[{"content":"","date":"April 29, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Categories","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"April 29, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/featured/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Featured","type":"categories"},{"content":"Innovation today rarely lives in a single discipline. The breakthrough product, the elegant solution, the thing that finally works—more often than not, it sits at the intersection of mechanical systems, electronics, and software. A clever mechanism is only as useful as the sensors that guide it; a brilliant circuit needs a physical form that can survive the real world.\nThat\u0026#x27;s why electromechanical engineers like Calvin Schlau are so essential to the work we do as PCDworks. For the past eight years, Calvin has been bridging hardware and code on projects ranging from autonomous boats to smart tie-down systems for transporting and securing heavy equipment. We sat down with him to talk about how he got into innovation, what\u0026#x27;s keeping him curious right now, and why follow-through matters more than the spark of an idea.\nHow did you get into innovation?I’ve always been interested in making things, which led me to pursue a degree in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Texas at Tyler. I graduated in 2018, and in my last semester, a team member of my robotics competition group was working for PCDworks as an intern. He mentioned the Chief Engineer (Bert) needed someone with electronics and software experience to assist with SecureLoad. I’ve been working here since. What drew you to PCDworks?The company has a great mindset and culture—of momentum, flexibility, and continuous learning. In my eight years here, I have yet to be told, “You can’t do that” or “That isn’t your role.” I have a broad set of interests, and as long as you show that you’ve put the time and work into building a skill, PCDworks is open to you contributing to areas outside of your academic background. This has allowed me to build practical experience in many different fields and bring a wider perspective to the problems we solve. Intellectual pursuits are treated as just as important as the financial aspects of the business, which prevents stagnation. What are your greatest strengths?I see myself as a lifetime learner and a global thinker. I’m also proactive in developing structured workflows, as I see them as a necessary tool for completing certain types of efforts efficiently. What are you most fascinated by right now?Lots of things. Probably too many things. Right now I’m especially interested in the pre-seed to early-stage start-up scene in Texas.\nWhat’s your favorite project you worked on and why?The WASP boat project, because I was able to do some fishing while testing out autonomous navigation features. Jokes aside, I try to enjoy any project I work on, but these projects do take real time and energy to complete. Any that end in success are my favorites by default of them feeling like time well spent.\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation?Being serious about follow-through. As fun as coming up with new ideas can be, it can take a lot of work for an innovative idea to become an innovative product or solution. I’ve spent a significant amount of time thinking about ways to minimize the effort and time it takes to abridge it. What is your favorite quote related to innovation?“So, in the face of overwhelming odds, I’m left with only one option: I’m gonna have to science the shit out of this.” —Andy Weir, The Martian\n‍\n","date":"April 29, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-calvin-schlau/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Calvin Schlau","type":"blog"},{"content":"","date":"April 29, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"News","type":"blog"},{"content":" MEET PCDWORKS Your ideal partner in innovation. \"PCDworks solves problems others can't.\"\n— James Wardlaw, Former New Products Development Manager, Ingersoll-Rand Solving the unsolvable since 1997.\nWork with us Learn more THE PCDWORKS PROMISE Delivering innovative and viable solutions for our client's most challenging problems. WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT Reducing risk at every step of the journey The path from an idea to a fully-realized solution is not an easy one, and can be fraught with pitfalls. We've mapped this route before, and bring an experienced eye to provide proven expertise throughout the journey. Our process takes an idea from zero to launch by truly understanding the problem, learning what we don't know, identifying the solution space, and bringing the right idea to life, reducing risk at each step for a successful launch. SEE OUR PROCESS OUR WORK Renewell: A Case Study in Commitment What if abandoned oil wells could serve as energy storage units for renewables like wind and solar? Texas startup Renewell Energy stepped into the HardTech Basecamp with PCDworks and the rest is history. HARDTECH BASECAMP Join us at our\nHardTech Basecamp The PCDworks campus also features our HardTech Basecamp for those who want to spend an extended period of time with us in a fully-immersed environment as you prepare, strategize, and launch a successful initiative. Here you can focus on the spirit of creativity, innovation, and camaraderie to accelerate your adventure—whatever it might be—to the next level.\nHARDTECH BASECAMP: LEARN MORE \"I have been all over the world, I\u0026#39;ve worked with universities, I have worked with people in US government and I have never met a more talented technical engineering group. They are topnotch and easy to communicate with. They can solve any technical problem. They can deliver innovative products faster and more efficiently than anyone else.\"\nBennett RichardDirector, Technology Innovation, Baker Hughes (Ret) Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","date":"April 29, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/","section":"PCDworks","summary":"","title":"PCDworks","type":"page"},{"content":"Everyone Wants Innovation. Few Companies Staff for It.\nEveryone agrees that innovation is good for business. It\u0026#x27;s practically a universal truth at this point, right up there with \u0026quot;the customer is always right\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;culture eats strategy for breakfast.\u0026quot; But agreeing that innovation matters and actually building the capacity to do it well are two very different things.\nThe real question isn\u0026#x27;t whether your company should innovate. It\u0026#x27;s whether you\u0026#x27;ve set yourself up to do it effectively.\nThe Data Is Clear: Dedicated Innovation Teams Get More ResultsDeloitte\u0026#x27;s 2021 Innovation Study, which surveyed more than 400 technology, innovation, and business leaders, put hard numbers behind what many of us already suspected: a formal innovation program significantly increases innovation. High-growth companies were twice as likely as the average to have a leading innovation capability. And organizations with the most mature innovation programs—the ones that had been doing this the longest—were nearly twice as likely to see revenue growth exceeding 20 percent.\nThe takeaway isn\u0026#x27;t complicated: having an innovation program is better than not having one, and having a mature, established program is better still. Innovation, like any discipline, gets better with practice. The companies that treat it as a core competency rather than a side project are the ones pulling ahead.\nInnovation Is a Discipline, Not Just a Flash of GeniusHere\u0026#x27;s where many organizations get tripped up. There\u0026#x27;s a persistent myth that innovation is about the lightbulb moment—the flash of insight. And sure, ideas matter. Anyone in your organization might have a great one. But having an idea and bringing that idea to life are fundamentally different endeavors.\nTaking a concept from napkin sketch to market-ready solution requires a specific mindset and a practiced skill set. It means knowing how to pressure-test assumptions, navigate ambiguity, iterate through failure, and maintain momentum when the path forward isn\u0026#x27;t clear. It requires a structured process to channel creative energy into tangible outcomes.\nIn other words, innovation is a discipline. And like any discipline, it\u0026#x27;s best practiced by people who have devoted themselves to mastering it.\nWhat Happened to the Innovation Experts?There was a time when large corporations understood this intuitively. Companies employed dedicated teams and divisions whose sole job was to push boundaries and develop what came next. Innovation wasn\u0026#x27;t a side hustle bolted onto someone\u0026#x27;s existing role—it was the role.\nBut over the past few decades, that model has largely disappeared. Researchers at Duke University\u0026#x27;s Fuqua School of Business have documented a significant transition away from formal corporate research toward a more diffuse innovation ecosystem driven by startups and universities. This has led to an overall decline in American innovation and growth, as universities and startups do not have the resources of large corporations, which can integrate multiple disciplines at scale. So while the volume of science being produced has grown, the transformation of that knowledge into innovative products has slowed.\nInstead of driving innovation, many large companies now prefer to let entrepreneurs shoulder the risk and cost of developing something new, then acquire the results once they\u0026#x27;ve proven profitable. There\u0026#x27;s a certain logic to that approach. It\u0026#x27;s safer and more predictable. But it also fundamentally limits what innovation can do for your business. Instead of developing solutions tailored to the specific problems you face, you\u0026#x27;re working backwards—starting with someone else\u0026#x27;s solution and trying to make it fit your challenges. And the track record of innovation-by-acquisition is far from stellar. Per the Harvard Business Review, “Companies spend more than $2 trillion on acquisitions every year, yet the M\u0026amp;A failure rate is between 70% and 90%.”\nSolving the Expertise GapSo if dedicated innovation capability drives growth, and most companies have moved away from maintaining that capability in-house, what’s the solution?\nThis is the gap that PCDworks was built to fill.\nFor more than 25 years, we\u0026#x27;ve been doing the work of innovation—not as consultants who hand you a report and walk away, but as a dedicated innovation team that works side by side with your people to solve your specific problems. Our Immersive Innovation™ process brings together your domain expertise and our innovation expertise in a focused, distraction-free environment designed to produce real, actionable solutions.\nWe\u0026#x27;ve spent decades refining the skills that make innovation work: how to frame the right problem, how to create the conditions for breakthrough thinking, how to move from insight to prototype to viable solution. It\u0026#x27;s not magic, and it\u0026#x27;s not luck. It\u0026#x27;s a practiced discipline, and it\u0026#x27;s what we do every day.\nThe Bottom LineYou wouldn\u0026#x27;t ask your marketing team to handle a complex legal matter just because they\u0026#x27;re smart, capable people. You\u0026#x27;d bring in legal experts. Innovation deserves the same respect.\nThe companies that are growing fastest aren\u0026#x27;t the ones hoping good ideas will materialize on their own. They\u0026#x27;re the ones investing in dedicated innovation capability, whether they build it internally or bring in a team that lives and breathes this work.\nIf you\u0026#x27;re ready to stop treating innovation as a buzzword and start treating it as the discipline it is, let’s talk.\n‍\n","date":"April 23, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/everyone-wants-innovation-few-companies-staff-for-it/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Everyone Wants Innovation. Few Companies Staff for It.","type":"blog"},{"content":"We recently came across a piece in Big Think that stopped us in our tracks. Writer Eric Markowitz visited Kaikado, a tea caddy workshop in Kyoto that has been in operation since 1875. When Markowitz asked a young apprentice what he enjoyed about the painstaking, repetitive craft of hand-hammering metal, the apprentice’s answer was unexpected: the work, he said, was a form of meditation.\nThat idea hit home for us at PCDworks because it crystallizes something we’ve spent decades building toward—the conviction that the deepest, most valuable thinking happens not when we speed up, but when we slow down and give our full attention to the work in front of us.\nThe Problem with How We Work NowMarkowitz’s article names a tension most of us feel but rarely articulate: “Work has become fragmented. Attention is constantly interrupted … We bounce between tasks, inboxes, and platforms, rarely staying with any one thing long enough to become truly good at it.”\nFor innovators and product developers, this should be alarming. Innovation doesn’t emerge from surface-level thinking. It requires the kind of deep, sustained focus that our current work culture is designed to prevent.\nAnd yet most companies still try to innovate in the cracks. Gather people in a conference room, put a whiteboard at the front, and hope for magic. Twenty minutes in, someone knocks on the door. Someone steps out for a call. An urgent email pulls another person away. By lunch, whatever creative momentum was building has been shattered.\nWhat If Innovation Could Be the Meditation?What struck Markowitz at Kaikado was an inversion of the way most of us relate to focus: for that craftsman, meditation wasn’t separate from work. The act of making—slowly, carefully, repeatedly—was the practice. At PCDworks, we believe the same principle applies to innovation. When you create the right conditions—the right people in the right environment with the right preparation—the process of innovating becomes its own form of meditation. Not in the cross-legged, eyes-closed sense, but in the deeper meaning: sustained, undistracted attention directed toward something that matters.\nThis is exactly what our Immersive Innovation™ process is designed to achieve.\nDesigning for Depth: How Immersive Innovation WorksImmersive Innovation is a three- to four-day process where teams come to the PCDworks campus to brainstorm, develop, and refine solutions to their most pressing challenges. On the surface, the structure is straightforward: the first day focuses on defining problems and aspirations, the second on generating and evaluating potential solutions, and the final days on funneling ideas down to the most promising options. But the structure is not the secret. The environment is.\nOur campus sits on 80 acres in the quiet hills of East Texas’s Piney Woods region. It was purpose-built around a simple dream shared by PCDworks co-founders Mike and Donna: a quiet place for people to come to think. That dream now includes guest rooms, shared dining, a gym, and a game room—everything needed so participants never have to leave and can remain immersed. For the duration of the session, teams eat, sleep, and breathe innovation. Cell phones and laptops stay off outside of designated breaks. There are no knocks on the door, no urgent emails, no competing priorities. Just the work.\nIf that sounds a lot like the Kaikado workshop—a dedicated space, free of interruption, where the work itself becomes absorbing enough to quiet the noise—that’s because the underlying principle is the same. Focus is not a personality trait you either have or you don’t. It’s a condition you design for.\nTrust: The Hidden IngredientEliminating external distractions is essential, but it’s only half the battle. In addition to all the obvious interruptions—the pings and notifications—some of the biggest distractions come from inside our own heads. The fear of being judged. The nagging thought that our idea is stupid and not worth sharing. The worry that we’ll look foolish in front of colleagues or leadership. And so we self-censor. We hold back the half-formed, unconventional thought that might have been the spark the team needed—and nobody ever knows what was lost.\nThis is why psychological safety is not a nice-to-have in innovation. It’s a prerequisite. Research shows a strong correlation between collaboration and innovation, but real collaboration—the kind where people build on each other’s wildest ideas—only happens when the fear of ridicule is off the table.\nKaikado’s apprentice could lose himself in his craft because there was no ego at stake—just the work and the steady pursuit of refinement. Immersive Innovation draws from the same idea. Every session begins the night before with a team dinner: great food, real conversation, the kind of connection that lowers defenses and builds trust before the work even starts. By housing participants together on campus—where they will share meals, unwind together in the game room, and walk the grounds between sessions—we create the conditions for the kind of trusting interaction that can’t be manufactured in a two-hour meeting.\nWhen people feel safe, they stop filtering. They say the thing they’d normally keep to themselves. And that’s where the breakthroughs live—not in the polished, pre-approved ideas, but in the messy, vulnerable, what-if-this-sounds-crazy ones. Immersive Innovation is designed to make those moments possible by creating an environment where humility and curiosity replace ego and self-protection.