Aping my Innovation

Aping my Innovation 

 

When can a Society be called truly Innovative, why do Organizations struggle to Innovative and how Innovative Individuals often, do not get opportunities to bring their ideas to the society. These questions have stayed forever begging for answers, which are sometimes almost staring at us, in our face.

We all do have a mental mapping of countries, which are innovative, and those, which are not. A country like India, with the so-called ‘Jugaad’ attitude has evolved innumerable innovative solutions, to our daily needs and to problems around us. A recent whatsapp video demonstrated a climbing ‘Step shoe’ that can enable an Electrician to climb an Electric Pole, easily and safely. We can draw two conclusions, One- innovations tend to happen where there is a desperate need and secondly the sufferers tend to find their own solutions to eliminate their suffering. It is evident, where there is an acute need there will be an innovation sooner or later, Plato did say ‘True creator is the necessity, who is the Mother of our invention’.

When it comes to consumer goods, it is not surprising to note, the almost near product similarity of competing brands, with the exception of some like Gillette which has kept itself ahead and continued to provide superior products in the Men’s shaving product category. ‘King of Shaves’ a not so big a brand, made in the UK, brought in product innovation, where in the gel is absolutely see through, for easy navigation while shaving, plus works wonders on your skin, leaving it clean and with no irritation. They claim ‘Proudly made in the UK’. Mr. Will King, the founder of the company says and I quote, ‘Back in 1992 I used to suffer from shaving rash and razor burn but couldn’t find a product on the market to solve my shaving problems. I suspected a lot of guys suffered in the same way I did, so I decided to solve the problem myself and develop a range of products to give a smooth, close and burn free shave – so in 1993 the King of Shaves was born’. Clearly, product innovation comes in when there is an expressed or a hidden need, not addressed by any existing, available product.

Brands like Shiseido, have created new benchmarks in the category of skin care, their product catalogue lists some of the following; luminizing surge emulsion, Bio performance lift dynamic cream, Urban environment tinted UV protector, Micro Targeting Spot corrector etc. This is clearly using innovation to redefine the category with products, which many others would want to copy.

Copying, from what others did, is misjudged to be faster and also seen to be cost effective. The unfortunate thing is that more often than not, Organizations look for a quick fix solution and hurry to ape the already available readymade solutions. There may not be a consumer need, but the fear of competition taking on the market share drives to desperation. The reality being that even aping is not easy or comes cheap. Sometimes it takes years and a whole lot of effort, just making a copy and that too at what cost. In the effort to go on matching competition, one goes on padding up costs, the relentless pursuit carries on much to the amusement of your competition. We all justify this Innovation for the sake of Innovation, fully well knowing that it is evidently ‘Resources wasted’, in the medium to the long term. The Question remains, then why this trapping and why, the mindless aping.

We can rationalize the copying of other’s innovation on the plank of ‘Speed to the market’, but it clearly brings out the inability of Organizations to access consumer needs and motivate their own teams to come out with breakthrough products. The downside being the impact on the organization culture, where in your Benchmark stays as your Competition or the one you wish to ape and not allowing your own resources to express their intelligence in a definitive manner. The irony is, very often by the time one gets ready with the copy, the leader has already moved forward and one is left gaping at the dust being left behind.

The joy of innovation is in the creation of a distinct advantage, for articulated superlative usage, it’s in the creation of better lives for the consumers and not just to get a share of business. Inevitably business and market share surges, once the consumer relates to the product, finding value and superiority over the current available offerings in the market.

Manu Jain, India Head of Xiaomi, Smartphones says ‘I’m a Maverick, I did exactly the opposite of what the rivals were doing’. Talking about competition he says and I quote, ‘They, make products for elites who would like to show them off. We make the same high-end technology available to the masses. Innovation for all is our philosophy’. Jain followed a different path, loading enviable features at an affordable price, makes the product cool. Xiaomi India, is today at the top of the stack, innovation has given it a meteoric growth. It has demonstrated, that it is not important to be in the numbers game, what works is the belief in oneself that you can be the No.1. The path is Innovation.

Very often individuals innovate to prove a point or to reassure their next raise in the organization. It is up to the leaders to insist and reaffirm, that the superordinate Objective of impact creation in the market, would always over ride a short-term competition strategy. Its all about the impact that you wish to create!

A Brand like Sketchers, has combined the right price with visible innovation in casual and formal shoes. Their campaign challenges the consumers to ‘Go walk’, coming from a visible confidence in their own product. They are already becoming a threat to some of the entrenched players almost pushing them to redefine their Brand positioning. They consciously stayed away from being a ‘Me to’ in their category. They wanted to create an impact.

