FIXING THINGS

An Exploration of the Experience of Repairing Consumer ProductsBy Greg Burkett

This book is based on thesis research done in the Master of Science in Design program at Arizona State University. Its purpose is to serve as a guide to the human experience of product repair and to the opportunities within repair to create positive experiences, reduce our ecological impact, and create business value.

If you would like further information on this research or my other work,

contact me at gregsburkett@gmail.com or visit www.gregburkett.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IntroductIon & FramIng

About the Study

Ecological Context

Cultural Context

Business Context

tHE rEPaIr EXPErIEncE

The Repair Journey

Introduction

Use

Repair Story: Natalie’s iPhone

Repair Story: Peter’s Blender

Failure

Decision

Repair Story: Tony & Leah’s Baby Gate

Action

Results

Repair Story: Dan’s MacBook

InSIgHtS & FramEWorKS

The Support-Value Transfer

5 Key Areas of Need

3 Approach to Repair

Moments that Matter

Insights into the Broader Context

arEaS oF oPPortunItY

Increase Brand Equity Through Repair

Adapt Product–Service Systems to Support Repair

Discuss Repair with Customers

Influence & Streamline the Repair Decision

Support Actions During Repair

Extend the Relationship Beyond Repair

aPPEndIX: tHE rESEarcH JournEY

Planning

Data Collection

Analysis

Backstory

12

06

26

34

42

iNTrOduCTiON& FrAMiNG

The practice of product repair has become neglected as consumption has increased and products have become more technologically complex. As companies simultaneously increase focus on customer experience and reducing their ecological impact, the subject of product repair will have an increased importance. This chapter will give you a further introduction to the research, and some context.

• Dan, one of the participants in

this study, showed me how difficult

and dangerous it would be to repair

his amplifier.

�

Durable goods are the most difficult to recover through recycling, leaving

many in the landfill. Trust and loyalty in brands is disappearing and brand

retention is becoming increasingly more complicated. These and other

factors have contributed to a gradual increase in the discussion of the

creation of more durable consumer products.

When companies begin to design products for durability, they are designing

an unfamiliarly long-lived user experience, which needs careful management.

Hurdles within this experience include creating attachment, fending off

desire for new products, upgrading products, ensuring products are reliable,

and repairing the products when they are broken or malfunction. Additionally

there are barriers to the implementation of repair, including economic,

cultural, and technological ones.

This research study sought to understand repair from a human-centered

perspective, to inform the design of longer lasting, more reparable products

and the services and businesses that support repair. All research, essentially,

focused around this one question:

What is the experience of repairing products like?

What are peoples’ stories of repairing consumer products? What are their

attitudes about the repair of consumer products? What are similarities and

differences in their experiences? Is there a common framework behind the

repair experience? What are peoples’ unmet needs in the repair experience?

Through a series of 8 deep conversations with 10 participants who had a

variety of experiences, as well as an introspective self-study, I have tried

to find answers to these questions. This book documents these answers

and provides insight into the repair experience through stories, themes,

and frameworks. Finally, a set of opportunities existing within the space

of product repair are articulated. These opportunities are framed with

questions that designers, business people, and entrepreneurs can use

to begin generating product, service, and business concepts that would

improve the repair experience, reduce ecological impacts, and create better

brand equity with people.

Though this research uncovered some powerful connections, it is important

to remember that the sample was relatively small, and consists of middle

class, mostly caucasian Americans in the Phoenix metropolitan area.

About this Study

• THE PARTICIPANTSParticipants were sampled based on their experience with repair. I looked to extremes on each end of the spectrum. I will refer to all of the participants throughout this book Below is a cheat sheet:

Pseudonym PeterDanTony & LeahFelixMaryEverettNatalie & ScottBethGreg

age range45–5425–3435–4445–5435–4418–2435–4425–3418–24

repair Freq.AverageHighAverageHighAverageAverageAverageLowLow

8

Though much environmental concern is currently directed at CO2

production and energy use related to climate change, it has become an

imperative for western countries to reduce their overall material throughput

and waste output by massive amounts. Activity in the ecodesign space

has been primarily focused on energy use, natural materials, and recycled

materials. Chapman1 has argued that most ecodesign tends to be “symptom

based”, and relies on a technological approach.

An over-emphasis on recycling has also led to the new “culture of recycling”2

that promotes recyclable cars and washing machines. Some argue that

this approach could lead to all products that malfunction being recycled

rather than repaired, when repair uses considerably less resources. In this

sense recycling becomes an excuse for more consumption1. When the

material waste of durable goods is viewed solely from the household waste

perspective, it can be misleading2. If household and commercial waste

streams are combined and the impact of the replacement products is

considered, the waste creation and resource depletion of product obsoles-

cence is considerable. Each ton of waste created by the consumer equates

to roughly five tons of waste during manufacture and twenty tons of waste

during resource extraction3.

No countries of the world have been completely successful in creating an

infrastructure to capture and recycle technical nutrients, and it is possible

that burdens generated from the collection of materials for recycling may

outweigh possible ecological boons. Based on this information, increasing

useful product life span has been cited as a key strategy for reducing our

resource consumption.

Ecological Context

TOTAL MUNICIPALSOLID WASTE

1. EMOTIONALLY DURABLE DESIGNChapman’s Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy is an excellent treatise on product durability.

• U.S. EPA SOLID MUNICIPAL WASTEBased on the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (2008) 2007 report on municipal solid waste. The total amount of solid waste created has continued to grow, as has the amount recovered (through recycling).

The recover of durable goods is only 18%, lower than any other category of goods. This data is not adjusted for population increase.

2. BEYOND RECYCLINGFrom Tim Cooper’s Beyond Recycling: The Durability Option (1992).

1960 200� 1960 200�

0

Tota

l MS

W G

ener

atio

n (m

illio

n to

ns)

150

0

150

300

NONDURABLE GOODS

DURABLE GOODS

CONTAINERS& PACKAGING

TOTAL AMT.AMT. RECOVERED

3. BEYOND THE LIMITSFrom Meadows, Meadows, & Rander’s Beyond the Limits (1992).

9

conSumPtIon oF oBJEctS

Our society’s consumption of objects and therefore natural resources has

continuously grown since the post-WWII years.4 It has been similarly reported

that if all humans were “to develop a lifestyle approaching that of the US or

of Western Europe, at least two additional planets such as ours would have

to be harness to provide the required energy and materials.” 5 The average

US person has been found to consume twice as much per day as they did 50

years ago. Yet the nation’s happiness peaked right around that same time.

This has been expanded upon in other studies, showing that despite the

fact that most of modern day consumption is to fulfill “higher needs”, that

“material well-being does not correlate with subjective well being. For

instance, while the average American’s income measured in constant dollars

has doubled in the last 40 years, the level of happiness they report has not

changed.”5 Many Americans are becoming aware of this and some consumer

trends are emerging that challenge our current idea of consumption where

we continue to desire the unattainable—the satiation of all our desires.