\nA Quiet Place to Come and ThinkMarkowitz left Kaikado with a powerful takeaway: mastery may be one of the oldest and most underrated forms of meditation we have. We’d add a corollary—immersion may be the most underrated condition for innovation. If you want genuine innovation—the kind that solves real problems and opens new possibilities—you need to create the conditions for focus and depth. That’s what Immersive Innovation is built to do.\n‍\n","date":"April 23, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/innovation-as-meditation-what-a-150-year-old-workshop-can-teach-us-about-breakthrough-thinking/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Innovation as Meditation: What a 150-Year-Old Workshop Can Teach Us About Breakthrough Thinking","type":"blog"},{"content":"In our last two blogs, we explored what insight is—that unmistakable rush of sudden clarity, positive emotion, and effortless certainty—and what insight does to us, from sharpening our memory to expanding our appetite for risk. Insight and innovation are closely linked, so the natural next question is, Can we make insights happen more often?\nThe short answer is yes. Not by forcing them, but by understanding the conditions that let them emerge.\nYour Brain Has a Default SettingEach of us leans toward one of two problem-solving styles: analytic, working through challenges step by step, or insightful, making sudden leaps of understanding. And remarkably, that tendency shows up in your brain even when you’re doing absolutely nothing.\nIn a study in the 2010s, Brian Erickson and colleagues at Drexel University recorded participants\u0026#x27; resting-state EEGs—brain activity measured while people simply relaxed with no task to perform. They then gave the participants anagrams and compound remote associates problems that could be solved either analytically or insightfully. They repeated this four times over seven weeks.\nThere were two key findings. First, the participants’ problem-solving styles were consistent over the course of the student. Second, and more interestingly, the resting-state brain activity could predict, weeks in advance, whether a participant would tend to solve by insight or analysis. Participants who showed greater resting activity in posterior regions—the back of the brain—skewed toward insightful problem-solving, while participants who showed more activity in frontal areas were more likely to be analytic. The frontal lobe is home to the executive processes that organize and focus thought, letting us think strategically and deliberately. But they can also act like blinders on a horse, keeping us on a narrow path and preventing the kind of meandering, associative thinking that leads to creative leaps. When frontal activity is relatively lower, the posterior regions become disinhibited—free to “go rogue”—and that’s when unexpected connections surface as an “aha!” moment.\nThe good news is that while your default setting is stable, you aren’t locked in. Your thinking style can be nudged.\nMood Is the Master SwitchIn a 2009 study at Northwestern University, Karuna Subramaniam and colleagues found that participants who reported feeling more positive solved more puzzles, and specifically more by insight, while those experiencing greater anxiety solved fewer puzzles overall and relied more on analytic problem-solving. A relaxed, positive mood loosens the brain’s cognitive grip, giving those rambling, fanciful thoughts room to roam—and those are the raw material of creative breakthroughs.\nWhy is mood so important? To increase the likelihood of insights, you need to release conscious control, and you can only do that in safety. Evolutionarily speaking, if you’re facing off with a bear in the woods, you need careful, deliberate thinking to stay alive, so your frontal lobe will take over with a vise grip. We aren’t fighting bears in our day-to-day anymore, but plenty of modern anxieties trigger the same analytic response in our brains. To foster more insight, you need both physical and psychological safety. Psychological safety is when you feel comfortable taking risks, sharing ideas, and admitting to and learning from failures—all critical skills in innovation. This is why, during our Immersive Innovation™ sessions, the first order of business is always a family-style meal. It allows us to build the environment of trust and respect needed for psychological safety. We maintain that environment by minimizing pressure during brainstorming and using humor (and Nerf guns, when we need to lay down the law). The goal isn’t to eliminate rigor—it’s to temporarily lower the frontal lobes’ inhibitory control so that unexpected connections have space to form.\nDo Your HomeworkIf mood opens the door, knowledge is what’s waiting on the other side. Insights may feel instantaneous, but they don’t spring from nothing. They are the result of linking previously stored concepts—so the quality and diversity of what you’ve stored directly determines the potential for breakthrough.\nThere\u0026#x27;s no shortcut here. You have to fill your brain with information. Read widely—not just in your specialty, but in adjacent and even unrelated areas. A diverse knowledge base increases the probability that seemingly distant concepts will encounter each other in your mind and click into place. Before Immersive Innovation, we spend weeks researching, parsing through relevant research and exploring novel avenues, from different industries to the animal kingdom.\nThe most unexpected insights—and the most powerful innovations—often come from the collision of ideas from different fields. When You’re Stuck, Step AwayHere’s the paradox of insight: when you’re genuinely stuck, trying harder usually makes things worse. Increased effort strengthens analytical looping—the very mode that’s failing you. The most effective move is often to stop.\nTake a walk. Visit a museum. Sit in a coffee shop. A change of environment can serve as a triggering cue—the nudge the unconscious mind needs to surface a connection that’s been forming below awareness. This isn’t procrastination; it’s strategic disengagement. You’re giving the analytical processes permission to stand down so the associative, insight-generating networks can do their work. More than once, the key insights we needed to break through a challenging problem came not in our brainstorming lab, but out in the woods on the hiking trails through the PCDworks campus.\nSo build breaks into your creative process deliberately, not as a last resort. And when you step away, expose yourself to varied stimuli—new environments, different people, unfamiliar ideas. Unlocking “Aha!”Insight isn’t a random gift bestowed on the lucky few. It\u0026#x27;s a neurological event with identifiable preconditions—and those preconditions can be cultivated. So foster psychological safety and a positive mood. Build a deep, diverse knowledge base. And when you hit a wall, have the discipline to walk away. It might just be the thing that leads to your next “Aha!”\n‍\n","date":"March 10, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/how-to-tip-the-odds-toward-your-next-breakthrough-insight/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"How to Tip the Odds Toward Your Next Breakthrough Insight","type":"blog"},{"content":"The Hidden Ripple Effects of Insight: How to Harness Your “Aha!” Moments for Innovation\nIn the third century BCE, the Greek mathematician and physicist Archimedes did something strange: he ran naked through the streets of Syracuse.\nLet’s rewind. As the story goes, King Hiero II of Syracuse suspected he was being cheated. He had commissioned a golden votive crown, and he believed the goldsmith had replaced some of the gold with cheaper silver. He tasked Archimedes with determining whether the crown was pure gold without damaging it.\nIt seemed like an impossible problem. Archimedes knew the density of gold, but he didn’t know how to measure the crown’s volume without melting and reshaping it into a regular geometric form. For weeks, Archimedes wrestled with the problem, trying calculation after calculation.\nThen one day, lowering himself into a bath, Archimedes watched the water level rise.\nIn that instant, he saw it. The volume of water displaced equaled the volume of his body submerged. And if that was true for his body, it was true for any object—including an irregular golden crown. He could measure the crown’s volume by measuring how much water it displaced, calculate its density, and thus determine its purity.\n“Eureka!” he shouted. (Translation: “I have found it!”) And then he leapt from the bath and ran naked through the city streets, so consumed by the insight that he forgot he was unclothed.\nThis story has become the archetypal example of an “Aha!” moment—that sudden clarity when an answer unfolds in front of you. Apocryphal or not, the story demonstrates an important truth about insight: it can make us behave in unusual ways. Because insights don’t just give you answers. They create ripple effects that reshape your memory, your conviction, your judgment, and your willingness to act boldly. For innovators, understanding these ripple effects is the difference between having breakthroughs and actually building on them.\nAnd the effects are more powerful—and more nuanced—than you might think.\nThe Memory Supercharge: How Insights Stick in Your BrainFirst, let’s appreciate what your brain is doing for you. In a study led by Amory H. Danek, participants watched videos of magic tricks and had to explain how the tricks were done. A week later, when asked about the solutions, participants were better able to remember those solutions that they discovered by insight as opposed to analytical thinking. The study attributed this tendency to the certainty and emotional pleasure that accompanies insights.\nIn short: “aha!” moments stick in your brain more than solutions found by working through a problem methodically.\nThis isn’t just convenient—it\u0026#x27;s transformative. Think about what happens during innovation: you have a breakthrough about how to solve a technical challenge, then you need to hold on to that solution through weeks or months of implementation, team alignment, and iteration. Analytical solutions fade. Insights stick.\nThe Double-Edged Sword of Conviction: Certainty ≠ TruthHere\u0026#x27;s where insight becomes even more interesting—and where understanding its mechanics helps you use it more effectively.\nAs we unpacked in our last post, insight comes bundled with certainty. You don’t just understand the solution—you know it’s right. You feel it in your bones. This conviction is precisely what gives innovators the courage to pursue breakthrough ideas that others dismiss as impossible.\nBut that feeling of certainty doesn’t perfectly correlate with correctness.\nIn Maxi Becker’s study examining insight using Mooney images—black-and-white pictures that suddenly resolve into recognizable objects—participants wrongly identified more than half of the images they saw. Yet in those incorrect instances, they still reported experiencing insight 40 percent of the time. In comparison, in correct trials, they felt insight 65 percent of the time.\nNotice what this tells you: insight is more likely to accompany correct solutions than incorrect ones. The certainty you feel is a genuine signal, not just noise. But it’s not a perfect signal—think of it as a probability indicator rather than a guarantee.\nFor innovators, this means you can and should follow your insights, with an important caveat: an insight is a hypothesis, so you can’t trust it blindly; you must test it. A Paradox of Judgment: The Halo Effect and “Bullshit Receptivity”Here’s where things get even more interesting. An “aha!” feeling can affect your beliefs about not just the insight itself but about other, even completely unrelated ideas.\nIn a study led by Ruben Laukkonen, researchers paired statements with anagrams to be solved. When participants solved an anagram by insight rather than analysis, they found the accompanying statement—which had nothing to do with the anagram—to be more believable, even when it was false. This suggests that “aha!” moments can cast a halo of certainty around other ideas occurring in the same “temporal neighborhood.”\nThis might not be a bad thing. Your brain, riding the high of one breakthrough, becomes more open to the next idea that follows. Imagine you’re pitching your innovation and trigger a feeling of insight in your audience. That will create momentum for the broader conversation.\nThe dark side, though, is that you can be tricked into believing falsehoods. So you must question your certainty of both the core insight and the domino effect of certainties that follow.\nHowever, there’s also a paradox here. Research led by Carola Salvi found that people who relied more heavily on insight when solving puzzles were better at distinguishing between real and fake news, and between meaningful statements and pseudo-profound nonsense. She calls this reduced “bullshit receptivity.”\nSo while an individual insight might cast a halo of false certainty, in the macro picture, people who experience and rely on insight have better BS detectors. Ultimately, insights can both improve and cloud your judgment, so be prepared to test your assumptions.\nThe Courage Factor: How Insight Fuels Bold DecisionsPerhaps as a result of this halo of certainty, there’s another interesting side effect of “aha!” moments: they increase tolerance to risk. In another study, Becker examined this effect by having participants solve Mooney images and then choose between monetary payouts. After solving a puzzle with high insight, participants were more likely to select riskier, higher-reward options. Corresponding brain imaging showed enhanced activity in the nucleus accumbens—a region linked to reward processing and dopamine release, which influences how emotions translate into action.\nIn other words, insight doesn’t just change what you think. It changes what you’re willing to bet.\nThe greatest innovations in history required people to make bold bets that looked foolish at the time. Risk is not a bad thing, but recklessness is. The difference between a smart risk and a reckless bet is the same difference between confidence and arrogance. Confidence is built through the acquisition of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. Arrogance is unearned and untested.\nUse the confidence boost that insight provides to push yourself into action, but recognize that whether you continue on that path of innovation is a question you must continually ask yourself. As you gain more knowledge, you may decide to go double or nothing, or to fold and pivot. Mastering the Insight AdvantageInsights are powerful precisely because they change you. They let you see what others miss, help you remember what matters, generate conviction that fuels persistence, and muster the courage to act.\nThese aren\u0026#x27;t bugs in the system—they’re features. They’re exactly what you need to do innovative work.\nBut certainty is an anathema to innovation, so you must be cognizant of what is happening in your brain after an insight. Don’t fall into the trap of false certainty. Insights are still just hypotheses until you put them through a rigorous process of testing.\nThink of it this way: Insight gives you the courage to make bold bets. Validation helps you make smart ones.\n‍\n","date":"February 24, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-hidden-ripple-effects-of-insight-how-to-harness-your-aha-moments-for-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Hidden Ripple Effects of Insight: How to Harness Your “Aha!” Moments for Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"The “Aha!” Moment: What Exactly Is Insight?\nWe’ve all had them—those sudden, exhilarating flashes of insight where the answer to a tough problem materializes out of thin air. It’s the \u0026quot;Aha!\u0026quot; moment, and it feels like magic. But for innovators, it’s more than magic. It is a vital skill. “Aha!” moments can spark initial inspiration for an innovation or help us to work past a tricky challenge in building our solution.\nThe better we understand the nature of insight, the more we can leverage it in our innovation efforts. Fortunately, cognitive neuroscientists have been peering into the brain to decode where these breakthroughs come from. Their findings point to four key traits—suddenness, positive emotion, certainty, and ease.\nA Sudden Flash of GeniusInsight comes all at once—a revelation, a reframing, a jigsaw piece clicking into place to complete the puzzle. Studies using EEG and fMRI data have verified the suddenness of “Aha!” In one study, led by Mark Beeman and John Kounios, participants were tasked with solving verbal puzzles (e.g., being given three words, like “pine,” “crab,” and “sauce,” and being asked to think of a fourth word that can be used to form a compound word with each of the three given words—in this case, “apple”). Participants would then identify how they’d come to their solution, either by analytical thinking or insight, allowing the researchers to compare EEG and fMRI results for both types of thinking. Insights corresponded to a burst of high-frequency brain waves in the brain’s right temporal lobe. In a later study, Kounios used anagrams (like rearranging letters in BELAT to get TABLE), and insight was linked to increased activity in the frontal lobe. In yet another study, run by Duke University’s Maxi Becker, Mooney images (black-and-white images made by cranking up the contrast on a photograph) were used, and they found an increase in brain activity in the ventral occipitotemporal cortex (VOTC), a region responsible for recognizing visual patterns in the environment. While the specific area of the brain that is activated depends on the task, in each instance, insight is marked by a burst of high-frequency brain-wave activity. This is the cognitive signature of a true breakthrough.