The marketing world of cars sometimes really surprises me. Other than the Branding and some superficial accessories thrown in, all Brands offer similar products in a given price segment. Car buyers, often base their choice on the colors available, the after sales service etc., and not the product per se.  Thus there are many brands but the same value proposition, truly aping each other for many years. The next generation Electric and the Driverless cars, once again seem to be in almost every Brand’s next five years plan.

The Brands, which hit the market first with a successful innovation, creates the greatest impact and in turn a higher market share. Inadvertently they also create the greatest chance of being copied by the ‘also ran’s’, despite the web Patents and the Copyrights. Lets look at the scenario, where we learn but not copy, where we compete but on our own merits, where our success is based in our own abilities and not trying to find loop holes in the previous Patents.

If we can truly empathize with the needs in the society or the issues around our own Brands, we will work towards being superior to the previous one. If we enable our fellow colleagues and support their ideas, we will not throttle a possible revolution from happening. True Innovation happens in an environment, which allows for collaborative thinking, which appreciates the differences, which challenges the status quo and discourages a quick fix solution. You may say, ‘Don’t we know that’! Yes indeed, I did say the answer is almost staring us in our face.

Ashwani Kumar

Chief Technologist

Design and Packaging

ITC Ltd.

Packaging Greats

We all talk of all time greats in music, writing , politics, but we rarely talk of all time greats in packaging.
Is it not a fact that if someone out there had had not developed something, we would have had different kinds of lives, is it not  a fact there have been certain turning points in the history of packaging development and there have been people who have made the difference.

I would like to understand from them asto what made them do what they did, I want to understand from them their struggles in the journey and I want to learn from them asto what made them continue their efforts in making such an impact on the society at large.

Lets salute some of these great people, out there and lets try to recall their immense contribution so that the next generations can value the past.

The Bloody war

I have been thinking of writing this post for sometime, but refrained. The value of Design is so critical and so overpowering that more and more CEOs are realising the deep impact it can have on their business. The issue is speed, Can I do things faster than the others, do we need to move at a snail's pace are some of the recurring questions. Lets get the Design moving, lets get someone to present next week. Or faster !

The war has only just begun, the next weeks' meeting turns into a disappointment, the Designs are no good and the brief is perhaps not even half done. A quick question which no ones asks, why did we choose a particular designer over the other, what was the basis and what were the credentials for the required kind of work. The blood shed increases as pressures rise.

The next week is better the designers have put together something which would save their skin and also which they believe will be liked by the Client, or rather just do what was said in the last meeting. Who wants quality, there is a war out there and I have to win! The motto drives not just the designer but the Client as well.

Meanwhile the product is still into research and not clear asto why it was not completed at least four weeks back. The meeting room had shoot outs, pointing at each other , lets use the best of the ammunition, I am going to win any war what so ever.

The Technical function claimed their total ignorance of the project, " I need to be told in advance, I do not have the required machines ". Despite all efforts the decision stays, I cannot get the machine earlier than what I have said, please keep me advised 'in time' next time. The war started raging, the information was given in the last Jan meeting, there are minutes. Well yes there are minutes but it does not say that the decision was taken to launch the project. WE ARE NOT READY.

We need to decide where to get bloodied and where not to. It is just not worth it to get bloodied for an insignificant outcome. Take up issues were it is worth it, let the war go on, like it is happening all around you , leaving you untouched. Difficult not impossible.

Is it essential to start this war, who starts it and who fans the fire. One has all the answers, but no one is prepared to listen, I do not want to understand the reality, it is too stark, I may have to take some action, why should I be the bad boy. Let the war go on, it happened last time, it is anyway happening all the time.

Hey ! when can I see the revised designs, you said you will show me last week. Design is the most critical input , lets get it fast, very fast, I have very little time, I have to start the next project. No I do not want wars, we are all a great team .

I do not need it now !

A few weeks back, a certain project was hot, ' I need it now ', WHEN CAN WE LAUNCH IT. Is the brief ready, is the communication ready, is the packaging ready........... Yes and everybody is charged up to get the entire package ready.

It is important to understand the seriousness of some of these projects, specially when it comes to packaging. The Implications are tremendous and and huge amount of work can get affected/ wasted.

The most important thing is to get the BRIEF into place, whoever needs to do it should do it irrespective of the urgency, as that reflects the first step towards seriousness of the project.

The issue comes in when everything is into place and suddenly the project is no longer so Hot. May be desirable but no longer urgent, hence nobody wants to stop the project completely but also do not have much time for it or want to focus on it or want to take a decision on it.

'I do not need it now ' is there in the mind and thus Packaging needs to work carefully.

Very often some great work can be put into abeyance or rejected or given a vague feedback and left into a complete whirlpool.

