main things we believe in is the catalytic effect of individuals. But the only way you can empower people to play a catalytic role is by removing the walls. We have to distinguish between incremental innovation which hardly moves innovation forward from innovation that exposes new possibilities in the peripheral vision. Both are important but often get confused. Half of the function of Probes was to put things into people’s faces thr ough design provocation and to take a very critical look at a technical or product direction with the purpose of finding alternatives. As Muhamed Ali said: aim for the stars, you will reach the top floor, reach for the top floor, you will end up in the basement. CvH:

JM: Making has been instrumental with what we have done from the be-

ginning. What we’ve done is demonstrate: we spread our work around the space as much into the lobby, everywhere you can… We would physically make things on the top floor of Witte Dame [the Probes’ former location in Eindhoven, ed.], where we had our studio or workshop, where we would make stuff. People would love to come there: the PR department would bring people by. You could show what you were making, people could experience it. If we were messing about with food, there was stuff that you could try out. Making is really crucial. As Jonathan Ive said – he created a ripple in the design world – “in design schools, nobody makes things anymore.” We were very enthusiastic to make tangible demonstrators of things with engineers: we would make the crudest of mock-ups from remnants of previous projects. Funnily, the people that were inspired the most were the researchers… CvH: Design is a strategic capability. As I already mentioned, we don’t see ourselves as conventional designers. What we have concentrated on is approaching this from two different angles. Firstly, at Philips they were unique in publishing this and putting it in the public domain. On the other hand we built these strategy models to look at developing new product eco-systems, new technologies and potential areas of new business. The point to being provocative was to create discussion and debate with a view to finding better solutions while testing the probable future shifts in the concerns, needs and desires of the people we design for. 16



Making Research Tangible Karianne Rygh

In order to research how networked collaboration can lead to new innovative opportunities, the Readership in Strategic Creativity collaborated with the printer company Océ – A Canon Company, in the networked collaboration project, Super-Maker, between the PSS101 (led by Professor Pieter Jan Stappers and Dr Ingrid Mulder, TU Delft) and the CASD (led by Dr Giulia Calabretta, TU Delft) research projects. The project was set up to explore how the new elevated printing technology of Océ could be applied in the field of architecture, as this type of printing revolves around the large-scale printing of flat surfaces. The aim was to investigate how the creative industries in general could contribute to determining new applications and markets for this innovative technology. To understand what elevated printing is, imagine adding an extra dimension to designs by printing multiple layers of ink up to five millimeters thick onto a surface. The parameters of this technique are in constant flux as the technology is constantly developing. You can create elevated designs which will be printed in full color and high resolution on flat and rigid media. The basis of the research was that to print elevated, the technology itself is so advanced that a simple user manual doesn’t suffice in covering its complexity. Furthermore, when faced with an endless number of possibilities (as is the case with most 3D fabrication technology), the ideation process for clients presents an even greater challenge. Therefore – even for creative professionals – it has proven to be difficult knowing where to begin with implementing and creating new ideas for how to use this technology. How, instead, can the technology be more easily understood and used by clients, and how can clients be facilitated in creating their own ideas and concepts for this sort of printing? These were questions that I defined within the research in order to position my contributions as a designer in a way that would create added value to elevated printing within Océ. ­ In addition, I questioned what the possibilities were within this type of printing in regards to architectural construction materials; what role 19

it plays within the scope of 3D fabrication and how we could define concrete new applications within architecture. A business-to-customer application of elevated printing (an elevated printing shop) had previously been piloted by Océ, leading the company to wish to explore business to business applications within the creative fields, choosing architecture as a starting point. In order to get immersed in the topic at hand, the project was initiated by a kick-off in Tokyo, where the future of fabrication services is already happening. The Readership in Strategic Creativity was invited to Keio University and given an introduction into how 3D fabrication has been integrated in the city centre by Assistant Professor Daijiro Mizuno (page 45). Mizuno has been researching the integration of FabLabs into society and how FabLabs could help democratise tools and techniques needed to (economically) empower those who wish to market a new or existing skill. This in turn made me question what businesses can learn from the development and implementation of FabLabs, especially in relation to the collaboration between stakeholders to develop new ideas and approaches. In Shibuya, the center of Tokyo, we witnessed how FabLabs had been integrated through FabCafés where technology companies were using the FabLabs as a test bed for their products; we observed how makers interacted with the devices while enjoying coffee. We visited department stores such as Muji, where there was a customisation department called MujiLoft where consumers could personally tailor Muji products. Furthermore, the store made it possible for consumers to sell their own customised Muji products within the same shop, giving the company great insights into what customers want, ultimately co-creating end products with their consumers. In addition to the maker-spaces and possibilities for customisation, we also observed that there were many material suppliers within the multitude of department stores, catering to the rise of these ‘semi-professionals’. These insights lead to questions in regards to what the semi-professional sector can mean for business innovation, and how it indicates that consumers want more than just an end product, they wish to be a part of the experience. “The industrial era was mainly about designing products for the masses; in the post-industrial digital era, the masses themselves are seizing the chance to design, manufacture and distribute products.” [1]. 20

FabCafe and customization in Muji Department store, Tokyo

Following the kick-off in Tokyo, we were introduced to the design process and specifications of elevated printing at Océ, located in Venlo. The starting point of the research was to master and explore the elevated printing design process and design ‘minimum viable products’ [3] (which were ‘minimum viable elevated samples’ in this case) to show architecture studios in order to collect ‘validated learning’ about potential customers and possible applications of elevated printing. As a context for the research, the city of Almere was chosen due to it being a completely new city in the process of being built. In Almere the ‘Wilde Wonen’ concept of building one’s own dream house has supported the idea that a city is built from a co-creative relationship between house owner and architect. “There is no logic that can be superimposed on the city; people make it, and it is to them, not buildings, that we must fit our plans.” [2] More information on the research conducted in connection to Almere can be found in the chapter on page 31. 21

Workshop at DAE with students: What can businesses learn from FabLabs and how can FabLabs be integrated into a community?


Interviews with Architecture & Design studios: (from top to bottom) CC Studios, Marcel Wanders studio and Next Architects.


In order to connect the development of 3D fabrication to the c­ ontext of architecture, I started making the research tangible by using a ‘thinking-through-making’ approach, asking how can we support home-owners in their role as ‘semi-professionals’ designing and ­directing how their home could be customised. I approached e­ levated printing with the perspective of a product designer, defining the unique qualities of elevated printing that set it apart from other 3D fabrication technologies. Defining directions such as ‘real-life Photoshop’, printing as repair for damaged buildings, replicating materials, producing intricate detailing not possible with other production techniques, and investigating the use of optical illusions to alter our perception of scale, I produced tangible outcomes to document each research path. The outcomes were compiled into an archive of elevated printing explorations as a sample book to show potential clients, and by interviewing architecture and design studios such as Marcel Wanders Studio, CC Studios and Next architects, and asking them how this technology could be utilised in their practice. The first samples were developed according to my own assumptions of what architects would be inspired by seeing. Following each interview, I designed a new batch of elevated samples that embedded the new insights and suggestions of the architects that were interviewed, which became tangible summaries of the meetings. Certain architects wished to see items such as signage on flooring, or detailing on leather or even the elevated print being used in a mold for concrete. In response, the requested elevated samples above were designed and produced; by making the insights tangible, it facilitated the communication of the research results of the meeting as well as inspired new elevated printing directions for exploration. For instance, one architect wished to see something completely new, something he had never seen before in real life. This prompted me to search for digitally made textures (such as moon rocks, or alien skin) that only existed as 3D computer renders. This translation from insight to tangible outcome triggered a discovery that many of the relevant materials I found were digitally 3D rendered materials made by gaming developers – and that digital textures could be scaled to architecture. This led to the realisation that gaming developers actually have a lot to offer when it comes to the design process of new elevated printing textures, opening up 24

the possibility for gaming developers to become potential new stake­ holders in elevated printing services. This is a great insight for the future of elevated printing, and one that emerged from the interaction of experts within the creative field I was investigating, combined with the ‘making process’ of translating new insights into objects, In my opinion, this outcome would not have come about through other design research methods. Translating discoveries into tangible forms creates the opportunity for findings to be understood and shared in new ways, triggering conversation on new topics. The research therefore took the direction of developing things to be understood rather than finalised prototypes to be used as tangible tools in co-creation workshops with experts. This development lead to the creation of the Super-Maker workshop methodology, which is further explained on page 31.

References [1] [2] [3]

Van Abel, B, Evers, L, Klaassen, R. Open Design Now; Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive. BIS publishers, Amsterdam, 2011. Jacobs, J. The Death and Life Of Great American Cities. Random House, New York, 1993 [1961]. Ries, E. The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. Crown Publishing, New York, 2011.


Interviews were conducted with Research Associate Cynthia Hathaway. 25

Clemens Weijkamp (OcĂŠ) explaining the elevated design process during a Super-Maker workshop.


Prototyping with Experts A conversation between Clemens Weijkamp, Senior Technical Specialist at Océ - A ­Canon Company, working with elevated printing, and Research Associate Karianne Rygh.

