Adam Amos Dissertation '08

8/6/2019 Adam Amos Dissertation '08

1/30

PRODUCT DESIGN AND ENGINEERING

Design Dissertation

Module: PDE3251

THE PROPOSITION OF DELAYED CONSUMER

CUSTOMIZATION TO IMPACT ON PRODUCT LIFE

CYCLES:

Through the use of Prefab and Modular methodologies and emotional

attachment techniques.

By: Adam. P. Amos Student Number: 2400282

Supervisor: Mehmet Karamanoglu

This dissertation is submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Ba

Product Design, January 2008.


2/30


3/30

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Iwould like to thank my family, friends and tutors at Middlesex University, for theirguidance and support during the writing of this dissertation. Finally I would like to thank

my girlfriend, simply, for her patience.


4/30


5/30

Design Dissertation. , January 2008

4

1. INTRODUCTIONThere are many different areas that need to be considered carefully when aiming to create

products for consumers. Many of these areas are physical parameters by which we would need

to adhere to in order to design for a certain market segment.

In this paper the issues of product longevity and life cycles will be raised, with thepossibilities

surrounding the impact that modularity and prefabrication methodologies could have on these

issues when applied to the fundamental design of a product.

Person-product relationships and emotional attachment will play a big part in the finding ofthe

theory to prolong the life cycles.

Life cycles of products are often distinguished in a very broad manner.

The chart below (Figure: 1.) shows the possible life of a product through the generalised stages

it may go through.

Figure: 1. Product Life Cycle Curve

The life cycle curve is usually used as a marketing tool to show the products development over

time. The four areas on the graph can show the position of the product in the market.

For example;

Situated in the Growth segment mp3 players utilizing larger flash based memory cards to

store audio, video or other such files.


6/30


5

Situated in the Decline segment Cassette tape players.

This would show the progression of technology and the products that were leading towards the

end of their usable, desirable and marketable life. In essence, the longer the curve of the

products life cycle, the higher the profitability margins of the product.

So to Providing a longer life cycle would not only be beneficial to the producer/manufacturer

selling the products, but would also be environmentally beneficial due to the reduction in

consumers discarding their products more frequently. Savas, [2004] comments that; the most

important product related factor in decreasing consumption levels, is to provide economical,

technological and psychological longevity of products.

The findings of his study into Attachment and Detachment suggest that attachment and

detachment have significant implications for consumption activities by affecting the

psychological life span of products. This suggests that by providing the consumer with

something that would make them grow more attached to the product, its longevity would be

increased. With Savas [2004] theory that if the person is attached to the product, the product

is not affected much by the ageing of the product or the changes in the market and it survives

with the individual.

The main aim of this paper is to decipher whether the use of modular methodologies would

positively impact product life cycles. It would discuss the options that would be created from

the utilization of the methods and what aspects of emotional reaction could or would be evoked

from the delayed customization. Connections will be drawn between emotional relationships

that are developed with products and whether modular customization would enhance these

person-product relationships and result in an impact to the life cycle of a product.

2. THE UNDERLYING METHODOLOGIES: MODULARITY ANDPREFABRICATION

Modularity and prefabrication are notoriously thought of within the consumer minds and

todays homebuyers as otherness andas recently as the 1960s, relatively few items found in

the average house were prefabricated [McLendon,S. 2005].

Whether it is within architecture or consumer products, these techniques are usually perceived

by the public as undesirable. However, many products and systems are based around the

methodology of modularity and prefabrication (M/P). Companies utilize modularity as the

component basis for many products, individually, or as product families. One example is Black


7/30


6

and Decker, who, during the 1970s decided to standardise the components across the board of

their power tools range, reducing overheads and increasing product variety. They then

proceeded to overhaul and redesign once more in the late 1980s to strengthen their focus on

product variety through component modularity [Pine 1993]

2.1. Brief Application Within ArchitectureIn Europe, Le Corbusiers vision of a mass produced house inspired the international style of

architecture and design across this era, stating in association with the above movement, If

houses were constructed by industrial mass production, like chassis, unexpected but sane and

defensible forms would soon appear and a new aesthetic would be formulated with astonishing

precision. Le Corbusier [1927]

The use of prefabricated elements within housing began increasing in the late 1930s, with a

prime example being that of Frank Lloyd Wrights pioneering building, Falling Water. Many

builder and designers copied Wrights contrast between prefabricated elements and natural

materials in alternative forms during the post war years. He also heavily influenced the designs

and styles used there after, utilizing the most modern of technologies and embracing the issues

of cost, production, manufacturing time and impacting on consumer choice.

