Posts Tagged ‘transparency’

  • Fri, Feb 19 2010

    Thank you all for your influx of comments and participation over the past few days. We appreciate constructive criticism and high expectations from community members.

    Taking some of the feedback that has been piping in on our support site, the forum, and emails to our community ambassadors, we are happy to announce the following changes to the design/influence process which will be put in effect beginning Monday:

    1.   At least half of the Quirky design staff will provide highlighted comments to each of the top 10 designs in each project. These are the designs that are considered serious candidates and that go through the full vetting process.

    To date, the vetting process has consisted of looking at the top 10 highly voted concepts for each project in a live internal discussion about a few main factors:

    -  Feasibility

    -  Marketability / Competitive Landscape

    -  Potential IP issues

    -  Overall (cool factor, value-add, size of opportunity)

    Instead of doing this in a vacuum, I have now encouraged each design team member to voice his or her expert opinion on all four of these factors as an individual comment on each of the top ideas under consideration.

    This will allow community members the chance to understand and/or refute our findings prior to the end of a project/a winner being chosen.

    2.   Jess will chronicle/produce a video each week called ‘The Quirky Roundup’.  The video will capture internal discussions that occurred in the past week (platform/tech, business, product development, and manufacturing/ops).

    The idea behind this is to invite you all in to the day-to-day here at Quirky with the hopes that there is better understanding for the global/business impact of each product design opinion.

    3.   In December of last year, we completed a 12 month plan which included our growth plans, feature additions, product sales expectations, etc.

    I am working on getting approval from our investors to make this information public. This will allow all members to share/comment on the global vision for the brand, which will help in understanding of why certain decisions are made. Hopefully this will allow us all to think more globally about this business together.

    4.  Re-Votes

    One thing that I have encouraged the team to do from now on is not be shy of a re-vote. If we ever feel unsure of something, we should put it back up and add more time to the clock. It’s in everyone’s best interest to be on the same page and be excited about a project rather then it being a one way discussion.

    5. Open lines of communication:

    I want to re-iterate the fact that we are striving to provide members easy access to our team. Whether it be the community form, Twitter, the support site, emailing a community ambassador, or calling us up on the telephone (yup, we’ve got those too). Are there other forms of communication we should be using and aren’t? Let us know.


    ———————————————————————————————————————————-

    With all of the above said, I encourage all of you as members to understand the fact that we are doing our absolute best to keep you guys as involved as possible. As always, if there is more we can be doing… say so.

  • Fri, Feb 19 2010

    We’ve gotten a lot of feedback in our Community Forum on the industrial design for the “Wrapster,” the “Earbud Cord Management Thingy” submitted by Matthew Fleming. In the spirit of transparency, we’d like to give you guys some insight on how we came to our final decision on this project.

    We got some great design submissions this round, and after much discussion, we narrowed the list down to two — Matthew’s original design and the Quirky “Bracelet Style” design. Neither design was perfect, and neither seemed like a fully marketable product for several reasons: size, design, functionality, etc.  It was clear, that regardless of the winner, there was still a ton of work to be done in order to incorporate everyone’s feedback and design a bad-ass product.

    In these cases, we try to select the design that is most like how we envision the product ending up. The form of the bracelet design was closest to the form we reckoned would wind up being used, given all the feedback that we’d collected and the competitive landscape. That said, the integration of a clip, vertical/horizontal wrapping, and even the elimination of the bracelet function were at the tops of our minds.

    At the end of the day, we want to work with you to create the best product we can, which will appeal to a wide range of consumers. Put simply: we’d like to sell bajillions of stuff.

    Given the conversation that’s transpired over in the Community Forum, we’d like to give both design ideas a fair shot… we’re going to a re-vote.

    Over the next few days, we’ll fully complete both designs given all of the feedback that came in from the ID, research, and eval phases. We will create formal, 3D visualizations of both designs and reopen the project on Tuesday for a 24-hour revote. Submissions to this project will be closed, but comments, votes, and rating will of course be on.

    We are excited to see how this plays out. We’re listening closely!