\nA Rush of PleasureWhile the effect can vary based on the individual, in general, insight triggers positive feelings. The “Aha!” is satisfying and rewarding. Researcher Yongtaek Oh found that in cases of insight, after the first burst of high-frequency brain-wave activity, there was a second burst in the orbitofrontal cortex, which is part of our brain’s reward system and crucial in decision-making. Christine Chesebrough’s work demonstrated that having insights could improve participants’ moods for the entirety of an hour-long test session, and the more insights, the better their mood.\nEssentially, insight is inherently pleasurable. For people with high \u0026quot;reward sensitivity,\u0026quot; this rush of pleasure acts as a powerful intrinsic motivator, driving them to pursue greater creativity and innovation—the joy of the insight itself propels the work forward.\nA Sense of CertaintyAs Einstein once wrote, “At times I feel certain I am right while not knowing the reason.” “Aha!” moments arrive quickly and forcefully. As soon as they arrive, we feel an intuitive sense of rightness.\nThere’s some basis for this certainty. Work by Carola Salvi showed that solutions arrived at by insight, both for visual and linguistic problems, were correct more often than analysis-driven solutions. Becker’s study further found that the greater the burst of brain activity related to insight, the higher the degree of self-reported certainty. A Feeling of EaseAs far back as the 1910s, Gestalt psychologists began exploring the idea of insight and problem-solving. Max Wertheimer broke it into two kinds of thinking: reproductive thinking, solving a problem deliberately (or analytically) based on previous experience and knowledge, and productive thinking, solving a problem through quick, creative, unplanned response to situations and environmental interaction (or insight). The first is deliberate, while the second is unplanned and unconscious.\nBecause insight is largely unconscious, it does not feel like “work” in the same ways as other thinking. A study spearheaded by Hans Stuyck found that, under high cognitive load, non-insight solutions require more time and become less frequent. In contrast, insight is not affected by cognitive load. It occurs at the same frequency and within the same average amount of time. Because insight does not tax attention and working memory in the same way as analysis, it feels easy.\nInnovative BreakthroughThe scientific exploration of the \u0026quot;Aha!\u0026quot; moment confirms what every innovator knows intuitively: insight is a powerful, distinct form of cognition. Defined by its sudden arrival, the rush of positive emotion it brings, the inherent sense of certainty, and the feeling of effortless ease, insight is not just luck—it’s a neurological signature of a genuine cognitive breakthrough. By understanding these four key traits, we can better appreciate the value of creating conditions that foster productive, insightful thinking, turning what feels like magic into a reliable engine for innovation.\n‍\n","date":"February 11, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-aha-moment-what-exactly-is-insight/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The “Aha!” Moment: What Exactly Is Insight?","type":"blog"},{"content":"What separates innovators from other people? What is it that allows them to think outside the box and come up with new, innovative solutions?\nIt’s one of the great mysteries of innovation, and there’s not just one black-and-white answer. However, it’s safe to say that innovators think differently. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be able to innovate.\nTo understand how someone thinks, you need to understand how they approach knowledge. So let’s look at three different knowledge profiles (I-shaped vs. T-shaped vs. M-shaped) and how they impact innovation. Then we can explore how to develop a knowledge profile primed for innovation.\nI-Shaped vs. T-Shaped vs. M-ShapedIn rough terms, knowledge can be broken down into two categories: specialized and generalized. Specialized knowledge goes deep, while generalized knowledge goes wide. Using this, we can visually represent different knowledge profiles using the letters I, T, and M.\nI-Shaped: The SpecialistThe “I” represents deep expertise in a single field (a vertical bar). These individuals are specialists, spending their careers drilling down into one specific domain. They possess unparalleled technical depth, which makes them experts in their field but can limit the scope of their creativity. For this reason, I-shaped people typically are not the ones who drive innovation. However, if you ever run into problems while innovating, they can be invaluable, as they often possess the tacit knowledge needed to work through complex, specialized problems. T-Shaped: The Generalized Specialist/Specialized GeneralistThe “T” represents deep expertise in one area (the vertical bar) coupled with a broad understanding of related domains (the horizontal bar). With both breadth and depth of knowledge, T-shaped individuals tend to be good at bridging gaps. They’re able to collaborate across functions and disciplines and can often translate their specialized skills to broader contexts. With both specialized and generalized knowledge, T-shaped people can often connect disparate ideas and see solutions others wouldn’t. They can grow to become excellent innovators. M-Shaped: The Jack of All TradesThe “M” represents deep expertise in two or more distinct domains (the multiple vertical bars) along with a broad foundational knowledge across many others (the horizontal bar). M-shaped people are the multi-specialists, or modern dilettantes. They have achieved proficiency in multiple, often disparate, fields. M-shaped people are an evolution of T-shaped people. They have not only the potential to translate their skills but a proven track record of doing so. An M-shaped knowledge profile is the most conducive to innovation. As the saying goes, “A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.” An M-shaped person has built knowledge in a way that naturally supports the creativity of thought needed for innovation.\nThe Strengths of the M-Shaped IndividualIn an era defined by rapid technological change, disruption, and the convergence of industries, the M-shaped person is uniquely positioned to drive innovation. Their strengths center on two crucial capabilities: synthesis and adaptability.\nThe Bridge of SynthesisTrue breakthrough innovation rarely happens within the silos of a single discipline. It occurs at the intersection of previously unconnected ideas. M-shaped people are the natural architects of this cross-pollination.\nBecause M-shaped people possess deep fluency in two or more disparate fields (e.g., software engineering and classical music theory, or psychology and architecture), they can recognize patterns and connections that remain invisible to single-domain experts. Their ability to synthesize and integrate knowledge allows them to understand the bigger picture and bridge silos to develop novel, holistic solutions.\nTheir power is not just in knowing a lot, but in connecting what they know. This is the core of innovation. Adaptation to Constant ChangeThe world today operates on short cycles. Technologies, market demands, and even entire industries can shift dramatically in a few short years. For the I-shaped specialist, such radical change can render their single, deep skill obsolete or irrelevant, requiring a difficult pivot.\nM-shaped individuals, by definition, have already mastered the process of shifting focus, learning new domains, and achieving proficiency again and again. Their diverse skill set serves as a resilience buffer. More importantly, they have mastered the meta-skill of learning itself. This inherent adaptability allows them to pivot quickly, which is essential in innovation, as nothing ever goes perfectly to plan.\nHow to Become an M-Shaped Innovator: Serial MasteryThe path to becoming an M-Shaped individual is not about collecting shallow hobbies; it\u0026#x27;s about engaging in serial mastery. This involves a deliberate commitment to achieving deep, functional competence in a new field once mastery has been established in the current one.\nDefine and achieve first mastery: Start by following the I-shaped path: achieve genuine expertise in your primary domain. This provides the professional foundation, confidence, and discipline required for future pursuits.Strategically pivot: Once proficiency is achieved, identify a new domain that is either completely unrelated (for maximum synthesis potential) or highly complementary to your first. This is where the M-person departs from the T-person. The T-person stays adjacent; the M-person sometimes leaps to an entirely different mountain.Engage in deep learning: Commit to achieving a second level of deep competence. This requires humbling yourself to be a beginner again, applying the meta-skills of learning from your first experience. This mastery doesn\u0026#x27;t necessarily mean becoming world-class, but achieving a level where you can contribute meaningfully, solve complex problems, and speak the domain\u0026#x27;s unique language.Repeat and integrate: Repeat the process. Each new mastery deepens the horizontal bar of broad knowledge and adds another vertical pillar of expertise. There’s an important caveat here: an M-shaped knowledge profile does not automatically make you an innovator. Being M-shaped gives you the necessary knowledge and skills, but it is up to you to use them. You must actively look for ways to apply concepts from your older domains to the new one, and vice versa. This intentional integration is what creates the synthesis advantage.\nThe Future of Innovation Is M-ShapedAs we race headlong into the era of AI, M-shaped knowledge profiles will become more important. Machine learning excels at deep, narrow problem-solving—the very domain of the I-shaped person. What AI lacks is the ability to connect seemingly unrelated concepts and apply meta-learning across radically different fields—the strengths of the M-shaped person. So a jack of all trades is a master after all, of innovation.\n‍\n","date":"February 4, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/i-shaped-vs-t-shaped-vs-m-shaped-how-do-innovators-think/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"I-Shaped vs. T-Shaped vs. M-Shaped: How Do Innovators Think?","type":"blog"},{"content":"Innovation is often depicted as a lightning bolt moment, a sudden flash of genius that solves a complex problem. In reality, bringing an innovation to life is a grueling slog up a treacherous mountain, and often, the crux of the climb is not the technical hurdles, but the financial ones. Brilliant ideas gather dust without the necessary funding to transition from concept to commercial reality. Even a perfect, technically sound solution must overcome the most critical barrier: convincing others to invest their capital.\nBottom line: you need money. And to get it, you will need to pitch your innovation. With these three tips, plus a bonus shortcut at the end, you can craft a more compelling pitch and get one step closer to the funding you need.\n#1: Know Your AudienceFirst things first, you must understand your audience. There are different types of investors, and they will be interested in different things.\nWith friends and family, they are going to invest in you—your dreams, your persistence, and your passion. Your loved ones will want to bet on you, but beware: they will remember your past mistakes just as much as your past successes. If you have left a pile of messes in your past, even they may balk, so be prepared to address your history.\nAngel investors are interested in both you and your team, and they are usually making bets on the problem and what you propose as a solution. They will want to know more about the technical risk and often will strive to really understand what you are doing. VCs care less about the technology and more about your ability to take it to market. So the team becomes the number one factor in their decision. They often bet on those who have already succeeded in building and making a profitable exit. For the most part, their motivation is “How much of a return will I get, and how fast am I going to get it?” Whoever you are pitching to, focus on what they are expecting. #2: Demonstrate Product-Market FitAssuming you’re pitching to someone who is worth their salt, you will need to demonstrate product-market fit, meaning your product satisfies a strong market demand. A.k.a., people need your product and will buy it. If you’re seeking funding, we’ll assume that you have identified a problem and come up with a solution to solve it. To establish product-market fit, you need to take things further. You know there’s a problem, but do your target customers know? Humans are both highly adaptable and also highly resistant to change. If a problem exists without a solution, they’ve probably come up with compensatory behavior to solve it themselves. They may not be looking for a different solution, and even if your solution is objectively better, it’s difficult to convince people to change what is already working for them, especially if they have to pay for the new solution. So, demonstrating a problem and solving it isn’t enough. You must provide enough value to customers that they are willing to (1) make a change and (2) pay for the solution.\nDepending on where you’re at in your product development, there are a lot of different metrics that demonstrate product-market fit: customer satisfaction, retention and churn rates, and user engagement. If you’re not yet making sales, you can demonstrate product-market fit through market research and target customer testimonials. #3: Prepare for and Tap into Fear: From FOL to FOMO Since the 1960s, risk theory has reigned supreme in investment. Recently, though, The Economist featured research that calls for a change in how we think about investment decisions. As the researchers—Rob D. Arnott, founder of the investment management company Research Affiliates, and Edward McQuarrie, of Santa Clara University—point out, “Aversion to risk presumes that investors are averse to both upside and downside risk,” meaning that they are averse to both positive, better-than-expected outcomes as well as negative, worse-than-expected outcomes. Obviously, common sense tells us this isn’t true. Arnott and McQuarrie thus argue fear, not risk, is the real driving market force. According to Arnott and McQuarrie, there are two types of fear that influence investors: fear of loss (FOL) and fear of missing out (FOMO). FOL is self-explanatory. Your potential investors don’t want to lose their money. That’s why you need a solid techno-financial analysis, a great team, a smart go-to-market strategy, etc., etc. Still, there is always risk with innovation, so you can also try to balance the FOL with FOMO. How many people have said, “If only I had bought Apple stock back in 1991 when it first came out\u0026quot;? You need to paint a picture of the potential returns, so that investors understand what they might lose out on.\nBonus Shortcut: Find an ExpertAs Socrates said, “The only true wisdom is knowing you know nothing.” Innovation is part technical engineering and part business acumen. Very rarely does a single person hold mastery of both parts. If you do not have a strong financial background, the best thing you can do is find somebody who does. Get a mentor, go to an incubator, or bring someone onto your team who has a deep understanding of the business of innovation. Work closely with someone who can help you navigate the financial terrain.\nWith an expert on your side, an understanding of your audience, a clear product-market fit, and the psychological driver of fear, you can transform your pitch from a mere presentation into a compelling investment opportunity.\n‍\n","date":"January 13, 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/3-tips-for-pitching-to-investors-plus-a-bonus-shortcut/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"3 Tips for Pitching to Investors, Plus a Bonus Shortcut","type":"blog"},{"content":"There’s a big mystery in biology called Peto’s paradox (named after statistician and epidemiologist Richard Peto, who first observed the oddity in 1977).\nCancer is a disease characterized by abnormal cell growth. So logic would suggest that large creatures and long-lived ones, those with the most cells and those with the most time for genetic mutations to occur, would be more likely to develop cancer.\nBut this isn’t the case. Just look at bowhead whales.\nWith documented lifespans of over 200 years, bowhead whales are the longest-living mammal on earth. They are also one of the largest, weighing in at 75 to 100 tons. (Bonus fun fact: They have the largest mouth of any animal, with their mouths comprising nearly one-third of their body length.)\nAnd yet, despite all those cells and all that time for genetic mutations to occur, bowhead whales have a far greater resistance to cancer (and aging) compared to humans.\nThe big question is why? New research published in the Nature journal may hold the answer, and the findings could influence how we treat—or, better yet, prevent—cancer in humans. It’s an important demonstration of the value of academic research and a reminder that innovation often comes from unexpected places.