ideaboard® Series: Product Development Story #10_Partners ｜ KYOTO Design Lab

 In December 2019, NKC Nakanishi Metal Works Co., Ltd. (referred to as NKC in the following) launched their new whiteboard, “ideaboard®.” Revealed by the project members themselves, this series records the story of how the ideaboard was brought to life, and into ours.
Following the past eight articles covering our interview with Riku Nagasaki, developer of ideaboard and head of “KAIMEN” (the business design team reporting directly to the president at NKC), we now move on to the external partners with whom KAIMEN collaborated during the course of ideaboard’s product development.

Read past articles

This time, we sit down with Associate Professor Sushi Suzuki from Kyoto Institute of Technology’s Design and Architecture department, as he unravels the tools and spaces of innovation workshops, as well as his outlook on the future.

Sushi SUZUKI
Associate Professor (Design Methodology and Innovation)

1. Ideaboard’s initial prototype: a handcrafted whiteboard for workshops

ーFirst, please tell us what kind of work you normally do.

As an Associate Professor at the Kyoto Institute of Technology, I teach students the process of developing innovative products from scratch. For example, I run an academic-industrial program where we work with students on challenges defined by various companies over the course of an academic year. (ME310/SUGAR – Global Innovation Program).

I was born in Kyoto but have lived abroad since the age of ten. I was invited by Nagasaki-san in 2015 to work at the KYOTO Design Lab (D-lab), and have been living in Japan for the first time in 22 years.

ーI heard you and Nagasaki-san used to make the whiteboards you used in workshops when you first started working together.

That was during D-lab’s early years when we were juggling multiple workshops. I remember running all over the campus to get from one workshop to the next. We made various tools for the workshops—little kits and boxes—and ideaboard’s initial prototype, the A-shaped board, was fairly usable despite it being made of cheap whiteboard and tape.

We also used whiteboards with aluminum frames, but they weren’t as durable as we hoped. The aluminum would break off and consequently the corners would wear out, but we did treasure its lightness. In contrast to the whiteboards with wheels, we could lift them up and carry six~seven of them over our heads. Looking back, I’m quite impressed with how much stuff we used to make!

2. Japanese culture as the backbone of ideaboard’s creation

ーDo you feel any differences when carrying out workshops in Japan and abroad?

First of all, it didn’t even occur to me to think so much about setting up and preparing when I was abroad. It was more about having enough material—whiteboards, post-its, pens—which the participants could take freely. One team would be looking down at a whiteboard laid flat on a table, while another team would vertically secure one on a chair’s backrest. I get the impression that in Japan, things need to be quite set-up beforehand. Ask someone to do the preparation for you, and a precise number for each item will arrive, an equal number of scissors and post-its laid out on each table.
I believe it’s this way in Japan due to the workshops being primarily structured on the goal of developing ideas. I guess we felt it necessary to eliminate any kind of confusion that would hinder that process by providing an obvious indicator of “what to do next.”

Students are divided on whether it is better to spend 5 minutes improving their workspace or just make do with what’s available. For instance, at our space in the D-lab, some teams choose to take their time designing and building a base to work in, while others will deal with every small thing that gets in their way as they proceed. I guess it is a matter of their personalities.

ーHow about the space or tools used for the workshops?

In the field of design thinking, most things are based on Stafford University’s Hasso Plattner Institute of Design* (d.school).
*An institution inside Stanford University, renowned for its many programs that seek to educate students on exploring the core issue of a problem through design thinking. Sushi was a former participant during his Stanford graduate school years.

Back in 2004 when it began, d.school was given the opportunity to make use of a vacant building on campus just until renovation started. Bare concrete panels and all, the space was free for us to do whatever we wanted to do with it. People played around, moving and making all types of things. The place truly became the end product of various prototypes.

To begin with, in America, there isn’t this notion of not damaging the house in order to rearrange the furniture. You break things down, drill holes. In Japan, I guess due to the basic rule of returning an apartment completely to its original state when renting one, there’s furniture made with the prerequisite of avoiding drilling holes in the walls. For example, we don’t see tension poles abroad, those things that you put between bookshelves and the ceiling so you don’t have to drill a hole in the wall to prevent the bookshelf from falling over. In the end, it’s all about moving the dining table and laying out the futon in Japanese culture. Considering how light and portable the ideaboard is, I think it’s fair to say that the ideaboard was a combined product of Japan’s environment (little space for flexibility), and a workshop that didn’t depend on the architectural aspects of its setting.

3. How idea thinking will change in times of telecommuting

ーFinally, in these times where working from home has become fairly common, how do you think the process of creating ideas will change?

In March this year (2020) when the pandemic started to have an impact was also the time when the ME310/SUGAR team’s ideas were being developed into their final forms. We had to cancel our trip abroad and decided on doing the final presentations online. We were coordinating online, using virtual spaces for prototyping, recorded presentations beforehand. Much of the output became digital. However, we realized that the final output wasn’t much different from what we were doing offline. 

So we went full digital from the kickoff workshop this year in October. This led to a significant appreciation for and literacy of online tools. After using an online whiteboard service called “Miro” for the kickoff, the students were fast to catch on, easily embedding it into their normal workflow.

On the other hand, despite knowing what could be done online, students would come to the school to work, and of course, use whiteboards. However, in times like a lockdown, when we truly cannot physically gather, we cannot use them. Our online literacy may have greatly developed, but whether in terms of offline/online or the process/output, I would honestly have to say indications are yet to be clear. Nonetheless, for a start, I am excited about how the output will turn out for our program this year.

To be continued in “ideaboard Series: Product Development Story #11 ”

(Interview by Mone Nishihama, NINI Co., Ltd., translation by Kyoko Yukioka, NINI Co., Ltd., and photos by Yukiya Sonoda)

▼Click below to see the original Japanese version / 原文はこちら