These movements into mass-produced, prefabricated and modular designs has sparked new

visions and a new aesthetic, which of late is nowcoming back into fruition.

One company has more recently become more synonymous within the M/P sector of

architecture.

Huf Haus, design, manufacture and build their own dwellings and structures across much of

central Europe, including the U.K. This company produces exclusive, contemporary modular

based, prefabricated homes for the high-end market. Utilizing over ninety years of honed

techniques, developing interlocking systems and infinitely customisable layouts to produce

maximum consumer choice.

The distinctive feature of a HUF Home is its post and beam architecture. This timber

frame concept frees the designer of the constraints of load-bearing (and thus dividing)

walls. It gives HUF designs their unrivalled breadth, openings and vast spaces. Wall to

ceiling glazing opens the view on the surrounding nature, making it part of the living

experience. [www.huf-haus.com]


8/30


7

2.2. Positive Applications of These MethodologiesFrom the authors own experience, whilst employed byHuf Haus, their houses can be regarded

as a very large mass customizable products. They offer the customer the opportunity to become

an initial co-designer, working with the architect to design the desired product within the

structural parameters set by the company.

The positive benefits are that it has allowed the company to modularize components to

customize end products and provide better service. This is due to the reduction in component

parts and generic connections of the prefab sections. This also impacts on general costs,

production and manufacturing speeds and then time scale of order to distribution. The overall

plan additionally results in a swift and highly efficient on site assembly time, undertaken by Huf

Haus own labour force.

This customization and consumer choice through the M/P methodology is what is so interesting

in this situation. Its fundamental design affords the consumer almost infinite possibilities and

variation; it allows an ironic bespokeness to its design. Although not without extra costs, it then

allows for possible extensions, additions and internal alterations to be undertaken at the

customers desire. Nevertheless this has allowed the consumer to act as a co-designer, with the

possible aim of the company to create a unique emotional connection through this situation.

2.3. What Could This Mean?The technique that Huf Haus employs is one that is utilized throughout the Mass Customization

(M/C) industry to adapt products to their clients and their different situational uses. As Pine

[1993] summarized in his book Mass Customization, the best method for achieving mass

customization minimizing costs while maximizing individual customization is by creating

modular components that can be configured into a wide variety of end products.

The question now is, can the methodology of modularity within mass customization directly

impact the life cycle of a product or product family?

Can the ability to adapt, change or add to the product be embedded into the design, as to not

only allow the customer to be co-creator/designer, but permit the product to change with the

needs and wants of the consumer after purchase?

If the product can genetically have the ability to reinvigorate its usefulness to the client, either

by its functionality, usability or by reconnecting emotionally, can that products life cycle be

prolonged?


9/30


8

3. MASS CUSTOMIZATIONOne of the first people to conceive the expression Mass Customization was Stanley Davis

[Future Perfect; 1987] who referred to M/C as when the same large number of customers can be

reached as in mass markets of the industrial economy, and simultaneously they can be treated

as individually as in the customised markets of pre-industrial economies. These expressions and

indeed this technique were first thought of as a strategy for business. However, through the

years it has allowed businesses and figures such as Davis, Pine, Piller, Tseng et al, to develop

strategies of mass customization in many different areas. Applying them to areas of industrial

design, practical manufacturing methods and even the structures of whole companies.

At a recent keynote speech at the World Conference on Mass Customization & Personalization,

2007 at Stata Centre, MIT, Boston, about the topic The Past, Present, and Future of Mass

Customization, Joseph Pine provided a useful summary of Mass Customization, stating: Mass

customization does not mean everything to everybody, but instead suggested that mass

customization is doing only and exactly which each want needs.

This generalization equates to business strategies and design. Allowing the notion of finding

those wants and needs: whether they be physical components, service activities, what a company

or supplier can provide then snapping them together like Lego building bricks [Pine, 2007] to

build the end product.