\nUnpacking the Mystery: From Elephants to Oncogenic HitsAs is true in all innovation, the researchers had to iterate through several theories before unlocking the answer.\nIn previous research, scientists found that elephants have more copies of a tumor suppressor gene, which produces a protein called p53 that can stop abnormal cells from dividing, activate DNA repair, and trigger cell death. Essentially, it helps to prevent cancer before it can take hold. While humans have just one copy of the tumor suppressor gene, elephants have twenty. Since bowhead whales are even bigger than elephants, the researchers thought the whales might have even more copies of the gene. When they looked at the data, though, they found that the whale cells displayed lower p53 activity compared to human cells. Next, they hypothesized that bowhead whales’ cells were simply better equipped to handle mutations. They tested this by examining the number of oncogenic hits (genetic mutations known to contribute to the development of cancer) required to trigger malignant growth. (The generally accepted theory today is the multi-stage model of carcinogenesis, which states that cancer develops through a series of genetic mutations, rather than a single cause.) To their surprise, fewer hits were required than for humans. So this second hypothesis was also disproven.\nAnd then the breakthrough came. The Breakthrough: DNA Repair ExpertsThe breakthrough began with a simple idea. If the whales did not have more tumor suppressor genes and they weren’t better at handling mutations, perhaps they simply did not acquire mutations in the first place. Here, the data turned promising. They found that bowhead whale cells indeed displayed lower spontaneous and induced mutation rates, with especially high resistance to large structural variants, including deletions, insertions, duplications, and inversions.\nBowhead whales, it turns out, are experts in DNA repair, particularly for double-strand breaks. DNA is structured as a helix with two long strands of nucleotides wound around each other. In a double-strand break, as it sounds, both strands are broken, which is particularly bad. In most species, when their DNA repair mechanisms put the two ends back together, a good amount of DNA ends up deleted, leading to those mutations that can cause cancer. Bowhead whales, though, manage to meld the pieces back together with far greater repair fidelity. Humans are already better than most species at this type of repair, but bowhead whales are two to three times even better than humans.\nAgain, that ever-nagging question reared its head: Why?\nThe researchers dug even deeper and found that this ability is at least partly related to CIRBP (cold-inducible RNA-binding protein), which is much more abundant in bowhead whales than other species. When researchers put the whale version of CIRBP into human cells, those cells improved at DNA repair, and when researchers induced an overexpression of the protein in fruit flies, the insects lived longer and became more resistant to irradiation. This suggests that the large amount of CIRBP could contribute not only to the bowhead whales’ resistance to cancer but also their longevity, and it opens up interesting new avenues for medical therapies.\nFrom the Arctic to the Clinic: Translating Evolution to InnovationFor billions of years the earth has been running the largest, most thorough experiment known to humankind: evolution. We have much to learn from it, as the bowhead whale demonstrates. If we can harness the superior DNA repair mechanism that evolution perfected in the Arctic deep—perhaps through CIRBP-boosting therapies or other novel treatments—we may move beyond merely treating cancer to actively preventing it. So often, this is the way innovation goes. It crosses industries and species and is built on the back of research, which makes it so crucial for academic institutions and innovators to work together, to transform knowledge into impactful solutions that improve people’s lives. ‍\nAt PCDworks, we believe deeply in the importance of collaboration in innovation, which is why we have helped to found the East Texas Technology and Innovation Coalition (ETTIC), which brings together the finest innovators from business, local government, and higher education. If you’d like to help advance innovation in East Texas, we invite you to join us. Contact us at hello@pcdworks.com or join the ETTIC mailing list at https://www.ettic.tech/. ","date":"December 30, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/secrets-from-the-arctic-deep-how-a-whale-could-revolutionize-our-approach-to-cancer/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Secrets from the Arctic Deep: How a Whale Could Revolutionize Our Approach to Cancer","type":"blog"},{"content":"This year the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences went to Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion, and Peter Howitt, for their explanation of “how innovation provides the impe­tus for further progress.”\nIn our last blog, we did a deep dive on Joel Mokyr’s work identifying the three prerequisites for sustained growth. This time, we’ll look at Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt’s work on how innovation drives economic growth, with a focus on creative destruction. By understanding the both creative and destructive power of innovation, we can make wiser decisions as innovators about what innovations to pursue and how much to invest in them.\nWhat Is Creative Destruction?For roughly 200 years, we have lived in a period of sustained economic growth. On the surface, this gives the appearance of great stability, but peek below, and you’ll find volatility and churn. On the macro level, the economy may continually grow, but on the micro level, there are clear winners and losers. Every year, more than 10% of companies exit the market, while a new 10% enter the market. Likewise, among incumbent firms, jobs are continually reallocated, with the annual job creation and job destruction rates being above 10% as well.\nThe vast majority of this “churn” happens within specific industries, as opposed to representing a shift between sectors. Additionally, there is a correlation between entry and exit rates as well as between job creation and destruction rates. Industries with a high exit rate also tend to have a high entry rate, and industries with a lot of job creation typically also have a lot of job destruction.\nThe question is: Why?\nIt’s due to creative destruction, a term coined by Joseph Schumpeter in 1942. Creative destruction is a natural consequence of innovation, in which the new replaces the old. Telephones and fax machines replaced telegraph services. Streaming services made physical video rental chains obsolete. And a number of data storage options have come and gone, from floppy disks to CDs to USBs to cloud storage. As solutions shift, new companies and jobs are created, while existing companies and jobs are destroyed. Aghion and Howitt identified this process of creative destruction as not simply a byproduct of innovation, but a key driver of sustained growth. When a company innovates, creating a new product or a better way of doing something, they can outcompete others in the marketplace. Assuming the first company has patented their innovation, others cannot simply copy the product or process. If they want to compete, they must produce their own innovation, leading to the upward spiral of continual innovation that drives sustained growth.\nA Mathematical Model of Creative DestructionAghion and Howitt constructed the first macroeconomic model for creative destruction to have general equilibrium (meaning that it reflects the whole economy, taking into account a number of interconnected factors, like interest rates, household savings, and more). We’ll spare you the mathematical details, and instead, we’ll look at how the model has been used to analyze two key areas related to innovation: competition and R\u0026amp;D investment/subsidies. Competition The model shows that with too much competition, companies actually have low incentive to invest in R\u0026amp;D and innovation because the pace of creative destruction is too high, making it difficult to earn back the money invested in R\u0026amp;D before a new innovation makes the first obsolete. On the other end of the spectrum, too little competition likewise deters innovation. Uncontested monopolies have far less reason to innovate than newcomers, as doing so would cannibalize their own profits. Instead, they typically try to block entry by new companies and hinder R\u0026amp;D efforts in order to retain their monopoly. In practice, we tend to suffer more from too little competition than too much, so policies should seek to prevent monopolies and encourage healthy competition. Similarly, patent protection should be designed in such a way to stimulate innovation, not discourage it by inhibiting the flow of ideas.\nThe takeaway for innovators: Think about the competition you are up against, and understand that while patents may be able to protect your invention, they won’t protect you from new innovations that come onto the market. R\u0026amp;D Investment and SubsidiesOne of the things the model can do is analyze whether there’s an optimal volume of R\u0026amp;D. It’s tricky to calculate, because there are two opposing mechanisms: societal incentives vs. economic ones.\nFor society, innovation is almost always a good thing. One innovation builds upon another, and so the old innovations remain valuable. For example, while cellphones have replaced many landlines, the invention of the telephone remains valuable, as it was a necessary stepping-stone to cellphones. In this view, innovation has a greater value for society than for the companies innovating, as they may not always make substantial profit from their innovations before new solutions take over. This suggests that society should subsidize R\u0026amp;D.\nAn opposing argument is that even a minor innovation can help a company outcompete others, securing profits much larger than the societal gains. From this perspective, investments in R\u0026amp;D can be too large and technological development can be too rapid.\nUltimately, the model concludes that a one-size-fits-all approach to R\u0026amp;D subsidies is not ideal. One thing Aghion does suggest in later research, though, is for universities to develop ties with private enterprise, in order to turn innovative ideas into adopted technologies.\nThe takeaway for innovators: Every innovation has a limited lifespan before something new replaces it. So think about not only whether your solution will succeed in the marketplace, but for how long before being dethroned. Pursue innovations that have a higher likelihood of returning your investment.\nInnovation Is Not a Rising Tide, but a WildfireIt’s said that a rising tide lifts all boats. While innovation may be a rising tide for society as a whole, on the micro level, it’s more like a wildfire. It changes the landscape, burning the old and allowing the new to take root. When the wildfire comes, the survivors are those that succeed in creating, adopting, and improving new technologies. Creative destruction is not merely a force to be endured, but the engine of progress that must be managed and embraced.\n‍\n","date":"December 11, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/what-the-2025-nobel-prize-in-economics-teaches-us-about-innovation-part-2-creative-destruction/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"What the 2025 Nobel Prize in Economics Teaches Us About Innovation, Part 2: Creative Destruction","type":"blog"},{"content":"","date":"November 25, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/authors/","section":"Authors","summary":"","title":"Authors","type":"authors"},{"content":"On Thanksgiving, Donna and I typically do four turkeys, all deep-fried. We used to do one regular, oven-cooked turkey to get dressing, but who needs dressing when you can have more deep-fried turkey instead? The only downside to deep-fried turkey (besides the Darwin Awards folks who manage to blow things up) is how expensive the peanut oil is—$50 for three gallons of oil is outrageous. Still, it’s worth it, because those turkeys are the best-tasting thing on the planet—crispy and juicy and packed with flavor. Each year, the vultures (a.k.a., my loving family) descend and pick apart the birds. By dinner, only one turkey survives. Deep-fried turkey has become a Thanksgiving necessity in our house, but this style of cooking didn’t always exist. What is now tradition was once innovation.\nOver the past couple of decades, deep-fried turkey has amassed a cult-like following. It has nearly made its way to the North Pole, thanks to our son, who took it to the far north country, where it has been widely adopted. As far as innovations go, it’s been wildly successful. So in celebration of the holiday, let’s take a look back at how this innovation came to be and what allowed it to take off.\nCajun Roots: From Boiled Crawfish to Deep-Fried TurkeyIf Donna and I are lucky and get any turkey leftovers after the vultures have left, I make turkey terazzini, and Donna uses the bones to make broth for gumbo. This is fitting, because the idea to deep-fry turkeys came from Cajuns in Louisiana.\nIt all started with the popularization of butane camp stoves back in the 1940s. By the 1970s, some Cajun innovators had the idea to adapt these camp stoves to make a favored delicacy: boiled crawfish. They rigged up a large aluminium pot to a gas burner, creating a portable way to cook crawfish. You could pull the crawfish from the water and plop them straight into the pot right there.\nBefore long, cooks realized that they could use the pots for more than just boiling crawfish. They started using the rigs to fry fish and chicken as well. From there, the jump to turkeys was inevitable.\nIt’s a tale as old as time in innovation: start with something that already exists, like a butane camp stove, and repurpose it to solve a different problem.\n“The Ultimate Insult to Wholesome Food”: Overcoming the CriticsIn the 1980s, newspaper articles about deep-fired turkey began to spread. (I miss the days when deep-frying turkeys was considered news!) While some were intrigued by the novelty, others were appalled, including the National Turkey Federation. They sent out a press release titled “Deep-Fried Turkey!!! The Ultimate Insult to Wholesome Food” in which they said eating fried turkey was like “staring into a loaded double-barrel shotgun. One barrel is a cardiologist\u0026#x27;s nightmare, the other … is a microbiologist\u0026#x27;s worst dream come true.\u0026quot;\nCritics also voiced concerns over safety. In 1984, the New Orleans Times-Picayune food editor Dale Curry published a recipe for deep-fried turkey after interviewing restaurateur Jim Chehardy, who claimed, “You’re never going to bake another turkey after tasting this.” As Curry put it, after publishing the recipe, “By nightfall I had become known as the first food editor to burn down two houses … In writing that first recipe, so tedious as it was, calling for a horse syringe and plastic rope, I managed to leave out one detail -- DO NOT COOK NEAR THE HOUSE. So I was watching the evening news that Thanksgiving night and a New Orleans resident with house flaming behind him told a TV news reporter, \u0026#x27;I\u0026#x27;ll never use another one of those recipes.\u0026#x27; (I silently thanked him for not mentioning my name or publication.)\u0026quot;\nAnd yet, over the following years, the Times-Picayune\u0026#x27;s most-requested recipe was that for deep-fried turkey. In 1987, Curry asked Chehardy to demonstrate the method for 110 members of the Newspaper Food and Writers Association (now the Association of Food Journalists). The innovation really started to take off then. By the 1990s, it had made its way to Martha Stewart Living and the New York Times, and today, the National Turkey Federation features multiple recipes for deep-fried turkey on their website.\nInnovations often face resistance from the general public and entrenched experts, but by enlisting a small, dedicated group of first adopters, you can push back against the status quo.\nMass Appeal through Micro InventionsThe first deep-fried turkeys were jury-rigged affairs, using crawfish or gumbo pots, DIY harnesses made from nylon rope, and, as Curry noted, horse syringes to inject the turkey with marinade. For the average home cook, this made deep-frying a turkey a daunting task. As the method gained popularity, though, specialized equipment was invented to make it safer and easier.\nIn our last blog, about Joel Mokyr’s work detailing the requirements for sustained growth (which earned him the Nobel Prize), we discussed micro inventions, which are the incremental improvements that build upon what exists to create something new and better. Deep-frying turkeys was the macro invention, and the micro inventions built atop it helped the practice achieve wider appeal.\nFor example, perforated inner baskets and lifting hooks replaced the need for DIY rope harnesses, which made inserting and removing the turkey far simpler. Injector syringes were created specifically for turkeys and were more accessible than horse syringes for many. Thermometers were built directly into turkey fryers to make monitoring temperature easier, with some fryers including automatic shutoff if the temperature gets too high. Today, there are even oil-less “fryers” that use infrared heat to mimic the effects of a deep-fried turkey without using oil. Even with an innovation that seems relatively simple, like deep-frying turkeys, there are often dozens of micro inventions stacked together to make it a commercial success. It’s not just about creating something new, but about making the “new” better.