Human-Product rELatIonSHIPS

“We seldom witness users affectionately stroking and caressing machines

after they perform well; most users, however, are prepared to invest and

enormous degree of emotional outlay in dysfunctional objects.”1 Chapman

has argued that people have emotional relationships with objects, and

that constant disappointment is one of the contributing factors to product

obsolescence and to peoples’ frustration. He posited, “a greater degree of

emotional resonance and symbolic exchange between users and objects

would elevate interaction beyond its current state.”1 Essentially, if emotional

relationships with objects are more meaningful and there is more oppor-

tunity for personal connection with a product, we may keep them longer

and be a bit happier in the process.

But how many products can people really love? Ezio Mazini articulated

this thought, “Speaking for myself: it is difficult for me to love more than

one woman. Maybe its my limitation, but that’s the way it is. And so the idea

is that if we try to solve the problem of sustainability by only thinking that

you have to love products one by one, which probably is important, you don’t

get the real solution. So at the end of the discussion the idea was that maybe

we don’t have to have so many lovable products, but that we could have a

basic system of services as well that could give us everything else we need

for our lives.6

Cultural Context

4. CONSUMPTIONRobert Bocock’s Consumption (1993) covers the genesis of modern day capitalist consumption, which really started post-WWII.

5. COSTS & BENEFITS OF CONSUMINGPsychologist Csikszentmihalyi’s article on the relationship between happiness and consumption, The Costs and Benefits of Consuming (2005).

6. EZIO MAZINIFrom the Time in Design conference, documented in the resource on product durability edited by Ed van Hinte, Eternally Yours: Time in Design (2004).

10

SHIFtIng EconomIcS

Much has been written about the need for a paradigm shift in thinking

about limitless economic growth, which has been inextricably tied to

resource depletion, waste, and planned obsolescence—and therefore

product durability. Daly and Farley� discussed this as a shift from thinking

of the economy as a separate entity from the biosphere and argue that

economics must begin to consider its reliance on rapidly depleting resources.

Though no real policies suggesting a reduction in consumption of consumer

products have been introduced, there have been policies introduced or that

are taking shape in the western world that affect the durability of consumer

products. Many EU countries have introduced increasingly tighter regula-

tions requiring manufacturers to be responsible for their products at the end

of life. There have been other policy changes suggested by economists, such

as “ecological tax reform, switching from taxing labour to taxing energy, raw

materials and landfill sites”8. Policy like this could resolve manufacturers to

think more dutifully about product lifetime.

duraBILItY and tHE SErvIcE EconomY

A service economy, which has been predicted as the successor of our current

model9, involves the reframing of ownership, and “that manufacturers cease

thinking of themselves as sellers of products and become, instead, deliverers

of service, provided by long-lasting, upgradeable durables. Their goal is

selling results rather than equipment, performance and satisfaction rather

than motors, fans, plastics, or condensers.”9 A service economy has many

implications for the durability of products. The “reduction of materials use,

maximization of product durability, and enhanced ease of maintenance

not only improve the customer’s experience and value but also protect the

manufacturer’s investment and hence its bottom line.”9

duraBILItY and Brand

Chapman1 offered several arguments for the positive impacts of product

durability on a company’s brand, though no empirical evidence of this

could be found. When given the time to develop empathy with a company’s

product, customers can gain brand empathy, therefore, “when the time

eventually does come for replacement, brand loyalty is generally high.” This

could also lead to a customer buying other products from that brand, due to

their positive experience and empathy with that brand. He also argues that

when consumers are able to gain empathy with their products, it “trans-

forms products into talking points, linking consumers to producers through

ongoing dialogues.”

Business Context

�. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICSDaly & Farley clear up the relationship between economics and the planet in Ecological Economics (2003).

8. THE LONG SEARCHCooper & Christer, The Long Search: Looking for longer lasting products (2005).

9. NATURAL CAPITALISMHawken, Lovins & Lovin’s Natural Capitalism (1999) has much to say on the service economy, among other important topics.

11

THE rEPAir EXPEriENCE

What is the repair experience like? Despite the variety of products, companies, and services, there are underlying themes and structures to the experience. This chapter will discuss the different phases, details, commonalities, and anomalies of participants’ repair journeys, and will tell some of their repair stories.

• The blade of my 1980s food

processor could not deliver on my

roommates desire for crushed ice in

his smoothie.

13

INFLUENCE ON REPAIR OUTCOME

Warranty

Durability

Investment

Expectations

Lifetime data

Reviews

POP

Intensity

Significance

Attachment

Moment of

Emotions

Nature

Cause

History

Repair vs. Replace

Self vs. Service

Warranty

Attachment

Principles

Confidence

Attitude

Ability

Parts

Time

Cost

Internet

Others

Self vs. Service

Manufacturer

Employees

Internet

Product

Retail

Service

Tools

Parts

Manuals

Friends

Family

Emotions

Satisfaction

Anxiety

Return to use

INTRO

TOUCHPOINTS / FACTORS

USE FAILURE DECISION ACTION RESULT

The Repair Journey

Whether participants were sending digital cameras to manufacturers, taking

a MacBook to the Apple store, or deconstructing a baby gate latch they

journeyed through six general phases: Introduction; Use; Failure; Decision;

Action; and Results. Different interactions, emotions, and touch points

existed within each of these phases, and they varied depending on how the

repair process was approached.

Introduction

A person’s practical thinking determines the purchase of a product and

includes many variables. Some key subtopics of the purchase process affect

the trajectory of the repair journey. Participants were not always responsible

for the purchase of products we discussed, which can also affect the process.

PurcHaSIng For quaLItY and duraBILItY

Participants mentioned purchasing certain products for quality and

durability, and had several methods for determining such qualities. Internet

research was a useful tool to, as Felix mentioned, “weed-out” the products

that may have not met their standards. Tony attributed he and his wife’s

relatively few recent consumer electronic failures to good research. If one

wanted a long lasting, quality product, many participants noted, a higher

price was inevitable. Many noted that they had to learn their lesson the

hard way. Scott noted that “you get burned on stuff,” and many participants

alluded to their parents’ better purchasing habits.

WarrantIES

Warranties had strong influence of the flow of participants’ repair experi-

ences. Dan felt that a warranty’s value rested in the company’s reputation.

There was some suspicion that companies used warranties to increase

sales, because most consumers would not utilize the warranty. When

discussing the purchase of extended warranties, they had mixed feelings.

Scott expressed, “That’s just a way for them to make more money off of

you.” Other participants shared his sentiment. Mary felt that “if you make a

good product, you shouldn’t need a warranty.” The few extended warranties

participants had purchased were on consumer electronics with frequent use.

EXPEctatIon and conSIdEratIon oF FaILurE

Participants had varying positions about the appropriate lifetime for different

products, which was influenced by personal beliefs, price, and technology.