Exploring new applications of elevated printing using a ‘thinking-through-making’ approach, required prototyping using both new methods and new materials. In order to prototype in this way, it was crucial to have a close collaboration with the elevated printing experts at Océ - A Canon Company. Although not an initial project partner of Super-Maker, Clemens Weijkamp immediately became embedded as a key stakeholder within the Super-Maker research project, when he started assisting us with our first prototype. Throughout the following conversation we reflect upon this collaboration and discuss the role of the designer in relation to the innovative elevated printing technology. Karianne (KR): To start off, what is elevated printing and how would you describe it to someone who has never seen it before?

It’s the next wave of printing with an extra dimension. With a normal print, the outcome is flat, but with elevated printing you now have a relief surface. It is best understood when it’s seen, so I usually take printed examples with me to show clients. You can try to describe it in words or in a nice presentation etc. but upon seeing the samples, it immediately becomes clear. You need to touch it to fully understand it, to see and touch the surfaces and experience how the light affects the print.

Clemens (CW):

KR: How

did the elevated printing come about in the first place and did this process differ from the development of other printers?

Oh, certainly. The funny thing is I have spoken to a lot of people who have been involved at some point and everyone claims they were the inventor of elevated printing. And I always say it was not me! It was basically a Friday afternoon looking at the Océ ColorWave 600® (the Océ TonerPearl® printer) that was the start of it. One of our colleagues in France was looking at the waste ink tray and wondered if you could



build things with that and furthermore, could we do that in the print ­itself? In Venlo a colleague did the same using an UV curable ink printer for a customer that wanted a bit of a relief in the print. Someone questioned whether or not it would be possible to put several ink layers on top of each other. So my colleague did it one Friday afternoon, and it was very successful. This was the start of elevated printing. I could imagine that for ideas to come about in this way, there has to be an environment there ready to receive them as well, and I can imagine that probably in some companies, it’s not possible to do this process, or that these things don’t happen because the company is too structured. KR:

CW: Perhaps that is the good thing about Océ. Especially a few years ago

it was clear that it should move into other directions, including generating products in a quicker way. We experienced a ‘trauma’ with our first colour copier. It was a huge investment, it took an awful lot of years, and in the end we discovered that our customers wanted something different. So we never made money with it. From a process point of view, we were looking for quicker ways to learn if the market is ready for this type of product, and what are the requirements from the market; this is what agile development programs are for. And at the same time, we need to move to new markets if we want to survive in future. KR: What has your direct role been then with this type of printing, or have there perhaps been several roles? CW: My background is actually in chemistry, and I was brought into this

project to resolve issues with adhesion of the print. On the job, they discovered that I had Photoshop skills, that I could make designs and could contribute all kinds of ideas. So I was responsible for the printing, but what I also discovered was that in addition to producing the actual print, you also need to guide the designers. KR: That brings me to the topic of the maker. Have you experimented with the machine and found your own way of working with it? It’s my impression that you have gone above and beyond the call of duty to make the prototyping for this project possible.


Oh yes. That is certainly true, the basics are in the machine and in the software, but if you understand these basics – that there are back doors – you can do much more. It was funny, in the beginning we said you could only print on rigid materials and then you came up with the leather and the other request, and then we tried, and we made it all the same thickness and printed it all at once to test the different materials. We did the same with the students’ samples, and of course it’s a test, and it doesn’t always work out. It was pretty simple – no guarantees. And that is of course very different from what we do with real customers; the prints need to be safe.


Final question, in regards to the future of elevated printing and knowing very well what it can do, where do you see this printing going? KR:

I think in the end it will be something the same as when you go from black and white printing to colour printing, and now in a few years you will have the opportunity to use elevated printing. If we invest in this technology we can increase the speed and cut the costs, which will make this printing available to far more people and that also changes the future of it. I definitely see the elevated printing as adding something extra to a normal print – a tactile and new way to really ‘see’ the content by experiencing it through touching and interacting with it.



Elevated Printing Pioneers from the first Super-Maker workshop, Almere.


Super-Making Karianne Rygh

Through a ‘thinking-through-making’ approach, I have used my ­position as a research associate at Design Academy Eindhoven within CRISP to investigate how the use of tangible tools can foster collaborations within complex networks by making networks more understandable for all stakeholders operating within them. In collaboration with partner company Océ – A Canon Company, I have researched what role the creative industries can play in determining new applications of Océ’s innovative elevated printing in the field of architecture. As an outcome, together with the research team, I have developed ­Super-Maker, a workshop methodology bridging the innovation gap ­between new technology and client or end-user operating it, as a means to also create a more participatory stakeholder network. The research insights resulting from the interviews with architects and designers (described on page 19), although valuable, produced more repeated responses that didn’t necessarily generate the new knowledge we were really looking for in this project. By using the research gained through my own elevated printing experience, I decided to explore how the discussion could be brought to a new level; less-generalised and of more specific interest to each creative professional, by designing a stakeholder co-creation methodology called the Super-Maker. Taking inspiration from the maker environment in FabLabs as mentioned earlier in the publication (page 9), the Super-Maker is a framed environment, structured to gather all relevant stakeholders and experts, (in this case architects, designers, researchers and Océ printing and business experts) in co-creation sessions producing tangible representations of the discussions and ideas that are triggered through workshop ­activities. Abstract design ideas are not always easily understood by the decision-making departments of larger companies. Translating these ideas into business language can be a difficult hurdle to overcome, requiring business experts to also be involved in the research process. I felt one possible way to bridge this gap was to invite all stakeholders to experi31

ence, in person, the research advancements and explore the findings through tangible means. Instead of single-handedly attempting to identify possible applications of elevated printing, I chose to broaden the scope of gaining insights by inviting various stakeholders – architects from Almere we had already been in touch with and technicians from Océ – to two Super-Maker workshops. Here they contributed to, and we harnessed, the magnitude of expertise, in regards to what role 3D fabrication could play in architecture. Through the workshop, the architects were introduced to the background of the research that had been conducted in the Super-Maker project, they were taught the elevated printing design process and also shown the archive of elevated printing samples, representing the various tracks of research that had already been conducted. The aim was to explore how elevated printing could be used in their practice, what the role of the architect would be and how much 3D fabrication adds to their designed outcomes. Several project partners facilitated these workshops ranging from technicians from Océ to other project partners in CRISP, as well the Strategic Creativity Readership, such as Bas Raijmakers and Daniëlle Arets (stimulating discussion and participation amongst stakeholders during workshops, debating the role of elevated printing), Cynthia Hathaway (presenting the research that had been conducted on elevated printing to use as a starting point and designing the workshop activities) and Mikaela Steby Stenfalk (supporting the teaching of the elevated printing design process and explaining various approaches to the digital tools). This co-ordination of roles and activities, as well as choosing the right participants and the right topics to discuss, was orchestrated by the designer (Research Associate) in collaboration­­ with Océ. The presentation of research combined with the elevated printing samples (described on page 37) provided ample stimulus for conversation, initiating co-creation through workshop activities and ideation. As a result, new elevated printing samples were designed and produced based on the conversations and ideation of participants, serving as tangible triggers for discussion in the following Super-Maker workshops. The participants thereby became extensions of the designers’ more strategic roles, (such as visualiser, connector and instigator, Value Pursuit, 32

2014) by the fact that they were visualising their own discoveries and using these to communicate with their individual co-workers or clients. “With these [elevated printing] samples I can create new business and also feel that I am on top of new advancements. I can show people that I know things. It’s good to be on top of new technology to gain new clients and also show existing ones that I am on top of things. It shows that I am curious about new developments.” Jan Eric Kooij, participant in Almere Super-Maker workshop 2014. Understanding stakeholders’ ideas and point of view, and embedding these understandings and insights in tangible conversation pieces contributed to guiding new ideas through an organisation. It is often difficult to get people on board when they are neither fully informed nor have a proper understanding of the concept in question. Embodying the explorations and research in tangible objects have contributed to triggering discussion and dialogue with relevant stakeholders within Océ, allowing them to communicate with one another in new ways. “I have to know the specifics of the print before I show it to others. We are not experts until we know how it is made. Having a sample book of elevated ­printing samples right now, we can just show them. If we make them, then we are ­experts.” Philip van Ekeren, graphic designer at Super-Maker meeting #2, Almere. In addition to the two expert Super-Maker workshops conducted in Almere, a collaboration with students from Design Academy Eindhoven was initiated through a five-week Super-Maker workshop (see also page 53). This workshop, or Design Research Space, explored how elevated printing could be experienced in 3D form, building on the existing research that had already been compiled on elevated printing. The design brief for the students was to investigate how elevated printing could be experienced in a new way, and create conversation pieces for the upcoming Dutch Design Week 2014 exhibition. The aim was to create an exhibition within the arena of the creative professionals in order to spark interest amongst potential clients of elevated printing. The students participated in co-creating the exhibition, carefully reflecting over how their tangible research fit in and built upon existing research. The result was a timeline, branching out according to different directions of exploration showcasing that design research 33