Given the urgency the Packaging team goes into top gear and gets everything ready with full excitement and the best that can be brought in. Now that the situation is somewhat nebulous, every presentation becomes an issue. ' I do not like this' can something more be done, can we explore with some more designers. Is this the best that we can have ?The fact remains that if the urgency of the project had stayed, the same designs would have looked brilliant , perhaps outstanding and would have gone into the market.

The issue that the Packaging development faces is the subjectivity in the Creative decision making. As somebody said ' A large part of decision making is emotional and a small part is rational'.

Perhaps the actually brilliant work now stands rejected or in a state of confusion, the worse thing being that our egos may not allow us to re-look at that work or even accept that work. ' I had a logic for rejecting it last time, why should I accept it now '.

How should the packaging development handle such a situation and not have some genuine good work wasted. One clear way is to keep you ears to the ground and have a picture of the shifting needs or the urgency. In case it appears to be the case, delay the presentation, keep working at it or re-prioritise it , but definitely not present it. Wait for the right signal, be sure that it is required and then progress it.

The other approach is to express clearly for a re - brief. It is indeed painful to re write the brief but incase the creative work is not liked, one should request for revised brief, as it brings in abundant clarity and also helps in removing subjectivity.

The reality is that the moods swing and the priorities change but the Packaging development team has to remain steady.

Innovative , differentiated - can also be serious

Very often whenever the Packaging developers come up with something innovative and out of the box, the straight comment that comes up - is this serious ! will the consumer think it to be frivolous and just not worth it . I firmly believe that such comments are not to be taken seriously. Such critiques do not know where is the seed of innovation and how one should nurture it.

It is this out of the box thinking and the ability to challenge the regular gives birth to packaging innovation. Most often than not for an idea to be taken seriously becomes a huge challenge. To sell the concept and have buy in from the decision makers itself becomes a stumbling block and the biggest de-motivator.

Very often the out of the box idea can be non serious at a superficial level, however the same idea could be carrying with it the seeds of a game changer.

How often we end up showering praises on an absolutely innovative packaging idea from competition and kill ourselves on why we did not do the same thing - ' Why did we not get this superb idea ' , whereas we would have on our own killed similar such ideas under the criticism of ' Non serious '.

The Polarity of the Packaging supplier and the Machine Packer

Most often than not for the large volumes of your Brands, we need heavy mechanisation on the packing and the filling lines and at the same time you need a large volume packaging supplier. It is interesting to see how the two are at the polar ends and very often large projects get hugely delayed just trying to get the two meet at the Equator.
Recently a very large project was to be worked upon paperboard and needed very special creases on the board to ensure proper running on the machine and above all a proper pack formation and a stable pack in the hands of the consumer. The volumes being large the Packaging supplier was very clear that the paperboard needs to be in the long grain. On the other hand given the complexity of the pack, the machine supplier was very clear that the paperboard has to be in the short grain. The Packaging supplier explained that in case they were to supply in the short grain the machine speeds are to come down drastically and impact the costs adversely. They agreed to supply in the short grain but came up with the issue of the ability to supply the required volumes given the machine speed retardation.
Negotiations of any sort did not work and every discussion led into a deadlock. The big question, where should we go from here , scrapping the project was not a solution given the competition pressures and going up to the Board and expressing this confusion was too much of an embarrassment for the senior managers.
These experiences are not uncommon and one could relate many more, however the solutions are extremely difficult and the challenges become insurmountable.
Often the solutions exist but need a technological breakthrough , which is time consuming and also cost consuming. One could say that one needs to build in timelines according to the project requirements, but the other side is the market pressures to implement the packaging change right away. You need both the supplier and the packer as both have their technical edge and unique competencies.
This polarity needs to be bridged, we need to work at an approach that the two parties can look at a single point or perhaps make an effort to look at a single point. One clear point emerges that on should not be dependent upon a single source for anything. A constant and persistent effort should be made to have alternatives and build competencies accordingly.
One clear challenge for the Sourcing manager should be supplier development and he needs to put in energies into building up multiple long term relationships in the supply chain. On the other hand the Organisation should seriously discourage rigidities , as this leads to the polar positioning.