All of the participants seemed somewhat disenchanted with the average

lifetime of many consumer products, particularly electronics. “It’s like

everything electronic breaks, it drives me crazy,” Mary exclaimed. Partici-

pants, because of both technological obsolescence and low expectations

of technology, considered technology a hurdle for durability. Natalie spoke

about their TiVo’s upcoming obsolescence, “now there is the HD one that’s

not compatible with our TV, so now it’s like we have to get a new one.”

When purchasing for durability, participants tended to emphasize quality and

brand reputation over reparability. Dan noted that he would sometimes look

for things that are “user serviceable,” but that it “depends on the product.”

• BETH’S PHONEAware of her propensity for dropping things, Beth challenged the salesperson to find her the most durable phone available. The salesperson demonstrated one phone by throwing it across the room, though she decided to purchase a slightly less bulky one.

• MY WARRANTY EXPERIENCEWhen exploring my own history of warranties I realized that I had never purchased an extended warranty. A few other participants had the same realization.

• BUYING THE BESTTony and Leah had purchased several vacuum cleaners before purchasing their Dyson. Tony declared to me that “you would expect a vacuum to last a little longer than a year for a hundred and forty dollars,” but even after making an investment in the Dyson he felt that “it’s still a crap shoot.”

• SCOTT’S DJ HEADPHONESAfter wearing out two sets of headphones from demanding DJing use, Scott began to think about buying for reparability. Learning his lesson, he bought a set of headphones that have all replaceable parts, and has replaced the ear pads once since his purchase.

15

Use

The use of a product typically leads to its failure. People can use products in

ways that were not imagined by its designers, which can lead to failure, but

often they are using it as it was specified. What influences the repair process

the most about the use phase, is the relationship that people form with their

product through its use, which takes form in three qualities: significance,

attachment, and intensity.

SIgnIFIcancE

The significance of a product to a participant’s life can have implications

for the course the repair process takes. The significance of a product refers

to its impact on a participant’s life. When Peter lost a piece to his espresso

machine, it was a big deal because he started almost every day with its

coffee. This resulted in immediate action—a phone call to the manufacturer,

Starbucks. Similarly, Tony and Leah needed to act quickly when their refrig-

erator stopped operating. The repair men could not come If not, all of their

food would have spoiled. Insignificance of a broken product occasionally lead

to procrastination of the repair process. Peter had a broken external hard

drive that, eventually, needed to be repaired or recovered. Since it was just a

backup drive, though, he had no impetus for immediate action.

attacHmEnt

Emotional attachment to a product also affected repair. This attachment

can be aesthetic, reminiscent, or sentimental. Natalie had a rug she had

purchased on sale from Anthropologie that had begun fraying. She spent

a few hours searching the internet for a suitable replacement, but nothing

sparked her interest, and she didn’t want to spend a fortune. Instead, she

embarked on her first rug repair journey. Beth had thrown away many

rings, but when the ring her mother had passed down to her broke, it was

imperative that she took steps to have it repaired.

IntEnSItY

In some cases the routine or intensive use of a product was the cause of

failure. Beth was hard on her high heels and wore them often, noting that

she would “walk around in them like they are Doc Martin’s.” Scott’s DJ

headphones were also intensely used, being exposed to sweat and dropped

every weekend. Conversely, use can have nothing to do with the need for

repair. Dan was using his MacBook as his “don’t mess with” computer

that he cared for and used to store important files. The hard drive “made

a grinding noise, the machine froze, and then turned off,” without any

abnormal or erroneous use.

16

Use

Natalie and Scott were a single couple in their 30s.

They owned a mid-century home, and invested much

time finding and fixing up furniture and other items

to complement their home. Both were involved in

technology in some way in the past. Scott runs own tech

company in Phoenix, whereas Natalie is now a freelance

internet journalist. They were both busy people with

prominent social lives—and therefore little time. They

tended to procrastinate on repairing products, due to

their busy schedules.

They felt that they had reached a point in their life were

they purchased items they cared about, and often

bought vintage products. They had recently purchased

a hefty chili warmer, “I mean this thing is ridiculously

made…I don’t think you could find anything like this, with

this much material today,” Scott said of it. Though they

often preferred older items, they were also “technology

people” and kept up to date with newer technology

products such as computers and phones.

Natalie was on her second iPhone. Recently she had

dropped it (two days in a row, actually) and the glass

was cracked. Her immediate reaction was to cry and call

Scott, who told her not to worry, they could take care of

it. They had not purchased AppleCare, so Scott never

contacted the company. The phone still worked, so they

placed some clear plastic over the cracked screen as a

temporary fix—and to keep the glass out of Natalie’s ear.

Then Scott went to Google, and searched to find

what others had done. He came across some YouTube

videos that explained the process of replacing the glass,

and discovered that spare parts and tools were being

sold on eBay. He ordered parts from an individual in

Hong Kong for about $15. After receiving those parts,

though, Scott realized he needed to replace the LCD

screen inside of the phone as well. The phone still had a

cracked screen during my follow up several weeks after

interviewing them, though Scott assured me they would

get to it soon.

Repair Story:Natalie’s iPhone

After lifting a stack of books with it resting on top, Natalie’s iPhone went spilling toward the ground. Her husband Scott used the internet to learn how to repair it and buy parts.

Repair Story:Peter’s Blender

Peter, a 50-year-old creative director with a family of four,

told me in an interview about his experience repairing a

blender. When his mother moved in with his brother, she

liquidated most of her belongings—and Peter inherited

a few new things. One of these was a KitchenAid brand

blender. He and his wife had a blender already, but this

one was of higher quality, so they shelved the old one

and eventually handed it down to their son.

It performed well, but one day Peter’s wife was making

a morning smoothie and “somehow she broke a big

chunk off the top lip of the pitcher.” As only a portion of

the glass was broken, the blender was still functional.

They handled the malfunctioning blender for as long as

was tolerable by holding a towel over the cracked area to

block the leaking liquid from squirting on to the counter

and unto themselves.

One day the couple were in Target and found

themselves in the appliance aisle, pricing out new

blenders. It wasn’t an emergency, so his wife vowed to

find the one they liked at a cheaper price online. After

this encounter, Peter recalled, “What am I going to do

with this big heavy motor unit that is perfectly good?”

He made a visit to the KitchenAid web site and it was a

bit hard to navigate. “I thought, you know what? I’ll go

on eBay.” With a quick search, he located the pitcher,

in the company of most other replacement parts he

might someday need. He purchased the pitcher and as

well as another part that seemed to be deteriorating

on the blender, just in case. He noted his amazement in

the simplicity of the transaction, “they made it easier

to replace than KitchenAid did…obviously it’s not a big

deal to them to help you out.”