is non-linear and can lead to open-ended directions – leading to new opportunities. The creation of the timeline became an analysis in itself, leading to new insights on how we could understand the technology by developing categories of ideas and samples that each pointed in different directions for possible applications. The open-ended directions indicated where new collaborations could be initiated between professionals and industry. The tangible conversation triggers within the exhibition were co-created on the basis of insights from interviews and my own research, by expert architects and designers in conversation with each other, by previous Research Associate Cynthia Hathaway, Research assistant Mikaela Steby Stenfalk, and by students reimagining what the existing research combined with their ideas could mean for the future of elevated printing. The exhibition attracted new potential clients, appealing to creatives within their own arena – as it was positioned within the Dutch Design Week Graduation Galleries at the Design Academy, instead of the usual technological showroom for companies showcasing new advancements in technology. When aiming for a collaboration with the creative industries, it is important to meet creative professionals within their own networks in order to have the opportunity of initiating fruitful discussions leading to new applications. In addition, the exhibition also communicated the research to internal and external stakeholders of Océ, gaining support and interest for our explorations and role of elevated printing. The items on display also brought technicians, business professionals and directors from Océ into a radio discussion, as Emma Radio (run by students of Design Academy Eindhoven) was hosting their daily radio conversations in the same space as the exhibition, referred to on page 37. Although the exhibition captured the attention of both internal stakeholders within Océ and potential new external partners, it could have reached further if the branding and promotion of the industry partner Océ had been somewhat amplified. Getting all relevant stakeholders on board in such a project to secure public promotion is a difficult task. As shifts happen within project directions and also in organisational structure within larger companies, it’s a challenge to sufficiently inform every internal stakeholder of the progress and content of a new proposal. Due to the dynamic shifts within the company, key internal stakeholders had unintentionally been left out and not thoroughly 34

informed about the Super-Maker developments. It’s not possible to endorse something unknown, and the absence of extra backing of the company was felt during the exhibition. This raises questions as to how far the role of the designer should extend in this sort of collaboration. How can a designer stay on top of internal shifts within the organisational and business structure of projects, when this information is not always communicated to the designer? Who within the company supports the designer in this context? Too often overlooked, these factors determine how successful the outcome of such a research project can be and is important to evaluate and take into account. A further elaboration on this topic and its implications for the design field can be found on page 9.

Super-Maker workshop combining experts within architecture and design, as well as expert technicians from OcĂŠ, using tangible samples as triggers for ideation and discussion.



A Design-Driven Approach to Innovation Transcript of a radio conversation led by Bas Raijmakers (Reader Strategic Creativity, Design Academy Eindhoven - DAE), between Merijn Neeleman (head of Design, Océ – A Canon Company), Giulia Calabretta (project leader of CASD – part of CRISP – TU Delft), Allard Roeterink (tutor, DAE), Karianne Rygh (Research Associate, DAE) and DAE students (Eric Barendse, Josephine Combe, Kumi Oda, Aneta Železníková).

During Dutch Design Week 2014, the Super-Maker design research project was exhibited as a part of the graduation show at Design Academy Eindhoven. Within the exhibition space, Emma Radio (a publicly broadcasted radio show run by DAE students), set up a ‘walkin’ studio to capture discussions and reflections from both exhibitors and visitors. Project participants of the Super-Maker were invited in to elaborate on what a design-driven approach to innovation can mean for a company such as Océ. Through the research carried out by CRISP project partners, researchers have found that when it comes to business innovation, companies often find themselves in a position where they need to involve more partners than they are accustomed to as the service solutions they are developing are too complex for their company to develop alone. This is especially the case for companies offering technology still in a pre-competitive stage, where it’s not exactly clear how the technology can be used and what the value for business is, or how companies can collaborate with creatives in such a process and how designers can play a meaningful role. Karianne, we are here in the space of the Graduation Galleries of the Design Academy and you have laid out a very long table here with examples of this elevated printing. Can you explain a little bit what can be seen here?

Bas Raijmakers (BR):

What we are showing here is the evolution of our research and the experimentation that has been done along the way. In the beginning, at the very start of the tables, you will see that we have defined four different directions of this exploration and then created more samples and outcomes based on those. But as you can see on the tables, these lines that you can follow are not linear; they branch out. As

Karianne Rygh (KR):


we have come across interesting possibilities with elevated printing, we have left them as open-ends because they point to new opportunities that can be followed up later. By creating all of these different samples, our aim in the beginning was to go to architects to see if they validated the proposed applications within architecture. But what we came to find was that we heard the same answers all the time, and although they were very interesting, we wanted to go further. So what you can see on the tables here is the further exploration where we’ve involved experts in making new samples. We have involved architects, designers and also students from the Design Academy. There are now new branches and some of them are very much focussed on experiencing the elevated printing, as when you move it around or see it from a different perspective you get different effects as the elevation cancels out the spacing in between. Or, elevations that act as pixels have several colours so that the colour changes when you walk past. You can see the whole development, not final outcomes, but rather conversation pieces to trigger discussion to lead to new applications. BR: So, Merijn, you have seen the whole timeline. What was your experi-

ence seeing everything organised like this? Merijn Neeleman (MN): This is very impressive. The way it’s presented is a very good way to show that this is a search. I think it’s important to realise that we are in the beginning of this, because it always takes a lot of experimenting, energy and fun to grasp what would be a future market. I think this is a very promising and good start, so I’m very happy. More in general, the value designers can bring in finding these new markets is of very big importance, and this shows the capabilities quite well.

It’s nice you bring that up, because it’s what I would like to go towards: what is the value of designers in this early work? Designers are usually more traditionally in a role where they are given a brief to make something specific and solve a problem or something concrete like that. But here it looks like a very different role.


MN: Yes, and I think that is a better definition of the design role actually.

So the first car was a horse carriage without a horse, and the first wireless phone was a phone without a wire, and for us a mobile phone was a wireless phone with a thicker antenna for a different network. So products start often as something that is looking at the past, and only the 38

second product is the breakthrough to a large audience. The difference is made by understanding. So not bringing the technology to the people, but adding value and real user needs for the people. And real user needs can only be competitive if they are new fresh, surprising, and […] finding user needs is a very complex, sensitive, fuzzy process that designers with a well-developed right brain can play an important role in. So I don’t see a designer as someone who makes things beautiful. They make the difference between the product and the technology and the value; and this value finding is a clear example. […] We make printers, and we find a new technology, so what if we just bring it to the market?I It will be like the horse carriage without the horse. How do you turn this into something of which people will say, “yes this is a product and I understand it” and also a big market understands it? And with that, we are still between the horse carriage and the car exploring. So I would like to introduce you into the conversation Giulia, because this is clearly about the situations that you study in your work. What is your view on the role of the designer in this project?


Giulia Calabretta (GC): Two

things impress me in this project and they are confirmed by other research I do. First of all, designers help a company finding users that perhaps before were not in the spotlight of the company. So at the beginning Océ didn’t think about doing a technology for architects; that is a particular area of the market that was actually discovered through the discussion they had with designers. And then what also happens quite often when companies start saying that they integrate the users’ perspective, they do that at the beginning when they declare it, but then they forget it. When designers are there they are exactly reminding the rest of the stakeholders that the users’ perspective should be taken into account continuously, so they are really the advocates of the users in every meeting: “but remember that your user said they didn’t like that and they would do this.”

There is a strong recognition also about the forgetting part and I would like to comment on that. So what you see, to make successful products you need three perspectives: technology perspective what are the possibilities; user perspective; and business perspectives, market relevance – can we make money? Like Nokia did in one; they made the step from mobile phone to real products. Because they understand that you don’t need an antenna and then it fits in your pocket, and the



screen should be bigger than the buttons. Nokia made a fortune and now they are gone. They forgot. And what happens, the business people perceive themselves as the only ones that make money. The technology people are after a while thousands of people, because there is a lot of work to do and then there is a handful of designers that should keep the user perspective in. And that’s what happens in industry and you can risk that this drifts away from attention. […] So I think it’s a very important remark that was made. Treasure that, and you don’t need thousands of designers, but make sure that this always gets attention. So Karianne, what is your view on what is the role of the designer in that kind of minority position that we just discussed here? Because you were in that position as well in the context of Océ, but at DAE you are not; so how was it to be in that position?


It was quite interesting having to all the time question myself in what role I should take on because in these types of situation it’s not entirely clear for the designer what role they should take on and it’s not entirely clear for the company what role they should take you in as. And it was quite interesting working on such a project like the elevated printing where that’s a process, and as a designer I could go on and make something great out of that. But I had to question, myself, what could I do as a designer to create the most opportunities for this technology and make that visible to everyone? So that’s what I went on to do by creating the Super-Maker. We very much wanted to have a FabLab environment where we could just put the printer in and have other 3D fabrication technologies there as well. But when we are dealing with technology that is also pre-market. It’s very difficult to do that. So what we’ve tried to do is that we’ve made the Super-Maker where we are discussing the technology without the technology being present. And we do that through design. We design tangible objects that people can touch, feel and discuss, and we get the experts involved in creating the new orders for the new meetings. So the experts are creating their own tools for the next meetings and the next meetings. And by doing that, I was facilitating the discussions, and creating activities that would produce these orders, but also in the beginning acting as a product designer really investigating the technology. So it’s a range of different roles. KR:

