MODU.

LARES DESIGN PILOT PROJECT: BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES

OF SUSTAINABLE SYSTEM INNOVATIONS

Viviane dos Guimares Alvim Nunes1

1Federal University of Uberlandia/MG/Brazil

[email protected]

Abstract: This work describes a Design Pilot Project experience developed in the city of
Uberlandia (MG/Brazil) with eight micro enterprises of the furniture sector from 2011-
2012. The pilot involved multiple organizations to work in a collaborative model with the
aim of achieving a more sustainable path through Design. The experience adopted the
action-research method in order to permit adjustments during its course. Findings
demonstrate some positive results but also the great difficulties of proposing such a
complex system, where each stakeholder should play a specific role, thus sharing
responsibilities, especially in a region where no collaborative practices are already noticed.

Keywords: Design Pilot Project, Collaborative networks, Furniture Sector in Brazil, System
Innovation, Sustainable Product-Service System.

INTRODUCTION
This work presents some results of the MODU.Lares, a Design Pilot Project carried out in a
collaborative way as a strategy to trigger the beginning of an evolution toward
sustainability of a fragmented local system, with poor records on the sustainability
dimensions. The pilot project was a socially and environmentally relevant network-based
experience, which engaged actors with different typologies, such as: wooden furniture
Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs), the university, support institutions, local government,
non-governmental organizations, associations and society as a whole. The experience
occurred in the city of Uberlandia/MG, Brazil, from January 2011 to June 2012.
Regarding the furniture sector, it is characterized by tailored and craft manufacturing
processes. Formed by about 800 MSEs (Oliveira, 2012), almost 85% of the firms are not
officially registered, and the majority work with old machines, with few exceptions. Most
MSEs lack control over the selection and use of safe raw material as well as of waste
disposal, which portrays a serious environmental problem for the city (SENAI et al, 2006;
Nunes, 2013)1.
The Pilot Project proposed a new way to conceive, to produce furniture, and to relate with
other organizations aiming at achieving better results of sustainability, economic and
technological issues, and sociocultural aspects (Manzini, Vezzoli 2002; Hardy et. al, 2005).
The adoption of modular furniture solutions aimed at reducing raw material waste and
residue as well as at optimizing time and manufacturing (Maxwell, Van der Vorst 2003;
Ljunberg, 2005; Vezzoli 2007).

1
In 2012, the estimated waste generated annually by these companies was about 22.000 m (including waste of panels,
cans, finishing and other small components).
Organizational and sociocultural aspects were faced in order to push collaboration among
companies themselves to exchange knowledge as well as to support a distributed
production process. The reorganization of MSEs was essential to restructuring
relationships and to manage actions, therefore making business advances (Van de Ven,
1986; Marchica 2004; Best, 2006). Besides, as the final furniture was oriented toward low
income customers, beyond producing a more efficient and sustainable product, with low
cost, it also intended to satisfy basic needs of this population strata (Elkington 1994;
Porter, Krammer 2006; Morelli 2007; Parker, Ford 2009).

RESEARCH METHOD
The whole research developed during the PhD program was organized in three main
phases: a first-theoretical phase, a second theoretical-empirical phase of Action Research
(Lewin, 1946) (where the Pilot Project is inserted), and a third-theoretical final phase. The
research methods adopted were: a) qualitative, aiming at grasping the context totality of
those involved in the research, in order to generate broader information in an illustrative
manner; and b) exploratory, to make the problem more explicit and involved: literature
review, interviews with the group engaged in practice with the problem, questionnaires
and case studies (Silveira e Cordova, 2009; Yin, 2009). The action research phase was
oriented, on one side, to wooden furniture MSEs and, on the other, to the multidisciplinary
team of stakeholders already mentioned. The pilot included: initial plan elaboration,
implementation/execution, action monitoring and re-orientation of strategies (when
needed), and a final evaluation of the experience.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

This work highlights the importance of increasing competencies and sustainability
awareness for achieving more responsible practices within MSEs. Indeed, this increase
depends on a radical change in the way MSEs operates, and requires knowledge and new
behavior. In general, due to work overload, often MSEs do not engage in processes to
improve knowledge that could support their evolvement, and, exactly because of this, a
collaborative network could help them to reach better operational levels.
However, when partners are not able to deal with internal problems, the barriers of
working together as well as the potential vulnerability of relationships, mutual respect and
trust among partners increase, as happened. Thus, it is critical for MSEs to recognize the
need for improving both the individual levels and the companys abilities, making them
part of the process by learning and sharing knowledge and information to obtain better
results of design and to engage in system innovations processes.
For example, the attention dedicated to organizational aspects (thus clarifying visions
about their business and more adapted paths to cover), and to technological and
innovation aspects (thus exploring new ways of manufacturing, especially adopting a
distributed production, even though still using craft systems) still must be reinforced and
translated into the strengthening of the MSEs management levels. Above all, the increase
of such competencies must be associated with the increase of interest in facing the
environmental problems that regard each MSE operation. All these aspects, if coordinated
with a main collective intent, can support better interaction in complex collaborative
systems, thus contributing effectively to the evolvement of the broader context as a whole.
It is therefore valuable that innovative and management strategies include the exchange of
knowledge among MSEs, hence contributing to the adoption of more efficient processes
through design oriented to products and services as well as contextualized solutions that
respect and potentiate local cultural aspects. On the other hand, achievement of effective
system innovations depends mainly on: a) the continuity of actions performed by a specific
group involved in any experience; and b) the quality of knowledge shared among them.
Also, maintenance of such system innovations will depend again on the quality of these
relationships built on a collaborative network approach.