Peter inherited a really nice blender, but one day his wife dropped the pitcher on the counter. They almost purchased a new blender, but Peter found a replacement pitcher on eBay.

cauSE & naturE oF FaILurE

Product failures had two primary influences: the cause of failure and its

nature. Causes of failure fell on a continuum of “user” fault to manufacturer

fault (y-axis above). Failures caused by users were typically accidents or

misuses. In the center of this continuum were wear and tear failures, caused

from both intensive use and non-durable manufacture. In this group were

also misuses of the product that may not have been anticipated by the

manufacturer. Manufacturer’s fault resulted from defects or poorly designed

and produced goods. The nature of the failure describes its severity. Failures

can be on entire system levels, individual component levels, or in between

(x-axis above). For most participants, products (that were repaired) were

single or several simple component failures.

momEnt oF FaILurE

The moment of product failure was characterized by diverse signals: a

loud crack, the sudden realization of a missing piece, a gradual build up, or

a pushed in power button followed by…nothing. This moment influences

how participants make their repair decisions. Confusion was a common

reaction at the moment of failure. Leah, when unsuccessfully attempting to

return the hose of her vacuum in to the machine, thought that she wasn’t

doing it correctly. Gradual failure can still surprise, but foreshadows it with

symptoms. Everett’s laptop had slowed down and was running hot. When it

just “clicked off” one day it may have been startling, but he had a notion of

what the cause might have been.

Failure

Fridge

Toy Blender

Espresso

Umbrella

Bike Crockpot Microwave

Phone Food Processor

Microwave

Headphones

TiVo

Fridge

Gate

Mower

Cat House

Bed

Projector

iPhone

Furniture

Door Opener Laptop 1

MiniDisc

MacBook

Rug

Laptop 2COMPONENTFAILURE

SYSTEMFAILURE

MANUFACTURERCAUSED

WEAR & TEAR

ACCIDENT

USERCAUSED

SELF-LED REPAIR

SERVICE-LED REPAIR

Vacuum

DEFECTIVE /POOR DESIGN

• FAILURE MAPThis plot of failed products (that were repaired) on a biaxial map shows several simple correlations. Most repaired products fail at a component level (the “weakest link”) and, unless the product failed under a manufacturers warranty, they tend to do the repair themselves.

• PETER’S MISSING ESPRESSO SLEEVE“One morning I go to make the espresso and…no sleeve. Its gone, can’t find it anywhere. Wake my wife up ‘where’s the sleeve?’ ‘I don’t know’. I want my espresso. We had gotten in this habit of rapping it on the trash compactor…one of us must not have noticed that it popped out into the garbage compactor. Well, the trash had been picked up a couple days ago.”

19

InFLuEncES on tHE rEPaIr dEcISIon

Warranties were taken advantage of when participants had them, but rarely

purchased them. If a product had a warranty, it negated other influences.

Some had poor warranty experiences, which reduced their reliance on them.

cost influences replacement and repair type chosen. Economic cost led

many participants to self-repair decisions or replacement if it was too much.

attachment to a product was a key driver in the repair decision. If there was

emotional or functional product attachment, repair was seriously considered.

A person’s principles, such as concerns about the environment and a culture

too focused on material goods, affected their decision to repair or replace.

If there was confidence in the manufacturer to support the repair process,

participants were more likely to repair a product. Many had poor experiences

and had lost confidence in a manufacturers ability to even supply parts.

time was individual and contextual, as participants perceived time differently.

Some preferred to save money and spend time, others would rather not.

Those with a positive attitude toward repair tended to repair more products.

This attitude did not, however, consistently override other factors.

If people had tools and abilities to repair themselves they were likely to

repair. Lack of abilities led many people to service-led repair or replacement.

Finding parts was a huge obstacle in the decision. Many participants (and

even services) attempted to repair products, but were unable to locate parts.

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

ATTITUDE

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

DIAGNOSIS

Decision

• REPAIR DECISION TREEThough it is difficult to simplify into a flow chart, the repair decision has distinct levels of importance. For example, if a product has a warranty, the other factors matter little. If one has attachment for a product, but its cost is too high, and they do not have the ability to repair themselves, it may not be repaired.

HaveAbility

HaveTime

Willing toTry

HaveTools

WarrantyLackTime

Not Willingto Try

JustifiableLabor Cost

LackAbility

LackTools

Can Find Parts

Cost ofLabor

• REASONS FOR SERVICE-LED REPAIR

• REASONS FOR SELF-LED REPAIR

20

Repair Story:Tony & Leah’s Baby Gate

Tony and Leah were a 30-something couple with a

toddler and a newborn child. As homeowners, they

had repairs related to their homes, but on the whole

considered themselves “lucky” to have not avoided a

large amount of product failures. Tony attributed this to

their smart shopping habits, including reading consumer

reviews on the internet and buying name brands.

We discussed their repair experiences with products

including a vacuum cleaner, lawn mower, refrigerator, a

sprinkler system, and a baby gate.

The couple had purchased a baby gate roughly a year

before its failure. In addition to the price of the gate, they

also had to purchase materials and spend time to install

it. The gate had a locking mechanism that needed to be

released in order to open and properly close it. Rarely,

though, did people press the button in when closing the

gate. This caused the locking mechanism to collide with

the frame of the gate, resulting in a broken mechanism.

After dealing with the broken gate for a while, Tony

resolved himself to fix the problem. Buying a new one

would be expensive, and would require Tony to fully

uninstall the broken one, so it made sense for him to

attempt the repair.

Tony resolved himself to attempt to repair the gate.

One Sunday, left alone in the house, he gathered a

screwdriver, some glue, and some beers and opened

up the gate mechanism. The inside of the mechanism

was “all jacked up,” and required him to disassemble

the many pieces and figure out how to piece them all

back together. After several hours, he had finally put

everything back together correctly (though there were

a couple mystery pieces left on the table). When his wife

and children returned he was beaming like pride. Leah

joked, “He felt like he was superman.”

Due to its faulty design (or faulty use, depending on who you ask), Tony and Leah’s baby gate latch failed after only a year of use. Mechanical issues were Tony’s forte, so he did the fix.

SERVICECOMPANY

SERVICEPERSON

CUSTOMERSERVICE

WEBSITE

EMAILMAIL

CAR

EMAIL

PAPERWORK

RETAILEMPLOYEE

MAIL

WEBSITE

PHONEFAMILY

FRIENDS

SOCIALMEDIA

WEBSITEPHONE

STORE

TOOLS/MATERIALS

TRANSPORT

SPAREPARTS

MANUALS

MNFR /RETAIL

PART/ TOOLSUPPLY

UNOFFICIALSUPPORT

PRODUCT

USER

22

The decision-making and action-taking phases of the repair journey are

reciprocal and iterative. The action phase of the repair process is the most

contextually related to the decision of self-led or service-led repair and is

replete with interactions among people and manufacturer, repair store, and

between people and the objects that they are attempting to repair.

IntEractIng WItH tHE manuFacturEr

The choice to involve the company at all in the repair process varied per

participant. In many other cases manufacturer contact was a requisite

activity to engage in the repair process. Warranties led many participants

into contact with the manufacturer. Participants also needed to contact

manufacturers for parts or instruction. Many participants had poor manufac-

turer interactions, and therefore would eschew contacting them unless

absolutely necessary.

IntEractIng WItH otHEr SErvIcES or rEtaIL outLEtS

Some participants needed to seek out independent repair shops for

consumer products. Participants described this as a common occurrence for

vehicle and home issues, such as plumbing, but not for consumer products.

The primary concern when approaching a repair service was economic cost.

Participants justified the cost in this situation in different ways. Beth liked

going to the bike shop. She had no interest in learning to fix her own bike and,

besides, she always received something for free at the shop. Both Everett

and Natalie set limits for how much they would spend through a repair

service. These retail repair experiences varied from mundane, to poor, to

great. Manufacturers often connected people with these repair shops, and if

the experience was poor, it tended to reflect back on to the manufacturer.

PartS & InStructIonS

For any self-led repair activity, participants needed some variety of tools,

parts, or other materials in order to succeed. Some participants’ first

instincts were to contact the manufacturer. When Mary’s microwave oven

button broke, she called the manufacturer to order a new part and, though

she frowned at the forty-dollar price, ordered it. Felix was unsuccessful in

his attempt to purchase a replacement component for a hand-held blender,

even though it wa sa removable part. For some participants, the internet

served as primary or secondary way of locating parts. If Scott was in need

of a part, he looked there first. He recalled the search for a small part for his

garage door opener, “It was pretty difficult to find that little piece. I had to do

a lot of Google searching.”

Action

• EVERETT’S MINIDISC PLAYEREverett’s MiniDisc player was under manufacturer’s warranty when it ceased to function properly. He had to search his saved files for the warranty card that included a number to call. His call to the manufacturer resulted in being directed to the closest official warranty repair store. This practice of manufacturer as connector was common.

• MARY’S SON’S TOY“My son had this electric toy and one of the pieces on it broke. And it was old—like it was probably fifteen years old when he started using it…its so old its not like you can find replacement parts. So I called the manufacturer and they directed me to someone in California who just collects old parts of old toys, and he just charged me the postage to mail it to mail it back. So he fixed it and shipped it back, and that’s what he did…I think he was subsidized through the government or something.“

• DAN’S IKEA CIRCLE BED In Dan’s case, he searched to find if others had encountered similar problems to those he was having with an IKEA circle bed. “I looked, but nobody had solutions because they don’t sell that many…it was like oh, I’m going to have to come up with something of my own. I was actually on the toilet, where I have my best ideas. I said oh, if I can just cinch them all together.” His solution involved a trip to the hardware store to buy a large ratchet strap to compress the four modular pieces of the bed that had drifted apart.

23

tHE SatISFactIon oF rEPaIr

I encountered, first hand, the pleasure of a repaired product. My cell phone

battery had depleted to the point that I could only hold a three-minute call

without need of an electrical charge. At one point, a friend had given me

her old battery that briefly increased my talking time. At every step of the

journey, including two retail stores, people questioned, “Why don’t you

just get a new one for free?” All I had to do was sign a new contract. I was

disinterested in this and as a graduate student involved in a sustainability-

oriented projects, I found it difficult to justify phone replacement. After

much searching, I located a battery for thirty-five dollars—less than the

forty dollars Verizon wished to charge—at Best Buy. I still felt it was overly

expensive, but didn’t trust batteries from eBay or random internet sites to be

reliable. On the second day with my new battery, having only charged it once,

I noticed that my battery level was still at �5%. My phone felt brand new and

fully functional. Tony, Dan, Everett, Peter, and others noted good feelings

following repair. They also discussed how they enjoyed the process of repair,

which was discussed previously.

anXIEtY & Hard FEELIngS

The end is not always satisfactory, though. Even with my phone, I was

concerned for weeks about a repeated failure. Most participants were happy

to have their products repaired, but high costs and poor experiences with

service representatives also left a stain on their journeys. Everett seemed

glad to have his laptop back during its early repairs at MicroCenter, but

his battles with customer service representatives made him resent the

experience and the company. Similarly, Mary did not intend to get a new

microwave but after spending forty dollars for a small plastic part, she was

uncertain of its value. Many participants were disappointed in the lack of

interest many companies had in helping customers to repair their products.

If a participant attempted to repair a product and it repeatedly failed or was

impossible to fix, they often harbored hard feelings for the manufacturer.

Results

VERSUS ANXIETYSATISFACTION

• SATISFACTION VS ANXIETYRepairing a product oneself can be extremely satisfactory and receiving a product back from a service person can make it seem brand new, but there can still be a nagging uncertainty or the stains of a poor experience that taint the final stage of the repair process.

24

Dan was a 2�-year-old computer technician, with a

degree in computer science. He described himself as

a tinkerer, and was known by his friends to fix, modify,

and do “weird” things to products. He enjoyed repairing

things, connecting it with his desire to do hands on

activities due to his sedentary, mostly digital day job. We

talked about his many self-repairs of a bed, a projector,

computers, a table, and his classic Volvo.

What was unique about Dan’s repair attitude was his

choice to purchase AppleCare (Apple’s warranty service)

for his MacBook laptop, even though he could likely fix

any issue with it himself. He used his MacBook as his

“don’t mess with” computer, so he preferred it to be

secure and under warranty. With AppleCare, if it the

laptop broke it became “their problem.”

Repair Story:Dan’s MacBook

Dan was trained as computer engineer, but still decided to buy an extended warranty for is Apple MacBook, so that it was “their problem.”

One day the computer made a loud grinding noise and

shut off. He was sure the hard drive had died. He set

up appointment online (with one of his many other

computers) and went to the Apple store, where he could

see his name on the waiting screen. When he spoke with

the customer service representative, they confirmed

what he thought was wrong with the computer. He

preferred talking with them about it, to make sure that

they were not missing anything, as he typically knew

everything that was wrong with the computer.

They shipped his computer to their repair center, and

he received an email a week later noting that his laptop

was ready for pick-up. When he retrieved the laptop, they

exhibited the working computer, he confirmed the repair

was completed, and took home his repaired laptop.

iNSiGHTS & FrAMEWOrKS

Further analysis of and reflection on the participants and my own repair experiences led to the generation of theories, insights, and frameworks. This chapter digs deeper into the subtext of the repair experience and synthesizes some of the information with existing research. These insights and frameworks can be used to guide the design of repair experiences.

• Everett had several experiences

repairing his Sony laptop, but after

repeated issues and failed repairs he

gave up on it working again.

2�

PEOPLE

Abilities Approach

Time

Principles

Parts

Info

Service

Education

Attachment

Money SUPPORT

SUPPORT

VALUE

People bring what they have, including skills,

ambitions, and attachment, to make the repair

process happen but almost always need some

form of outside support.

Support can come from many places—not

solely from the manufacturer—such as friends,

community support, the internet, the hardware

store, and even the thrift store.