Giulia, we discuss that it’s not just about the things we make but the environments we create around them. I think this is the core focus of



the larger CRISP programme. Perhaps you can explain a bit more of that context? GC: The aim of this research programme is looking at the role of designers in creative industry not only as the designers of new products and services, but actually also as important role players in the innovation strategy around Product Service Systems. So, just like what is happening in this project, designers shouldn’t only design the PSS but actually also help the company find business opportunities around it. And there is limited knowledge about what additional skills designers need to play that role, and this is exactly what Karianne said earlier on: “In the beginning I didn’t know how to help the company and what skills to use”. So what we are trying to do is discover what these skills are and what are these roles that designers can play. And this project gives us a great opportunity to discover this, because as researchers we can observe what designers can do in addition to designing the PSS. And there are many things being discovered there. Dialogue about S ­ uper-Maker is not only between the designers and potential users of the technology but also with other stakeholders, internal actors in Océ… it’s a broad discussion that creates ownership of the project. Business innovation is something very scary! The company starts doing something new that they were never doing before. If the business innovators are involved hands-on, and conversation-wise, and see what can be done with the technology, perhaps they lower their resistance. And perhaps they can see that business innovation can be less scary. BR: So have you experienced any of this inside Océ, Merijn? MN: Yes of course! So I like the word ‘ownership’ and I also understand a bit that it might be scary to use the word ‘business’, because they have a different perspective and they don’t always value it. But opening the gates towards new markets requires experimentation, which ­happens a lot at Océ, and I recognise that this was in close collaboration with more people at Océ, who were also in-depth experimenting with the technology. So it’s not a request to generate more business; to ­experiment and contribute to this ownership begin to be taken to a new level. BR: I think we have identified that as well in the project, I think we call it

the power of ‘dropping something on the table’. Because then you can 41

discuss what is on the table, and disagree, and have a more focussed conversation than just having the idea and not making it. MN: And that has the highest return of investment of all activities within

the company because it’s a very small investment to bring this visualisation. And what sometimes industry risks doing is already taking the step to make a complete product that is already made and launched, but then it turns out that it’s an unfinished product, and that you build, like, half-houses and ask people to live in them.


Dutch Design Week 2014 Super-Maker exhibit, showcasing a timeline of research contributed by research associates, creative professionals and students of DAE.


Daijiro Mizuno hosting workshop at DAE on FabLabs & business.


Orchestration in Design Bas Raijmakers

We start this conversation with Daijiro Mizuno on the various roles designers can employ in multi-stakeholder collaborations, with a topic that is closely linked to his design practice: orchestration. This theme was further defined in the final year of CRISP. [in my practice] I’ve been very familiar with the open design movement, therefore the term ‘orchestration’ wasn’t new to me. The very first time the term orchestration or orchestra in design came up was in the book ‘Open Design Now’, published in 2011[1]. One of the chapters was called ‘orchestral manoeuvres in design’. Another ‘orchestration’ I recently came across was in a lecture at IDEO Tokyo by Jane Fulton Suri, Chief Creative Officer at IDEO. She elaborated on her current thinking, ‘symbiotic design’. She brought up a funny example of a fungus-growing ant. The ants cultivate fungus in the nest. As the fungus grows, ants can eat it, but if the ants eat it all, there wouldn’t be any fungus left to eat, so they are interdependent. There is a mutualism between the ants and the fungus. Through that example Jane tried to explain the complexity of the actor networks. These networks are very hard to explore for only the benefit of a company. The way she explained this ‘orchestra in design’, was an important link to me, which led to my latest project ‘Inclusive Digital Fabrication’. Daijiro Mizuno (DM):

Currently I am working with a care home, where there are many semi-professionals with physical or mental impairments. They have been practicing arts and crafts activities for some time to generate a bit of income. The Japanese government is pushing care homes to generate income, rather than relying on money from the government. Care homes nation-wide are trying to become micro-entrepreneurs. That’s creating major difficulties, since the staff can’t really figure out what to do. Since 2007 I have been working with a care home on a project called ‘Able Art Company’. This is an art gallery, which searches for manufacturers to come up with new products. Together we want to figure out how to use the drawings from the residents on bags, shoes, handkerchiefs, etc. I soon realised that the benefits and opportunities 45



internet-based tactical design

informal / situated learning based

meta designer

savage designer

(a designer who shapes design environment)



conventional art&design education based

design thinking-based strategic design


service designer (a designer who facilitates the holistic design)






– low quality design – QOL oriented – community-generated value


– high quality design – business oriented – globally generated value



– genius

– group

– no methodologies

– methodogies

– star-designer

– anonymous


may be limited in the traditional market structure. But in the context of digital fabrication, you can actually upload the finished product and the data for designers to appropriate and pay a licensing fee. In order to optimise the production and consumption, you really need to set up a type of new business or service model.” Bas Raijmakers (BR): “How would you describe your role in this network?”

“Within this network I play a role of facilitator (to come up with how these designers with impairments can do things in the way they like), sometimes ethnographer, and then I come up with the design, so I become product or fashion designer, and I also play the role of a business manager. I play different roles depending on the situation. I cannot fully predict what I am doing; I build bridges between different sectors.”


“You sent me a diagram (see previous page) and the roles you just described almost c­ overs that whole diagram. How did you come up with it?”


“The diagram is based on the work of several people. One is a business strategist or strategic designer at ZIBA design, Hideshi ­Hamaguchi. He talks about a new role of design in the strategic domain. He was trying to explain how designers, or design firms, are currently playing a bigger role in the US than before. The other person was a director of a design firm called Team Lab, Toshiyuki Inoko, in Tokyo. He introduced global, high-quality production with low community factor, and local production with low-quality but with community factor. On the one hand you’ll have the super expensive fashion brand, and on the other hand is the semi-professional, who makes handmade garments and sells them in the local market, who might have many followers who love to see his or her work; this may be called craft. According to his argument, these sectors won’t cross each other, they will keep running in parallel. They won’t merge, they’re two different strands.


Now we are seeing more people who are producing low-quality, handmade goods and sell them at places like Maker Faire or on Etsy, instead of the low-priced stuff that you find on the high street. The main difference is that you want to ‘back’, or support those designers. Therefore the upper half of the diagram is termed as community-driven value gen48

eration, rather than the lower part, where the customer is creating the value. These are two different co-created values: one by the customer, one by the community. In the digital fabrication community the user is in part designer (sort of prosumer) who takes part in the value creation.” “Then the other axis in this diagram is far and fast. That was driven by my colleague, Dominick Chen. He came up with the matrix based on ‘far / fast / alone / team’, which he based on the African proverb: ‘if you want to go fast, go alone, if you want to go far, go as a team’. He was trying to explain the shift from Do-It-Yourself, to Do-It-With-Others.” “You distinguish four designers, or design activities perhaps. The bottom left corner – what you call designer – that’s the more traditional role or image of a designer, isn’t it?”


“This is where many of the existing designers are at the moment. That’s where the star-architects, star-designers are. Also on that side, but on the community side, there is the savage designer. That’s a term I came up with, so it’s not a well-known term. Savage: the word itself came from Lévi-Strauss’s work ‘The Savage Mind’ [2]. Against the conventional designer, the savage designer is someone who actually makes and designs things, but they are often not trained formally to be a professional designer. The green grocer for instance, makes tables to sell vegetables, or your mum makes things to adjust the height of a chair. They make small adaptations to what the professional designer does for industry; savage designers do it as a way of life. I met many savage ­designers in the care home, but they never have a chance to sell their work or exhibit. They often do not have the opportunity to disseminate their works, like professionals do.


Though, you can also find savage designers in large companies, professional designers playing a dual role. At Google they have a 20% rule: 80% you work for Google, 20% on something completely different. That time can be used to come up with personal projects. Sometimes that may be a great seed for user innovation or innovation in general. Even in a big company like Sony, these designers are emerging. Sometimes professionals and savage designers merge. I think the main difference between the two is motivation. Savage designers do not work for the money or social status, but they really have the motivation to make new stuff. On the one hand you have designers within the compa49

ny who, apart from their company duties, develop their own projects, which benefits the company in the end. On the other hand, you have designers outside the company who bring interesting insights to the company. For instance the masking tape scenario. There was a group of housewives who really loved the colour of masking tape. Masking tape used to be colourful for painters not to forget to remove it. The housewives started playing with the tapes to decorate things and created a decoration masking tape toolkit, ‘how-to’ books and so on. They approached masking tape manufacturers to create more colours. One company decided to work with them. They ended up not selling their goods [known as washi tape] in the home centre (hardware or DIY store), but in stationery shops. They sold really well and over five years the market grew enormously. That company now sells 15 to 20% of the goods through the stationery store for decoration purposes, rather than industrial purposes.” “The right side of the diagram is the collective side. This bottom right corner, design-thinking, strategic design, service designer and facilitator are pretty clear roles. But it might be nice to talk about the meta-designer, who we have in the top right corner.”


“The job of the meta designer is to shape the design environment for savage designers. You need to be aware of the context in which the savage designers are making: what kind of tools they need, what kind of information they need or what kind of motivation they have.”


“I can recognise that the way we understand orchestration is also visible in the navigating and steering of the process. So, if we talk about orchestration, would you say that is firmly in the corner of the meta-designer – as the person who deals with that most, with the biggest part of a network?”


“Just like the fungus-growing-ant, in a network everyone is interdependent, based on their own motivations and benefits. You can’t just push one benefit for the sake of another. It’s really important that you really care for each other’s motivation, consider the wider stakeholder network integral to the eco-system. That to me is the interesting bit of orchestration and orchestral manoeuvres in design.”



References: [1] Bas van Abel, Lucas Evers, Roel Klaassen, Peter Troxler. Open Design Now. (N.d.) Retrieved July 25, 2015 from [2] Lévi-Strauss, C. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1966 [1962]. 51

Design Research Space at DAE.


