Cambridge Design Partnership was recently featured in The Times with our Co-Founder Matt Schumann and Head of Mechanical Engineering Stuart Curtis discussing how our innovative solutions are helping clients speed up time to market and enhance the lives of those they serve.
A Device Shining a Light on Usher Syndrome
Learn more about our involvement in the remarkable Usher syndrome awareness campaign.
The global economy is facing a potential downturn. In fact, economists are claiming there’s a 50% chance of a recession in the next 12 months. It goes without saying that companies who design, develop and manufacture consumer products need to take proactive measures to come out on top. But how?
As any innovative company will know, there are a whole host of elements to juggle as they strive to reduce costs and maintain profitability. These include product design, innovation, supply chain strategy, and manufacturing services. On top of that, IP strategy is also important – it helps companies future-proof their business by identifying future revenue opportunities and securing intellectual property for future post-recession investment.
But managing all of this in-house is a big ask at best. For many, it’s simply not feasible. This is where end-to-end innovation partners can take care of the heavy lifting and accelerate time to market, all while reducing cost.
Let’s take a look at five key ways innovation partners are helping companies prepare for a potential decline without compromising on product quality.
1. Implementing a cost-down design strategy
One of the most effective ways to reduce product costs is to conduct cost-down design exercises. This involves reassessing the need for product functionalities, redesigning components to lower costs, and selecting lower-cost materials.
By eliminating unnecessary features and reducing the number of components, companies can significantly lower the cost of their products without impacting its usability, effectiveness or the product experience. Additionally, by streamlining and improving the design for manufacture and assembly, they can lower the cost of manufacturing, as well as reduce labor costs.
2. Optimizing geography of manufacture
Another strategy to reduce costs is to consider the geography of manufacture. However, it can be a complex task evaluating which locations may or may not be more cost effective for your particular product development needs.
By partnering with experts who have deep knowledge in the manufacturing industry, companies can be confident they are sourcing components and manufacturing products in regions with lower labor costs. Additionally, by manufacturing products closer to the point of consumption, they also reduce transport costs (with the added benefit of minimizing the carbon footprint) and minimize supply chain disruptions.
3. Preventing component shortages and supply chain issues
Recessions often result in a shortage of certain components, which can disrupt the supply chain and delay production. Companies can mitigate this risk by
Diversifying suppliers,
Sourcing components from multiple regions
Creating diversified product design strategies to allow seamless swap-outs (to utilize alternative components and suppliers where necessary)
Building up inventory in advance.
4. Avoiding landing taxes
Companies can also reduce costs by avoiding the need to pay landing taxes (fees imposed on imported goods). This can be achieved by manufacturing products in regions with lower taxes or by sourcing components from regions with free trade agreements.
5. Implementing a future revenue-focused IP strategy
Building an IP strategy can help companies identify future revenue opportunities and secure intellectual property for future investment in more stable economic times. This includes identifying untapped markets and technologies, and securing the IP rights necessary to enter those markets at the right time.
The prospect of a recession presents significant challenges for companies that make consumer products. However, by leveraging the deep experience and breadth of capabilities of an end-to-end innovation partner across these five core services – cost-down design exercises, optimizing the geography of manufacture, preventing component shortages, avoiding landing taxes, and IP strategy – companies can proactively reduce costs and maintain profitability throughout the recession and beyond.
At CDP, we’re already starting to see companies build out a strong roadmap for success, embracing the additional support, and efficiencies, that an innovation partnership can afford. The economic future may be uncertain, but the potential for building a profitable product is there, waiting to be untapped.
Neil Campbell is Head of Consumer Technology and Global Head of New Business at Cambridge Design Partnership, where he is the resident expert in helping innovative companies get their products robustly to market faster.
Plastics’ reputation has gone from miraculous to maligned in the last half-century. Suppliers have even resorted to disguising their use with brand names and faux-natural finishes. However, if good product design means selecting the right tool for the job, there are many applications where these unfashionable materials may still be the best choice in products with design lifetimes of many years.
Below we look at the case for considering plastics in the design of durable products, and why they don’t need to spell disaster for the environment when used responsibly.
Short for ‘thermoplastic’, the term ‘plastics’ describes materials that will soften and melt under heat, meaning they can be molded into intricate shapes at moderate cost.
The first synthetic plastic was patented in 1907, and by the mid-20th century, plastics were enjoying a heyday. As manufacturing techniques and costs improved, products, such as plastic bags and cling film wrap, became prolific. By the end of the century, the realization that these packaging materials could take thousands of years to break down (and may cause environmental harm when they do so), resulted in an anti-plastic movement.
The challenge for today’s innovators is that the case for durable-use plastics got swept up in the backlash against single-use items. There have also been many examples of low-cost reusable plastic items which are often thrown away after being used for only a brief time. This has made it harder to convince manufacturers, product designers, and consumers that sometimes plastics may be the most suitable option for products designed to be used for ten years or longer.
There are many factors to consider when choosing the most appropriate material for an application: properties, price, ease of processing, and sustainability. These have different weightings depending on the intended application.
For example, in ‘life-or-death’ products, a material’s properties will often outweigh its eco-score. For example, would you choose a biodegradable yet less effective version of the following: a bulletproof vest, hospital machinery part, or heart valve? In less critical applications, choosing between different materials may be more finely balanced, and selecting a material that permits a long design-life remains a key factor.
We’re currently recruiting for a Sustainable Design Consultant, Life Cycle Assessment Engineer and a Head of Sustainability.
Plastics’ original (and ongoing) attraction is that they can be blended with additives, such as colored pigments, stabilizers, antioxidants, flame retardants, and reinforcing fillers, to take on an incredible range of properties. The flip side of these additives is that they make recycling harder, so they should only be included when they provide an important benefit. The range of properties includes:
A comprehensive design process should look at the whole lifecycle of any material, including sourcing and afterlife. Here are three ways to ensure plastic is used responsibly:
Look for sustainable sources. In the medium to long term, all plastics will need to come from a renewable resource. In many cases, a part- or wholly recycled material may be suitable. Lego, for example, has started designing its bricks from recycled plastic bottles. Designing with plastics, such as nylon and polyethylene, for which plant-based sources are already available, enables these to increasingly compete with fossil-fuel sources.
Design for ease of repair and longevity. In our article, Making it last, we looked at how materials and design can work together to ensure a long useful product lifetime. The ‘Right to Repair’ will become increasingly important for durable products. Where wear is anticipated, the product should be designed so individual parts can easily be repaired or replaced. We examined these issues in the context of electronic products in another article, Ten ways to reduce e-waste in product development. Many of the same principles may be applied to reduce plastic waste.
Take responsibility for the afterlife of plastics. We can design plastic products with as long a lifetime as possible. Still, we also need to consider their eventual disposal and the likely changes in regulations during the product lifetime. The diversity of plastics means it’s hard to recycle them all. Manufacturers will need to take increasing responsibility for the fate of products at the end of their useful life. They will also be required to work locally with legislators to design waste streams so plastic products are specifically designed for ease of recycling and users are incentivized to recycle or reuse them whenever possible.
Evaluating materials is a key element of product design. Putting a product’s intended application at the center of this choice leads not only to a better end-user experience but can be the more sustainable option too.
