Language mining: Analysis of the innovation of dominant product languages in design‐intensive industries

Purpose – The main objective of this article is to propose an interpretive model that attempts to decipher a product's values in terms of functionality, usability and meaning. This model can support companies in better integrating these values in their product offering and in defining the most adequate innovation strategies that they can adopt. Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted an empirical analysis on more than 450 products from the Italian furniture industry. Moreover, using an interpretative model 50 product signs were mapped (materials, surfaces, colours, etc.) for each product. The obtained database was analyzed via the principal component analysis (PCA) statistical technique with the intent to identify dominant product languages. In fact, interpreting a product language as a set of product signs, the article describes an objective process able to identify dominant product languages as combinations of different product signs. Findings – The interpretive model described in this article represents a first result in itself. In addition, by mapping the dynamics of dominant product languages, it has been demonstrated that they evolve differently in relation to several product typologies. In turn, the possibility of “brokering” dominant product languages from one product typology to another and from one industry to another has been verified. Practical implications – First of all, this model can support companies in the identification of emerging trends and, consequently, allows them to develop product semantic forecasts. In addition, the analysis of dominant product languages over time can also allow a company to propose combinations of product signs typical of past periods. Finally, the identification of dominant product languages can also allow companies to analyze the state‐of‐the‐art of the industry and, consequently, identify different ways to propose innovation to the market. Originality/value – Most of conducted researches related to product languages have shown primarily a qualitative‐based approach, in which the observations are made by a restricted set of design experts on a subset of representative products. In contrast with the current literature in this research field, this article describes an objective process that is able to identify dominant product languages.

[1]  Cherie Lebbon,et al.  The Emotional Domain in Product Design , 2000 .

[2]  Pieter Desmet,et al.  Designing Products with Added Emotional Value: Development and Appllcation of an Approach for Research through Design , 2001 .

[3]  K. Clark,et al.  Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction☆ , 1993 .

[4]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  The meaning of things: Coding categories and definitions , 1981 .

[5]  Rosemary R. Fullerton,et al.  The production performance benefits from JIT implementation , 2001 .

[6]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  Perceptive sorting: a method for understanding responses to products , 2003, DPPI '03.

[8]  Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders CONVERGING PERSPECTIVES: Product Development Research for the 1990s , 2010 .

[9]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Understanding User Needs , 1995 .

[10]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Product Semantics: Exploring the Symbolic Qualities of Form , 1984 .

[11]  Jeffrey F. Durgee Soul branding:SM How to do it , 2010 .

[12]  Pieter Desmet,et al.  Measuring Emotion: Development and Application of an Instrument to Measure Emotional Responses to Products , 2005, Funology.

[13]  Deanne Beckwith Putting a Hard Edge ON SOFT VALUES: The Higher Order of Cross‐Functional Multidisciplinary Teams , 2010 .

[14]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network , 1995 .

[15]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories , 1993 .

[16]  Rajendra S. Sisodia Competitive Advantage Through Design , 1992 .

[17]  P. Desmet,et al.  A Multilayered Model of Product Emotions , 2003 .

[18]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[19]  Hj Norussis,et al.  SPSS for Windows , 1993 .

[20]  Roberto Verganti,et al.  Design as brokering of languages. The role of designers in the innovation strategy of Italian firms , 2003 .

[21]  Seybold Pb,et al.  Get inside the lives of your customers. , 2001 .

[22]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or on the Proposition That "Design Is Making Sense (Of Things)" , 1989 .

[23]  Ding ˜ Bang Luh The Development of Psychological Indexes for Product Design and the Concepts for Product Phases , 2010 .

[24]  E. Hippel,et al.  Customers As Innovators: A New Way to Create Value , 2002 .

[25]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change , 1990 .

[26]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and market Concepts in Technological Evolution : Research Policy , 1985 .

[27]  J. Rayport,et al.  Spark innovation through empathic design. , 1997, Harvard business review.

[28]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .