• On GameSpot: Wii Fit tells 10-year-old she's fat
May 19, 2008 11:38 AM PDT

What Low Design Differentiation Looks Like

Posted by Adam Richardson
  • Font size
  • Print
Six helmets

Guess the brand

(Credit: Bell Sports, Giro, Specialized, Louis Garneau)

I was recently shopping for a new bike helmet and I was struck by a realization: Is there another category with lower differentiation amongst the different brands?

Above is a representative sampling of helmets from four different manufacturers: Bell, Giro, Louis Garneau, and Specialized. I've removed the logos. Can you tell one brand from another? I certainly can't. (Answer at the end of the post)

The bike helmet category, so far as I can see, is primarily style driven, as all the helmets have to meet minimum safety standards determined by a couple of third party organizations. The differences in weight and comfort between the lower end and upper end helmets (a price range of $40 to over $200) are marginal. The major difference is in the amount of cooling -- the upper end helmets have larger vent holes -- but contrary to a few years ago even the middling helmets are good in this respect. The $60 Bell I picked up cools much better than my five year old $100+ Specialized.

A significant incentive in many bike purchases is what pro's are using, and having bragging rights to the latest gear. In that case you would expect more obvious differences at the upper end -- if there's isn't a strong visible tiering, or a strong brand identity through the product design, then only a tiny number of people will be able to spot that you're wearing the latest and greatest, which dilutes the incentive to spring for the expensive stuff.

Bell Sports owns Giro, who was the originator of the bare-styrofoam helmet that dramatically reduced weight over the older style that had a hard plastic shell. Typically when a company acquires another one they want to keep a differentiation between them, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Based on my experience, the two brands seem tailored for slightly different shape heads (Giro = rounder, Bell = elliptical). Other than that they are largely the same. Between the two of them they dominate the category; I don't have stats but I'm guessing 80%. Perhaps they're just a bit complacent due to their almost-monopoly?

It's odd that in such a style driven category that all the manufacturers have basically converged on a single aesthetic and stuck to it. In fairness, designing anything to go on the head is a tricky and highly constrained exercise and one of the most difficult things to design, but this level of conformity is still very odd. How about a little choice so we don't all look like racer wannabe's with Trilobites stuck to our skulls?

(Brands answer, clockwise from top-left: Giro, Specialized, Louis Garneau, Giro, Bell, Bell)

Adam Richardson is the director of product strategy at frog design, where he guides strategy engagements for frog's international roster of clients, envisioning and creating new products, consumer electronics, and digital experiences. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network.
Recent posts from Matter/Anti-Matter
The paradox of loyalty
Fake Times
TEDGlobal coming back to Europe in 2009 - and staying
We Feel Fine
Gadget-less Bond
Jan Chipchase and Design Research
Disruptive Realism
The marketing of a president
advertisement

In the news now

Slowing expectations at a green-tech start-up

Six months ago, biofuels start-up Mascoma had the wind in its sails, as did the rest of the clean-tech sector. Now, the company is treading carefully and scaling back.


With JavaFX, Sun seeks new coders, new revenue

With the launch of JavaFX 1.0, Sun is trying to reclaim Java's strength as a foundation for rich Internet applications. But it's no longer the incumbent.


Tim Lincecum, motion capture star

San Francisco Giants pitcher, who won the Cy Young award last month, dons a motion capture suit for 2K Sports' Major League Baseball 2K9 video game.


About Matter/Anti-Matter

Tim Leberecht and Adam Richardson both work for frog design, a consulting firm specialized in designing innovative products and services for Fortune 500 clients. On the Matter / Anti-Matter blog, they engage in a debate around questions they face day-to-day in their work, using convergence/divergence as a lens through which to look at the pressing issues in business, culture, and technology. What makes a successful convergent product or a successful divergent innovation? Is convergence a myth that users don't really care about, or is the current state of convergence just not satisfying enough for them to embrace? How much divergence of innovation is good, and when does it just become confusing? How do you stay on top of people's ever changing needs and wants?

They are members of the CNET Blog Network and are not employees of CNET.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Matter/Anti-Matter topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right