Posted on Leave a commentPosted in Circular Design Brief

When choosing which way to go with the business models I got into a struggle with myself, and with “Circularity”.

Even though a lot of ideas pop up to improve the product/service of slippers but when it comes to decision making it conflicts with something in my head. Starting this project I was completely focussed on product design. Especially after doing the survey I was stuck with the thought of wanting to help people improve the quality of their slippers. To design slippers that way, that they would last forever.
When applying the different strategies from the ‘products that last’ framework this still fitted to my idea of what to improve and how.
But when arriving at the business model archetypes it started to daze that actually designing a product that lasts for years cannot work in reality, only on paper (or on a blog).
From a commercially perspective it is almost impossible to design something durable, sustainable, when it is desired to sell the product for an acceptable price.
Since slippers fall in a very cheap market segment, as a product people are not willing to spend a lot of money on this might not work. It can not work. The business world does not work like that.
Money needs to be earned to invest and explore, grow and meanwhile slowly try to convince people that they need to change their consuming behaviour.

So what is the difference between circularity and sustainability?
The idea of the Access model is something that can be made plausible, tangible, but is that sustainable? Creating this idea of a slipper service, giving people the change to lease slippers in public spaces to enhance their personal comfort and therefore their mood and well being means ADDING MATERIAL TO SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXISTS YET? WHAT? Wait what? Can I provide people with a service that would in the end make them more happy and circular because they reuse the base of this pair of slipper over and over again? Circular, sustainable, but not necessary?

Classic long life, but try to convince people to spend more money on a pair of really well designed high quality slippers which they can use for a long period, creating less waste or
Acces model, but add new material into a segment where actually no slippers are needed to enhance comfort and happiness and try to teach people about circularity by offering the service of well being?

These thoughts are flowing through my mind. What to do!


Design Challenge & Design Goal

Posted on Leave a commentPosted in Circular Design Brief

After the product analysis and user context research a decision can be made concerning the circular design challenge!

Because this statement couldn’t be made only based on my own (horrible) disposal behaviour when it comes to slippers..
(I throw my slippers in the bin almost every half year, I buy them new at the Bristol for 5€ and whenever I feel like replacing them I do it. I know how bad this is and that is why I wanted to design circular slippers!)
Slippers are an undervalued product that is used by most Dutch people all year round, every single day!
The online survey really shows what slipper behaviour people have and by asking around in my direct surroundings this only got confirmed.

Circular Design Challenge:
Proof 75% of people to be wrong by buying slippers over and over again, year in, year out instead of spending more on a longer lasting and probably more comfortable slipper.
Create circular awareness for even the smallest undervalued products people use in their day to day life.

Design Goal:
Improve the slippers (on product level) in a way that they get to be long lasting, but with the wishes of the consumer in the back of the mind.
Warm, comfortable, breathable and safe (anti-slip), preferably in the acceptable price range of 0-20€.