Case study report. James Dyson and Mark Sanders innovation process

Introduction

This report analyses the role of the Design Thinking method and its influence over two product designers and their innovative products, Dyson’s Ballbarrow & Cyclone Vacuum cleaner and Sanders with Strida, a folding bicycle. Moreover, the report also investigates innovative features and how both British innovators scaled creativity to overcome technical issues and commercial challenges to launch disruptive products in their time. Such analysis provides insights into how the Design Thinking process supported creative insights and organised techniques toward industry disruption. Finally, the report discusses ArchiMate and its Enterprise Architecture modelling capabilities, along with a case study of its application in improving the city’s services in Peru.

1. Analysing Dyson and Sanders’s innovative features through the product development cycle.

There are several similarities and differences between Dyson and Sanders throughout the creative development process. Firstly, both are product designers involved in-depth in their ideas, from insight to sketching, designing technical details, and prototyping before going to market. Secondly, they started developing inventions themselves, whereas Sanders was graduating and Dyson was a small business. In contrast, Dyson was an entrepreneur and inventor by his nature while creating the wheelbarrow and the bagless vacuum cleaner. On the other hand, Sanders had a small Design consulting business and became famous for creating the folding bicycle. Thirdly, from the beginning, while these inventors were challenging the status quo, they had an eye on commercial outcomes and, therefore, took special care of their product patents. Finally, there also able to overcome hardship to succeed in sales, whereas adopting third part factories or embracing building a factory to control the whole process (Roy, 1993).  

The Method

Dyson and Sanders approached a creative and human-centred method, Design Thinking, to solve complex problems through an iterative process. Moreover, the methodology supported them while challenging and questioning the status quo. Both inventors empathised with users before defining a problem and brainstorming (Wöhler & Reinhardt, 2021) to generate as many wild ideas as possible before sketching and prototyping. The final product required extensive experimentation by testing and potentially further brainstorming sessions before the process’ conclusion. These inventors mastered their products supported by consistent product development background skills that allowed them to tackle technical aspects, mechanisms and materials to thrive in product development. 

Originality

Although Dyson acknowledges that most inventors have a mindset ready to connect existing ideas to evolve into something new (Roy, 1993). As a result, innovators may lack some originality. Even though both Dyson and Sanders were able to empathise with user needs and translate them into original products with a clearly defined problem to solve: to enhance user experience with commercial results in mind (De Paula et al., 2014). Also, both inventors succeeded with sketching and prototyping their products throughout a significant lean process; small businesses with limited resources to accomplish their missions. Finally, throughout the ideation stage, both Dyson and Sanders were open-minded, curious, diligent and encouraged by their vision to develop something new. 

Different styles

While Dyson sparkled ideas from discontentment with current market options, he found inspiration in transferring technologies from other industries to his ideas. For example, the amphibious car wheel for the Ballbarrow and the Cyclone filter in the Ballbarrow factory led to the bagless Vaccum Cleaner. In contrast, Sanders imagined a convenient solution while commuting; then, he envisioned the folding bicycle and supported his idea with extensive literature research. Their resilience throughout the process also stands out because it took them several years to improve and refine their ideas from inspiration to production. Notwithstanding, acknowledging how to fit their product in the market was equally relevant. Each product needed creative commercial effort to succeed since investors, retailers, and manufacturers initially declined to embrace these innovations. For example, the Ballborrow started with orders by mail; the Vaccum cleaner transitioned from a patent licensing to Dysons own factory, allowing him to control production and distribution. In contrast, Strida was lucky enough to have an investor later but shifted to a different manufacturer when the business started declining. As a result, Dyson and Sanders could make timely commercial decisions that guarantee long-term success in their products.

2. The Design Thinking role in supporting Dyson and Sanders’s creative ideas. 

Design Thinking is an iterative, complex problem-solving and human-centred method that approaches creativity and experimentation to enhance outcomes. Furthermore, this method optimises the innovation process, encouraging disruptive ideas from concept to production until products go to market (Foster, 2021). Therefore, Design Thinking was vital for Dyson and Sanders to succeed with their inventions because it encouraged innovative ideas and organised their development until products thrived commercially.

In all three cases – the Ballbarrow, Cyclone Vaccum Cleaner and Strida, a mix of personal dissatisfaction with current products sparked both designers’ to envision new products. Hence, it started the initial step towards the Design Thinking process that supported their genuine innovative products with a vision of change and inspiration to get started into the initial phase, “empathise”, where Dyson and Sanders assumed themselves as final users. Nevertheless, their perseverance paved the solid ground for both inventors to move forward while overcoming adversities. For example, as small businesses, none could afford the traditional market research and user interviews. 