Print Runs- whats done cannot be undone

Many a times, one believes that certain issues would be resolved during the print approvals on the bulk machine. I am reasonably sure that you would be mostly disappointed. Whatever needs to be done to get your Brand design right has to be done before hand or at the pre- press stage. Thus a lot of stringent preparation and detailing leads to success on the press. To begin with the mandatory text, get every word, punctuation etc all perfect, as changing at the time of the press run is costly and time consuming, plus also there is a chance of just missing out and you may be saddled with incorrect text packaging. The artwork and the ability to think through is critical, one needs to have the experience to predict as to what are the likely results due to a particular level of screens or the colour sequence. This has to be got right at the time of the pre-press or else whats done cannot be undone at the time of the bulk run.
It is a healthy practise to do a semi bulk proofing on a separate press to analyse the likely results and build in corrective actions. I have had several incidents when the lack of this understanding has resulted in costly print run failures and above all huge loss of time.
Plan to treat the bulk printing as a final and commercial run rather than an opportunity to do creative iterations or subjective value additions.
Very often by a stroke of good luck one hits upon something interesting during the print run and can feel reasonably elated about the outcome. It is always advisable to doubly check if that will sustain,very often what looks good may have scuffing problems or may have odour or may not glue well or may not run well on your packing lines etc. You will be surprised as to how many unimaginable issues crop up and become serious problems and bottlenecks.
The critical role is for each and every element to get the print run successful - the printing machine, the inks, the people running the machine and the knowledge they have and above all the printing plates and the printing cylinders. Each of them needs to work in unison and in perfection to ultimately get things right. Try to have a colour swatch approved and a colour matching be done offline, thus ensuring that the inks are in total readiness. Check the cylinder prints or the pulls as they are fairly indicative of the likely on the machine results. Rarely can we correct things, if the inks of the printing plates / cylinders are not just right.
Yes , I have seen rare examples of extraordinary wisdom ,when the knowledge of the People on the machine has helped to overcome the blemishes and get things undone. Yes it happens but rare !

Packaging Shape and Product Shelf life - meet at a point

There was a brief, yes there was ! Develop a pack, that is square not round but light and thin and not too valuable a feel but the product shelf life , should be 6 months before opening and 6 days after opening.

There was no way that the shelf life requirements could be met in a square box as it can fit the lid and the bottom only as a snap fit , whereas a round box can be a screw on mechanism and thus give much better moisture barriers.

The visual facts of the brief became super dominant as the marketing strategy hinged upon it. The round pack structure had feminine connotations, the product being targeted at adult Males. The light and thin was critical as the product quantity was low, needed be carried in the pocket and consumed 'On the go'. The not too valuable feel was important so that the consumers do not attribute the packaging waste as costs and consume frequently without the psychological barrier of perhaps too premium and possibly out of reach.

The net out come was perhaps predictable, the Structure fitted the desired brief but the shelf life studies failed at the required levels.

This is extremely important to realize that the shelf life often is a clear derivative of the shape of the packaging structure and hence to get the desired results on both the quadrants of Physical appeal and Product stability, it may be required that certain compromises are made at both the ends. Yes, the brief needs to be modified and reworked!

If the box necessarily has to be square, can it be with thicker walls and a Tagger foil seal be provided inside. If all this is not possible, can shape be round and the feminine connotations be handled through the other elements of the marketing mix. If that is not agreeable, can an optimum shelf life be agreed upon. Lets start questioning , why the required shelf is 6 months before opening and 6 days after opening. Perhaps the Marketing strategy was incorrect , maybe the calculations on the segment volume projections were incorrect. Maybe such a segment never existed and the Marketing research had a fine print which nobody read.

Often the Packaging team has to contend with a whole lot of issues, which are perhaps not visible at the time of the Brief , which are deep seated in a marketing error and extremely difficult to digest.

The issue did not end here. The brief was indeed modified and the box was made into a round shape, the fit was right and perfect. The shelf life studies failed, the assumption that the shape will solve the problem was perhaps incorrect. The detailed study proved that the fault was with the product, which was not tuned to the required weather conditions and consequently did not give the required results no matter what was done to the shape.

Lets remember the Packaging shape and the product shelf life very often meet at a point and only at that one. The difficulty lies in realizing this early in the day and accepting where the error is. Who wants to accept the error, we are all at zero defect !

Whip up a Tornado !

Last time this friend of mine had organised a party, I was left with just one everlasting impression

' Energy '. There was so much of energy in the event that, one could not but have a great experience. Packaging is all about the energy that one brings to ones work, right from the word go.

It is a career which is as exciting as one can make of it and each time the returns are manifold. The returns not just in terms of the outcome but in terms of the journey and all the fun while at work.

So, put in the energy in the designs, just not accept the ordinary, keep on the search for the best. Let the team experience the search for the unknown ,the undefined territory and the high of finding it. let there be a perpetual hunt for innovation and a quest for raising the bar.

Whip up a tornado and see for yourself what great fun Packaging development could be.

If the graphics are coming right, think of what inks could do, if the graphics and inks are coming out brilliant, think of what embossing could add and if all that is looking outstanding, do a quick inhouse test and check if the output is good enough. If the output is not actually good enough , do not go to bed dejected and giving up but sleep on new ideas and new solutions.

It is all about the attitude and your sheer love for your own work, the energy that you impart to the work generates the energy around for the others, who in turn compound the effect , with the experience becoming memorable.