\nA Feast of InnovationThe story of the deep-fried turkey is a perfect reminder that innovation rarely happens in a vacuum. It began with an existing technology (the butane camp stove), was sparked by an unrelated need (boiling crawfish), faced fierce resistance from established institutions (the National Turkey Federation), found a following among culinary enthusiasts, and achieved mass market success through iterative improvements—the micro inventions that made the process safe and accessible.\nWhether you’re celebrating with a classic oven-roasted bird or a crispy, deep-fried masterpiece this year, take a moment to appreciate this simple truth: every tradition was once an innovation. The most successful innovations, like the deep-fried turkey, are those that solve a problem (dry turkey!) in a unique way and become so good they can’t be ignored.\nFrom all of us at PCDworks, we wish you a safe, delicious, and innovative Thanksgiving.\n","date":"November 25, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/deep-fried-turkey-a-thanksgiving-innovation-story/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Deep-Fried Turkey: A Thanksgiving Innovation Story","type":"blog"},{"content":"","date":"November 25, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/authors/mike-rainone/","section":"Authors","summary":"","title":"Mike Rainone","type":"authors"},{"content":"This year’s Nobel Prizes have been announced, and the one that caught our eye is not the prize in chemistry or physics or even medicine, but economics.\nThe 2025 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences went to Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion, and Peter Howitt, for their explanation of “how innovation provides the impe­tus for further progress.”\nEssentially, their work not only proves the value of innovation on a large, global scale but also details how innovation takes place. This isn’t just academic theory; it’s a blueprint for understanding the very forces you’re trying to harness. So let’s take a closer look at these economic theories, starting with Joel Mokyr, to uncover what lessons you, as an innovator, can take away from them.\nThe Phenomenon of Sustained GrowthJoel Mokyr received one-half of this year’s prize “for having identified the prerequisites for sustained growth through technological progress.”\nMokyr, an economic historian and professor at Northwestern University, is unique among his peers in that he has a surprisingly optimistic outlook. As he said recently at a Northwestern symposium, “The last 150 years have been absolutely miraculous in the history of the human race. The living standards that would have been unimaginable in the 1870s have been attained not just by the very wealthy and top layers of society, but basically, by regular citizens. The average life expectancy in the world today is 73 for women and 68 for men. In the 1870s it was in the upper 30s. We have doubled it. That gives you an indication of what we have achieved.”\nThis is one of the key findings of Mokyr’s work: the last 150 years are in fact quite unique in relation to a larger view of human history. It is only for the last 150 years or so that we have seen sustained economic growth. Prior to that, before the Industrial Revolution, growth was largely stagnant, despite major scientific and technical breakthroughs. For instance, the Enlightenment saw such developments as Isaac Newton’s laws of motion and universal gravitation and Benjamin Franklin’s experiments in electricity. Yet such discoveries did not lead to applications that led to sustained economic growth. To visualize just how drastic this change in growth was, look at the aggregate GDP per capita for Europe from 1300–2000, from Stephen Broadberry and Jason Lennard’s journal article “European Business Cycles and Economic Growth, 1300–2000.”\nWhat accounts for this change, and what keeps us on a path of continued sustained growth? This is the question that Mokyr answered, identifying three important prerequisites for sustained growth: useful knowledge, mechanical competence, and a society open to change.\n#1: Useful KnowledgeMokyr argues that “useful knowledge” derives from two types of knowledge: propositional knowledge, which is the knowledge of “facts” (or whatever is believed to be fact at the time) about the world, and prescriptive knowledge, which is how things work in practice. It’s an oversimplification, but you can think of propositional knowledge as the precursor to what we know as “science” and prescriptive knowledge as “technology.” Or as another simplified way to think of it, propositional knowledge is theory, and prescriptive knowledge is practice.\nIn early human history, there was a disconnect between propositional knowledge and prescriptive knowledge. As Mokyr wrote, it was “a world of engineering without mechanics, iron-making without metallurgy, farming without soil science, mining without geology, water-power without hydraulics, dye-making without organic chemistry, and medical practice without microbiology and immunology.” Often, people knew that something worked but not why it worked. Knowledge and understanding were limited, and so people lacked the wisdom necessary to be able to innovate effectively, with innovation after innovation driving sustained growth.\nBeginning in the Enlightenment, this disconnect began to close. Propositional knowledge became more accessible to greater numbers of people, spreading from, in Mokyr’s words, “more arcane realms of mathematics and experimental philosophy to the more mundane worlds of the artisan, the mechanic and the farmer.” Thus began an important feedback loop. Propositional knowledge influenced prescriptive knowledge, leading to the development of innovations. The technological success of such innovations then reinforced and increased confidence in the propositional knowledge, leading to yet more innovations and ultimately contributing to the sustained growth we’ve now enjoyed for so long.\nThe takeaway for innovators: Science and technology are intertwined. For sustained economic growth, scientific breakthroughs and university research must be translated into practical, commercial innovations. In turn, the success of innovations can potentially point researchers toward the most useful areas of study.\n#2: Mechanical CompetenceMechanical competence refers to the ability of skilled workers to implement new technologies, putting them into economic use. These are people Mokyr calls “tinkerers,” “tweakers,” and “implementers.” They’re the ones who can translate abstract ideas into practical applications. I would argue that most innovators today fall into this category.\nMokyr distinguishes between “macro inventions” and “micro inventions.” Macro inventions are the major breakthroughs with no clear precedent that create entirely new industries or technological paths, like the steam engine. Micro inventions are the incremental improvements that build upon what exists to create something new and better, like James Watt’s separate condenser for the steam engine, which greatly increased engine efficiency and allowed the steam engine to be applied in more ways, like in ships. While there have been macro inventions throughout history, Mokyr points to the micro inventions as key for sustained economic growth. A single macro invention will cause a spike in growth, a succession of micro inventions is necessary to sustain that growth over time. The tinkerers are often the ones who drive micro inventions.\nThe takeaway for innovators: Look for what already exists and find new, innovative ways to improve it or apply it in new areas. These so-called “micro inventions” are crucial to driving economic growth.\n#3: A Society Open to ChangeStill today, there is often widespread resistance to change—it’s part of human nature. In the past, though, such resistance was even more pronounced, typically driven by people with vested interests who oftentimes held (and wanted to maintain) monopolies on resources, formal skills, equipment, etc.\nFor example, in the seventeenth century, Galileo faced backlash from the Catholic Church for his support of the heliocentric model. In the eighteenth century, John Kay, the inventor of the flying shuttle for mechanized weaving, was harassed by weavers. And in the nineteenth century, the medical establishment vehemently opposed Ignaz Semmelweis’s proposition that physicians should wash their hands to prevent the transmission of contaminated matter.\nBeginning in the Enlightenment, though, a “culture of growth” began to take hold. People and institutions both became more open to new ways of thinking, allowing for more and faster innovation. A number of factors likely contributed to this shift in culture. I would personally argue that one of the most important is that the changes improved people’s lives, from their health and safety to the cost of goods to the experiences available to them. The takeaway for innovators: Anticipate resistance. For your innovation to be adopted, it must provide enough value to overcome the pain of change.\nFrom the Past to the FutureSo what does all this mean for the future? Well, that depends on what we do with the information. As the economic sciences committee at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences wrote in their scientific background report, “Economic stagnation, not growth, has been the norm in human history, and the role of science, innovation, and creative destruction cannot be overstated in the unprecedented economic growth experience since the Industrial Revolution.” If we want sustained growth to continue, on a societal level, we must foster environments that support the generation and application of useful knowledge, cultivate mechanical competence among workers, and encourage societal openness to change. For us innovators, the best thing we can do is keep striving to improve people’s lives and do what we do best: innovate.\nStay tuned for part 2, in which we’ll look at Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt’s contributions, including the concept of creative destruction.\n‍\n","date":"November 11, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/what-the-2025-nobel-prize-in-economics-teaches-us-about-innovation-part-1-the-3-prerequisites-for-sustained-growth/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"What the 2025 Nobel Prize in Economics Teaches Us About Innovation, Part 1: The 3 Prerequisites for Sustained Growth","type":"blog"},{"content":"‍\nWhat’s your background (academic, work experience, etc.)? How did you get into innovation? \u0026quot;I am a self-taught trashologist. I’ve spent a lot of time perfecting my technique in getting into trash cans, trash bags, and any pile that could be deemed as garbage. Honestly, I think my charming looks and cute face really got me the intro. It was a sheer accident.\u0026quot;\nWhy are you here at PCDworks (i.e., why have you chosen to work here instead of elsewhere)? \u0026quot;I was chilling in an animal shelter. It was the right place, right time thing. I love it here! There is so much to do, lots of rooms to wander, many little critters to bug, and lots of TRASH.\u0026quot;\nWhat areas are you looking to improve on (i.e., any continuing education or development you\u0026#x27;re interested in)?\u0026quot;Trying to remember not to turn over the trash cans. Oh, and I am working on my begging, not getting as many treats as I would like. I really need to fix that.\u0026quot;\nWhat are you most fascinated by right now (i.e., a new technology, an area of study, etc.)?\u0026quot;That is tough. I don\u0026#x27;t mean to repeat myself too much, but trash cans. My reputation as a trashologist is making my job a little harder. They’re on to me.\u0026quot;\nWhat’s your favorite project you worked on and why?\u0026quot;Honestly, it is too hard to pick just one. I give emotional support to all the projects, so I love them all.\u0026quot;\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation? \u0026quot;A long afternoon nap in the sun right after a little dip in the pond.\u0026quot;\nWhat is your favorite quote related to innovation? “Everything I know, I learned from dogs.” —Nora Roberts\n‍\n‍\nImage traditionally edited by marketing.\n‍\n","date":"October 30, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-ranger/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Ranger","type":"blog"},{"content":"Horror’s Hidden Genius: What Special Effects Can Teach Us About Innovation\nSpecial effects turn movies into magic, tricking us into believing that what we see on the screen is real. From convincing gore to alien monsters, special effects designers are constantly coming up with new ways to shock and scare us.\nTo celebrate Halloween, let’s take a look at the special effects in three horror films to see how the magic happened, with an innovation lesson hidden in each.\n#1: The Sound of A Quiet Place: Lateral Thinking in ActionIn A Quiet Place, the world has been taken over by sightless creatures with an acute sense of hearing. Every noise—the creak of a floorboard, the rustle of leaves—comes with high stakes. The very premise of the film is rooted in the need for silence, which makes the sound of the film even more impactful. While working on the movie, sound designers Ethan Van der Ryn and Erik Aadahl faced a problem common to horror films. If you need the sound of a person walking barefoot, you can simply record someone walking barefoot. But how do you create the sound of a fictional creature? This is the essence of innovation: creating something that does not exist. Like all innovators, Van der Ryn and Aadahl had to get creative. To create the sound of the creatures moving, they rubbed crab legs together, and they used twisted celery stalks and lettuce for the opening of the creatures’ ears. And the creatures’ echolocation? A stun gun on a patch of grapes, with the sound digitally slowed down so you can hear the individual clicks.\nThe lesson here is the importance of lateral thinking. Often, the way you innovate is not always by creating something new but by applying something that already exists in new, novel ways, like using the crunching, snapping sounds of twisted celery stalks to bring life to an alien creature. This kind of lateral thinking was used not just in the sound, but in the visuals of A Quiet Place, with the designers taking inspiration from prehistoric fish, snakes, bats, and bog people.\nSo when you face a tricky problem and need to create something that doesn’t exist, try thinking laterally. You might find inspiration in an unexpected place.\n#2: The Thing’s “Spider-Head”: Prototype TestingWhen it comes to practical effects, The Thing is arguably king. The film’s creature effects, designed by Rob Bottin, were groundbreaking and memorable, particularly the spider-head creature. In this sequence, a character’s head detaches itself, rolls to the ground, then sprouts stalks like a spider’s legs and scurries away to escape a fire.\nFirst, a mechanical replica of the actor’s head was made, and a hydraulic ramp was built under the table in order to stretch the head from the body. To make the stretching veins and viscera realistic, they used a mixture of melted plastic and microwaved bubble gum. (There’s that lateral thinking again!)\nAfter the head detaches, a tongue whips out of the creature. In reality, the tongue was actually a cable being retracted into the creature, and then the shot was reversed. Operators hidden under the floor then pushed out the spider-head’s legs, and the creature was moved across the room with a combination of remote control and physical pulling by translucent fishing line.\nIn the movie, this scene lasts only a few minutes, but it took months of testing to achieve the effects, as they needed to shoot it in one take. When they finally filmed it, though, disaster struck. The plastic and bubble gum mixture let off toxic fumes that built up in the room. When fire was added to the scene, the fumes ignited. Fortunately, no one was injured, and after reconstructing some damaged props, they were able to reset and shoot the scene.\nThis leads us to our innovation lesson: test, test, and test some more, making sure to mimic real-world (or real-filming) conditions as much as possible. A successful test in perfect lab conditions tells you little about how something will perform in the real world, where conditions are rarely perfect.\n#3: Gruesome Transformation in The Fly: Breaking the Solution DownThe Fly is a masterclass in body horror, largely due to the grotesque and unforgettable practical effects that chronicle Seth Brundle’s agonizing transformation into the Brundlefly. Chris Walas and his team, including Stephan Dupuis (who won an Oscar for Best Makeup), meticulously crafted seven distinct stages of makeup to depict Brundle\u0026#x27;s genetic deterioration. They first designed the final incarnation of the creature and then worked out the various steps needed to reach that point. In the early stages, the changes are subtle, like thick black hairs and scaly lesions. With each stage, the changes become more dramatic, through the use of prosthetics, then full-body suits, and finally animatronics. The lesson here is twofold. First, start with your desired end state. By first knowing the end goal, you can work backwards to map out how to get there. Then, break the solution down. If you try to tackle everything at once, it can be overwhelming, but if you focus on one piece at a time, it becomes more manageable.