The Ballbarrow

Dyson was dissatisfied with the current barrow option that often sunk into wet terrains while providing poor performance for mixing cement. Hence, the desire to improve user experience sparks the Design Thinking process. In the first stage, he empathised effectively and defined a borrow’s problem, defining himself as the user to leverage the user experience because he was working on his own. Afterwards, to solve a defined borrow’s problem, he applied his previous product development experience with amphibious vehicles—Dyson’s creativity, therefore, shows up by transferring technology from industry to industry. 

The inventor also used his product development skills to sketch and prototype (See figure 01). For example, he designed numerous mechanic parts and used a football to shape the fibre-glass wheel model to patent the invention. Finally, creativity was also an essential element for commercialising the Ballbarrow. While Dyson had no retailer engagement, he succeeded in selling the Ballbarrow by mail while trading a product three-time more expensive than the traditional barrow from the retail stores.  

Figure 01: Ballbarrow’s wheel mechanism (Roy, 1993)

The Cyclone Vaccum Cleaner

The creative process of the bagless Vaccum Cleaner started when Dyson tacked a clogging issue on the filtration system in the Ballborrow factory. While the solution for clogging was the acquisition of an industrial cyclone, it sparked its use differently in a domestic cyclone cleaner (see figure 02). So once again, Dyson adapted technology from one industry to another while equally applying the Design Thinking method to evolve his idea. 

Dyson kept applying his technical skills extensively while sketching and prototyping. In addition, similarly to the Ballbarrow, he also assumed himself as a user to set the problem and define new standards for user experience.

Figure 02: Illustration of how the Cyclone captures large and small particles throughout the airstream flow.

The Folding Bicycle

Sander’s perspective for developing Strida approaches his dissatisfaction due to lacking convenient commuting options while a student. Then he envisioned a foldable, lightweight bicycle to support daily errands sparking the Design Thinking process. In addition, similar to Dyson, he played the final user role in defining the problem while setting the user experience new standard. Moreover, he applied specific research and background skills to sketch, prototype (see figures 03 and 04) and advance within an iterative refinement process achieving the best alternatives before manufacturing the folding bicycle.

As part of the innovator profile, Dyson and Sanders applied significant effort to transform their ideas into thriving products. However, the process lasted several years from the insight until manufacturing, which required patience, resources and effectiveness to assure that the process would not lose focus throughout the way. Therefore, the Desing Thinking method supported their inspiration in an organised approach and spared them from wasting time and funds.

Figures 03 and 04: Sanders’ sketching process for Strida (Roy, 1993).

3. How inventors tackled the Design Thinking process from insights into winning products. 

The Design Thinking method had a vital characteristic by its dynamic and incremental customer-centred approach to innovation and paradigm-breaking. Thus, Dyson and Sanders optimised their insights to transform them into successful products.

The method comprehends five steps to shape ideas into innovative products (Interaction Design Foundation, 2021).

1. Empathise: is about understanding the user in-depth or “stepping in someone else’s shoes”. Vital as a human-centred approach, it is a valuable opportunity to collect as much data as possible to define a problem and support the ideation phase. At this moment, Dyson and Sanders had a vision of new products and assumed the role of the final user to tackle this requirement. For example, Dyson was dissatisfied with the current barrow performance and tried himself as a user. Afterwards, he did the same while enhancing the user experience of the Vaccum Cleaner with cyclone technology. Sanders envisioned a convenient commuting option for those who travel daily like him. Unfortunately, as both inventors were small companies, none had the funds to perform further research out in the market.

2. Define: is the moment to build a problem statement addressing an issue to solving. At this phase, inventors apply the knowledge gathered while empathising to clarify the user profile with a “persona” that translates product characteristics and market particularities. Both inventors had clearly defined their goals at this stage; Dyson had an innovative Ballborrow addressing construction industry needs; before approaching a novel Vacuum Cleaner to facilitate household chores. Meanwhile, Sanders had a folding bicycle designed to support a commuter’s day like himself.

3. Ideate: Aims to promote Brainstorming sessions to generate as numerous wild ideas as possible as an effective way to contest assumptions and spark insights before product development begins. The ideas should address the problem statement supported by the collected data from the previous phases to drive the process towards a solid creative direction effectively (Dam & Siang, 2021). In the case of Dyson and Sanders, both sparked ideas before empathising and defining the problem following the Design Thinking method formally. That is because their initial approaches were more intuitive and informal and, therefore, they developed empathy and defined problems almost simultaneously with their ideas. Nevertheless, throughout the process, Sanders brainstormed with people with complementary skills to help him solve technical issues while prototyping, a multidisciplinary approach to creativity (Lee, 2019). Dyson invested enormous time refining the idea going back and forward through iteration while tackling the Cyclone Vacuum cleaner’s technical problem-solving.

