Paradigm shift: Do-it-yourself (DIY) invention and production of physical goods for use or sale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose

There has been little explicit consideration of do‐it‐yourself (DIY) in previous manufacturing literature. This may be because traditional DIY is an outlet for physical goods that are made‐to‐forecast, such as boats kits for self‐assembly and personal use. However, since the beginning of the twenty‐first century, DIY has extended to the invention and the sale of physical goods, as well as their assembly and use. The purpose of this paper is to make a contribution to the manufacturing literature by providing an analysis of DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale (new‐DIY paradigm).

Design/methodology/approach

Literature review related to DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale; and its differences with the existing paradigm for creating physical goods: including enabling technologies and enabling thinking.

Findings

DIY invention and production is able to create physical goods, which are both original and economical, through open, distributed, minimal processes. Within the existing paradigm, by contrast, physical goods are created, which are either original or economical, through processes that are less open, less distributed, and less minimal than the processes of new‐DIY.

Practical implications

DIY invention, production, and sale of physical goods deploys technologies that are used within the existing paradigm for creating physical goods. The difference in outcomes is due to the different conceptualization of invention, production, and sales within the established paradigm.

Originality/value

The originality of the paper is that it provides an analysis of key aspects of DIY invention, production, and sales. The value of the paper is that it provides a starting point for researchers and practitioners seeking to determine how practices, technologies, and challenges of the existing paradigm can be related to DIY opportunities.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)218-234
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of Manufacturing Technology Management
Volume24
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Fingerprint

Patents and inventions
Sales
Boats
Paradigm shift
Invention
Paradigm

Keywords

  • digitally-driven manufacturing technologies
  • DIY stores
  • internet
  • new-DIY
  • sustainability
  • web 2.0

Cite this

@article{82e76427af434433971c6268aa028cf4,
title = "Paradigm shift: Do-it-yourself (DIY) invention and production of physical goods for use or sale",
abstract = "PurposeThere has been little explicit consideration of do‐it‐yourself (DIY) in previous manufacturing literature. This may be because traditional DIY is an outlet for physical goods that are made‐to‐forecast, such as boats kits for self‐assembly and personal use. However, since the beginning of the twenty‐first century, DIY has extended to the invention and the sale of physical goods, as well as their assembly and use. The purpose of this paper is to make a contribution to the manufacturing literature by providing an analysis of DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale (new‐DIY paradigm).Design/methodology/approachLiterature review related to DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale; and its differences with the existing paradigm for creating physical goods: including enabling technologies and enabling thinking.FindingsDIY invention and production is able to create physical goods, which are both original and economical, through open, distributed, minimal processes. Within the existing paradigm, by contrast, physical goods are created, which are either original or economical, through processes that are less open, less distributed, and less minimal than the processes of new‐DIY.Practical implicationsDIY invention, production, and sale of physical goods deploys technologies that are used within the existing paradigm for creating physical goods. The difference in outcomes is due to the different conceptualization of invention, production, and sales within the established paradigm.Originality/valueThe originality of the paper is that it provides an analysis of key aspects of DIY invention, production, and sales. The value of the paper is that it provides a starting point for researchers and practitioners seeking to determine how practices, technologies, and challenges of the existing paradigm can be related to DIY opportunities.",
keywords = "digitally-driven manufacturing technologies, DIY stores, internet, new-DIY, sustainability, web 2.0",
author = "Stephen Fox",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1108/17410381311292313",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "218--234",
journal = "Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management",
issn = "1741-038X",
publisher = "Emerald Publishing Limited",
number = "2",

}

Paradigm shift : Do-it-yourself (DIY) invention and production of physical goods for use or sale. / Fox, Stephen.

In: Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2013, p. 218-234.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paradigm shift

T2 - Do-it-yourself (DIY) invention and production of physical goods for use or sale

AU - Fox, Stephen

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - PurposeThere has been little explicit consideration of do‐it‐yourself (DIY) in previous manufacturing literature. This may be because traditional DIY is an outlet for physical goods that are made‐to‐forecast, such as boats kits for self‐assembly and personal use. However, since the beginning of the twenty‐first century, DIY has extended to the invention and the sale of physical goods, as well as their assembly and use. The purpose of this paper is to make a contribution to the manufacturing literature by providing an analysis of DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale (new‐DIY paradigm).Design/methodology/approachLiterature review related to DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale; and its differences with the existing paradigm for creating physical goods: including enabling technologies and enabling thinking.FindingsDIY invention and production is able to create physical goods, which are both original and economical, through open, distributed, minimal processes. Within the existing paradigm, by contrast, physical goods are created, which are either original or economical, through processes that are less open, less distributed, and less minimal than the processes of new‐DIY.Practical implicationsDIY invention, production, and sale of physical goods deploys technologies that are used within the existing paradigm for creating physical goods. The difference in outcomes is due to the different conceptualization of invention, production, and sales within the established paradigm.Originality/valueThe originality of the paper is that it provides an analysis of key aspects of DIY invention, production, and sales. The value of the paper is that it provides a starting point for researchers and practitioners seeking to determine how practices, technologies, and challenges of the existing paradigm can be related to DIY opportunities.

AB - PurposeThere has been little explicit consideration of do‐it‐yourself (DIY) in previous manufacturing literature. This may be because traditional DIY is an outlet for physical goods that are made‐to‐forecast, such as boats kits for self‐assembly and personal use. However, since the beginning of the twenty‐first century, DIY has extended to the invention and the sale of physical goods, as well as their assembly and use. The purpose of this paper is to make a contribution to the manufacturing literature by providing an analysis of DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale (new‐DIY paradigm).Design/methodology/approachLiterature review related to DIY invention and production of physical goods for use or sale; and its differences with the existing paradigm for creating physical goods: including enabling technologies and enabling thinking.FindingsDIY invention and production is able to create physical goods, which are both original and economical, through open, distributed, minimal processes. Within the existing paradigm, by contrast, physical goods are created, which are either original or economical, through processes that are less open, less distributed, and less minimal than the processes of new‐DIY.Practical implicationsDIY invention, production, and sale of physical goods deploys technologies that are used within the existing paradigm for creating physical goods. The difference in outcomes is due to the different conceptualization of invention, production, and sales within the established paradigm.Originality/valueThe originality of the paper is that it provides an analysis of key aspects of DIY invention, production, and sales. The value of the paper is that it provides a starting point for researchers and practitioners seeking to determine how practices, technologies, and challenges of the existing paradigm can be related to DIY opportunities.

KW - digitally-driven manufacturing technologies

KW - DIY stores

KW - internet

KW - new-DIY

KW - sustainability

KW - web 2.0

U2 - 10.1108/17410381311292313

DO - 10.1108/17410381311292313

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 218

EP - 234

JO - Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

JF - Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

SN - 1741-038X

IS - 2

ER -