Once everything is done and ready, bring in visible energy in your presentations, the excitement in every design that you showcase, the views that you generate ,the concepts that you challenge and the new directions that emerge for your development.

Think of it, with so much energy in your work, you will still never be tired and looking forward to more and plenty. Rainbows day after day.

2 mm to the left !

How often we come across the request , well the design looks brilliant and actually perfect but could we just move this text VERY VERY slightly to the left, maybe about 2 mm. Sometimes the request is even for 0.5 mm to the left or right or top or bottom and so on.

The question is , does this make a difference and if so, how much. We need to answer this as very often a lot of iterations are undertaken and a lot of time and money is spent in just these very fine adjustments. So it is important to understand if these inputs are IMPORTANT !

The perfection in design comes with a fine balance and alignment based upon some well understood design principles but very often in the eye of the beholder and more often than not in our minds. Lets examine this, if it is to ensure congruence with a well established design principle, well yes , it is then not only desired but one would say mandatory for the developer to correct the shifts and positioning in decimals of millimeters. If it is in the eye, it could be subjective but definitely needs attention, one should try to execute the recommended change and debate the rationale. If it is in the mind, the issue becomes critical, how does one establish if the recommended suggestion makes sense. More often than not, if it comes from some one very senior in the Organisation, whether with any sense of aesthetics or not, the Packaging developer just tends to give in rather ' better to surrender ' .

I define this kind of development as ' Design by Ego'. This happens all the time, a wonderful design developed is often ruined as it goes up the Organisation ladder if the principle of ' Design by Ego ' is constantly at work. Sometimes these small Millimeters shifts, shaving offs , stretching etc. can lead to not only delays but also ultimately a BAD design.

The developer needs to bear in mind that he/she holds the responsibility of not only the development but sensible development, not only output but meaningful output. To ensure that one must have logical reasons to implement these so very subtle reasons and also very logical reasons to to 'Say No' if and when required. Lets be honest to our work and to ourselves, lets be guided by the necessity and not just subjective desires and lets be able to stand up and defend our own creation.

The big danger is that there is a very fine line between ' being honest to oneself ' and being 'Close minded', let that not happen to the developer. Getting close minded could be not only detrimental to your work but also lead others to discard your defense for the design, branding you as ' Close minded '.

The big advantage of giving due attention to often the apparently ' Design by ego ' is that it could be challenging a very well established design principle and perhaps changing the rules of the game rightfully. In such a case you need to examine the 0.5 millimeter shifts as who knows there could be a breakthrough which you may completely miss out. So let that not happen to us !

Breach of confidentiality - 'The cat is out of the bag'

Despite so many precautions and binding agreements, it is not very unusual to have a breach of confidentiality or the leakage of the project. There is definitely shock and disbelief on having a well guarded design or project leak out into the market , the net outcome is to do a hunt asto who could be the culprit, often with no clear answers.

However in some cases there are clear answers but one does not know as to what action to be taken. Here is a case with the names changed to avoid the ' Breach of Confidentiality' !

Alto was a big company in India selling a premium brand of Biscuits. Alto wanted to do a celebration series of their Brand and source packaging from a very reputed company in UK , Parkville Inc. The Packaging team in Alto tied up all the aspects of the confidentiality agreement and the development progressed with full speed. The project head at Parkville built in a clause that the packaging would be ultimately sourced from a company in China to ensure lower costs and speedy delivery. The prototypes were developed and changed several times. Ultimately the prototypes were approved by Alto but the bulk delivery did not happen as the Brand plans changed and the project got postponed.

Several years later a company from UK, Briganza, selling similar packaging participated in an International Packaging fair in India. The packaging team of Alto who were visiting the fair got a complete shock and were in for a disbelief when they saw their project prototypes displayed by Briganza with great pride , indicating as if it was their development. On checking out Briganza explained to Alto that they had not manufactured it but had got it done from a company in China who are their partners for such packaging. On further checking out the Chinese partner turned out to be the same as the one Parkville had used for the development. There was more to the story, the project manager from Parkville had moved to Briganza and claimed rights over the development.

The net result for Alto was a leakage of their project and thus a breach of confidentiality. The answers one need to seek is that who should be blamed for this and what action could be taken.

Is Parkville to be blamed , the Chinese party, the project Manager or the Briganza who were trying to pass it off as their work.

Such breach of confidentiality is not uncommon , the challenge comes asto what action to take and against whom, specially when one is working across continents and encounter diverse laws.

Packaging has to take lessons from such experiences and work out the proposals and agreements trying to prevent the 'Cat to be out of the Bag'.

Best Outside vs Inside - The dilemma with no answers

All of us have this question facing regularly- should we do the Packaging design development in-house or should we do it with an outside Design agency, or should we have both work in parallel and 'let the best one' win. Often the cost and time constraints help to decide asto what should be the way forward, as the in-house is much faster and time saving. However if costs are not a constraint, one wishes to explore the best that could be possible Globally.