PEoPLE nEEd SuPPort

Myriad external forces, such as cost or availability of parts, and internal

forces, act on people during the repair experience. Despite these forces,

people tend to do what they can to repair products with the abilities and

resources available in their context. In most cases of product failure, partici-

pants in this study preferred to repair their products, rather than throw them

away. However, participants almost always needed support in some capacity,

typically in the form of parts, service, or education.

Parts tended to be difficult to find for many consumer products. Repair

services were rarely used by participants, due to the high economic cost

and general dismissal of them without a warranty. Therefore, in most cases,

participants repaired their broken products themselves. They often had no

idea what they were doing and at times sought education, though it was not

always easy to find.

PEoPLE rEturn vaLuE

For those who received support, particularly good support, they returned

it with value. Brand value was created when companies managed a repair

experience well; it was removed when the opposite occurred. In the case

of an online information and education forum, value is provided through

increased readership and, in cases not found in this research but available on

the internet, increased participation and content creation on web sites such

as Instructables.com and Makezine.com.

When companies provided a positive repair experience, such as Dan’s first

MacBook repair (which led to a second MacBook), participants lauded

the company’s care for their customers. When a service rendered a good

repair experience, people suggested the service to friends and family. When

companies did not provide support, or provided poor support, it reflected

back on to them. Everett summed this factor up, “I will never buy a Sony

laptop again.”

This support-value model builds on the increasingly more important

factor of customer experience, and its impact on a company’s brand—and

therefore the bottom line.

The Support–Value Transfer

• REPAIR & MAKE COMMUNITIES Many websites have started in the last 5 years, with the rise of the Maker movement, that support DIY activities, as well as repair activities. There is room for these to be less niche, to help average people find information on repairing their products, though.

• THE REPAIR SAVVY NEED HELP, TOO Even my most capable, “extreme” participants needed help, though they often needed help to find obscure parts or advanced instructions.

29

CO

NF

IDE

NC

E

UNDERSTANDING

OF COST

CLARITY

EMPOW

ERMEN

T

REASON

undErStandIng oF coSt

During decision-making, people

do a “folk-quantification” in their

heads that may or may not take into

account the full economic, personal,

and environmental costs. In some

cases, the net cost could have been

less, had participants repaired.

5 Key Areas of Need

conFIdEncE

Participants seem to lack confidence

in manufacturers’ ability to support

repair, and the general repairability

of consumer products. “Am I going to

box it up and send it to the manufac-

turer? They don’t want it. They want

you to buy a new one,” noted Peter.

rEaSon

Reasons people repair products

include emotional attachment,

personal principles, and cost savings.

Everett aptly noted that, “a repaired

product is only as good as the

original one.” Investment in a quality

product can provide reason for repair.

cLarItY

The repair process offers multiple,

often confusing options. People need,

and are drawn, to anything that

provides clarity in decision making.

The simplest solutions found in the

research were the stickers that said,

“problems? Call 1-800-COMPANY.”

EmPoWErmEnt

Many people have become accustomed

to repairing products themselves, due

to high labor costs and dismal service-

led repair experiences. They need

empowerment in the self-led process,

though, as it involves learning new skills,

locating parts, time, and energy.

30

SELF-LEDFOCUS

SERVICE-LEDFOCUS

REPAIR OFTEN

REPAIR SELDOMLY

RATIONALIST

SERVICEORIENTED

FIX-IT

FIX-It aPProacH

A participant, Felix, described his ilk

as “fix-it” guys. Those with a fix-it

approach have skills and ambitions

to perform most repairs themselves.

They tend to have extra technical skills

from hobbies or careers, coupled with

a willingness to attempt the solving of

any repair problem.

ratIonaLISt aPProacH

This approach was the most common,

characterized by a careful balance of

the various impacts on the decision,

with economic cost as a primary

driver. Their primary needs are of

support and cost-effectiveness, and

there was a willingness to learn and

personally attempt repair.

SErvIcE-orIEntEd aPProacH

Beth, who had this approach, avoided

most self-led repair. She enlisted help

from manufacturers, services, or

friends and family. The needs of a

person with this approach contrast

with the others based on their

reliance upon other individuals and

willingness to pay for their skills.

3 Approaches to Repair

31

INTRO USE FAILURE DECISION ACTION RESULT

BECOMINGINFORMED

MOMENTOF FAILURE

CALLFOR HELP

ASSISTANCE& SUPPORT

THE HAND OFF

RETURN TO FUNCTION

momEnt oF FaILurE

This key moment is characterized

by disappointment, confusion, and

anger. The decision is often formed

following this moment—and directly

influenced by it. Careful though

to providing immediate clarity for

decision-making can create a better,

more plausible, repair experience.

Moments that Matter

BEcomIng InFormEd

It would possible to mistake the

beginning of the repair experience

for the moment of failure but,

really, it begins before purchase.

Addressing repair knowledge and

expectations at this point can

ensure repair, and improve and

structure the experience.

caLL For HELP

Each person will approach the search

for help differently, depending on

his or her personal communication

preferences. Careful consideration of

the different channels in which these

distress signals are traveling can

help to simplify and steer the repair

process in the right direction.

tHE Hand oFF

When people decide to deliberate

repair duties to a service, they are

have to transfer the product and/or

the responsibility of repairing it to a

service person. This activity leaves a

strong impression on the experience,

and manufacturers feel the effects of

a poor third party experience.

aSSIStancE & SuPPort

People often decide to go-it-alone,

and repair by themselves. It is rare,

however, for them to have all parts

and knowledge needed to do the

repair. They need support in the form

of parts, manuals, instructions, etc.

With good assistance, many could be

empowered to repair more.

rEturn to FunctIon

Having a product that is functioning

again can be satisfying, but can also

cause anxiety. Return to function

can vary widely, depending on a self

or service-led process. Regardless,

consider this moment in the design

of any repair experience, as it can

leave a lasting impression.

32

Brand EquItY

Brand equity is often seriously affected by the repair experience. Positive

repair experiences can lead to future purchases from that brand. Negative

repair experiences can lead to total avoidance of brands. People are in a

vulnerable state during the repair process, and impressions from everything

from a web site to service professionals can be lasting. Enhancing the repair

experience can provide positive brand value for people, and vice versa.

Participants perceived a focus on new customers and offerings rather than

support of existing customers and products. If a product was replaced, and

the manufacturer was suspect of some fault in the failure, it was rare for the

replacement product to be of the same brand. Companies who cared for and

supported their customers found repeat customers on several occasions.10

Insights into the Broader Context

EcoLogIcaL FactorS

In many cases repair only extended product life for a short period—often in

technology products. In some cases, the opposite occurred, and products

lasted for many decades. Repair is only part of a suite of methods for

extending a product’s life, and aligns well with other strategies such as

design for disassembly and take back programs. Additionally, my intuition

was that those who repaired the most would have smaller ecological

footprints and those who repaired less would have larger ones. In the case

of these participants, the high quantity repairers also tended to have a high

quantity of possessions and have interest in different types of technology.