\nPushing the Boundaries of CreativityFrom the eerie sounds of A Quiet Place to the meticulously crafted set pieces of The Thing to the gruesome transformations of The Fly, special effects artists continually push the boundaries of creativity. Their ingenious solutions, often born from unconventional thinking, rigorous testing, and a methodical approach to complex problems, offer invaluable lessons for anyone seeking to innovate. Happy Halloween!\n‍\n","date":"October 29, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/horrors-hidden-genius-what-special-effects-can-teach-us-about-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Horror’s Hidden Genius: What Special Effects Can Teach Us About Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"In theory, a patent is the best way to legally protect your innovation. A patent grants you exclusive rights to your invention for a period of time, preventing others from making, using, or selling it without your permission. In practice, things are more nuanced. The reality is that a patent isn’t iron-clad protection, and you need to be prepared for the practicalities and limitations.\nLet’s look at the good, the bad, and the ugly of patents so that you know what to expect.\nThe Good: The Benefits of PatentsWe’ll start with the good. While patents are not perfect, they do offer benefits. If push comes to shove and you find yourself in a legal battle, you will need a patent to have any real chance of winning. However, you don’t need to rush out and file a full-disclosure patent right away. In fact, you shouldn’t do so until you have a clear idea of what you’re doing and a fairly solid prototype. Instead, at earlier stages, you can file a provisional patent. It’s fairly cheap—$130 for a small entity—and you can even file it yourself, though it’s admittedly a bit of a pain. A provisional patent establishes a precedent date and gives you one year to continue developing before you file your full-disclosure patent.\nThere’s also another benefit to patents beyond legal protection: assurance for investors.\nInvestors are particularly wary of potential infringement lawsuits, as these can severely disrupt anticipated cash flow and undermine their investment. So they will almost always look for patents as proof of original ideas. The patent office is supposed to rigorously check for similarities (as to whether they actually do so is again a matter of nuance). Still, a granted patent provides some assurance that you haven’t infringed on existing IP and gives investors assurance that you have an original idea worth investing in.\nThe Bad: Having a Patent vs. Enforcing a PatentThe key issue with patents is that having a patent and enforcing a patent are two very different things. It is incredibly rare for individuals or small companies to sue over patent infringement because enforcement is prohibitively difficult. First of all, you have to prove financial loss, which can be especially difficult in the early stages of innovation. Another company could be violating your patent, but if you aren’t yet selling much of your product, you can’t say, “Hey, you’re stealing our business!” because they’re not. They may have stolen your product, but they haven’t stolen your profit, because you’re not at that stage yet. Unless their stolen product manages to take off substantially where you haven’t yet made traction, there won’t be anything for you to sue over.\nAnd when we say “substantially,” we mean it. It’s time to get into the ugly side of patent enforcement: the money.\nThe Ugly: The Deepest Pockets WinEven if you can prove financial loss, defending a patent is expensive and time-consuming, and there’s no guarantee you’ll win. Here are the stats about the average cost of patent litigation, tied to the amount of damages at stake, as reported by the American Intellectual Property Law Association: Amount of damages\nAverage cost of litigation through trial and appeal\nLess than $1 million\n$900,000\n$1 million to $10 million\n$1.6 million\n$10 million to $25 million\n$4.5 million\nOver $25 million\n$5.125 million\n‍\nWith the high legal costs, patent litigation only becomes profitable when a large amount of damages is at stake. With smaller amounts, you can end up paying just as much and possibly even more in legal fees, so it’s often not worth pursuing litigation. Also keep in mind that these cases take years to resolve. This means that the winners in patent infringement cases tend to be whoever has deeper pockets, because they’re the ones who can afford to delay and defend. So if you’re a little guy up against a larger company, good luck—you’ll need it. Better Safe Than SorryYou’re better safe than sorry, so yes, you should still go ahead and get your patents. However, without the ability to enforce your patent, its protective value diminishes significantly, so don’t rely on it solely.\nKeep your intellectual property (IP) secret when you can, use non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) whenever possible, and work to get your product into the market and adopted by customers quickly. Seek to win in the marketplace rather than the courtroom. ","date":"October 16, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/patent-protection-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-100/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Patent Protection: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly","type":"blog"},{"content":"In 1953, on his wedding night, Robert Kearns popped a celebratory bottle of champagne in his hotel room. The cork flew into his left eye, leaving him legally blind in that eye. A decade later, this unfortunate accident became the inspiration for an invention we still use today.\nIn November 1962, Kearns was driving his Ford Galaxie through Detroit when it began to drizzle. He switched on his windshield wipers, which had only two speeds at the time, driven by a vacuum-powered system: fast and faster. As the wipers squeaked across his windshield, Kearns grew frustrated. The wipers were designed for steady rain, not finer drizzles like this one. The constant back-and-forth motion was not only unnecessary but also distracting, particularly for Kearns with his impaired vision.\nSo he started thinking. Why did wipers have to move continuously? Wouldn’t it be better if they moved intermittently, like the human eye, which blinks every few seconds instead of constantly opening and shutting?\nUsing off-the-shelf parts—a transistor, a resistor, and a capacitor—Kearns built a prototype of an electric intermittent wiper in his basement and installed it on his personal car. It worked wonderfully, allowing him to adjust the delay between windshield wipes. Now he just needed to sell it.\nA $557 Million TheftIn 1963, Kearns met with representatives from both Ford and Chrysler to pitch his intermittent windshield wipers. Ford expressed interest but asked Kearns to perform additional testing to ensure the wipers met their standards for longevity. Kearns did so, and after his wipers passed the test, he filed for his first patent on December 1, 1964 (with the patent being granted on November 7, 1967).\nAfter a series of presentations, Ford offered him a contract, with one condition. The wipers weren’t just a convenience. They were a significant safety improvement, improving visibility and reducing driver fatigue. A Ford representative explained that, because the wipers were a “safety item,” the law required that Kearns disclose all the details of the invention before they could give him the contract. At the time, this seemed reasonable to Kearns, and he agreed.\nFive months later, Ford dismissed Kearns, telling him that their engineers had designed their own wiper instead. In 1969, they debuted the industry’s first intermittent windshield wiper, with the same configuration that Kearns had designed. By 1989, Ford would sell 20.6 million cars with the intermittent wiper purchased as an add-on, with a profit calculated at $557 million. The true loss to Kearns was far greater, because other major automotive companies quickly followed suit with similar intermittent windshield wipers using his configuration, including Chrysler, General Motors, Saab, Honda, Volvo, Rolls-Royce, and Mercedes. The Battle for JusticeWhen Kearns realized what had happened, he had a mental breakdown that led to a two-week stay in a psychiatric ward. Feeling betrayed and appalled by the injustice, Kearns embarked on a monumental legal battle against these automotive titans. He filed his first lawsuit in 1978 against Ford. As big corporations usually do in patent cases, Ford stalled, hoping Kearns would run out of motivation or money. It is a tactic that has unfortunately proved successful time and time again. This time, though, Ford underestimated Kearns’s tenacity, which soon transformed into an obsession.\nOver the next twelve years, Kearns hired and fired five different legal firms and ultimately decided to represent himself. Eventually, Ford offered him a $30 million settlement. Against everyone’s advice, he turned it down. Accepting the settlement required clearing Ford from any wrongdoing, and he refused to do that. This wasn’t about the money for him.\nIn January 1990, the case finally went to trial.\nKearns sought damages of $395 million. The jury ruled in Kearns’s favor, but they awarded him only $5.2 million, with Ford agreeing to pay $10.2 million to avoid further litigation. Kearns went after Chrysler as well, receiving approximately $30 million in compensation. After that, he filed more suits against more than a dozen other manufacturers.\nVictory, But at What Cost?Kearns\u0026#x27;s unwavering determination in the face of overwhelming odds is inspiring and vindicating for all independent inventors struggling to defend their patents against corporate infringement.\nAnd yet … there is something deeply sad and unsatisfying about his story. His victory came only with great sacrifices. He spent decades and more than $11 million fighting this battle. It became his entire life, and as a result, his wife filed for divorce, and his relationship with his children became strained.\nAs much as we love stories of Davids winning out over Goliaths, the unfortunate reality for most independent innovators is that they will not have the money and time needed to take on big corporations. Still, Kearns gives us hope that justice can and will prevail. His legacy reminds us that what matters most is not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.\n","date":"September 23, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/they-stole-his-invention-so-he-fought-back/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"They Stole His Invention, So He Fought Back","type":"blog"},{"content":"The Curious Case of the Segway: A Visionary’s Ride to Reality (and Back Down Again)\nLike many kids, when Dean Kamen was young, he did not enjoy making his bed each morning. Unlike most, he decided to do something about it. At just five or six years old, he devised a system of pulleys so that he could roll out of bed, pull on a few ropes, and have his bed made.\nIt was the first in a long line of inventions. Kamen was particularly successful in the medical field, where he developed the first drug infusion pump and the all-terrain electric wheelchair iBOT.\nHe is most famous, though, for the Segway. The Segway was brought to market in 2001 to sky-high expectations. Kamen once said, “Segway will be to the car what the car was to the horse and buggy.” Steve Jobs said it would be as big as the PC. John Doerr, a venture capitalist who had previously invested in both Google and Amazon, said it would be the fastest company to reach $1 billion in revenue.\nKamen believed that within a year of releasing the Segway, he would sell 10,000 a week. He was off by several orders of magnitude. In 2020, when production of Segways ended, only 140,000 units had been sold. That’s fewer than 10,000 a year.\nThe Segway seemed to have everything going for it: a brilliant inventor with proven success, groundbreaking tech, tens of millions in funding, and nationwide press coverage. So what went wrong? A Clunky, Expensive Solution to a Good ProblemThe Segway was meant to be the ultimate solution to urban mobility, a response to a well-known problem in public transportation: the “last mile” gap. You take a bus or a train, but it doesn’t drop you off right at your destination. You must walk that last “gap” from the bus stop or train station to your destination, which deters many from using public transportation, leading to more cars on the road and greater congestion.\nKamen got at least one thing right: the “last mile” gap was a good problem to solve. Fixing this problem would improve people’s lives, so much so that people would be willing to shill over their hard-earned dollars (to a point). Unfortunately, a good problem does not guarantee a good solution. Several issues plagued the Segway:\nCost: The Segway came with a hefty $5,000 price tag (which later rose up to $10,000 for some models). At the time, you could buy a reliable used car for that amount. While people were willing to pay for a solution to the “last mile” gap, $5,000 was simply too much.Practicality: The Segway came with some cool, sci-fi-esque features, like gyroscopic self-balancing (which contributed to the high cost), but on a practical level, it fell short. It could manage only about ten miles per charge. It was also heavy, weighing in at more than eighty pounds—so good luck trying to lug it up or down stairs! Beyond that, it was just a bit awkward to use, feeling tippy and clunky.Lack of needed infrastructure and regulation issues: Today dedicated bike lanes are common, but back in 2001 they were a rarity. So where exactly was one supposed to ride a Segway? It was too dangerous to ride on the road with cars, but sidewalks were often too crowded with pedestrians. There was nowhere for it to go. Compounding the problem, many cities were slow to establish the needed laws and regulations to allow widespread use. Many banned Segways outright.PR disasters: The Segway captured the public’s imagination before it was ever released, and that kind of attention can be a double-edged sword. The greater the hype, the harder the fall—in this case, literally. Several high-profile accidents damaged the Segway’s reputation, most notably a fall by then President George W. Bush and, tragically, one that led to the death of the company’s then owner Jimi Heselden. Simultaneously, popular media latched on to the Segway as a tool for comedy (as in Paul Blart: Mall Cop). The Segway was no longer cool, and with that, the final nails were hammered into the coffin. In many ways, the future Kamen envisioned now exists today. E-scooters and e-bikes have become popular, helping to close that “last mile” gap. They’ve succeeded for all the same reasons the Segway failed. They are more affordable than the Segway was, particularly with the rise of shared-use models that allow users to rent them. They’re also more compact and lightweight, making them more mobile and practical. There are also more bike lanes now, and cities have had a chance to figure out regulations. And where the Segway was uncool, e-scooters and e-bikes are familiar, a natural extension of manual scooters and bikes. Ultimately, Kamen’s core idea was correct. The market was just waiting for a simpler, more affordable, and less conspicuous solution. Don’t Go It AloneThere’s actually one more mistake Kamen made that led to the Segway’s failure. This was the greatest mistake of all, the one that preceded—and arguably caused—all of the subsequent issues. He chose to go it alone. With Kamen’s previous innovations, he partnered with healthcare giants. He was able to focus on developing the tech while others handled the operational details. He simply was not prepared for the challenges of doing it all himself. As he later reflected, \u0026quot;I wouldn’t have predicted the mountain would be so big and that there would be so many hills to cross to get to the top.\u0026quot;\nThe Segway is a stark reminder that a truly transformative innovation isn’t just about groundbreaking technology but a dozen other factors and circumstances all influencing one another. So while you may be able to invent alone, you can’t innovate alone. ‍\n","date":"September 9, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-curious-case-of-the-segway-a-visionarys-ride-to-reality-and-back-down-again/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Curious Case of the Segway: A Visionary’s Ride to Reality (and Back Down Again)","type":"blog"},{"content":"For more than one hundred years, a war has been waged. You may have never heard of its name, but you have almost undoubtedly been an unwitting participant. The war began in the United States but has since spread across the globe, with billions of dollars at stake. We’re talking about the Cola wars. While this war has primarily been fought through advertising, with the occasional failed attempt at corporate espionage, innovation has also played a role. When you’re in a head-to-head battle for market share, you need to differentiate yourself from your competition.\nA while back, a major soda company hired us to help them innovate. They laid out all of their problems, and we picked four to work on. The following is a short case study on our favorite of those four solutions, even though it ended up not going into production.