Challenging the machine Report of an intense Design Research Space Allard Roeterink

Every CRISP Research Associate works with a group of DAE students at some stage of their design research project, in what we call a Design Research Space (DRS). Ten students from the full range of course years participated in an extra-curricular five-week (in reality, five full Wednesdays) programme, set up jointly by Karianne Rygh, Associate Reader Danielle Arets and myself, tutor at the LAB department. It proved to be a rather ambitious programme with high expectations, from Océ - A Canon Company, the Design Academy and the students themselves. In LAB2 where I teach at Design Academy Eindhoven, students are asked to explore their fascinations with hands-on experiments. And that’s exactly what we asked of the students in this exciting Design Research Space. When I was first told about a certain elevated printing technique, I imagined a 3D printer with height limitations. After seeing some elevated print samples, I immediately understood that it would be wonderful for students to research this promising new technology.

Briefing and debriefing

Research Associate Karianne Rygh gave a brief for the end-result: to create a conversation piece for an exhibition during Dutch Design Week 2014. The students were asked to embrace positive failure along the way, but to have something at the end that would trigger discussion among experts and the public. Guido Stompff, senior designer at Océ, explained the background of the printing technique and shared his wishes and hopes for the programme during the kick-off. He was convinced that the students’ original way of thinking and their outsider perspective concerning the technology would lead to innovative ideas. The trust in the capabilities of the students that he radiated was very motivating. 53

“Having a design research place such as CRISP is very valuable as it offers the opportunity to make short research become very rich, in a limited time. Working with companies outside the school and using new techniques is also really ­valuable.” (Charlotte Haak, student)


The students were enthusiastic and keen to explore the possibilities of the elevated printing technology without restrictions, which led to surprising experiments. After the first round of tests during week 1, the students were eager to know more about the possibilities of the machine. Clemens Weijkamp, the elevated print expert and machine-operator at Océ (read his interview on page 27), patiently answered the questions students had and often said that their ideas would be impossible to print. And then he would try anyway. Mikaela Steby Stenfalk (student assistant of DAE, who worked on the samples with Karianne Rygh earlier and had gained great elevated printing technical expertise) supported Clemens by preparing and correcting files from the students to make them ready for the printer. Some time into the process, the students realised this project was not solely about exploring a material or a machine, but a tool to change common perceptions of everyday ­objects around us by changing how they are made. This resulted in an even wider range of test results: tactile prints for ceramics, wall panels with holographic qualities, books for the blind, materials that are hard and flexible at the same time, stunning optical effects, 3-dimensional pixels… In fact, the students were constantly challenging the machine – and thus challenging Clemens with unorthodox material experiments. His enthusiasm and perseverance to print on all kinds of untested materials and surfaces was crucial to come up with truly innovative results. The students were very enthusiastic about this thinking-through-making approach to doing research. “Océ’s experts pointed out that my samples were giving new shapes to pixels. What would a printed surface look like if pixels are triangular and oriented ­instead of square and flat? It is an exciting concept!” (Joséphine Combe, student) “What I greatly enjoyed was the trust from the side of Océ. They gave us a fair amount of freedom to explore the possibilities of their printer. It was also very 54

v­ aluable to see how large companies think; it is not easy for a student to create such a opportunity yourself.” (Eric Barendse, student)

Hit the ground running

But all this creative experimentation was built on a solid foundation. Karianne’s nine months of extensive design research that preceded the DRS gave the students a head start. Their explorations continued from her and Mikaela’s previous samples, the unique way of working with Clemens to make the prints, and with Océ regarding the approach to innovation. This brief, pressure-cooker project wouldn’t have otherwise been possible. At the same time, Karianne benefitted from the temporary surge in enthusiastic experiments that the students did as they tested the Super-Maker environment and approach (see page 31) that Karianne had been developing, initially with Research Associate Cynthia Hathaway. The students were asked to explore possible ­applications of elevated printing in (interior) architecture, just like architects had done before them, in workshops in Almere. The Design Research Space was designed as a next iteration of the SuperMaker concept where students would create experimental samples and ­prepare them with u ­ ltra-precise instructions for the printer, together with ­technical experts. This all worked very well, but because time was very limited, students had to conceive experimental test samples in a few hours, prepare the ultra-precise digital files and sometimes find printable materials, all in one day. It took until the following Wednesday before they would see their prints. Given the gap between their experiments and the results, the students had to practice to formulate research questions that led to structured experiments, which was often difficult for them. It is, however, necessary for designers under such circumstances to understand what exactly needs to be explored. Doing this kind of design research projects allows students to gain more experience with ways to experiment and conduct research. The Design Research Spaces are a great way to experiment with this way of working. “In the CRISP elevated printing project I learned a different way of researching. This way of working, combined with a short amount of time, is surprisingly efficient. I had to think smart and fast. I had to choose one field to research and 55

This print by Corinne van Grevenbroek examined how a surface can change colour when viewed from another angle (two images from the same sample).


experiment with. I was very happy to see how a designer already – as a student – can overwhelm and inspire a company.” (Corinne van Grevenbroek, student)

Presenting and exhibiting

After the run of experiments, the fourth Wednesday was scheduled for the final presentation at Océ’s R&D headquarters in Venlo. The Océ design team was really impressed by the diversity of the ideas made tangible using elevated printing technology. The students showed them many new ways to look at and use their technology. Some Océ designers cancelled other meetings to attend all the student presentations, which took a full afternoon. Fruitful discussions between the students and Océ designers and innovators evolved with very useful feedback on possible business applications. After this informal presentation, the last workshop day was attributed to setting up an exhibition of the results, together with Karianne Rygh and the samples she made with Mikaela Steby Stenfalk, in the Design Academy Graduation Galleries during Dutch Design Week 2014. This resulted in an evolution tree that expressed the different ways in which all the samples related to each other, and analysed four main directions of exploration (see page 31). In the exhibition, Océ reflected on the work of the students and their results with the following statement: “The Océ experts were stunned by the results; the students showed not only that they are capable to think outside the box, but they also came up with sound tangible samples and prototypes. Some ideas were aesthetic, such as almost holographic images whereby the image changes when one moves around it, drawing the attention of anyone around. Some ideas showed the potential for business applications no one at Océ had considered before, such as jewellery or using elevated prints as a mold for thin walled porcelain.” Within the exhibition, it was wonderful to see how the students’ samples connected to the earlier samples by Karianne, Cynthia and Mikaela, and how Karianne consequently had built on some of the student samples. In the middle of the exhibition daily Emma radio conversations (see page 37) were recorded around related topics like Design Research and Business Innovation, directing attention to also 57

the circumstances in which the exhibited samples were made and the situations they had caused. Visitors, like Océ before, were impressed by the variety of possible explorations and applications that originated from the new elevated print technology.

Educational benefits

For students, this other way of working proved a valuable addition to their regular academy teaching: “I’d never thought about considering d­ esign research as a real alternative before this Design Research Space.” student Joséphine Combe said. Students do several assignments for real clients during their education. This CRISP project combined working for a real client with learning ways to ­conduct design research. The combined objectives from all stakeholders (academic design researchers and corporate designers and innovators collaborating in a scientific programme) make it a great addition to the regular DAE programme. Perhaps the most valuable outcome of this Design Research Space is the role design students can play in contributing to design research that aims to develop new approaches to innovation. Their curious questions, critical perspectives, diligent experiments and wild ideas were indeed valuable contributions to business innovation, sometimes to the students’ own surprise.


Flexible prints by Magnús Ingvar Ágústsson, Filip Setmanuk and Charlotte Haak


Design Thinking and Super-Making Karianne Rygh

Designers are often referred to as ‘makers’, but what lies in the term ‘super-making’? As a part of the larger research umbrella of the Creative Industry Scientific Programme (CRISP), I was asked in to conduct design research on how professionals in the creative industries can assist large companies in determining new markets for new technology. The outcome – the Super-Maker workshop methodology – is one approach to how designers can take on more strategic roles and foster co-creation, in turn stimulating innovation for both companies and clients. However, as a designer my greatest learning throughout this research has been in regards to how tangible research and the role of the designer is viewed by large companies and non-designers, and what implications operating within these new roles have for the design practice. How can designers design not only the end products and services, but also design for the organisations and the relevant stakeholders? And how can designers do this without getting too far removed from the ‘making’ within the practice of their trained professions? Giulia Calabretta, co-project leader of Super-Maker and leader of CASD research project in CRISP, has conducted research in the form of interviews of project partners questioning the strategic value of designers. Klaas Jan Wierda (Océ - A Canon Company) was interviewed on this topic in connection to the development and management of Product Service Systems (PSS). “I think there is strategic value in designers. First of all, it’s not necessarily the design people themselves, so the graphic designers, but it could also be people like me, that don’t have a design background. What designers most easily do is envision stuff and make prototypes, make a visual, or make a concept, which then brings the project further. I think that’s the most visible contribution, and also the most recognisable.” Wierda’s experience in CRISP has made him increasingly aware of the contributions of designers, and he has also learnt from them: “When I 60