The fact remains that the knowledge that the in-house team has on a product category is far superior and thus their ability to develop designs which hold critical relevance to the brand is far higher. The other view could be that the Outside design agency has a much wider exposure across Brands and categories and perhaps bring in a much needed fresh air. In many companies the in-house packaging team are well exposed and with experience , they are able to handle some of the most challenging of the projects. Often with a motivated team and with the right leader the in-house team can work towards the just right synergy of the Outside idea and the in-house specialism.

The entire exercise can be fruitful and rewarding if the Organisation provides the Credits and acknowledges the contribution of the team that rightfully deserves. Very often the in-house team may do excellent work and clear all the Consumer tests, however there are residual 'desires' , wishing that the design had the name of a Global name or of the best in the industry. In such a case one must not demean or forget the good work that the in-house team puts together consistently and with considerable amount of hard work and commitment.

Do not forget to accept asto who has done what, if the credit is given deliberately or inadvertently to not the deserving, the packaging team could be left extremely de-motivated.

The fact remains that we all like the association with the Brand names and the tags that go along with them, so even if the in-house team has done the best, we end up saying ' we did this from the best design house in the country and our in-house team added value to it '. The worst case would be if the in-house team has done all the work right from the start to the finish and then they have to hear similar comments, they would never again like to take any project seriously.

The truth is that there is always a dilemma with no clear answers, the approach and the methodology has to change. One needs to go back to the Consumer and check asto which is the best design and thus link back to which team deserves the recognition. Let us all be truthful and honest to ourselves and give the credit to the team that deserves rightfully.

In case we believe that for us the Brand name of the design house is extremely critical, one must stop the development in-house and be prepared to spend the time and the costs that go along with it. More often than not, the work may start with the Outside agency but the time pressures compound, the in-house team may have to step in to salvage the project. In case we believe that we will not be able to give the credits to the in-house team, let the time pressures not change the course of action let us continue the work externally, as that is what we wanted deep down in our hearts!

And off course the deserving get their credit some day and with the full interest !

Creative collaborations- the Journey of the unexpected.

There has been a lot of excitement around the process of creative collaborations, wherein the packaging design gets designed not by a Brand designer but by a designer from another stream, e.g a Fashion designer, a Photographer, a Contemporary artist, an Architect and so on.

The idea is extremely exciting and filled with immense possibilities, as a different kind of mind looks at the Brand personality and may come up with amazing new approaches.

Some large Brands have used it regularly and very successfully and continued to enhance the salience of their Brands.

The journey is of a different kind, you may end up meeting the top most fashion designer of your country or the top most Canvas Artist and may need to brief them about the exercise.

Off course the first worry comes in, that very often such creatively arrived people have very little patience to handle the so called corporate complexities. Infact they may have very little patience to even listen to the brief, let alone understand it to get back to you with a debrief.

The worries are compounded when you have to work out the price of their priceless work and try to draw very sharp timelines.

Once the work is embarked upon , the experience perhaps may get more and more interesting and rewarding. The challenge still remains asto how to work within your brief and the 'so well done' Brand Architecture.

Perhaps the best option in such a a scenario is to expect the unexpected, to let the fresh wind blow into your design and to condition your self to take to the market the unimagined experience. While you may condition yourself and the design team to look forward to the absolute unusual, the larger issue remains of convincing the other functions and the teams working on the project. One gets so used to the ' Focus group' studies and the research analysis that it almost a decision to be taken with complete blindfolds.

If one is prepared for this and can handle the twists and the turns, the Journey of such creative collaborations could be immensely memorable and fruitful.

Driven by Objectives - Whose !

The Objectives setting exercise in an Organisation is a mandatory one and every Packaging Manager needs to set his/her Objectives in the beginning of the year and work towards it or rather get driven by it.

The question that one has to often answer as to where should he/she draw his/her Objectives from, should it be from the Marketing strategy or the Technical strategy or the overall Corporate strategy.

The obvious answer is that it has to be completely and clearly aligned to the Marketing strategy as ultimately that is aimed at delivering the consumer needs and packaging is one 'P' in the complete marketing mix. While there is a clear positive to this, there are several negatives as well. The Brand strategies more often than not are focused on short to mid long term as the pressures of competition are very live and have to be dealt with NOW ! . The other very stark reality is that the Brand Managers come and go with the stints lasting a maximum two years, where their energies are locked with dousing the immediate fires and delivering the obviously expected.

Packaging today is becoming more and more complex and has a much wider implications not only on Brands, Organisations, Countries but on the entire humanity and infact on the Planet Earth itself. If the Packaging Manager has to look at the very long term issues of packaging he/she has to set Objectives which can look much beyond the immediate Brand needs.