\nThe Problem: Hot SodaFew things are as refreshing as an ice-cold soda on a hot day. Here in the United States, it’s a luxury we take for granted. You go to a convenience store, and you grab a cold soda from the fridge or the fountain machine. It’s that easy. Elsewhere in the world, though, it can be a different story. Especially in developing countries, there often aren’t convenience stores (not the way we think of them). Electricity can be expensive and unreliable, and refrigeration systems are often more limited, as is access to ice. Because of this, in several countries, the primary way soda is sold is by bicycle cart vendors. Those countries also happen to be among the hottest in the world. Even using coolers, the vendors struggle to keep the soda cold.\nSo this was our mission: figure out how to keep a chest of soda cans cool in 110-degree heat.\nThe Solution: An A/C Mobile Soda CartWe had some clear specifications to work under. The solution needed to fit on a bicycle and be light enough for the vendor to pedal it around. Since the solution would be mobile, it needed to be self-powered. We had a target temperature range for the soda.\nOne of the first things we did was bring in an air conditioning expert to design the pumps and heat exchanges. After that, we faced a series of fascinating challenges.\nFirst, we worked on the problem of how the solution would be powered. Solar panels were the obvious choice, particularly since the carts would be used in sunny climates. However, solar panels simply did not generate enough power for the initial cooling of the sodas. So we designed the chest so that it could be plugged into an electrical source. The sodas could then be cooled overnight to the appropriate temperature, and the solar panels were used to maintain that temperature throughout the day. Another problem was air flow. If you’ve ever sat under a draft and been cold while the person across from you was perfectly comfortable, you understand the importance of air flow. We needed to figure out how to manage the flow of cold air so that all the cans in the chest would be cooled. After running a lot of computational fluid dynamics on air flow, we figured out a solution for that too.\nThen we turned our attention to the matter of insulation. Part of this involved research into which materials to use (we ultimately opted for a foam and fiberglass setup). The greater part was figuring out how to keep the cold air in while getting cans out. When you’re trying to isolate cold from hot, you have to use vestibules. If you look at houses in either very hot or very cold climates (assuming they’ve been designed well), you’ll find that the front door does not lead directly into the house. There’s a small space, or vestibule, that functions as an air lock of sorts. This way, when you open the door, you don’t get a blast of cold or hot air going directly into the living space. We applied a similar principle to the dispenser component of the chest.\nThrough a process of research and iteration, we designed a compact, lightweight, mobile cooling unit that could keep sodas cold all day in scorching heat.\nLessons Learned: The Power of the Pivot and PoliticsWe had two big takeaways from this project.\nThe first lesson was that solutions often require a mix of techniques to get the job done, and you must be prepared to pivot. Originally, we planned to use solar panels exclusively. If we’d gotten hung up on that idea, we never would have found a solution, because, at that time, it was simply impossible for solar panels to do what we needed. The other big lesson was that corporate politics play a huge role in which innovations see the light of day. As we worked on this project, the team we were working with at the soda company began to fracture. One after another, key team members, many of them brilliant R\u0026amp;D folks with PhDs, disappeared. The group we were working with was based in Texas, and the company was moving all “innovation” back to its headquarters. Many of the people we worked with left the company entirely, including the boss who was the real driving force behind the project. So we weren’t surprised when the mobile cart was not put into production. When people start disappearing, you can see the writing on the wall. Still, it’s a shame, because we are proud of the cart we designed. Perhaps this is simply another lesson: When you fight in the Cola wars, be prepared for casualties!\n‍\n","date":"August 27, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/case-study-no-refrigerator-no-problem--keeping-soda-cold-in-110degf-heat/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Case Study: No Refrigerator, No Problem—Keeping Soda Cold in 110°F Heat","type":"blog"},{"content":"In 1946, Genrikh Altshuller was working in the inventions-inspection department of the Caspian Sea flotilla of the Soviet Navy. As he reviewed countless patents, a question started to nag at him: What makes inventions inventive? For the next ten years, interrupted by a gulag sentence from 1950–53 for political reasons, Altshuller dedicated himself to answering this question. And thus was TRIZ born. It was perhaps the best and the worst thing to happen to innovation. TRIZ (which stands for Teoriya Resheniya Izobretatelskikh Zadach, or the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) was one of the most substantial attempts to formalize and analyze the process and psychology of innovation. And then the corporate world got their hands on it.\nMany titans of corporate innovation—Samsung, Boeing, HP, IBM, and more—have utilized TRIZ methods in their processes. They have even done so successfully, but somewhere along the way, as TRIZ was institutionalized, it was also bastardized. It transformed into something unrecognizable—a tool not of creativity but rigidity.\nTRIZ can still be valuable, as long as you use it properly, so let’s look closer at what TRIZ is and how to best utilize it to support your innovation efforts.\nThe Origins of TRIZ: A Study of ContradictionsTo understand what TRIZ is, we must consider both what it started as and what it has since morphed into.\nAltshuller’s first paper on TRIZ, co-written with Raphael Shapiro, was “On the Psychology of Inventive Creation,” published in 1956 in Issues of Psychology. At the time, the available research on creativity was limited, and with this paper, Altshuller began to demystify the black box that was innovation.\nIn this paper, he described what is really the core of TRIZ: the idea that every technical problem is a contradiction. You want to make something stronger—but also lighter. You want a battery to last longer—but charge faster. You want to speed up a process—but keep it safe.\nHe gave the bicycle as an example. The first commercially successful bicycle was Karl Drais’s “running machine” in 1817. The year prior, there had been widespread crop failure, leading to the starvation and death of many horses. This inspired Drais to set about finding an alternative mode of transportation. The running machine had a seat, wheels, and handlebars and was propelled by one’s feet. Drais had successfully solved the issue of starvation. However, there was a contradiction: the running machine could not starve, but because of that, it did not have the speed or ease of riding a horse. This contradiction led to a new innovation: pedals.\nThe pedals let riders go faster, but in solving one contradiction, a new one emerged: with an increase in speed, operating the bicycle became more dangerous. Again, the contradiction provided new opportunities to innovate, leading to the invention of brakes. TRIZ sees these contradictions not as dead ends, but as springboards for innovation. As Altshuller said, “The elimination of the contradiction is an invention.”\nThe Evolution of TRIZ: An Algorithm for Eliminating ContradictionsThe key finding that set TRIZ apart from other approaches was the idea that innovation is often a repurposing as opposed to a fully new creation. “In many cases, the technical contradictions that we encounter while carrying out creative work have direct analogies in nature and technology,” Altshuller said. “Therefore, it is advisable that the first step we take is an investigation of similar contradictions and typical ways to eliminate them.”\nEssentially, TRIZ proposes that someone (or some animal, plant, etc.) has already solved a version of your problem. Your job as an innovator is to find and adapt that solution—not to reinvent the wheel. This is a solid approach and one that we often use at PCDworks.\nSo where did things go wrong? It started, in my opinion, with the 40 principles of invention and the contradiction matrix. The 40 principles of invention are known solutions to problems, like segmentation (divide an object into parts; e.g., modular furniture), nested doll (place one object inside another; e.g., extending radio antenna), and mechanical vibration (make an object oscillate or vibrate; e.g., electric toothbrush). The contradiction matrix lays out in a table 39 parameters you will find in technical solutions or systems, like speed, temperature, reliability, ease of repair, and so on. Once you identify your contradiction—let’s say you want to improve “speed” while maintaining the “weight of moving object”—you can go to that cell in the table and find which principles of invention to use, based on how such a contradiction has been solved in the past. (In this example, the suggested solutions would be “taking out,” “mechanics substitution,” “the other way round,” and “strong oxidants.”)\nEssentially, TRIZ morphed into an algorithm for innovation. Maybe that sounds great to you. Just run your finger along a table and find your solution. It’s like a shortcut for innovation. Who doesn’t want that? Well, spoiler: this algorithmic shortcut will lead you astray more often than it will lead you to innovation.\nThe Problem with TRIZ: A Mindset Turned into a ChecklistTRIZ began as a way to think about innovation. But some people are allergic to thinking. As soon as they get their grubby fingers on a cool idea, they start institutionalizing it, turning it into a formula. They do this because it’s a lot easier to sell people a formula than it is to sell them a way of thinking. This is the problem with modern-day TRIZ. What was meant to be a mindset has been reduced to a formulaic checklist.\nTRIZ was initially developed by analyzing thousands of patents and real inventions. It is a reverse-engineering of the creative process. It identifies what these inventors did to innovate, but the way TRIZ has been institutionalized today, it fails to properly show how these innovators innovated. Here is the crux of the matter: Not a single one of those inventors used TRIZ in the creation of their innovations. They were not able to successfully invent because they were using the principles of TRIZ, but because they had the right mindset for innovation. TRIZ was an attempt to describe and formalize this mindset. As soon as you isolate the principles from the mindset, you corrupt them. TRIZ works only when it is ingrained. If the way you’re using TRIZ is to go to a contradiction matrix to come up with solutions, you’ve lost the point. You’re boxing yourself into a prescribed set of solutions instead of looking to the real world for inspiration as intended.\nWhile I largely blame corporations for what TRIZ has become, Altshuller himself played a large role. In 1984, roughly thirty years after he first established TRIZ, he published Creativity as an Exact Science, in which he proposed an “algorithm for the solution of inventive problems.” In the introduction, he said, “When talking about their work, scientists and inventors spoke with a striking unanimity about sudden enlightenment, the impossibility not only of controlling the creative process, but also of understanding what it is and how it comes about.” Altshuller “disbelieved them immediately without argument.” I, however, think that an argument is warranted. Altshuller, as valuable as his contributions are, was not an innovator. When you are an observer, on the outside looking in, there are some things you necessarily miss (especially when you so wholly and, in my opinion, stupidly disavow the opinions of the very people you seek to understand). TRIZ can be a useful tool, but it must be paired with the wisdom that innovation is not an algorithm and cannot be completely controlled.\nA Mindset ShiftAs a checklist of step-by-step directions, TRIZ borders on snake oil. However, as a mindset, it is invaluable.\nThink of Triz not as an algorithm but as a way of thinking about the world. Challenge yourself to identify the contradictions and search for solutions in unexpected places. But don’t let TRIZ replace your own judgment and imagination. ‍\n","date":"August 12, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/triz-a-russian-tool-for-innovation-that-the-corporate-world-ruined/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"TRIZ: A Russian Tool for Innovation That The Corporate World Ruined","type":"blog"},{"content":"Carson Freeman is our intern. He is currently pursuing a materials science and engineering degree at Texas A\u0026amp;M University. He’s a quick learner and has accomplished a lot for a young intern. In particular, he has proved incredibly valuable in fabricating samples for testing. Here are some of his thoughts about innovation and his experience at PCDworks.\nHow did you get into innovation?For years, I have helped my dad with his farm maintenance and construction projects. This background in building and carpentry led me to pursue a career path in engineering. Through my time in engineering at Texas A\u0026amp;M, I have been pulled more in the direction of creative invention and innovation, which has led me down a path I continue to follow today.\nWhat drew you to PCDworks?I have known Drew Pyle for many years, and after finding out about his work here at PCDworks, I was intrigued and eager to get hands-on experience. I was seeking an internship, and after talking with Drew, they welcomed me to the team to help with the many projects that they are currently working on.\nWhat is your greatest strength?My greatest strength is my perseverance and determination to learn. When faced with an unfamiliar process or a problem, I train myself to complete the task in such a way that I’m always improving.\nWhat are you working to improve on?I am working to improve my open-mindedness and creativity to consider multiple solutions to a problem and think outside the box. What are you most fascinated by right now?I am very fascinated by AI and its increasing potential and use in the materials science field. Specifically, AI tools used in creating phase diagrams for binary and even ternary alloys are very intriguing.\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation?I think the most important thing in innovation is the ability to listen to and consider all possible solutions to a problem. Giving solid consideration to all ideas, even those a bit outlandish, helps to build upon our creativity and allows us to better understand what the problem is and how to address it.\nWhat is your favorite quote related to innovation?“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” —Albert Einstein\n‍\n","date":"July 31, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-carson-freeman/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Carson Freeman","type":"blog"},{"content":"Meet the Team: Irene Ramirez\nIrene is our IT specialist. Her primary responsibility is to keep our technology infrastructure running smoothly. She is also a great graphic artist and designs infographics, charts, and more to help us best communicate complicated technical concepts.\nIt takes a village to innovate properly, and Irene plays a critical support role that allows the rest of us to do our jobs better. She sat down with us to share her thoughts on innovation and her role at PCDworks. How did you get into innovation?The IT side is what got me here. I have an AAS degree in network technology as well as an AAS in game and simulation development (with a focus on illustration and game art). While I didn’t initially set out to be in innovation, I’ve found it to be a great fit for my skills, and I’ve grown to appreciate it a lot. In innovation, things are never boring!\nWhat drew you to PCDworks?I went to college in the area. I had just finished an internship with the US federal courthouse and was in my last semester when I interviewed with PCDworks. The culture was a good fit, and timing wise, everything worked out perfectly where I was able to start right after graduating. It just felt meant to be. What is your greatest strength?My ability to learn new things. I learned Python during an internship, taught myself how to use Webflow and many, many new art programs, and have studied and explored marketing, design use, and much more. Whatever challenges I face, I’m quick to explore and learn the skills needed to find a solution.\nMy old illustration professor said, “We are never done learning ever” and that has always stuck with me. Life is a never-ending cycle of learning. If you are not learning anymore, you are not doing it right. You fail to challenge yourself and create.\nWhat are you working to improve on?Ii would love to focus more on animation and developing better skills within video editing What are you most fascinated by right now?Right now I’m interested in the ethics and philosophy surrounding AI. Essentially, how can we use AI to improve our lives without sacrificing all the things that make humans and human creations so special? In particular, as an artist myself, I’m fascinated by Glaze/Nightshade, a tool to help prevent the theft of art for the creation of AI slop. It poisons the data so that AI models cannot use it.