3.1. The Product Process Change MatrixFrom a producer, manufacturer or even design point of view, to create product change, within

a market segment, product range or family, Pine [2007] suggests that to invigorate new product

offerings, a stable set of processes that allow a dynamic flow of individualised offering would

be needed. He suggests this due to his belief that mass customization is structured on a modular

basis. Also stating that the problem with mass customization is that it is pre-engineered.

Something new is not new, it just hadnt been asked for in its current parameters. [2007-

World Conference on M/C and Personalization at the Stata centre, MIT, Boston]

This implies that if the structure of the business or product is modular based, the ability to

expand the scenario by adding to the modular system can have beneficial effects on the possible

product range.

Pine exemplifies this in the following model ( Figure: 2).


10/30


9

Figure: 2. The Product Process Change Matrix Joseph Pine, World Conference on Mass

Customization and Personalization, At the Stata Centre, MIT, Boston. 2007.

Using this model, Pine [2007] describes how the use of the modular format would provide the

ability to pass through all four of the above categories, touching on the areas that need

reinvigorating. He believes that this can only be done through a modularized architecture.

For example, if one was positioned at the M/C stage and the customer asks for something new

and you could not offer them what they want from your current Product Architecture Platform,

he suggests moving back round to the invention stage to update your product architecture to

include new capabilities. This can be done due to the modular methodology used within this

scheme.

It is the move between the M/C stage and the Invention stage that is of high interest to this

papers aim. If the aim of the model above was directed in a simple format towards the design

of a product, could it be beneficial to the life cycle of the product to allow the customer to act as

co-designer at a later stage?


11/30


10

For example: Allowing the customer to add module components to the scenario in order to

directly strengthen its usefulness. It may also strengthen the person-product relationship by

touching on emotional connection points such as the Four-pleasures model defined by Jordan

[2000] on the work by Tiger, L. [1992]. This is explored later in the dissertation.

3.2. Customizing Products Through Modularizing ComponentsApproaches such as, cut-to-fit modularity, component-sharing modularity, component-

swapping modularity, sectional Modularity [Pine 1993], Collaborative customization and

cosmetic customization [Gilmore, Pine 1997] and adjustable and dimensional customization

[Anderson 2004] have been posed across the mass customization sector, [Bardill et al]. These

methods can have different applications within industry and can have different levels of impact.

Some of these methods are easier to understand than others and are more relevant to the issue of

delayed consumer modification. I.e. they could be easier for the consumer to fathom and handle

if directly applied to the structure of a product, allowing them to use the method themselves.

Four of the above methods of modularity presented by Pine [1993] have been represented below

in the diagram (Figure: 3). Brief descriptions about them, examples of their use within industry

and how they could effectively be utilized for the proposition of this paper.

Figure: 3. Four Modularity Methods Joseph Pine, 1993, Mass Customization.


12/30


11

Component Sharing Modularity Is when the same component is used across multiple products. Benefits of this process are the reduction of cost through the supply chain, the

lower cost and ease of production by utilising the shared component as the core to the

product, resulting in product development producing a wide variety of products. As

previously mentioned, Black and Decker applied this component-sharing form of

modularity to the successful redesign of their product range.

Component Swapping Modularity The basic premise of this is to pair differentcomponents with the same standard product. This then creates opportunity to produce as

many products as there are different components. However there is a fine line between

component-swapping and component-sharing as Pine [1993] provides a prime example

of this type of modularity in the form of the Swatch watch.

Are the basic watch elements, a component shared across all the fashion products

(component sharing)? Or are the watch parts the basic product and the incredible variety of

face styles the components (component swapping)?

Would this method be able to be used in a delayed scenario? And if it could be? would the

added component, change the use of the product and give the user a strengthened sense of

connection to it through its new or increased functionality?

Cut-To-Fit Modularity Although being very similar to the above-mentioned methods.Cut-to-fit differs by basing its core around one or more components that can be varied

within its physical parameters. Bikes and clothes are prime example of the cut-to-fit

method, as companies use this method to provide a customizable product and service to the

customer by using them as the core component to establish the physical parameters of the

product. i.e. measurements of the customers height resulting in the frame size of the bike.

Could the customer cut the product to change its parameters and increase its functionality

to fit with their progressed wants and needs?

Sectional Modularity This method of modularity enables the most flexibility andcustomizability. It creates the greatest variety by allowing any mixture of components to be

combined as long as they are coupled together by a generic connection. This allows for very

different components to be used as long as they are designed within the parameters set by

the connection method. The leading example used for this is LEGO, and fundamentally it

has no limits to the scale and variety of what the resulting product could be.


