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 !