Conversely the low repair quantity participants simply had less belongings.

There could also be behavioral rebound effects.

BUSINESS

ECOLOGY SOCIETY

cuLturE

The internet has created new cultural implications for repair. Its primary

use seems to be as an aid in the search for parts and to find advice and

instruction to inform the repair process. Manufacturer’s web sites are often

visited, but information about repair is often buried under new products.

Third party web sites have entered this space to provide support people. As

internet communities continue to grow more connected, the DIY movement

grows, and more people rely on the internet, its importance in the repair

process will grow. The desire for a new product is a constant influence on the

repair decision. The economic costs and benefits of purchasing new, rather

than repairing, are nearly always weighed. In many product categories, this

desire may overcome other reasons to repair.

10. CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE & RETENTION Reichheld & Sasser, in Zero defects: Quality comes to services (1990), note that customers are not as loyal as they once were, and that “companies can boost profits by almost 100 percent by retaining just five percent more of their customers.”

33

ArEAS OF OPPOrTuNiTY

There is no formula for creating a positive repair experience. Nor is there a definitive road map to implementing repair for every company. Based on this research, though, there are many opportunities for designers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs to profitably engage in repair and support people in the repair process. This chapter provides these opportunities and stimulus to begin generating concepts.

• Some entrepreneurs in Hong

Kong ceased the opportunity to

provide replacement iPhone parts,

when Apple was not.

35

Increase Brand EquityThrough Repair

How could repair be used to increase retention of existing customers?

How might repair be utilized to increase brand contact?

How might companies use repair as a dialogue with their customers?

How might companies better collaborate with third-parties?

Based on the primary research, there is a clear connection between a

company’s management of the repair process and peoples’ perceptions of a

brand. There is much business literature written about the value of keeping

existing customers. Repair is one way to show a customer that a company

cares about them and extends the customer-company relationship.

KEY oPPortunItIES:

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

36

How might companies reframe their finances to include positive repair experiences?

How might companies rethink warranties to align with customer needs?

What if possible failures repair were anticipated and planned for?

What are some ways a company might viably retain components for future repairs?

The current paradigm for manufacturers is to produce new goods and sell

maximum amounts of them. This focus on new offerings affects a company’s

capacity to care for its existing customers, and often undermines the repair

process. For companies to have focus on supporting the repair process may

require shifts in their existing product-service system.

Adapt Product–Service Systems to Support Repair

KEY oPPortunItIES:

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

3�

How could repair be used to increase retention of existing customers?

How might repair be utilized to increase brand contact?

How might companies use repair as a dialogue with their customers?

How might companies better collaborate with third-parties?

KEY oPPortunItIES:

A person’s introduction and awareness of a product rarely includes thoughts

or discussions about reparability. Starting this discussion at the beginning

and continuing it could provide smarter consumer choices, an opportunity

for market differentiation, a positive brand image, and a mechanism to start

a long lasting customer relationship.

Discuss Repair with Customers

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

38

How could decision to repair be made a no-brainer?

What if the moment of failure was a moment of clarity?

What could influence a person to disregard replacement?

How could people be made confident in the ability to repair something?

How could the full costs of repairing/replacing a product be communicated?

KEY oPPortunItIES:

The repair decision is a decisive phase of the repair process. The fewer

options a person must balance, the easier and more likely repair becomes.

People who have a streamlined decision making process often had an overall

positive repair experience.

Influence & Streamline the Repair Decision

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

39

How might different repair approaches be supported?

How could cost effective support be provided to people?

How could local support and enablement be provided?

How might the repair system be design to best support self-led repairs?

How could people be supplied with the right repair information when they need it?

How could the internet be used to improve the repair process?

How might companies connect people to the parts and support they need?

Supporting repair actions is possibly the largest area of opportunity.

Currently support for people in the repair process is minimal and focused

on warranties or full service. The actions taken to repair a product are the

defining moments of the experience.

Support Actions Duringthe Repair Process

KEY oPPortunItIES:

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

40

How might companies maximize a positive repair experience?

How could companies ensure that people are happy with their experience?

How might companies reduce the emotions of uncertainty following a repair?

How could retained contact with a customer benefit both parties?

There are many unexploited opportunities to retain contact with customers

following product purchase that could both strengthen brands and enable

end of life take back. Similarly there are several opportunities to ensure the

experience closes in a positive way at the end of a product repair process.

Extend the RelationshipBeyond Repair

KEY oPPortunItIES:

VALUESUPPORT

CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER

BRAND

COMPANY

DECISION

INTRO ACTION RESULT USE

SOCIALNETWORK

Marketing

Support

Service

Parts

Labor Help

Instructions

Service

Connections

Tools

Knowledge

SupportParts

Servic

e

NEWOFFERINGS

EXISTINGPRODUCTS

SUPPORT

INTRO

?

FOCUS

FOCUS

?

WARRANTY

COST

TIME

MNFRCONFI-DENCE

PARTS

APPROACH

PRINCIPLES

TOOLS &ABILITIES

ATTACHMENT

PRINCIPLES

ServiceParts

Return Product Confidence?Satisfaction?Purchase of

other products?

PurchaseWarranty

Expected Life

Warranty

Preparation

What skills needed

What tools needed

This is what do o

Diagnosis

Is it working?

Are you happy?

We can help

Here is what to do

Here is how to fix

+

ACTION RESULT

TYPICAL COMPANY FOCUS

COMPANY

EXTENDED FOCUS

FAILUREUSE

TOTALFAILURE RE-INTRO

Take back?Apology?

Discount?Warranty?

DECISION

41

APPENdiX: THE rESEArCH

JOurNEY

This research saw me traveling from the library, to strangers’ homes, and in to my psyche. This appendix documents that journey and the details of my rationale for the project, reflections, data collection methods, methods of analysis, and the details of the synthesis all of this in to frameworks and opportunities.

• Some of the tools that went with

me on every interview: consent

forms, notebook, a few cameras, and

most importantly, an audio recorder.

43

FormIng tHE rESEarcH quEStIonS

To form a focus and theoretical foundation for the primary data collection

and to describe the broader context in which the repair experiences studied

were taking place I did a review of pertinent literature. Through the literature

review my goal was to sensitize myself to concepts and to provide a suffi-

cient context and setting that would enrich a readers interpretation of the

primary research results. Its purpose was not to find theories for which to

base data collection or to establish my mastery of the subject matter. The

literature review provides this context through the synthesis of various

author’s explorations of four major topics: definitions of what product

durability is; business factors related to product durability and repair;

ecological implications of product durability and repair; and human factors

of durability, consumption, and replacement of products.

rESEarcH dESIgn

The design of my research plan went through several iterations. I explored

ideas of shop-alongs, surveys, focus groups, and various forms of partici-

patory research. At one point, a make tool, to help participants articulate

their ideal repair experience, was actually designed and printed. After the

pilot study, though, I realized just a long, in-depth conversation with people

would be the best use of both their time and my own.

