Max Plummer

This exploratory research tests a plausible new paradigm for object creation that combines the benefits of mass and local production scales by distributing standardized, objectively designed components to local artisans. The goal is to provide agency to one-off and batch producers in order to create what may be termed hybrid objects. The nature of the hybrid making approach is uncovered through the research.

This research utilized a research-through-design (RtD) methodology in order to better understand the new making paradigm. With a stool chosen as a vehicle object, the researcher designed and produced objectively ergonomic seat pan components within mass-manufacturing parameters. These parts were then distributed to nine central Anatolian artisans for use in novel seating objects. No design instruction was given to the participants. Once created and returned to the researcher, submitted stools were analyzed based on design and workmanship criteria. Each maker was interviewed in order to supplement submissions with maker’s opinions on the hybrid making approach.

The submitted objects are diverse in design approach, workmanship philosophy, and capability. Object appraisals and interviews indicate that the hybrid making approach improved object utility and had a mixed impact on object narrative. Artisans of different original capability levels are affected by the approach in different ways, with experts being most capable of harnessing benefits while simultaneously mitigating limitations. Artisans were optimistic about the incorporation of hybrid making into their businesses and into the small-scale making industry, demonstrating alongside the submissions the potential in the hybrid making approach.

Materials Experience and Design Opportunities of New Medium-Scale Manufacturing Methods

Consumers are using global communication methods to build unique worldviews and define their styles as individuals independent of mass-market trends. Consumer preferences are diversifying, leading to fewer opportunities to justify mass-manufacturing. Simultaneously, new and re-imagined manufacturing technologies create opportunities for small- and medium-scale production beyond arts and crafts and do-it-yourself; these methods may open the door for valid business models at a medium scale.

Design must develop an understanding of the design for manufacture and material opportunities specific to these new technologies in order to capitalize on their potential, rather than simply transposing the current understanding of large-scale production to these new making methods. Indeed, medium scale manufacturing may yield new ways to showcase a redefined sense of craft and material experience – more perfect than handmade, and more human than mass-manufactured.

Utilizing a research-through-design methodology, I will survey material and manufacturing pairings based on feasibility, novelty, and application to overall research goals. I will then explore, categorize, and test a single pairing with the aim of extrapolating the findings for other adjacent materials and methods. I will design and make objects with the intention of revealing new scale-specific DFM and material strategies, and measure success by gauging others’ appreciation of these objects relative to “control” objects made using traditional craft or mass-manufacturing methods. A roadmap for designers and business owners that showcases the benefits achievable with medium-scale manufacturing will be prepared.

What happens when precision is only displayed when necessary, for instance to keep a stool from rocking, or at moments of precise joinery? What is a piece of firewood with two custom complex CNC joints on either end, with the bark still on in the middle? Is that as little as possible, is it restraint, is it honesty? Is it interesting that the material can do both?

thoughts on precision | September 24, 2021

Large-run manufacturing methods and artisan craft making traditions stand at opposite ends of a spectrum of scale, and the center of this spectrum remains vacant. How can industrial designers design for this middle scale while leveraging advantages from both making traditions?  

Most products in our lives are, to some degree, mass manufactured. This is no surprise: mass manufacturing of objects in daily life is convenient because of the values it affords in required objects. For example, the cost-effectiveness of scale is apparent, but beyond cost savings these methods allow detail resolution, unique material/form opportunities, and access to precision and repeatability (Campana, G., Cimattia, B., Melosia, F., 2016). Furthermore, mass manufacturing benefits from a robust pipeline and established method for training professionals. With all this said, the paradigm is not without its faults: by definition, one must make many, many copies of an object. From a practical standpoint this puts this making tradition out of reach of many small-scale companies and individuals, typically requires large investment, and may contribute to a pervasive homogeneity in a culture’s used objects.

            On the contrary, many of our most beloved objects are one-off, handmade creations fabricated by experts of implicit craft knowledge. These objects are typically analogue, culturally significant, and have imprecise technical or performance requirements. What makes these objects significant to us is not their ability to perform their prescribed task, but rather their semantic, aesthetic qualities and the associations they create for us. Of course, artisan products are not without their faults as well: typically they are expensive, difficult to source reliably, and occupy niches that are not always required. Artisan values and scale are often seen as mutually exclusive (Solomon S.J. & Mathias, B.D., 2020).

