BraunPrizeBlog

Last but not least I’d like to finish my report about the BraunPrize 2007 forum with referring to the head of Braun Design: Peter Schneider.

First of all let me state that Peter is far more relaxed than it might appear here in the video. If you meet him in person he truly is an energetic, curious while still a critical person. During the jury meetings I’ve always experienced him as an experienced juror which is no wonder since this has been his 8th BraunPrize jury he has participated in!

What Peter emphasises and illustrates in his forum address is the relation between Braun Design principles and their reflection in the BraunPrize itself. For him design is most innovative if it is able to generate value for the user in combination with design quality. And for sure this is also the key premise for successfully competing in the BraunPrize as well.

However he has lots more of advice to share. While one might think that submissions that are close to Braun’s product lines are being favoured Peter explains that this is not the case at all. For him design with the people/user in mind and design that is embedded in our everyday lives (work, health, recreation, leisure, sports, family, etc.) is what the BraunPrize is about. And as you will understand Donn Koh’s submission has addressed most of these criteria very well.

Anyway if you want to get a better understanding what it takes to make it to the last round of future BraunPrize entries listen to Peter’s speech! Any while I’m at it: Hopefully see, hear, read about you here on this blog when it comes to: BraunPrize 2009!

From my very own perspective I find it a great ‘unspoken rule’ that the BraunPrize jury needs to comprise at least one woman. Moni Wolf filled her role in a perfect fashion as she combined freshness of attitude with insights from technology & innovation (facilitated by her responsibilities at her employer Motorola) paired with curiosity on emerging future trends.

Therefore it’s no wonder that in her address Moni emphasised the intelligent and very often seamless use of technology in the various entries. But most importantly she highlights that from her perspective this has not been done for the sake of technology itself, but rather for solving complex problems with quite simple, yet intelligent and effective solutions.

According to her view from the very beginning submissions & designs that made offers to relevant, implementable solutions while still keeping aesthetics in mind made it smoothly to the next stage of the judging process.

In any case she has lots more of advice. So listen to her forum address:

Next in line has been Dr. Mark Breitenberg from Art Center College, Pasadena/US. In his adorable way of articulating complex issues via the selected use of the English language Mark thanked Braun for the perfect organisation of the competition as well as for applying the high quality standards of Braun Design to the execution of the BraunPrize competition itself.

One of his key remarks has been that as a member of the ICSID board he is visiting a lot of design schools around the globe. Accordingly he is pretty much impressed how well design students use their skills in order to not only solve everyday problems, but also more and more issues that address our quality of life as well as environmental issues.

For him quite a few BraunPrize entrants (he estimates almost 50%) demonstrated that there is a great sense of social and ethical responsibility reflected in their thinking and designs. However listen to him yourself:

Well what remains to be shared here are the short statements the BraunPrize jury members addressed at the audience of the BraunPrize forum.

I’d like to start with Benjamin Holch. The jury membership of Benjamin this year has been a sort of novum for the BraunPrize since Benjamin was a BraunPrize Winner himself back in 2003. Accordingly he has experienced the process of judging from a slightly different angle as it has been only four years since he stood on the panel presenting his very own entry as well.

In his short address he openly shares his memories from his participation in 2003 as well as his observations from the perspective of a 2007 jury member.

From my very own perspective I’ve experienced his participation in the jury as very stimulating and valuable as he seemed to act as a kind of mediator between students/participants and the more distant design professionals of the jury.

So this video drop-out took slightly longer than expected, but no worries I won’t bother you with any details here ;-) In any case: Thanks for your patience and understanding!

So as the title suggests: What is left to be said about the BraunPrize 2007? Well when you’ve been able to look behind the scenes of the BraunPrize as I’ve used to than for sure there is stuff for a lot of postings … On the other hand this blog has been our first experiment with this medium in this context so for this iteration of the BraunPrize I’d like to focus on sharing the most interesting basics in order to give you a good overall impression on the character and scope of such an event.

Therefore any report about the BraunPrize 2007 finale would be incomplete without sharing the final jury statements with you. It’s part of the BraunPrize tradition that the jurors give a short wrap-up speech about their overall impressions from being a member of the BraunPrize jury.

Accordingly I will finally present each of the 3 BraunPrize 2007 jury members here for you and finish this BraunPrize blog (at least for this iteration) with the keynote given by Peter Schneider, Head of Braun Design and chairman of the jury.

So, enjoy this last chapter of the BraunPrize 2007 finale!

Second jury member in a row was Udo Milutzki. Udo is actually with Braun for 47 years (that’s continuity, folks!) in various postions and today he’s Gillette’s Vice President Engineering and Product Program Management.

For Milutzki it has been the second time he’s been member of the jury and from my perspective the fact that the BraunPrize jury explicitly acknowledges the engineering discipline makes it again different from other design competitions where mostly design experts are engaged.

One key insight Milutzki is sharing is that “Design” at Braun is being considered as an equity which not only in terms of a function, but also as a way of living the brand. Accordingly he sees the “application of design” (in its broadest sense) not only in Braun’s products, but also in corporate architecture as well as corporate spirit and behaviour at Braun Design.

Anyway instead of reading my summary you should rather listen to him directly. Simply click on the video shot below:

Just before the rest of us is rushing forward to the annual summer vacation I’d thought it might be nice to share a set of three videos interviews I’ve made at the second and last BraunPrize jury session on June, 13th.

