The performance model: delivers product performance rather than the product itself (eg hours of thrust in a Rolls- Royce, Power-by-the-Hour jet engines). Primary revenue stream from payments for performance delivered .
For the hockey stick this would mean providing access for people to play hockey. This could mean a service would be invented, where a provider, like the hockey club owns the sticks. Per training and game a new hockey stick can be grabbed and put back after using it. With this service no sticks will be at people their own homes, the clubs keep the ownership and will know where they all go. Another advantage is that the sticks will be used to its full technical life and the sticks will stay at one place, so easy collection is possible.
The gap-exploiter model: exploits ‘lifetime value gaps’ or leftover value in product systems. Main revenue stream from selling products, parts and services based on the mixed product life of components (eg printer cartridges outlasting the ink they contain, shoes lasting longer than their soles) .
No clear ideas were made for the gap-exploiter model with the field hockey stick.
Posting had a small break, but new posts are coming! What did I do the last weeks?
After the third session had been held discussing the circular design strategies and chronologically the circular business models; a few concepts have been discussed. This were three concepts; extend, skin and leasing. These concepts are based on the research question; ‘How can the differences of usage life and technical life of hockey sticks be brought closer towards each other?’. The focus is still on junior hockey players, these juniors represent two third of all the field hockey players in The Netherlands. The conclusion after the session was to continue with Skin (now called Sleeve) and Leasing. Extend still exists, but doesn’t get the focus for now.
One week left, and further detailing of the concepts needs to be done. Thursday second of July will be the last session where end results will be shared. I am curious how everything will be by then!
By redesigning the field hockey stick into a circular design, field hockey playing Dutchmen is my target group. As said before this group consists of almost 250.000 players. This group can be divided into two groups juniors (165.000) and seniors (85.000). This devision is important to make, as the juniors and seniors have different needs and different usage lives.
The most important reason for juniors to want a new stick is because a new colour is wanted. Wether the stick is to its technical end-of-life is not important. Also if the stick is technically really good, or brand new from 2015 doesn’t matter. The stick has to be pretty. Another reason for kids to need a new stick is growth. Length of the stick and the kid are dependent of each other, and when a kids grows also a bigger stick is necessary.
Kids use their stick on average for one to two seasons when playing two times a week. Reasons to choose a new one is because the new colour is wanted, wear age or a stick is necessary because of the size.
Seniors buy their stick on a feeling that they have, the new hockey stick ‘feels’ best. There is a high chance that the stick is not the best one, but because the buyer doesn’t know better. Usage life is less long, when a person plays five times a week the stick will last at least one season. This depends per person, as another person will last five years with one stick. For seniors reasons to so good-bye to their stick is because they stop playing field hockey, because of wearage or because a new one is wanted. A new one could be wanted because the other one is ‘old’, but in this case the stick often is still good to play field hockey with.
Conclusions can be drawn for the juniors and the seniors. Juniors want to have a pretty stick, quick change of colours is wanted. Seniors on the other hand have limited knowledge, and would like to know more.
Together with designers sessions will be held to discuss the circular design strategies and business models with regards to my subject, the field hockey stick. The first session is held at the seventh of May, at discusses the circular design strategies.
New ideas have been produced considering the strategies. For attachment & trust this were ideas like sensoring in the stick, an app that tracks information and give tips, changing colour with wearage and the grip could be made out of a material that remembers hand positioning.Durability focussed more on optimal stick properties for a longer life. For example extra material could be added around the hook, the part were the sticks wears the most. Standardisation & compatibility was a difficult subject as the hockey stick has many rules. Interchangeable parts could be made, but due to the rules this has to be internal.
Next strategy is maintenance & repair. Hockey sticks can be repaired with an additional glue layer when the are damaged. This is an already existing solution but not done often. Also other production methods like 3D weaving. Last strategy that is disgusted is upgradability and adaptability. Functional upgrading and the usage of other materials like flax are considered.
Some overall thoughts were about the question if the material combination epoxy/carbon be reused, how hockey sticks could be returned to the store, as they now all end up at people’s home and