13/30


12

3.2.1. Object and Parameter Based ApproachesOne way to represent the above language, depicting the mass customization approaches to

Customer-Product-Producer interactions, has been simplified by Bardill et al [2007] as either,

Object or Parameter based; or a Hybrid approach that encompasses these two.

Their associated definitions can be referred to as;

1. OBJECT BASED Where the customer specifies component option, and theproduct is assembled to order.

2. PARAMETER BASED Where the customer interacts with variable parameters in the given objects, e.g. shape, form, personalized

decorative/graphic elements, and the product is manufactured to order.

3. HYBRID Where the Mass Customized product contains both object andparameter based elements.

These classifications are being applied to the Bardill et al [2007] Mass customization work on

the Product Envelope. They imply the beneficial aspects of the customer acting as co-designer.

Also the direct positive aspects of the Four-Pleasures on the customer product producer

and the respective relationships.

From what has been discussed within this chapter, Sectional Modularity could possibly be an

appropriate application for the delayed customisation scenario, due to the variety allowed

through the interchanging of so many components. It would enable the customer to physically

change the use of the product either completely or enough to modify or enhance its use or

function. However, the simpler representations may be a better way of applying the theories of

modularity. I.e. the Parameter based approach would probably be most suited as stated by

Bardill et al, the customer interacts with the variable parameters in the given objects. Even

though it has been said in the context of pre-manufacture, to apply this in a post manufacture

manner would allow the customer to re-customise the product, encouraging modification.

These methods could be applied to the scenario mentioned in the previous section 3.1 The

product Change Matrix, about allowing the customer to add module components. If the client

were to be able to utilize the invention stage of the Product Process Change Matrix, the

question then would be how would it impact the customer. Would it enhance the emotional

connection with the product and allow a greater relationship to be formed?

Would the product change have to physically prolong the products usefulness andfunctionality in order to extend the life cycle? Or would the product change be enough, to

emotionally reconnect the consumer with the product? Extending its life cycle even if the


14/30


13

product was not meeting the evolved wants and needs of the consumer and not providing any

new or improved functionality.

In this instance, allowing the customer to once again become co-designer (or in their eyes the

designer) could encourage the strengthening of the person product relationship by impacting

on some of the psychological, physiological, sociological and ideological pleasures laid down

by Jordan [2000] on the work of Tiger [1992].

Pine [1993] suggests that, customization through the modularization of components not

only increases variety while reducing costs in manufacturing, it also allows product

development to produce new designs and proliferate even greater variety much more quickly.

Here, it is the possibility for the customer to produce new designs that could have the

most rewards concerning product longevity.

4. THE EMOTIONAL ASPECTS: PERSON-PRODUCTRELATIONSHIPS

Emotions are involved in everything humans do; emotions are inseparable form and a

necessary part of cognition. Everything we do, everything we think is tinged with emotion, much

of it is subconscious. In turn, our emotions change the way we think, and serve as constant

guides to appropriate behaviour, steering us away from the bad, guiding us toward the good

[Norman 2004]. The good that is talked about is often referred to as the desired pleasures, and

as Jordan [1999] stated; humans always have and always will seek pleasure.

So underlying this would be the notion that products need to be designed in a way that elicits

these pleasurable emotions in order to provide desirability and encourage attachment. These

product emotions influence both the decisions to purchase a product (eg; Holbrook, 1985) and

the pleasure of owning it after purchase. [Desmet and Overbeeke, 2001].

In the UK at least 476 kilotons of household appliances, totalling 23 millions units, were

disposed of annually between 1993 and 1998 [Cooper and Meyers, 2000], illustrating how

people are simply discarding their durables and more likely than not simply replacing them.

Much of the time this may be due to the products failure to function. However many products

are replaced while they are still functioning properly; only 22 per cent of the products do not

function anymore at the time of replacement.[Van Nes, 2003]. This could suggest that peoples

relationships with products are relatively weak. Ways of strengthening these relationships and

providing more emotional connection points should be a consideration when designing


15/30


14

products. However, there is in reality a limit to the level of a relationship one can have with

inanimate objects.