go to a meeting, I stop for a moment to think about how I am going to visualise my ideas and suggestions, if I should bring a prototype, thinking about how to involve people.” Working together with Wierda within the research team, I’ve come to realise that he has actually become quicker than the designer to pick up a pen at a meeting and visualise what we are speaking about, to get everyone in the team on the same page. In turn, I have learned that business and marketing departments within larger companies struggle to properly understand the ideas and visions of design researchers, in proposing new modes of operation or new methodologies. As soon as these ideas or directions are made tangible, they can more easily be discussed, and also passed around within company departments to generate engagement and interest. Klaas Jan Wierda recalls how this happened in our project: “In the Super-Maker project, we saw that the design students that were taught the elevated printing technique and who came up with ideas on flexible materials and three-dimensional objects created a breakthrough moment in how we think about the future of the technology. When Karianne in the beginning talked about these various opportunities for architects we thought she was kind of abstract. We didn’t understand her until the moment that she and her students (through the Design Research Space see page 37) made these samples, physically, and we could touch them and feel them, and hear that the architects also really liked those samples. Those were critical moments in conveying our technology to the other stakeholders. And I think only then did we realise where this technology could lead.” When operating in new roles, approaching more ‘wicked’, complex problems within a large company like Océ, creating tangible samples, I was in addition forced to step a bit away from my general practice of designing tangible concepts and also apply my own perspectives and approaches in new ways, utilising more design thinking. If propositions and ideas were not immediately understood or embraced, I had to work in new ways to bridge that gap. Klaas Jan Wierda elaborates on this: “Some designers have a tendency to be recognised for their skills, so to speak. They take all the input and have the impression that by making something beautiful, they will convince everyone. So they make this beautiful design, and then they are surprised that only few people seem to pick it up at the end because 61

that’s not how it works out in a large organisation. The interesting thing is that designers often think from the user’s perspective, and design for users, but they don’t design for the organisation around it. Designers like to design for end-users. It’s sexy and it’s cool and it looks nice, but nobody cares about designing the workshop to train sales-reps or making the service procedures, which are as important, I think, as the end-application if you want to make it a success. That’s the challenge for designers today.” Designing for stakeholders and the organisation in which they work required me to take a few steps back, zoom out and investigate where I could intervene within this complexity and which skills to employ. Engagement and understanding, I found, were two areas of focus that acted as good starting points to orchestrate an environment where new ideas could be received. But as I worked towards this goal throughout my research, I found myself more and more facilitating workshops, fostering co-creation and creating the foundation which others could design and innovate, resulting in feeling even further distanced from my familiar practice of designing. “Karianne for example, she has designed the type of workshop I mentioned earlier. But I think that it’s a real struggle for her, because she’d rather design an end-product. We’re kind of pushing her to design the workshop now, because that’s what it takes today. You need the workshop to come up with a good application, but it’s not by nature her interest. But she does it because she sees the need for it. But when you let her loose, I think she would start designing beautiful things again: products, images. When you look at new innovative stuff at Océ, the new breakthrough things, then mostly the problems lie in the organisational change. Many creatives can think of new applications or new products or new services, but they often fail because they forget to think about all the stakeholders involved as well as the needs of the organisation. When suggesting new approaches from what was done in the past, suddenly the context can become very complex due to all the people coming with different opinions. You need somebody that oversees all this mess and makes something out of it that people understand again. Envisioning means not only simplifying but also setting a direction. A key design skill is understanding everything that is complex, but also thinking “okay, given all this complexity, where should we go now?”, says Klaas Jan Wierda. Through the development of the tangible prototypes/samples used within the various workshops, I had a close collaboration with Clemens Weijkamp, the technician working with elevated printing (page 27), 62

who explained that it is a challenge to be an outsider. That is, proposing new approaches to the business and marketing departments who have very different mindsets, as well as a lack of a common language. “More than a lack of a common language, I think it might be an expectations problem. What I always say is that we should do two things: Firstly, do projects that make money and discover customer leads that have the potential of making money and secondly, (which I felt was the case with Super-Maker), do projects that we can learn from to make a basis for making money in the future. In the process of making money, you don’t want lots of brilliant ideas, instead you want one really good idea that can be worked out for the market and that can bring you revenue.” According to Weijkamp, tangible samples play a key role in engaging and inspiring clients: “What is really needed is a sort of ‘cookbook’ with brilliant new ideas that you can have in the back of your mind, so that when you meet a new customer who wants to make a concrete wall, for example, you can say ‘hey we tried that already and here is an example’ and then go from there. The only way to get these kind of things is by collaborating with researchers, creatives, students, etc, who can come up with these brilliant ideas. And then you have to pick out a few of these that you can then bring to market.” There is a very important design process in that in itself – how to capture all those ideas and make it into what Weijkamp called a ‘cookbook’. This is also what I found challenging throughout my research because I was focussed on long-term thinking, following the brief I was given, but was often met and confronted with short-term expectations. “What can we do with this or how would you apply that?” When trying to find new directions for new technology, and go in through the back door so to speak, to get a new look at the situation of the technology, it ­becomes difficult to also have to cater to the short-term expectations of ­deliverables. “For a business unit there is rarely interest in the long-term thinking, or that is at least what I have discovered. They are only interested in showing nice things: “first show us that you can make money and then we will give you money.” The chicken and the egg problem.”, says Klaas Jan Wierda. In the development of the Super-Maker workshop methodology, ­inviting all experts in to co-create new samples of elevated printing, 63

we­s­imultaneously stumbled upon a different problem, even within the short-term business thinking: bridging the gap between the clients and the complicated technology is a difficult issue. Elevated printing cannot be easily summed up in an instruction manual, and samples or ‘proofing’ of prints are difficult to do, as there are such large variations within one print file. How can clients see opportunities with the technology if they cannot easily use it/experiment with it and get a feel for what it’s all about? As Clemens stepped out of his traditional role as a chemist and technician and into the role of also operating as a designer, I stepped into the role of a facilitator and moderator. That is because Océ found that utilising the Super-Maker workshop methodology as a framework to introduce new clients to the elevated printing design process was a feasible way to bridge the gap between clients and new technology. But what happens if the designer is not included in this next phase? What happens to the orchestration of the Super-Maker: finding the right people, the right questions, the appropriate samples and triggers and the most productive activities to host within this workshop methodology? Can another professional orchestrate and lead the workshop in the same way? And if included, does the designer wish to do this? What Klaas Jan, Clemens and myself have been doing in our various roles is what I understand as the term ‘Super-Making’. It’s about going beyond the traditional ‘making’ and designing with all stakeholders in mind. This requires individuals to move out of their traditional practices and collaborate and ‘make’, not only think, with other experts in new ways. What designers can contribute to other fields is often defined through ‘design thinking’, but as a designer operating within this field. I think it’s important that designers have a clear understanding of where their unique value lies within their own practice, so as not to get detached from their initial training within design – the pursuit of tackling more ‘wicked’ problems. There is a lot about the way designers operate and I think that is not easily summarised when trying to explain what designers can contribute to areas beyond the domains in which they have traditionally worked. As Fred Collopy[1] put it: 64

“The phrase (design thinking) has gained currency in part because it suggests that there are multiple kinds of thinking… I am in agreement with these observations. But they stop short of the real contribution that could be made. For it is not in the modes of thought that designers most distinguish themselves, but in their actions. Designers act differently than analysts or decision-makers. Design is an extreme activity. It tends to call on all of the faculties of those engaged in it. It is contextual. It is embodied. It uses the whole person’s mind and body, left brain and right, hand and heart, analysis and taste. And it never gets enough of any of them.” With this in mind, I hope that by questioning ‘What is Super-Making?’ we can trigger further discussions on what are the unique and fuzzy qualities that designers can offer in contexts where other professional experts need a helping creative hand, head and heart.

References: [1] Collopy, F. “Thinking about Design Thinking”, FastCompany (2009), retrieved April 2015 from Fast Company: 65

Super-Maker implementation The Super-Maker is a co-creation workshop methodology designed to enable large companies to explore pre-market technology. The workshop is arranged together with a variety of experts and creative ­professionals, through using tangible tools that embody the capabilities of the particular innovation. By implementing co-creation activities with short feedback loops, that follow a thinking-through-making ­approach, various professional experts – that are rarely in contact – can share, build upon and discuss possible new applications and markets for new technologies. In this way, large companies can efficiently benefit from the contributions of the various experts by the creative professionals fostering ideation and prototyping of ideas and thoughts. The tangible outcomes of the Super-Maker workshops are therefore not only prototypes of new applications but also tangible conversation pieces, ­triggering further discussion and engagement amongst internal


Customer’s designer Customer’s customer

Facilitator Océ Designers and customers interested in elevated printing


Designers experienced in elevated printing

Designers learn about possibilities of elevated printing

Facilitator Océ Elevated printing expert Océ

Intake interviews


Intro - the role of 3D fabrication in architecture & presentation of online archive (by facilitator) Intro - Elevated printing technology and design process (by Océ)

­stakeholders. The Super-Maker workshop methodology was developed to explore new applications for pre-market technology, but the SuperMaker methodology can also be implemented wherever new applications, services, activities or products need to be developed together with a network of professional experts. The diagram below illustrates how Océ – A Canon Company plans to integrate Super-Maker over a five-day period, in order to explore new applications of elevated printing but also inform and train clients on how to design with elevated printing.