4. Prototype: the method requires extensive iterative experimentation to validate the idea. Also critical to evaluate and refine most final product components, which is essential to assure quality, functionality, and good user experience while addressing the problem statement. Although the most challenging phase for both, the inventors tackled well this phase by using their knowledge to design components and describe technical specifications before production. Moreover, it required outstanding resilience because it took years for Dyson and Sanders to solve numerous technical problems. In contrast, while Dyson struggled to adapt technologies from different industries into his inventions, Sanders sketched scaled models and extensively researched new components; however, he needed technical support to design mechanical components. Dyson also stands out for iterating a remarkable 5,127 times before getting the product done (Portigal, 2008). Finally, this stage was crucial because these prototypes allowed their patents, guaranteeing royalties when manufacturing.  

5. Test: The last phase of the Design Thinking method approaches the latest prototype built as the final product concept and ensures no failures. However, further ideation or prototype efforts might occur before the product is ready because the refinement effort remains iterative. In different words, the method approaches a non-linear process, see figure 05 (Interaction Design Foundation, 2021). Ultimately, the inventors could finalise their inventions after extensive research and numerous prototypes over many years. Dyson and Sanders stand out due to their remarkable commitment to their ideas, adherence to the Design Thinking process, and solid product design skills actively supporting their technical needs.  

Figure 05: Design Thinking: a non-linear process (Interaction Design Foundation, 2021)

Overall, the Design Thinking approach was vital to solving complex problems through an iterative and organised process that enhanced empathy while fostering creativity and experimentation to achieve innovation as a final functional product. Although Dyson and Sanders are similar in many aspects, their approach was quite different throughout the sketching and prototyping phases. Nevertheless, the method encouraged these innovators’ to transform disruptive ideas into products. Therefore, Design Thinking was vital for Dyson and Sanders to succeed with their inventions because it encouraged innovative ideas and organised its development until products thrived commercially. Accordingly, Design Thinking plays the role of a mindset for both individuals while working as a culture at the organisation level (Reine, 2017).

4. Innovations’ challenges in approaching products onto the market. 

After consolidating the final prototype, both Dyson and Sanders had a hardship when approaching their products over retailers, manufacturers and investors in the UK. Although they were solid players, their vision had a conservative bias, and they had negative feedback regarding the potential commercial outcome of their inventions. As a result, while investors, retailers, and manufacturers decided not to embrace the Ballbarrow, Cyclone Vacuum cleaner and Strida, innovators were forced to evolve their products under alternative solutions.

Dyson set up a business to produce the Ballbarrow himself because the retailers turned down including the Ballbarrow in their stores. While retailers did not believe the invention would generate revenue, Dyson shifted to a different strategy and thrived on selling by mail. With this approach, he proved that his product had significant potential, even with price three times higher than traditional barrow.

Afterwards, Dyson was involved with the Cyclone Vacuum Cleaner. His central hardship addressed the prototype phase when he performed 5,127 (Portigal, 2008) iterations until he solved numerous technical issues and had the final product ready to manufacture—for example, adapting the mechanism of the industrial cyclone into a convenient size to fit a domestic vacuum device. As a result, prototyping and testing were costly and time-consuming. Finally, in contrast with Dyson’s disruptive innovation, leading manufacturers in the UK did not believe that the bagless vacuum cleaner could sell, refusing to produce the device, which forced Dyson to keep searching for a third-party manufacturer. However, in the future, Dyson will embrace a costly patent dispute with one manufacturer that used his Cyclone technology without permission.

Although Sanders started his project as an academic project just before graduation, he struggled with designing components, which required too much time for sketching and researching. Afterwards, he had industry experts’ support to refine his ideas into mechanisms propper to manufacturing and achieving his product design objectives. In addition, he performed brainstorming sessions with trustful colleagues throughout the process to help him find the solutions he needed. Finally, after concluding the product development process, Sanders approached investors who might support him in manufacturing the Strida. However, they did not adhere to investing in the invention at this stage. Later on, he finally met an investor that believed in his idea. As a result, the innovative Strida started designing in 1984 and manufacturing in 1987 (Strida.com, 2022).

5. The impact of ArchiMate on the organisation’s outcomes.

The ArchiMate is an Enterprise Architecture modelling language that Enterprise Architects enhance visualisation, description and analysis across business domains clearly and concisely (The Open Group, 2022). Analogically, It works similarly to the construction industry or civil engineering and architecture disciplines, in which designs adopt globally accepted standards. In addition, ArchiMate provides tools and guidance for specifying an organisation’s processes and structures, Information Technology Systems, information maps, and operational infrastructure. Its primary goal is to provide an enhanced business process picture that enables stakeholders to plan, evaluate, see the relationship between areas and analyse the impact of strategies across business areas.

Below, figure 06 illustrates the benefits of Archimate modelling language visualisation capabilities (Virtual Paradigm, 2022b).

Figure 06: The benefits of Archimate modelling language visualisation capabilities.