To do get a sense for the actual, in action, repair experience, I embarked on

an autoethnographic study. The notion of a researcher immersing her-or-

himself in the same experience as their participants has become increasingly

popular in the social sciences. Autoethnography is a method that employs

the rigor of social science to evocatively articulate an experience through

personal narrative.11 By weaving my personal experience in with my partici-

pants’ it helped to create a more complete view of the experience and a

deeper interpretation of the data.

I handpicked participants for this study from respondents to a call for partici-

pation primarily based on their frequency of repair experiences. Age and

gender were considered to create a broad sample, though were secondary.

There were eight interviews, including two married couples. This brought

the total participant number to ten. Ages were distributed from 18–54 and

there were a total of seven men and four women. Extreme cases of repair

were sought, based on their self-reported frequency of repair. Extreme cases

were useful for their ability to “help magnify the details” that could have been

overlooked.12 There was one novice repairer and two expert repairers.

Planning

12. EXTREME PARTICIPANTSFulton Suri and Gibbs Howard write in Going Deeper, Seeing Further (2006) about the benefits of not just sampling average people, but also the extremes of the population.

11. THE ETHNOGRAPHIC ICarolyn Ellis’ The Ethnographic Eye (2004) heavily influenced the way I conducted research during this study.

44

In-dEPtH IntErvIEWS

Though largely unstructured, most interactions with participants followed

a similar trajectory. Participants were given a pre-interview ‘homework’

assignment to get them thinking about their past experiences. First, I would

run the participant through my basic research topics and questions. We

would then do an overview of their past repair experiences, which often led

to singling out one or two of those experiences to go in to detail. Some sort

of tour or show-and-tell often occurred, where we would discuss different

types of products and how they would deal with their malfunction. This is

where their personal opinions about the topic would become most evident.

All interviews were audio recorded and most were documented with

photopgraphs. Following each interview, I completed a post-research audio-

recorded recapitulation of the experience, where I would memo important

details and capture ideas that bubbled up during the interview.

SELF-StudY

The self-study portion consisted of immersing myself in the repair

experience and understanding my own attitudes about it through the repair

of two objects—a three-year old cellular phone and a considerably older

food processor. During the repair of these products, I dutifully documented

my experiences with notes, photographs, and screen shots of websites. I

attempted to approach the repair of each product as I normally would, had

I not been studying it. I must note, though, that this was impossible. Any

suspicions of caveats from my typical repair process were noted in memos.

Data Collection

• BEING IN CONTEXTContext is key, but in this case I was rarely able to be directly in the context of repair. In participants homes was the second best option, as most of their products were still there, including in-process repairs. I did follow one participant, Everett, on two trips to the computer repair store.

• MY REPAIRSFor this study I repaired a failed cell phone battery and an older food processor. They were both objects that I actually needed to repair, so the emotions I felt during the process were real—as was my realization of my tendency to procrastinate and draw out the repair process.

• FELIX’S BARFelix walked me around his house to show my things he had repaired. In every closet and on every shelf, there was something.

45

anaLYSIS mEtHodS

Grounded theory served as the basis for analysis in this study. As the entire

study was flexible, so was the method of analysis, which also adopted

elements of the thematic analysis and Miles and Huberman13 approach as

necessary, including the use of scoring themes, methods of reducing the

data and making it visible both physically and through frameworks.

The process began with transcription of the interviews onto sticky notes as

well as my personal memos. Each data collection session was then initially

coded and clustered on its own board. During this process, I created visual

representations and diagrams to display emerging temporal and theoretical

relationships. Once categories were formed, they were combined, integrated

and cross-referenced, which tied them together as theories. Throughout

the whole process, I strived to retain the power and value of the stories

people told. I wrote different stories as vignettes, and wrote about my

past repair experiences.

After the different frameworks and theories were formed, I went back to

the data and began generating possible opportunities. Combined with the

literature and my personal knowledge, I affinity diagrammed these opportu-

nities into groups, and culled them in to six distinct areas of opportunity.

Analysis & Synthesis

• THE WAR ROOMDuring the analysis of the primary research data, the work room in my apartment was plastered in post it notes.

13. MILES & HUBERMAN Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (1994).

46

Backstory

WHY tHIS StudY?

As I entered graduate school at Arizona State University, I was interested

in the concept of sustainable consumption. Some strategies I explored

for helping people to consume in a more ecologically benign way included

reducing packaging waste, raising energy efficiency, creating product-

sharing systems, and extending the useful life of consumer products.

Product life extension, or product durability, became my primary focus

after exposure to the work of the Eternally Yours foundation6. My interests

formed into the question, “how can we support people to purchase and

keep products meant to last a long time?.” An article by Van Nes and

Cramer isolated different strategies for extending product life: reliability and

robustness, upgradeability, variability, attachment, and repair and mainte-

nance. I was interested in the human aspect of product life extension and

felt that the areas of attachment and repair afforded the most opportunities.

There was little research into repair—and nearly none into the human aspect

of it—and its connection to manufacturer relations and service piqued my

interest in service design.

Alex Steffen of WorldChanging.com once said, “If we are going to avert

ecological destruction we need to not only do things differently, we need to

do different things.” This quote describes my personal standpoint about the

use of qualitative, human-centered research in the sustainability realm. I am

positive that the creation and specification of more ecologically conscious

materials and more efficient manufacturing processes will reduce the

impacts that mass consumption has on the planet. However, if we are ever

to reach a point of sustainability, systemic behavioral shifts will need to

occur. Through a better understanding of human needs, we can begin to

understand how to support people to change their behavior. By connecting

human needs and sustainability issues in this way, we can influence business

strategies that go way beyond eco-efficiency and toward more sustainable

consumption worldwide.

acKnoWLEgEmEntS

There are quite a few people that, without them, this research could not have

been completed. Philip White, ecodesign guru and my thesis chair, guided

me through the process, while Prasad Boradkar and Eric Margolis provided

pivotal guidance on material culture and ethnographic research, respectively.

Friends and classmates shaped the form of my research with invaluable

input . Most important, though, were the kind research participants who

allowed me in to their home and on trips to the repair store. Thank you all!

• ABOUT THE AUTHORMy name is Greg Burkett. I come from the woods of Pennsylvania, and have a mixed background in industrial, graphic, and environ-mental design. I now do design research and strategy, with a focus on aligning peoples’ needs, businesses’ needs, and the needs of our planet with a unique approach to qualitative research and problem setting.

Contact:gregsburkett@gmail.comwww.gregburkett.com

4�

This book is based on thesis research done in the Master of Science in Design program at Arizona State University. Its purpose is to serve as a guide to the human experience of product repair and to the opportunities within repair to create positive experiences, reduce our ecological impact, and create business value.

If you would like further information on this research or my other work,

contact me at gregsburkett@gmail.com or visit www.gregburkett.com