            Distilling the values of both extremes we see precision, performance, and cost as the benefits of mass manufacturing. For artisanship we see beauty, aesthetics, and, connection to the maker. I hypothesize that the two methods remain separate because their traditions and cultures remain separate, and knowledge acquisition processes are opposite. I would like to explore what the design process might look like for objects in the middle of the spectrum: leveraging the benefits of mass manufacturing for the bones, and the benefits of artisan craftsmanship and creativity for the flesh. Relevant knowledge areas for this research will include a clear list of pros/cons for each end of the scale spectrum, which will define assessment criteria for the made hybrid objects. Opinions of individuals embedded in both schools of thought would also be beneficial. More broadly, open design goals and product-specific consumer preferences will be important contextual knowledge before establishing a research plan or a “vehicle” object.

Campana, G., Cimattia, B., Melosia, F. (2016). A proposal for the evaluation of craftsmanship in industry. Procedia CIRP (40) 668-673.

Solomon S.J. and Mathias, B.D. (2020). The artisans' dilemma: Artisan entrepreneurship and the challenge of firm growth. Journal of Business Venturing (35) 106044.

Jamia Mosque of Khiva (photo: Marie Claire Maison) (1788)

alpha: post / beta: support base

Sung Jang, Given (2021)

alpha: granite / beta: wood supports

Normal Studio, Carafe Fresh (2021, fabricated by Atelier Mercier)

alpha: terra cotta pipe form / beta: handle stamp action

Konstantin Achkov, Z-Tense (2021)

alpha: plywood assemblies / beta: thread tensioning

Lert, V1 Joint System (2021)

alpha: joints / beta: plywood

Jo Nagasaka, stool (2021)

alpha: glued assembly / beta: lathe action

The rise of mass personalization has brought to the forefront mass manufacturing’s failure to satisfy diversifying consumer demands, and business goals and consumer preferences have aligned to incentivize product diversity. Many researchers believe Industry 4.0 theories provide the best path forward towards cost-effective mass personalization; however, this technocratic approach introduces unforeseen and unnecessary problems of compounding tolerance within processes and products alike. Furthermore, consumer-designed products are often naive or silly: good design is often diluted when buyers are given too much control over a final product.

Already-established craft traditions provide an opportunity to solve both these systemic shortcomings. First, these traditions enjoy an inherent understanding of culture and aesthetics, replacing the blind consumer-led form-giving step. Second, while these makers’ tolerances are lesser than industry 4.0 methods, final-step customization processes rarely require such precision and even may benefit from makers’ softer design-while-fabricating approach. Can the artisan craft tradition be matched with mass manufacturing methods to create more manufacturable, valuable mass personalization objects? What values are manifested when artisan craftsmanship is employed to solve last-step customization?

updated problem statement | November 24, 2021

I am hesitant about incorporating “artisan craft” as a romanticized concept. I’d rather discuss local maker cultures, maker spaces, medium-scale local production, that sort of thing instead of calling on these grand old traditions.

thoughts | November 25, 2021

mass personalization: problems and opportunities

research proposal

This is the third revision of the top seat pan surface, which is mathematically the easiest to manipulate. The original design was a three profile loft with two swept surfaces for the thighs, the second design was a 5 profile loft, and this is a 3 profile loft. I’m hopeful the refinement of the top surface will make prototyping and modifying easier in next steps.

I also updated the base to include threaded holes, which will probably become heat set inserts in more standard sizes. I’m still looking for more connection opportunities on the base, specifically for ceramicists. Plastic, Metal, and Wood joinery all feels more mechanical and more familiar.

top surfacing update and base redesign | March 7, 2022

Seatpan vertical holes updated to include heat set inserts for thermoplastics (wouldn’t be compatible with a thermoset resin cast).

updated seat pan with new design examples | March 7, 2022

seat pan detail resolution | March 8, 2022

white gloss

clear gloss

stereolithography yellow

white matte

clear matte

stereolithography white

opportunities | March 14, 2022