Accordingly, a case study regarding the adoption of ArchiMate shows a significant city’s service delivery enhancement by Peru’s Government (Posadas, 2019). This example illustrates how ArchMate benefits the operation by enhancing visualisation, providing insights and optimising outcomes, as follows:

1. The process begins by approaching essential viewpoints template models to facilitate visualisation, whereas it contemplates the descriptive language from ArchiMate.
2. Next, an enhanced viewpoint takes shape due to the intersection of several template models. The initial insights support recognising fragmented business services, program procedures and data duplication.
3. Finally, a structured suggestion for integrating services occurs when approaching an Enterprise Architecture.
4. Design knowledge is applied to analyse insights and outcomes from the generated artefacts.

The insights yielded from ArchiMate were valuable for new initiatives to enhance service delivery. Therefore, ArchiMate has supported achieving significant goals defined in the solution proposal:

1. Guarantee that strategic motivators, services and business operations properly align;
2. Secure processes in line with data, applications and services;
3. Support to city’s service redesign along with multifunctional information systems.

Figure 07: Strategy Viewpoint Example (Virtual Paradigm, 2022a)

Therefore, ArchiMate demonstrates to be a valuable tool to clarify and scale service performance. The case study illustrates that the Peru Government has leveraged cities’ services and optimised cross-functional processes by adopting ArchiMate in a complex Governmental environment, approaching people, processes, services, technology and data. Similarly, businesses can rely upon Architect Designers embracing ArchiMate to benefit from its models and templates to understand in-depth business pain points and improve outcomes. As a result, the organisation should optimise processes while operating cost-effectively.

Conclusion

This report shows the vital role of the Design Thinking method alongside product designers to support their product development from an early stage until its commercial success and, most importantly, encourage revolutionary ideas. The five steps of the process are critical to aligning creativity and product development throughout an optimised process, which guarantees superior outcomes. In parallel, clarifying the successful innovators’ features, like vision, creativity, perseverance, organisation and technical product design, highly-skilled professionals; At the same time, also intuitive and highly empathetic to understand the final consumer perspective and provide an outstanding user experience. Ultimately, commercialising disruptive products is also a complex process due to lacking confidence from retailers or hardships controlling manufacturing. Nevertheless, this landscape demonstrates outstanding end-to-end control from Jame Dyson and Mark Sanders over their products and the well-deserved success both had. Undoubtedly, their approaches were groundbreaking from the perspective of approaching innovative ideas, leveraging user experience and disrupting industry paradigms.

ArchiMate is a valuable tool for Business Architecture modelling that provides a transparent picture of processes and service strategy, supporting stakeholders’ engagement by providing insights to optimise Enterprise service design. Service Design Architects may benefit from many model templates to streamline processes and optimise customer services, resulting in a cost-effective operation. Ultimately, ArchiMate benefits the whole production chain from enhancing process visualisation to delivering enhanced products. Therefore, all-size businesses might benefit from adhering to it.

References

Siang, T. Y., & Interaction Design Foundation. (2022, February). 5 Stages in the Design Thinking Process. Interaction Design Foundation. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process

De Paula, D. F. O., Menezes, B. H. X. M., & Araújo, C. C. (2014). Building a quality mobile application: A user-centred study focusing on design thinking, user experience and usability. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8518 LNCS(PART 2). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07626-3_29

Roy, R. (1993). Case studies of creativity in innovative product development. Design Studies, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(93)80016-6

Foster, M. K. (2021). Design Thinking: A Creative Approach to Problem Solving. Management Teaching Review, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2379298119871468

Lee, J., Jung, Y., & Yoon, S. (2019). Fostering group creativity through design thinking projects. Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2019.11.020

Virtual Paradigm. (2022). Full ArchiMate Viewpoints Guide. Https://Www.Visual-Paradigm.Com/Guide/Archimate/Full-Archimate-Viewpoints-Guide/. https://www.visual-paradigm.com/guide/archimate/full-archimate-viewpoints-guide/

Strida.com. (2022). History of STRiDA. Strida. https://www.strida.com/about/history/

Portigal, S. (2008). Some different approaches to making stuff. Interactions, 15(6). https://doi.org/10.1145/1409040.1409049

The Open Group. (2022). The ArchiMate® Enterprise Architecture Modeling Language. The Open Group. https://www.opengroup.org/archimate-forum/archimate-overview

Prud’homme van Reine, P. (2017). The culture of design thinking for innovation. Journal of Innovation Management, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_005.002_0006

Wöhler, J., & Reinhardt, R. (2021). The users’ perspective on how creativity techniques help in the idea generation process—A repertory grid study. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12424

Posadas, J. V. (2019). Transforming service delivery with TOGAF and archimate in a government agency in Peru. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2019.0100756

Virtual Paradigm. (2022). What is ArquiMate? Virtual Paradigm. https://www.visual-paradigm.com/guide/archimate/what-is-archimate/