4.1. What Breaks These Relationships?To look at the person-product relationships in a more analytical way, an inverted study will be

taken to identify several different aspects that make people throw away products and the many

different circumstances that surround the consumers choice. Mugge et al, [2005] Suggested

several different motivations for this:

- The loss or reduction of a minor function.- The appearance of the product may have diminishedand so may have become visually

un-stimulating.

Van Nes et al [2003] suggest that in this case, the products performance has decreased

over time up to the moment when the person perceives the costs for maintaining the

product to be higher than its benefits.

- Compatibility issues can arise through the arrival of new product or services on themarket. This is usually applicable to a computer that is still functioning correctly, but

cannot run any new software programs due to insufficient processor capacity.

- Legislation Compliance; which is a form of artificial replacement out of socialenforcement.

- General consumption demands due to technological progress. This creates an increasein the consumers desire for product benefits. The consumer assesses their current

products performance against the new, which is often induced by market information.

Verbeek and Kockelkoren, [1998] add to that saying; A product may be discarded since it

can not function as expected any more or since its new forms are introduced to the market

- Fashions and styles can influence the desires of consumer. The currently ownedproduct becomes outdated in comparison to new models that have more fashionable

and stylish designs, resulting in a replacement need[Bayus and Gupta, 1992; Van Nes,

2003]

These are some of the issues that should be addressed in order to encourage a stronger

emotional connection and relationship.


16/30


15

4.1.1. Alternative StrategiesIn order to combat the above-related issues, several eco-design strategies have been proposed

(e.g. Charter and Tischner, 2001; Van Hemmel and Brezet, 1997; Van Nes, 2003) to create

products with a reduced environmental impact by prolonging life cycles and reducing the

motives to replace durables.

-The first suggestion was to allow for easy maintenance and repairs of the product. This allows

the consumer to undertake minor repairs, providing a sense of satisfaction in the result of a task.

In the case of a major malfunction, the producer could fix the product in a relatively short space

of time. This however would be more of a service issue, than that of a design consideration.

-Another simple strategy would be to implement a long-life guarantee. Consumers are more

willing to repair their products if the cost of the repair is covered by the producer.

These first approaches concentrate on extending the technical lifetime (the time the product

performs its primary function) and initiating replacement only in the result of product failure.

-One very interesting proposal is to implement a modular or adaptable product structure. This

would allow the consumer to incorporate the benefits of a new technology in their current

product and/or to renew this product aesthetically (e.g. by replaceable covers) [Mugge et al,

2005].

Mugge et al [2005] comment how this strategy would enable the consumer to upgrade the

product to meet their changing functional and aesthetic needs. This would allow the product to

improve its usability and update technically. But what would the consumer gain besides these?

And this alone may not elicit enough pleasures in order to strengthen the relationship.

However, if the consumer was to be involved directly in this adaptive process, many more

emotions could be brought out and impacted on, which in theory would provide a stronger sense

of connection. Importantly, Norman [2004], contributes to this by implying that; perhaps the

objects that are most intimate and direct are those that we construct our selves, hence the

popularity of homemade crafts, furniture and art.

-The other strategy that is closely linked with that of the above would be to offer the consumer

variation. Mugge et al [2005] write: offering variation to the owner without the need for

additional parts. The product itself can be changed (e.g. in composition) over and over again.

Due to the possibility for such variation, the product remains interesting for a longer period of

time. This is a very appealing scenario. The statement about the product remaining interesting

for a longer period of time due to variation is encouraging. Interesting in an emotional sense

could be thought of as a positive pleasure that would promote attachment. The ability to create


17/30


16

variation could be taken from the modular methodologies and impose the ability to alter the

product architecture through component change.

Component change or alteration could be the key to the design of a modular based product. To

elicit more positive pleasure by way of interest could be a direction to take. To make a product

interesting you may need to keep the customer interested in the product. How do you keep a

person interested?

These last few strategies are towards extending the products longevity through psychological

avenues of perceived value. Sometimes the product itself and its function are not the main

signifiers of attachment.As Norman [2004] suggests; the surface appearance is less important

than their ability to evoke memory of particular people or events.

So the creation of an event would possibly be key to a strong emotional attachment.

Could it be that by designing a product that creates the opportunity for an event - through the

means of modification or alteration - the user could subconsciously be strengthening their

relationship with the product. The interaction with the product could induce interest, which

could lead to greater Attachment. (Figure 4.)