Today more and more Corporates are setting Objectives which are aimed at not only delivering the bottom line but becoming more and more inclusive towards delivering the larger cause of the humanity and the society. Should the Packaging Manager allign himself/ herself to these larger goals and contribute in the Overall corporate Objectives, if yes how should he/ she set the Objectives, budgets and the targets.

The reality is that while many Organisations do talk a lot of the societal and the global objectives the here and now continues to get the larger focus. Hence even if the Packaging Manager were to set Objectives of greater implications, he / she is time and again dragged into the here and now. There are also the parochial perspectives which are purely what appeals to individuals and

to 'Me' , which often one has to contend with.

The answer clearly lies in bringing in fresh perspectives , putting together proposals of universally challenging nature and pushing more and more functions to see the benefits. Lets keep the search on and keep on building Ones Objectives with the very large and long term goals for packaging in sight. The challenge is to not just get driven by the Marketing objectives or the Corporate Objectives, one has to set ones own Objectives , have faith and conviction in them and work towards making others also see reason in them. Yes it is difficult, but then what is easy !

Packaging '10-20' The next decade

What would be the challenges in the next decade for packaging and what is the likely course things are going to take. We have heard a lot on the environmental concerns and the impact it can potentially have on the world and each one of us.

One can see two key areas where the focus will need to be directed , one being the action and infact serious action to arrive at solutions on the environmental issues and secondly joining hands globally in a pioneering research. Can we find common grounds for research, wherein there is a lot more sharing and a lot more effort towards a common goal. If a substitute for a particular material is to be found, rather than having pockets of research, can we work together, as we all agree it is for the common goal, the planet Earth and for the humanity ultimately.

Today there is very little effort towards sharing and opening up, as there are competitive pressures and rightly so. We need to work out areas wherein we arrive at understandings wherein the outcome is shared for all those who could contribute. Sounds difficult and a pipe dream for competitors to do research and share for the common good, but think if we were not to do it now , when would we do, are we not losing time hand over fist !

Perhaps the biggest challenge for the Packaging in the coming decade is to drop the boundaries, build bridges, join resources and work at common goals. Can we dedicate the coming decade to cross country, cross company, cross products and cross Brands Packaging development.

The first step will obviously have to be, to firm up the areas that need to be worked upon, then the necessary prioritization and off-course the serious commitment.

The question that we need to answer is that can we fight the issues around packaging and its disastrous impact independently, or should we fight independently. If the concerns are global and the implications universal, then the effort has also got to be united and the commitment singular. Think ! is it so difficult and impossible.

My design or yours !

When a Packaging design is successful, there are several who would like to claim it as theirs, there is always a debate, is it mine or is it yours ! While somewhere it is not very significant as to who actually owns the design but when it goes out into the market and to the consumers, the ownership issues become more and more significant. Many marketing wars are fought on the grounds of the trade-dress not being unique and hence it is imperative that the ownership is established .

The process of Copyrighting is a fairly simple exercise and one must go through this for all ones Packaging designs and artworks. In order to establish ownership and complete rights one needs to get the design assigned from the artist to the Brand owner and ensure that the Brand does not face any ownership battles at anytime in its life history.

The issue comes in when there are many who would like to claim it as theirs and want a stake in the success story. Here as well, the Packaging developers need to ensure that proper agreements are put into place so that if there are many agencies/ designers/ Brand consultants working on you Pack design, the contract ensures that the rights at any given time belongs to the Brand owners.

The other aspect of design ownership is the aspect of motivation , acknowledgement and a salute to those who have created the concept and the execution. The developers who have put in the passion and the sweat would feel cheated if the acknowledgements do not go to the rightful owners. Would they like to put in the same passion and energy next time when they work on your Brand, would they feel for the project the same way and add spirit to it. We need to remember that very often the achievement lies for many not in the remuneration but the public acknowledgement , not in the Promotions up the ladder but in the respect shown for the work.

The question is how to establish , who owns the design, as many would have worked on the design. Apparently the legal definition is the person who has finally put together the complete artwork, irrespective of where the inputs are coming from. While this seems to be most logical way to establish an ownership, but one wants to clearly disagree with this. Which is more important the Concept or its execution, thus who should be the design owner the Concept provider or the actual creator. Think ! do we have the answers, this question has worried many for time immemorial.

Down to the Bones

Every year the same target gets flashed around ' How do you cut the costs ' and ' Who can show maximum savings '. The challenge of cost savings is a like a double edged sword, as all the cost savings come with the additional rider of no loss in perceived value for the consumer.

Very often the Packaging team runs into a dead-end as their costs are down to the bones and any reduction perhaps may start impacting the overall feel.

