Working on this issue of S&P made me keenly aware of the creative process and the different ways it functions within manufacturing. Clearly, there is no one right way to approach successful production. There are three features in this issue that are in essence stories of different planning strategies. While end products are interesting, it takes the context of the process to fully appreciate them.

I have my own creative process. Although there is a huge amount of research that goes into any feature story, when I actually sit down to write, the first draft generally proceeds without much structure. Certainly there is some technique and basic organization of thoughts, but for the most part the process is just getting comfortable with the information and trying out possibilities. The beautiful thing about my creative process is the permission to make something that is absolute garbage. I can revise, or start over completely as many times as necessary to create a good editorial product. Of course my material costs are low (mostly consumable goods that are either crunchy or caffeinated, with the occasional sip of something stronger). There is no additional cost for me to produce more copy, and any waste from the editorial product disappears completely with the push of a button.

This is not always the case. In fact, when it comes to the production of material goods, as much revision as possible must be done in the planning stages. Material waste is costly and strategic mistakes even more so. Creativity and planning must go hand in hand.

For me the Robert Shaw Mfg. piece was fascinating to work on because of the team’s almost supernatural understanding of the creative process. From the ether of a designer’s vision, the company teases out all the tangible details of each unique job, as well as all the possible challenges, before the actual fabrication process even begins. No two jobs are the same, and each premium architectural woodwork project has a very precise objective. This operation is the epitome of careful planning.

Mossy Oak on the other hand, is an intriguing story because it sets the stage for the creative process. Kudos to the people who thought up this application of an already widely recognized and popular design. The adaptation of existing designs to decorative surfaces shows how careful planning can create a fertile environment for product development.

Innovation doesn’t always mean brand new. In fact, using existing resources in new ways is the height of creativity. I’m sure someone is going to read the story on composite five-piece doors and think, “Hey, we already use all of those things…” It could be the beginning of a whole new plan. Aufderhaar and I have discussed this trend at great length. It is not an “if” or “when” or even “how” possibility. The homework is done, the only remaining question is “who?”

One of the best parts of this job is gaining insights into how different companies approach the creative process. In this marketplace of ideas it is always exciting to watch emerging concepts, and infinitely interesting to see how those ideas are brought into reality. There is no limit on innovation. Who knows what’s next? Maybe five-piece camouflage doors…?

Until next time,

Suzanne VanGilder • Editorial Director • svangilder@surfaceandpanel.com