Figure 4. Event Induced Attachment [Amos, 2008]

4.2. Human Factors The Wanting AnimalUsability within designing products is a simple and direct approach and designing for the

personal issues that surround the user are a lot harder. That said usability is normally the main

contributor to the results of the design process. This process often results in the unfortunate and

misrepresented view that users are merely cognitive and physical components of a system

comprising user, system and environment [Jordan, 1999].

Jordan [1999], Desmet and Hekkert [2002] also comment that usability based approaches tend

to look at products as tools with which users complete tasks, and that products are living-

objects with which people have relationships.

If we are to design products for the varying and developing user wants and needs, other

approaches must be taken to understanding these wants and needs and the levels they come at,

Event

Interaction Interest

Attachment


18/30


17

otherwise, if we design products with a basic usability ethos, then that product or tool will

only result in the most minimum of relationship with the user.

4.2.1. Understanding the NeedsThese Needs are the pleasurable desires that designers try to evoke within their designs. To

understand these needs better, many designers, including Jordan, [1997,1999 etc] refer to the

work of Abraham Maslow [1970], concerning the Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow [1970],

portrayed humans as a wanting animal who rarely reaches a state of complete satisfaction.

This proposes the idea that no matter how many needs we suffice, another need or desire will

emerge in its place. The following diagram below (Figure: 5). [below] demonstrates the idea

that people will fulfil the primary needs lower down the hierarchy, then as each one is sufficed,

they will want to move up. If peoples basic needs such as the physiological and safety needs

have been met, they will strive to meet the remaining needs and become aggravated if they do

not do so.

Figure: 5 Maslows Hierarchy of Needs (1970). (Adapted from Maslow (1970))

From this principle, Jordan, [1999] proposed the idea (below) of a Hierarchy of User Needs,

based on applying Maslows theory to human factors.


19/30


18

Figure: 6 Jordans Hierarchy of User Needs (1999). (Adapted from Jordan (1999))

Jordan [1999] devised this model as a way of distinguishing the needs of the user and

categorizing them in importance and flow.

The following explanations are given for the levels of the hierarchy;

Level 1 Functionality This is the initial need to be satisfied and is the primary subject

for the designer to understand. Jordan states that if the product does not have the right

functionality it will dissatisfy the user.

Level 2 Usability This is the level at which people have expectations to be able to use

the product. Jordan [1999] states his argument as; what is the point of providing users

with the vast arrays of functions if the design of the product makes it difficult to use them

to their full advantage?

Level 3 Pleasure By this stage the theory is that the consumer has got used to usable

products and will still strive for more fulfilment [Jordan, 1999]. Which is backed up by

Maslows [1970] theory that humans are wanting animals. This fulfilment has been

referred to as product pleasurability. Jordan [1999] states, It is a challenge that

requires the understanding of how people relate to products and poses an important

question; what are the properties of a product that elicit particular emotional responses

in a person?


20/30


19

So far in this chapter, we have taken an inverted look at the person-product relationship by

addressing the issues that can break them down, and have also highlighted the different

strategies that could possibly be implemented to impact on life cycles and these relationships.

Derived from this, is the principle, that it is variation that makes products more interesting for a

longer period of time [Mugge et al, 2005] which is supported by Norman [2004] who declares

that perhaps intimacy comes from personal construction, i.e. the involvement in a process or

event.

Also, it would seem that the Pleasure level is proposed as being the continual aim of the

consumer and if pleasure is thought to be the key desire of the consumer. The question now is

what kind of pleasure is the user craving? And what type of pleasure should a product try to

evoke, involve or impact on?

This supports a possible aim to repeatedly involve the user in an event that would allow the

third level (pleasure) of Jordans [1997] hierarchy of user needs to be frequently met. This

would perhaps be a way of positively impacting the life of a product.

4.3. Defining PleasureJordan [1999] defines pleasure with products as the emotional, hedonic and practical benefits

associated with products. It is these benefits that are the aim of the section. To recognise the

type/s of pleasure that would be best suited to the proposed scenario of this paper. To aid in this

identification, Lionel Tigers [1992] framework for addressing pleasure will be used. Tiger, an

anthropologist and well-known practitioner in the field of behavioural studies, developed this

framework to help address the issues of pleasure. It is based around four principle types of

pleasure defined by Jordan [1999] below Physical, Social, Psychological and Ideological.