You must know that it’s not always easy to get the folks in front of a camera after two stressful days of discussion, collaboration and argue; therefore some moaning [in German] before the interview guaranteed ;-) In any case I was more than happy that Peter Schneider and Udo Milutzki agreed on some short interviews on their impressions and experiences with the BraunPrize 2007.

First in row was Peter Schneider who in contrast to the stereotype “Designer Diva” you would usually expect to meet candidly answered my questions regarding an event he now assisted for the 8th time ever since 1986! So from my view “consistency” is exactly what Peter Schneider expresses with his remark right at the beginning of the interview and what characterizes the atmosphere at the jury sessions: “I feel as part of the family”.

Having said this in the interview Peter shares with us what still fascinated him about the BraunPrize beyond his formal role as head of design at Braun. Beyond this are discussing the changing role of design at Braun and in general as well as his impressions about the record scoring submissions this year.

Last but not least he tells us about his view on the phenomenon that among others one main motivation for students to take part in the BraunPrize is indeed its linkage to and heritage from the company’s history. Having participated in the BraunPrize seems to serve as some sort of “quality seal”: A great deal for the participants and an appreciation of the work of the jury. Well that definitively can be called a win-win deal!

I’m already looking forward to Wednesday & Thursday this week when I’ll meet the BraunPrize Jury 2007 for the first time in Kronberg at the corporate headquarters of Braun and Braun Design.

While preparing myself for some nice conversations & interviews I’ve stumbled across a short series of Q&A with the jury members to be found on the BraunPrize website.

Just to remind you who this year’s jury members are, here we go. While you can go through the complete interviews here I’ve allowed myself to pick and list the most interesting (according to my perception) quotes for you:

Moni Wolf, Director of Design at Motorola, iDEN, Plantation, USA:

“My main inspiration is born out of the love to dealing with problems. Having fun with discovering them, defining them and trying my best to resolving them cleverly. Multidisciplinary and multi cultural teams are a lot of fun and offer a great deal of inspiration and new ideas/viewpoints.”

Dr. Mark Breitenberg, Dean of Undergratuate Education at Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, California, USA:

“My definition of good design is design that solves a problem that leading to a better quality of life. By “quality of life” I include not just social issues but also the business of everyday life as well as the importance of beauty and pleasure.”

Benjamin Holch, Designer/Design analyst, Frogdesign Europe GmbH, and BraunPrize winner 2003:

“The BraunPrize has a special role because its participants are totally free in what they want to send in. If you see how many students and young designers from all over the world send in their designs and ideas this year you can clearly see the enjoyment which these people have in selling themselves, in competing against the others.”

Peter Schneider, Director Corporate Design at Braun and chairman of the BraunPrize Jury:

“Competition is part of our life. Not only designers should be trained to compete with others and assess their capabilities. But they should consciously look for which Design Prize they apply for. Some of the organizers are interested in grabbing new ideas in a cheap way. The ICSID endorsement is a valuable “quality mark” for open design competitions.”

Udo Milutzki, Vice President Engineering and PPM at GTM Kronberg:

“Don’t stop learning. Young designers should search and apply new technologies and materials, strive to reach clear forms and easy to use products; this makes them invaluable. The interplay between design and engineering is very evident to create innovative products.”

Stay tuned for the next couple of days and check back soon for my jury session blogging! I’ll also check where to find the live webcam on the BraunPrize site …

I’ve received a note from a BraunPrize team member today about a recent email conversation with one of the visitors of the BraunPrize website.

In this email a design student raised some criticism about the (according to his view) low proportion of time invested into the judgment process in comparison to the (absolutely high!) number of submissions. And to be honest this first sight impression is more than understandable!

For sure a member of the BraunPrize team has been so kind to respond and explain some of the most important details around the judgment process and jury sessions to the student. After all I think some arguments from this conversation might be worth to share with you. Unfortunately the correspondence has been in German so the value of some snippets might be limited. However let me try to summarize the most important statements for you here:

• In total there are 2 Jury Sessions each of which lasts for 3 days. This makes a total of 6 full workdays!
• For each jury session the complete city hall of Kronberg (Braun’s Corporate Headquarter) is being reserved for the BraunPrize competition.
• For the duration of the jury sessions all stakeholders fully dedicate their time into the judgment procedure. Due to the location there is no quick chance neither for checking emails nor for any ad-hoc meetings with externals ;-)
• In case of any technical questions or concerns a team of engineers, health professionals and senior designers is instantly available for any consultations

Last but not least all invited jury members (present and past) are professionals in their domain and have worked several times in similar contexts. So your work/submission is in good hands!

Thanks to e.sens.e (the Media Agency which is responsible for the technical setup around this blog and the BraunPrize website among others) I’ve been able to share this well edited video below containing impressions from the jury sessions of the BraunPrize 2003. In the video you will see Anne Stenros, Alexander Manu, Rainer Silbernagel and Peter Schneider among others during and in between the jury sessions. Enjoy!

Link: sevenload.com

P.S.: Stay tuned as I will post some notes about the current Jury members of the BraunPrize 2007 soon. Furthermore I’m even more excited about the fact that I will join the jury at their first jury meeting in Kronberg on March, 14th – 15th.