Session 1 Thinking Through Making Learn about the technology + design

Prepare file for printing

Session 2

Elevate print experts Océ print files

Participant submit A5 size print file for elevated print. Océ facilitator finalize file for printing. Outcomes are presented and discussed in the next session

Thinking Through Making Learn about materials + design

Customer Prepare file for printing

Customer’s designer Customer’s customer

Elevate print experts Océ print files

Participant submit A5 size print file for elevated print. Océ facilitator finalize file for printing. Outcomes are presented and discussed in the next session

Session 3 Thinking Through Making

Facilitator Océ

Develop Design

Session 5 Follow up the results Evaluation interviews

Prepare file for printing

Elevate print experts Océ print files

Participant submit design. Océ facilitator finalize file for printing. Outcomes are presented and discussed in the next session

Session 4 Thinking Through Making Refine Design

Prepare file for printing

Elevate print experts Océ print files

Participant submit final design. Océ facilitator finalize file for printing. Outcomes are provided and discussed in final interview



The contribution of Super-Maker to CRISP Bas Raijmakers

Super-Maker is a collaboration between two of the eight main projects within the CRISP programme: PSS 101 – the 101 of product service systems – and CASD, Competitive Advantage through Strategic Design. The results of Super-Maker presented in this publication greatly contribute to the overall goals of CRISP, a programme which started in 2011 and will end in 2015 with the particular the aim to create more strategic roles for designers in the economy.

Designers create new perspectives on PSS and their design

Océ - A Canon Company excels in technology-driven innovation but is much less familiar with design-driven innovation. Innovation at Océ has already moved beyond physical products – into systems and services – but its innovation process is still largely dominated by technology, and processes and procedures that favour technology-driven innovation. This also applies to Océ’s elevated printing technique that Super-Maker took as its starting point. The technical capabilities of the printers (only three had been developed while Super-Maker ran) changed thanks to the efforts of Research Associate Karianne Rygh and research assistant Mikaela Steby Stenfalk as they progressed with their experiments. At the same time there was an early understanding within the design department at Océ that, parallel to the technical development, a service element needed to be created to make elevated printing a success. Nowadays, many tech companies know that developing a technology that ‘can do virtually everything’ is not a very good tagline to sell the technology because it confuses the people who might make use of it: where does one start when everything is possible, and what would it specifically do? Océ anticipated that ‘applications’ of the technology needed to be developed to make it valuable to businesses and people. Super-Maker started with a brief to develop such applications in the field of 69

a­rchitecture. The brilliance of the design research team at Design Academy Eindhoven (DAE), however, was to not come up with one application (that could easily get outdated again, or superseded by another technology) but to develop a co-creative, collaborative way to keep developing applications on an ongoing basis, together with the professionals that would use these applications themselves. This insight flipped the thinking about elevated printing from ‘we need to find the golden application’ to ‘we can actually create a new way to develop applications with our professional customers on a continuous basis’. That valuable insight did not come as a ‘eureka!’ moment. Instead, it came through actually doing it; through hard work and through thinking-through-making – the approach DAE takes to design research. By involving architects in workshops, and by involving Design Academy students in the design research, the experimenting of Karianne Rygh and Mikaela Steby Stenfalk (initially also with Research Associate Cynthia Hathaway), together with key people at Océ – like Clemens Weijkamp, who managed the production of the elevated printing samples – effectively created and improved a PSS prototype of the SuperMaker over time. This prototype eventually embodied the radically new perspective of the design of an application for elevated printing.

Organisations should learn about the strategic role design can play

As a result of this new perspective, the involvement and contribution of the design researchers of DAE became much more strategic than anticipated. Karianne Rygh and her colleagues’ project ended up being about how innovation itself can be more successful, instead of creating ‘just’ an innovative PSS. Designers within Océ are only a minority of the entire R&D group in Venlo, but it is a group that is keen to grow their role within Océ. Hence their decision to be actively involved in CRISP, because the programme promised in 2011 to develop new, more strategic roles for designers in innovation. Super-Maker did indeed develop these roles, by providing some interesting and valuable answers to the question how innovation can become more design-driven. As this publication shows, designers do not only develop ideas (as many others inside a large company) but also immediately make their ideas tangible, for instance, resulting in much more concrete conversations about these ideas in the organisation. Another example is that designers go 70

beyond mere facilitation of the innovation process by orchestrating the innovation process, meaning that they actively build common ground and relationships between different stakeholders in the innovation project; they also make sure it steadily progresses and contributes to a vision for the longer term. Super-Maker achieved all of that in a remarkably short time, with many people involved.

How can design education prepare designers for such roles?

One important group to distinguish among those many people are the students, with their DAE tutor, Allard Roeterink, who together participated for five weeks in the design research for the project after Summer 2014, led by Karianne Rygh. It is one thing to develop new roles for designers in innovation, but making sure designers are capable of taking up such new roles is quite another. This is why bringing the results of CRISP into design education is also one of the programme goals. If CRISP would not engage with education as well, it would not make sure that future generations of designers build on its legacy. Also here, DAE took a thinking-through-making approach. Instead of first developing the knowledge that students need, and then find ways to transfer that knowledge to them, we gave the students a role in the design research itself as it unfolded. This resulted in the students’ playing a key role in developing Super-Maker. Their five-week involvement was an advanced prototype of the Super-Maker PSS, which pushed the Océ elevated production cycle to its limits and created results that “blew the Océ design team away”, (their words) during the final presentation in Venlo. Everyone involved – not just the students – learned a lot from the experience, one that ended with a very successful exhibition of the entire evolution of the Super-Maker samples in the DAE Graduation Show at Dutch Design Week visited by more than 30,000 visitors. How can we better prepare students than by integrating them in the real thing, and showing their results on a real, world-class platform? With Super-Maker we managed to innovate design-driven innovation, as well as design research education.


Contributor biographies Giulia Calabretta

Dr Giulia Calabretta (PhD) was born and raised in Italy, where she ­developed her creativity, curiosity and sensitivity for different aspects of design. ­ Calabretta graduated in Business Administration (minor in Marketing) at Bocconi University in Milan, with a thesis on how iconic fashion designers transfer their stylistic identity into recognisable brands that sustain designers’ work lives. Moving to Barcelona, Calabretta obtained a PhD in Management Science from ESADE Business School with the ­dissertation studying market acceptance of sustainable technology, with focus on the role of product design. After a two-year Post D ­ octorate at BI Norwegian School of Business, Oslo, Calabretta joined TU Delft to undertake research on the strategic role of design in companies’ innovation strategy. Allard Roeterink

Allard Roeterink (MSc) is an independent designer, currently focussing on interactive installations. He worked as an interaction designer in Amsterdam and Tokyo before moving away from the screen. He is tutor at the Design Academy Eindhoven in the LAB department, where he stimulates students to experiment with technologies. He also teaches Information Design at Avans CMD Breda as well as occasional ­science classes at primary schools. Allard is triggered by inventive use of limited means, such as clever prototyping and low­tech/high-impact solutions. He loves to turn old junk into new, playful junk and has ­facilitated many workshops around that theme. Daijiro Mizuno

Dr Daijiro Mizuno PhD (RCA) is co-author of Fashion Design for Living (Routledge, 2014). Awarded his PhD at Royal College of Art (London) in 2008, Daijiro Mizuno is currently working and living in his land of origin, Japan, and is based in Kamakura and Kyoto. He is an Associate Professor at Keio University SFC, in the faculty of Environment and Information Studies. 72

Guido Stompff

Dr Guido Stompff (PhD) is senior communications manager at Océ – A Canon Company. He has been actively involved in CRISP; first as a ­participating designer and later as a bridge between Océ developers and CRISP researchers. He has a background in Industrial Design (TU Delft). He finalized his PhD in 2012 on the contribution of designers inside teams and organisations, providing insights on the boundary spanning capabilities of designers. He is a strong advocate for design thinking as a means to incite and leverage good ideas inside large organisations. Today he is using his design skills to build bridges ­ ­between stakeholders across the globe, in relation to Océ products. He still writes and lectures on the contribution of designers. Klaas Jan Wierda

Klaas Jan Wierda works as a solutions developer for Océ – A Canon Company in the R&D department in Venlo. Trained in applied physics and cultural anthropology, he has worked in various innovative projects on developing new products and services. Klaas Jan is interested in understanding and applying innovation processes in large organisations, an area with more interesting angles than one would at first assume. Klaas Jan works with Karianne Rygh in the Crisp PSS101 project on identifying and visualising stakeholder values. They both hope to deploy this work in a current study: the development of exciting new print applications for the architecture market. Daniëlle Arets

Drs Daniëlle Arets is Associate Reader (Associate Lector) in the Readership (Lectoraat) Strategic Creativity. She also possesses a key role in communicating the knowledge that results from CRISP to creative industries and educational establishments as a Knowledge Transfer Manager for Design Academy Eindhoven. Daniëlle has a strong record in organising debates for a wide array of public, educational and commercial institutes, and through this experience she has become a strong advocate for inter-disciplinary research and design. Daniëlle aims to bridge academic and design thinking through strategic, creative tools and techniques, and of course, many debates.