- Physio-pleasure Is related to influencing the body. It is concerning the sensory organsin the manner of receiving stimulation through connection with touch, taste, smell and

feelings of sexual and sensual pleasure. In relation to products, the sense of feel and

touch would coincide with physical interaction. A golf club for example would give a

pleasurable sense of touch and provide benefits to the users grip through inducing a

sense of comfort, safety and performance. Olfactory pleasures concern the smell of the

new product. The smell inside a new car could be an issue that affects the levels of

pleasure the owner of that car could receive. However some consumers may be equally

displeased by the new smell.

- Socio-pleasure Is related to the pleasure gained from interacting with other people.Products that elicit socio-pleasure could be the talking point of a conversation, e.g. a


21/30


20

piece of art, or the focal point of a room e.g. a fireplace. Socio-pleasure could be raised

through the wearing of clothes, distinguishing styles and providing social identity.

- Psycho-pleasure As Tiger [1992] defines it; psycho-pleasure is the pleasure that isgained from the accomplishment of a task. This pleasure is heavily linked with product

usability and is usually best addressed through using this method. From the point of

view of a product, this type of pleasure relates to how satisfying and pleasurable the

experience can be through its use.

For example; the chip and pin service provided at a shop or kiosk, makes the process of

buying simple and easy and creates the perception of safety.

- Ideo-pleasure Is based upon theoretical entities, such as books, art and music. Itrelates to the aesthetics and values embodied buy the product. For example; if a

products were said to be carbon neutral, this would elicit ideologies of consideration to

the environment and would be particularly desirable for those who support and uphold

those values.

These four identified characteristics proposed by Jordan [1999,2000] allow us to design beyond

usability and functionality. To utilise these for this papers purpose, the identification of how

each one would positively impact should be looked at. These will be thought of in the context of

a created event as this is the papers so far assumed route to tackle the issue of product

longevity and attachment.

The list of physio-pleasures that the can be linked with products are endless in the form of its

usability. Physio- pleasure would be a likely start for impact if an event were to be under taken

by the consumer during the products life. If the modularity methods were designed into the

product, the ability for the consumer to physically interchange components would be useful and

would evoke many pleasures through the bodys senses. Touch would obviously play a key part.

The initial design process of the product would need to think about material choice as an impactso as not to negate the possible delayed interaction later on. Olfactory issues may have little or

no impact if the main beneficial factor of this sense was its newness.

However, the results of touch would probably induce pleasures of a psychological kind if

interaction were to be the key to the emotional connection target. The physical interaction

would provide the opportunity to accomplish a task. The task could necessitate the creation of

a new or modified functional use for the product, which would give a sense of triumph by

reaching a set goal.


22/30


23/30


24/30


23

6. CONCLUSIONDrawing on all aspects of this paper, the theories suggest that a products life cycle could be

impacted on one way or another.

If the modification of a product can occur, the chances of reinvigorating emotional attachment is

likely and plausible due to the many areas of pleasure that can be touched on. Added to that, the

possibility that by utilizing a modular component structure to a design, parts of the product

could be interchanged, updated, adjusted or altered to either improve its current function or to

develop with the needs and wants of its user.

It is these wants and needs that would need to be pre-empted by the designer in order to allow

for optimum configurability within the initially set parameters of the product.

This dissertation has shown that whether or not a modular method is adopted, the creation of

interaction could hold the key to prolonging the life cycle. It is the interaction that could initiate

a stronger person-product relationship and allow the product to survive for longer.

Savas [2004] theory that if the person is attached to the product, the product is not affected

much by the aging of the product or the changes in the market and it survives with the

individual.

A modular method to allow for interaction (the mentioned event or task) would transcend

replacing components for functionality purposes. It would allow the consumer to turn creator

and develop new connections with the products on aPleasure Level.

However, on a product-functionality level, the intensity at which modularity is included into

products architecture would allow for different levels of attachment. It would also depend on the

product that it was being applied to.

For example; In the case for a set of hair straighteners (See Figure 7. Below).


25/30


26/30


25

Dependant on how the modularity concept is applied and to what kind of products, it would

provide a valuable amount of emotional attachment, benefiting person-product relationships

tremendously. These them selves are key attributers of life cycle extending in their own right.