CONCLUSIONS
Sustainable strategies must include collaboration and exchanging of knowledge as well as
the adoption of more efficient processes through design. However, for Lopes and Baldi
(2009) collaborative works are not per se a synonym of system innovations and local
development, but they depend on the involved group, the contexts and the mechanisms of
coordination. Also, factors such as motivation, potential for innovation, environmental
awareness, skilled labor and competencies, and capacity for establishing (and maintaining)
partnerships can jeopardize the continuity of collaborative and interdependent initiatives.
Mozota (2003) and Best (2006) affirm that the insertion of design strategies within
companies depends on the increase of strategic thinking within the organization. Actually,
the outcomes validate that not every partner (MSEs or other organizational typologies) can
successfully be engaged in collaborative networks, as well as positively implement system
innovations, whether technical or behavioral, or related to designing products, processes
or services, due to either their limited economic capacity or their owners vision.
In terms of technology, infrastructure and production, the majority of local furniture MSEs
presented a low technological level which reflected in limited productivity and lack of
competitiveness in a broader market. Moreover, design awareness is still quite challenging
because it is not perceived as a key factor for the MSEs operations. This highlights the
pressing need for diffusion of the design culture within the sector, in order to improve both
technical and systemic aspects as well as management issues.
A relevant aspect noticed during the pilot was the need to guaranty the success of any
investment of time and money, before it could occur. In a few instances, only two
entrepreneurs (from eight) recognized the experience either as an opportunity for both
improving knowledge and creating value for their companies, or an opportunity for
increasing the sustainable aspects of their operations or their competitiveness.
Despite diverse limitations, the MODU.Lares Project revealed that some partners had
feasible conditions to adopt new paths and collaborate toward a new scenario. However,
the strong state of passivity of the local furniture sector and other organizations (i.e.,
support institutions, local government) as well as political constraints also demonstrated
that, notwithstanding those feasible conditions, there is a demanding path to follow.
Therefore, it is decisive for the sector to recognize that innovation is not the enterprise of a
single entrepreneur and that systemic operations are a strategic key to MSEs. Above all, a
network-building effort is necessary which focuses on the adoption and the continued
execution of a set of new ideas among organizations which, through healthy interactions,
become properly engaged with these ideas in order to transform them into good and
replicable current practices.
REFERENCES
Best, K., 2006. Design Management. Managing design strategy, process and implementation.
Switzerland: AVA Publishing SA.
Elkington, J., 1994. Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for
Sustainable Development. California Management Review, 36(2), pp. 90100.
Lewin, K., 1946. Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues, pp. 34-46.
Ljungberg, L., 2005. Materials selection and design for development of sustainable products.
Materials and Design. Science Direct, Volume 28, pp. 466-479.
Lopes, F., Baldi, M., 2009. Redes como perspectiva de analise e como estrutura de governana:
uma analise das diferentes contribuies. Revista de Administrao Pblica, 43(5), pp. 1007-
1035.
Manzini, E., Vezzoli, C., 2002. O desenvolvimento de produtos sustentveis - os requisitos
ambientais dos produtos industriais. 1a. Ed. So Paulo: Edusp.
Marchica, M., 2004. Reti Aziendali e problemi di finanziamento: teorie e ipotesi interpretative.
In: F. Cafaggi, ed. Reti di impresa tra regolazione e norme sociali. Ed:Il Mulino.
Maxwell, D., van der Vorst, R., 2003. Developing sustainable products and services. Journal of
Cleaner Production, Volume 11, pp. 883-895.
Morelli, N., 2007. Social Innovation and New Industrial Contexts: Can Designers "Industrialize"
Socially Responsible Solutions?. Design Issues v. 23, n. 4, Autumm, pp. 3-21.
Mozota, B. B., 2003. Design Management using design to build brand value and corporate
innovation. New York, NY: Allworth Press
Nunes, V. G. A. 2013. Design Pilot Project as a Boundary Object: A Strategy to Foster Sustainable
Design Policies for Brazilian MSEs. Doctoral thesis. INDACO Department, POLIMI, Milan, Italy.
Oliveira, P. et al., 2012. Cadeia produtiva da movelaria: o Plo Moveleiro do Tringulo Mineiro,
Viosa/MG: EPAMIG.
Parker, S., Ford, E., 2009. Principles for Networked Innovation: Learning Lessons from the RSA
Networks Project. London: NESTA.
Porter, M. E., Kramer, M. R., 2006. Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive
Advantage and Corporate Social. Harvard Business Review, pp. 7893.
SENAI, FIEMG, SEBRAE & SINDMOB, 2006. Diagnstico empresarial das industrias moveleiras
de Uberlandia e Regiao. Uberlandia: Sistema FIEMG. Pool Comunicaao.
Silveira, D., Crdova, F., 2009. Unidade 2 - a pesquisa cientfica. In: T. Gerhardt & D. Silveira, a
cura di Mtodos de Pesquisa. Porto Alegre: Editora da UFRGS, pp. 31-.
Van de Ven, A., 1986. Central problems in the Management of Innovation. Management Science
v.32, n.5, May, pp. 590-607.
Vezzoli, C., 2007. System Design for Sustainability. Theory, methods and tools for a sustainable
"satisfaction-system" design. Ottobre. Maggiore Editore, S.p.S..
Yin, R., 2009. Case Study Research: design and methods. 4th a cura di Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage Publications, Inc.