Mikaela Steby Stenfalk

Mikaela Steby Stenfalk is a Research Assistant in the Readership in Strategic Creativity and student in the Man & Communication program at Design Academy Eindhoven. Her background lies in architecture, at the School of Architecture in Lund, and Wooden Furniture Design at Nyckelviksskolan in Stockholm. She believes that her practical skills can be a solution in many situations, but also that design thinking is just as important. Designers have the possibilities to do beautiful things, but they also have the responsibility to understand what actually needs to be done. Jack Mama

Jack Mama is co-founder of vHM Design Futures and former Creative Director of Visioning and Probing at Electrolux. Previous to joining Electrolux Group Design he was Creative Director of the Probes program at Philips Design. In this role, he articulated the vision and design expression of Probes projects, which are ‘far-future’ research initiatives aimed at identifying long-term systemic shifts and anticipating changes in future lifestyles. In 2006, he worked as part of the core team on the award-winning Next Simplicity project, which explored tangible and inspirational ways of communicating the brand promise of ‘sense and simplicity’ for Philips. Clive Van Heerden

Clive van Heerden is co-founder of vHM Design Futures in London. He has spent more than twenty years exploring new product genres, innovation strategy and vision projects for a series of global technology companies that has culminated in pioneering approaches to research, product innovation and new business. Raised in Johannesburg South Africa, Clive’s academic background started with degrees in the social sciences before moving to London where he obtained a design Masters at the Royal College of Art. He joined Thorn EMI Central Research in 1990 where, as part of the Chief Scientists group, he experimented with ‘diverse capability’ management on advanced technology explorations. After joining Philips in 1995 he continued to challenge conventional approaches to technology research. After Philips he joined Electrolux in Stockholm as Director of Visioning and Probing in 2012 before re74

turning to vHM Design Futures in London earlier this year. In addition to vHM he heads the Product Design Masters at IED Madrid. Bas Raijmakers

Dr Bas Raijmakers PhD (RCA) is Reader (Lector) in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven and leads the in-house CRISP research team. Raijmakers has a background in cultural studies, the internet industry and interaction design. His main passion is to bring the people for whom we design into the design and innovation processes, using visual storytelling. He holds a PhD in Design Interactions from the Royal College of Art, London. He is also co-founder and Creative Director of STBY in London and Amsterdam: a design research consultancy specialised in service innovation. Bas Raijmakers works for clients in the public sector and industry, around the globe. Karianne Rygh

Karianne Rygh (MDes) is a Research Associate in the PSS 101 and the CASD projects with CRISP, and combines her research with design work at her independent design practice Studio Rygh. After completing a Bachelor of Industrial Design at Swinburne University of Technology, in Melbourne, Karianne went on to pursue a Master of Social Design at Design Academy Eindhoven, graduating with the thesis: ‘Choice within the Making’; A thesis converting carpentry skill-training in prison, into a tangible tool fostering reflecting thinking. With a background in governmental institutions in Norway as well as professional design experience in large organisations, Karianne has an interest in how designers can take on new roles and change mindsets by designing on a systemic level. Clemens Weijkamp

Clemens Weijkamp is a Senior Technical Specialist, R&D at Océ - A Canon Company in Venlo. He studied Chemistry and has more than 25 years of experience in product development. At Océ he was one of the inkjet pioneers and holds 10+ patents (and still counting). In Project Eiger Elevated Printing he is responsible for the print process and ink development. In this role he also investigates the technical feasibility of new applications and advises designers how to adapt their designs to get the best Elevated Print results. 75

Glossary Creative Industry Scientific Programme

The Readership is embedded in CRISP (Creative Industries Scientific Programme, see CRISP is a Dutch national research programme of more than 60 organisations, in which Design Academy Eindhoven collaborates with the Technical Universities of Delft, ­Eindhoven and Twente, VU and UvA in Amsterdam and more than fifty ­design companies and service providers in The Netherlands. CRISP is supported by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. CASD

Competitive Advantage through Strategic Design (CASD) is about achieving effective strategic design thinking that enhances the competitive position of Product Service Systems and industrial design providers. Product Service Systems (PSS) can help companies achieve competitive advantage. To realise effective PSS, companies should integrate design thinking in their innovation process. Design thinking is characterised as a creative, user-centered and vision based approach – rather than being technology or marketing driven. Design thinking becomes strategic if it is adopted in the fuzzy front-end of innovation where opportunities are identified and ideas are generated, or when it informs strategic decision-making at later stages. Strategic design thinking can help firms to realise (a portfolio of) PSS combinations that are recognisable, legitimate and coherent for customers. PSS 101

Methods for Conceptualising Product Service Networks (PSS 101) is about developing a framework of methods, techniques and tools that improves conceptualisation and communication between all those involved in design and development, across industries. Products are no longer just products, Services not only services. Take Océ – A Canon Company for instance; once they used to sell printers and now they ‘support document management across different departments.’ Exact, well known for its financial and administrative software, now produces business service systems for SMEs, enabling them to integrally support 76

and manage their business, including relationship management. This type of thinking requires new design and development structures, moving people out of their traditional compartments, meeting the needs of an often diverse and evolving group of end-users. Product Service Systems (PSS) are designed in highly dynamic network environments, mixing people and parties, models, interests and goals. Design Research Space

The Design Research Space is an initiative of the Readership Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven. The team of Research Associates of the Readership works on collaborative projects within CRISP. The Open Design Spaces extend this collaboration to students and tutors at the academy to introduce what academic design research entails. These workshops are a way for students to participate in this research programme. They are a bridge between the Readership in Strategic Creativity and the educational programme of the academy. The Readership Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven

The Readership explores how design and creativity can play a strategic role in society and the economy in general, and in service innovation in particular. Academic knowledge is created through designing, within the strong design culture of Design Academy Eindhoven. The results of the programme are used within the educational programme of Design Academy Eindhoven by way of Design Research Spaces: a four-week design research module for students around a topic related to the research of a Research Associate. Furthermore, results are disseminated through public debates, conferences, workshops and publications. You can follow the work via several digital channels. See more details at


Colophon Super-Maker The Readership in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven Editor:

Karianne Rygh

Editorial team: Daniëlle Arets, Bas Raijmakers, Ellen Zoete Writers:

Danielle Arets, Karianne Rygh, Daijiro Mizuno, Allard Roeterink

Clive van Heerden & Jack Mama, Bas Raijmakers


Jane Hardjono

Graphic design: HeyHeydeHaas Printed by:

Snep, Eindhoven



CRISP research groups: PSS101 & CASD CRISP partners:

Océ – A Canon Company, Delft University of Technology, Connect to Innovate Exact, Océ – A Canon Company , STBY, VanMorgen Guest tutor Design Research Space:

Allard Roeterink Participating students Open Design Space:

Eric Barendse, Joséphine Combe, Corinne van Grevenbroek, Charlotte Haak, Magnús Ingvar Ágústsson, Boris Lancelot Tichelman, Kumi Oda, Kristofers Reidzans, Filip Setmanuk, Aneta Zeleznikova Special thanks to:

Mikaela Steby Stenfalk, Cynthia Hathaway Images:

Mikaela Steby Stenfalk, Cynthia Hathaway, Karianne Rygh, Bas Raijmakers



Design Academy Eindhoven Emmasingel 14 Eindhoven, The Netherlands email: ISBN: 978-94-91400-20-9 Price: 10 euro The Readership in Strategic Creativity, 2013 Reader (Lector): Dr Bas Raijmakers PhD (RCA) Associate Reader (Associate Lector): Drs Daniëlle Arets Visiting Research Fellow: Ré Dubhthaigh MA (RCA) Research Associates: Michelle Baggerman BA, Alessia Cadamuro MDes,

Heather Daam MDes, Maartje van Gestel BA, Susana Cámara Leret MDes, Karianne Rygh MDes, Mike Thompson MDes, Jonathan Wray MDes The Readership Strategic Creativity is partly funded within the Creative ­Industry Scientific Programme (CRISP). CRISP is supported by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-­ NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. © 2015 Karianne Rygh and the authors.




Designers are often referred to as ‘makers’, but when do they become ‘super makers’? Karianne Rygh researched how professionals in the creative industries can support large companies in the search for new markets for their new technologies. How can designers design not only the end products and services, but also design for the organisations and the relevant stakeholders? And how can designers do this without getting too far removed from the ‘making’? The outcome of her work – the Super-Maker workshop methodology – is an approach to how designers can take on more strategic roles and foster co-creation, in turn stimulating innovation for both companies and clients. Super-Maker is a project by Karianne Rygh, Research Associate at Design Academy Eindhoven, and part of the PSS101 and CASD projects within CRISP (Creative Industry Scientific Programme). CRISP focusses on Product Service Systems, requiring designers to think and work more broadly and more strategically in response to large-scale societal challenges. Today even large multinational companies need to collaborate in order to innovate. Designers can play a key role in making those collaborations successful by creating tangible results very early on. This book is part of a series of publications of the Readership in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven. The Readership explores how designers trained at Design Academy Eindhoven can create academic knowledge through design.

Bas Raijmakers PhD (RCA) Reader in Strategic Creativity at Design Academy Eindhoven

Strategic Creativity Series #08: Super Maker  

Super-Maker is a project by Karianne Rygh, Research Associate at Design Academy Eindhoven, and part of the PSS101 and CASD projects within C...

Strategic Creativity Series #08: Super Maker  

Super-Maker is a project by Karianne Rygh, Research Associate at Design Academy Eindhoven, and part of the PSS101 and CASD projects within C...