The application of a post-purchase consumer modification scheme would open many avenues

into person-product interaction. Creating greater opportunities for consumer involvement in the

creation or re-creation process. This would undoubtedly have beneficial results on the pleasure,

fulfilment and memories people would gain from owning or using products.

These methods together would be a powerful tool for the designers of now, to combat naturally

shortening life cycles within todays rapidly growing consumer replacement society.


27/30


26

7. REFERENCES:Belk, R.W., (1988), Possessions and the Extend of Self. Journal Of Consumer Research, 15

(Sept), pp139-168

Bayus, B. L. and Gupta, S. (1992). An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Durable replacement

Intentions. International Journal of research in Marketing, Vol. 9, 257-267.

Berger, C., and Piller, F. (2003) Customers as Co-designers, IEE Manufacturing Engineer, Vol.

82, August, 42-45. From website: www.open-innovation.com (Accessed 26/11/2007)

Bardill, A., Herd, K. and Karamanoglu, M. (2007) Product Envelopes: Designing positive

interplay between brand DNA and customer co-designers, Int. J. Mass Customization, Vol. 2,

Nos. 1/2, pp.57-75.

Le Corbusier,. (1927), Towards a New Architecture, (translated by Etchells), 1946 Edition,

London UK.

Cooper, T. and Mayers, K. (2000).Prospects For Household Appliances. Halifax: Urban Mines.

Charter, M. and Tischner, U. (2001), Sustainable Solutions. Developing Products and Services

for the Future . Sheffield, Uk: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.

Davis, S, M., (1987),Future Perfect. Addison-Wesley

Desmet, P. and Overbeeke, K., (2001) Designing Products with Added Emotional Value:

Development and Application of an Approach for Research Through Design. The Design

Journal, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp. 32-47.

Desmet, P. and Hekkert, P. (2002) The Basis of Product Emotions, in W.Green and P. Jordan

(Eds)Pleasure with Products: Beyond Usability, London: Taylor and Francis.

www.huf-haus.com

Jordan, P, W., and Green, William, S., (1999), Human Factors in Product Design: Current

Practice and Future Trends . Taylor & Francis, London.

Jordan, P, W., (2000),Designing Pleasurable Products: An introduction to the Human Factors,

Taylor & Francis, London.

Mugge, R., Schoormans, J, P, L. and Schifferstein, H, N, J., (2005) Design Strategies to

Postpone Consumers Product Replacement: The value of a strong person-product relationship.

The Design Journal, Volume 8, Issue 2.


28/30


27

McLendon, S., (2005), Prefabelements: adding custom features to your home, Harper Design:

An imprint of Harper Collins Publishers.

Norman, D, A., (2002) The design of everyday things. Reprint: Originally Published: The

Psychology of Everyday things . New York. Basic Books, (1988)

Norman, D, A., (2004)Emotional Design, Basic Books.

Pine, J. (1993), Mass Customization. The New Frontier in Business Competition, Boston:

Harvard Business School Press.

Pine, J., (2007), Key Note Speech - The Past, Present, and Future of Mass Customization,

World Conference on Mass Customization & Personalization 2007 at Stata Center, MIT Boston.

Piller, F., (2007) Interactive Value Creation with Users and Customers. From website:

www.open-innovation.com (Accessed 02/01/2008)

Savas, Ozlem., (2004), A perspective on the person-product relationship: attachment and

detachment. From the Book Design and Emotion, Ed: Mcdonagh, D., Hekkert, P., Van Erp, J.

and Gyi, D. 2004. Taylor & Francis, New York.

Tseng, M, M., and Piller, F, T., (Eds) (2003), The Customer Centric Enterprise, Advances in

Mass Customization and Personalization. Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg.

Tiger, L. (1992), The Pursuit Of Pleasure, Boston: Little, Brown & Company.

Van Nes, N. (2003).Replacement Of Durables: Influencing Product Life time Through Product

Design. PhD Dissertation Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Verbeek, P. P. and Kockelkoren, P., (1998), The Things That Matter. Desgn Issues, Volume 14,

Issue 3, pp.28-42.

Van Hemel, C, G. and Brezet, J. C. (1997). Ecodesign; A promising approach to sustainable

production and consumption. Paris: Untied Nations Environmental program.


29/30


30/30

Date post:	07-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	david-be
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Adam Amos Dissertation '08

Documents