In such a scenario one has to follow a two pronged strategy, firstly , examine an approach where there is a deliberate change in the visual feel for the consumer through a cheaper input material, in effect a some kind of design change which reduces costs and adds a fresh new feel for the Packaging. The second approach is the more daring one......accept the perceived value loss. Here one can work out the stages, the change which impacts the least on the perceived value loss perhaps could be examined the first for the implementation.

The fact remains that the consumers buy the Brand first and foremost for the product and some downgradation on the packaging which does not impact the product quality when bought, in use, or the shelf life, is unlikely to impact the consumer behaviour.

However the best strategy that one could follow is that to keep a look out for the developments which are likely to give a cost reduction and keep examining if these developments provide any synergy for your Brands. The best sources are offcourse the current vendors or their competitors. Some companies have this annual event wherein they invite all vendors for a display of their developments and innovations. This affair ensures a very open discussion around developments and the possibilities that they offer.

The problem is indeed a complicated one , if your costs are already down to the bone and hence a lot of creative problem solving needs to be looked into to arrive at possible solutions.

Read more Books !

It is amazing how over the years the value additions that have been happening on the Book covers have simply taken over several product categories. The Book covers have always been graphically trying to give a snap shot of what is the overall essence and the writers thought. However more recently the Vibrancy, the Embossing, Foil stamping and the UV ink treatments have been reaching mind boggling proportions.

Just like any consumer product the Book cover has to virtually scream from the Shelf, 'Pick me up' and for that the producers are trying out all the possibilities.

The improvements in the grades of paper and the availability of lot many options have opened up the opportunities even further in terms of the overall look and feel of the Graphics and the visual appeal.

So very clearly if one were to read more books, one would be getting a lot more ideas that could be borrowed onto packaging.

The one issue that clearly comes in our way is the cost, while a book with a high unit price could take on a lot of costs, a packaging may be constrained by the budgets and linked to the overall cost of the complete product. So keep reading........

Ultraviolet Inks - has the future arrived

The coming in of the Ultraviolet inks and the possibilities it has opened for printing is simply amazing and in fact never ending. Just when you thought that you have understood the new system, a further new development comes up. Be it raised/ embossed effect inks, glitter inks, tectile effect inks, there is an answer to every kind of creative expression.

With the new generation machines in Offset, Gravure and Flexo having inline UV decks, it has made things even simpler for getting inline printing and thus faster solution. Consequently costs have seen a downtrend and the technology getting much more amenable for a lot more Brands.

What started as more of a Chinese phenomenon has now taken over the world and like how. The glossy packaging that one would see in China and wonder how it was being done slowly and gradually has evolved to dizzying heights.

While the UV inks and the printing processes evolved and started becoming available more easily, the post press operations needed to be worked upon. The answers were sought to the Odour problems and the food grade ability of such inks and one has come a long way. However there are still questions remaining unanswered, how do we avoid finger marks on the glossy surface, how do we do over-wrapping without having misty formation in-between layers etc.

As is obvious, the results of the UV differ from printing process to process and one has to make a conscious choice based upon the cost, required output, volumes etc. The process of Silk Screen which has developed to a very large extent in China ,offers dramatic results and huge possibilities for the creative exploration.

Given the almost forever developing technology one wonders if the future has arrived and what more is waiting to be explored.

Put a full stop to Counterfeit

How much one may want to, but putting a total stop to Counterfeiting perhaps is becoming increasingly impossible. There are numerous ways to curtail this perennial problem and Packaging can play a remarkable role in this problem. Today there is a possibility to build in Visible ( Overt ) and Not so visible ( Covert ) features in the packaging which can control this problem to quite an extent. The visible features are built in through inks, surface treatments, holograms etc. The not so visible features are built in through the use of specialized substrates, usage of infrared light to enhance certain elements, watermarks, microembossing, intaglio printing etc.

The issue lies in what features to use and what to avoid. One theory is that an anti- Counterfeit feature is relevant, only if it is visible to the consumer, in the sense that the absence or the presence of a certain feature should help the consumer assess the authenticity of a Brand/ product. In this case one may perhaps have to communicate in some manner to the consumer about such a feature.

The counterfeit features which the consumers cannot see, perhaps are more for the Brand owners to judge as to which product is authentic. Thus technically a counterfeiter can go on copying and selling as there is no way the consumers are likely to know the original or the copied.

There are features with various levels of difficulty in copying, but may also have cost associations, a feature extremely difficult to copy may also be extremely costly to implement.

Packaging has been on the forefront in this area and a significant amount of development has been done and is being done currently. The key value addition that packaging developers could do is to build in these features in the development process itself.

The fact remains, that the counterfeiters do catch up slowly and gradually, thus for the packaging developers this is a moving target and a continuous challenge.