\nI’m all for using AI in things like self-driving cars and phone interfaces, making workflows easier, and improving people\u0026#x27;s lives. I am against AI being so underregulated, though, as this is harmful on an environmental level and, honestly, an ethical one as well. However, AI art can never be true art. It is a generation of others’ hard work. It just steals and recreates from the pixels. The death of real art is the death of humanity. And while AI can be an aid in innovation, it can also be a hindrance if we rely on it too much. So I think it’s important for us to be thoughtful around how we use AI.\nWhat’s your favorite part of your work?I love getting to work on marketing-related things. It’s a chance to flex my creative skills, with photo editing, asset creation, and so on.\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation?In my opinion, the fundamental definition of innovation is to solve a problem or help others. That means creation with purpose and ethics. When you create without keeping humans in mind, you are creating for nothing. To better the world is to add to life.\nWhat is your favorite quote related to innovation? \u0026quot;You can stay young as long as you learn.\u0026quot; —Emily Dickinson\n‍\n","date":"July 22, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-irene-ramirez/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Irene Ramirez","type":"blog"},{"content":"Engineers have lots of strengths, but usually, project management is not one of them. If you let them manage their own project, it can quickly turn into a runaway train careening off the tracks. Work will creep out of scope, the budget will balloon, and deadlines will go by the wayside. That’s why we have Drew, our project manager. From managing timelines to ensuring clear client communication, he helps keep the train on the tracks. Read on to learn more about Drew’s journey in innovation.\nHow did you get into innovation?A proud product of child labor, I grew up on a ranch raising livestock and running tractors. With a ready supply of duct tape and baling wire, along with grit and determination, we solved a lot of problems there on the ranch. After that, I went on to hold leadership roles in both restaurant and property management, addressing and resolving problems of all kinds, from technical and operational problems to interpersonal ones. And at its core, that’s what innovation is all about: problem-solving.\nWhat drew you to PCDworks?We have a great team and supportive leadership. We get to work with a diverse group of clients across multiple industries and scales, from start-ups to Fortune 500 companies. The location is beautiful, and it being within driving distance to mine and my wife’s family is a huge plus as well. What are your greatest strengths?Adaptability, with dedication and perseverance in the face of adversity, as well as active listening and communication. I seek to understand clients’ concerns and needs and help them reach not just a solution, but the right solution for them, no matter what obstacles may arise.\nWhat areas are you looking to improve on?Though I’ve done the work of project management for a long time, I’m currently studying it formally, with the goal of gaining certifications in that field. Right now I’m taking a Google AI Essentials course to best leverage the productivity gains the technology offers when applied effectively. I also constantly seek out research articles and news publications to better my scientific understanding, engineering knowledge, and business acumen as it relates to client projects as well as personal interests.\nWhat are you most fascinated by right now?Applications for flexible composites and any projects or products that require a multi-disciplinary approach or integration of novel systems into a strong value proposition and solid product-market fit. What’s your favorite project you worked on and why?My favorite project is also the first one I worked on at PCD: the WASP boat project. WASP, or Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program, is one of the best ways to understand and manage water composition and quality. It all starts with baseline data. However, real-time measurement of various chemicals in bodies of water is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. Our solution was to build an autonomous, motorized boat that tracks inside of the body of water (on a pre-programmed route that can be changed by downloading new directions from the cloud) and collects chemical data in real time, displaying it on a cloud-based dashboard.\nTeaching a boat to boat involved many challenges—figuring out the navigation so the watercraft could move autonomously, integrating and testing electronics, and designing control systems so that the sensor data could be collected remotely and the boat course could be adjusted as needed without having to take a swim. Working with the team, we were able to overcome all the challenges. Plus being lakeside for testing was enjoyable. As much as I love the lab, field trips are always a lot of fun.\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation?Finding a problem that is worth solving and seeing it through to the end, whether that means a profit or pivot. I like to say that an idea is only as good as its execution, meaning if it is not realized, then it is of little value other than for thought’s sake or as a mental exercise.\nWhat is your favorite quote related to innovation? “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” —Mike Tyson\nWhile not directly related to innovation, this quote highlights the idea that even the most well-thought-out plans can be disrupted by unexpected events or adversities, which are all too common when developing new technology.\n","date":"July 8, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-drew-pyle/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Drew Pyle","type":"blog"},{"content":"The Shinkansen, known colloquially as the “bullet train” in English, is a masterclass in innovation. A speed of 177 mph.\nApproximately 7 billion passengers transported since its inauguration in 1964.\nNot a single passenger fatality due to derailments or collisions.\nAn average delay of just 1.6 minutes.\nThe train is known for its speed, safety, and reliability, but one of its most remarkable features is its noise—or lack thereof.\nTo prevent noise pollution, the Shinkansen’s noise is limited to 70 decibels in residential areas. That’s roughly equivalent to the noise of a washing machine or the noise inside a car driving at 60 mph.\nThis is the story of how the engineers managed to make a 177 mph train that weighs hundreds of tons sound no louder than a washing machine, all with the help of a little, unassuming bird.\nSuperfast Train + Narrow Tunnel = Big BoomIn order to achieve its high speeds safely, the Shinkansen operates on dedicated tracks that go through, instead of around, geographic obstacles, making use of many tunnels, some of them quite long. This is the crux of the noise problem.\nWhen a train travels on an open track, the air it displaces can be pushed in every direction except the ground. In a tunnel, though, the walls confine the air, forcing it down a single path: the length of the tunnel. Behind the train, as air is pushed away, suction is created, pulling even more air into the tunnel at the front of the train. The result is a compressed wave of high-pressure air at the front of the train. This is called the piston effect, because the train (or other moving object) functions like a piston. Just as a piston transfers force, when a high-speed train exits a tunnel, it pushes out that build-up of high-pressure air, releasing a loud boom. As the engineers worked to make the Shinkansen faster, the so-called tunnel booms grew too loud. They could be heard up to 400 meters away and exceeded the 70 dB limit. The engineers were stuck between a rock and a hard place. How could they make the train faster while also lowering the noise?\nTrain + Kingfisher = Faster, Quieter Ride Enter Eiji Nakatsu. Nakatsu was one of the engineers working on the Shinkansen. He was also a bird-watcher.\nOne bird in particular had sparked his interest: the kingfisher. The kingfisher is a striking bird, with brilliant blue-green feathers and a rust-orange belly. They are, as their name suggests, fishers. They catch fish by diving headfirst into the water at speeds of up to 25 miles per hour. At that speed, with surface tension, the impact should ostensibly give them a concussion. Yet instead, they glide effortlessly from air into water with hardly a splash. Researchers hypothesize that kingfishers may have actually evolved a brain structure that helps prevent concussions, but there’s another obvious factor at play: the kingfisher’s beak. The kingfisher’s beak is long and narrow, gradually widening as it approaches the bird’s head. If the shape of the beak could smooth the transition from air to water for the bird, Nakatsu theorized it could work for the train as well. Like a true innovator, he tested the hypothesis. In a test fitting of the Shinkansen’s English moniker, the team got bullets shaped like the different train nose models. They then shot them down a pipe to measure the pressure waves and dropped them into water to measure the splash. The bullet that did best in the tests was the one that most closely mimicked the kingfisher’s beak.\nWith evidence to back up the hypothesis, the team went ahead with design and manufacturing. The redesigned train, with its kingfisher nose, reduced energy consumption by 15%, increased speeds by 10%, and reduced noise levels. The impossible problem had been solved, thanks to the kingfisher.\nThe Cheat Code: BiomimicryThe kingfisher was not the only bird that influenced the design of the Shinkansen. The redesign also incorporated elements that were based on the wings of an owl and the body of an Adélie penguin.\nThis is the cheat code: biomimicry. The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and life has existed here for at least 3.5 billion years. That is billions of years of trial and error and the fine-tuning of evolution.\nOften, the real secret to innovation is not inventing something entirely new but finding the right solution that already exists in the world that you can apply to your particular problem. For instance, at PCDworks, when we were working on a problem with pumps, we looked to the giraffe, because what is a giraffe’s heart but a pump that manages to move blood all the way up a 7-foot neck?\nThe next time you face a seemingly unsolvable problem, try looking to nature for the solution.\n","date":"June 24, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/an-innovation-cheat-code-how-a-bird-helped-to-shape-the-japanese-bullet-train/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"An Innovation Cheat Code: How a Bird Helped to Shape the Japanese Bullet Train","type":"blog"},{"content":"Scott is our machinist. You can do hand sketches and draw pictures in CAD until your fingers ache, but it takes a machinist to turn your ideas into something real. Good machinists are worth their weight in gold. With past machinists, we could tell them, “Go make this thing, about yay big,” and they’d go off and do it. When we ask Scott to make something, though, he shoots back, “What are the dimensions? What are the tolerances?” “Good enough” isn’t in his vocabulary. You know when Scott makes something, it’s going to be properly done. Scott isn’t one for the limelight, but recently, we cajoled him into a short interview about his work in innovation.\nHow did you get into innovation?For as long as I can remember, I have been fixing things and finding ways to make them work better. I have now been a machinist for twenty-nine years.\nWhat drew you to PCDworks?PCDworks just fits me. It’s real people working on real problems.\nWhat is your greatest strength?My work ethic. You can count on me to show up and get the job done right.\nWhat are you most fascinated by right now?Shape memory alloys (SMAs). For SMAs to work properly, they need to be housed in a fixture that allows them to move and pull, while also making sure the wires don’t touch each other while they’re being heated and cooled. It’s extraordinarily complicated and requires close attention to detail. What’s your favorite project you worked on and why?My favorite project was when we made Harmonic Drives. They are fascinating and complicated to machine. They require extreme precision, and the gear teeth need to be shaped a particular way to prevent as much wear as possible. We were making very small Harmonic Drives, which made them even more challenging. At one point, we had to examine the gear teeth under a microscope.\nWhat do you think is most important to innovation?To do more of it. Innovation doesn’t stop.\nWhat is your favorite quote related to innovation? “If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got.” —Albert Einstein\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/meet-the-team-scott-bammel/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Meet the Team: Scott Bammel","type":"blog"},{"content":"2 Brainstorming Exercises to Boost Innovation\nEvery innovation begins with an idea. At PCDworks, in our Immersive Innovation™ sessions, we guide participants through two to three days of brainstorming to discover potential solutions to their identified problem. Through experience and real results, we’ve identified several exercises that reliably increase creative thinking. In this article, we’ll share two of our favorites.\nThe interesting thing about these two exercises is that at first glance, they seem like polar opposites. One is fanciful, the other practical. One erases all limits, the other establishes boundaries. With a deeper look, though, you’ll find that they share something important in common. Let’s dive in.\n#1: Free-Thinking WishingWhen you first begin brainstorming, you don’t want to be limited by such trivialities as “reality.” With free-thinking wishing, you suspend all notion of physics and natural laws, and imagine the ideal end state without constraints. I wish … How could we … What if … At this point, you allow everyone to have the most fanciful ideas, regardless of whether they have any grounding in reality or possibility.\nFor example, maybe the problem you need to solve is how to transport pallets. In that case, you might wish you had antigravity, so you could make the pallets weightless and move them easily. Out of the absurd, one might find a way to make the impossible possible.\nFrom the perfect, impossible solution, you can back up and work your way to a great, possible solution. What are the issues that make you want antigravity? How do you achieve part of that perfect solution? We can’t do antigravity, but we can lighten a load. We could add tires, get better bearings, have independent suspension, or put motors on it. What’s the closest substitute for impossible?\nWith free-thinking wishing, you’ll probably come up with some impossible solutions, but you’ll also surprise yourself with what is possible. Often you can get far closer to that ideal end state than you would have let yourself imagine.\n#2: Liberating ConstraintsImagine I gave you a blank piece of paper and said, “Go create something.” How would you react? How quickly would you be able to come up with something? How good would your solution be?\nThe great irony is that for most people, when faced with a completely blank piece of paper, their mind goes blank too. When there are too many possibilities, we get overwhelmed. Our brains don’t know what to focus on, and we end up spinning our wheels without making any progress.\nA complete absence of limits is itself limiting. As counterintuitive as it may seem, brainstorming is often more productive when there are constraints. Of course, there’s a fine line to walk here. Too many constraints, and you will stifle the free thinking needed to be innovative. Too few, and you will be paralyzed with indecision. The right balance is liberating constraints. A liberating constraint pulls the scope from “anything” to something focused. As opposed to boxing you in, it gives you an anchor to ground your brainstorming. Liberating constraints can come in many forms, and often, they naturally occur based on the problem you’re trying to solve. Maybe there’s a certain technology you need to use—e.g., electricity versus hydraulics, linear motors versus rotating motors, lidar versus radar. Perhaps you know the solution needs to fit into a specific space, or it must be below a certain weight threshold. Are there energy requirements? Output specifications? Safety considerations?\nStarting from the problem you’re trying to solve, identify the nonnegotiables and prerequisites for the solution. These can serve as your liberating constraints.\nThe More Ideas, the BetterSo, what do these two exercises have in common? Though the methods are different, the ultimate goal is the same: to generate more ideas. Each exercise is designed to help overcome a common block to brainstorming. The first addresses the limiting assumption that “It can’t be done,” and the second mitigates the overwhelm and resulting paralysis. By bypassing the common roadblocks, both exercises free up our thinking, allowing us to come up with more ideas. The more ideas you generate, the more likely you are to discover that one great idea that leads to an impactful innovation.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/2-brainstorming-exercises-to-boost-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"2 Brainstorming Exercises to Boost Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"For an innovation to be considered successful, you must sell it, and to sell it, you must manufacture it.\nToo often, though, manufacturing is treated as an afterthought in the innovation process. Many innovators don’t think about it until they have a working prototype and are ready to begin mass production.\nIf you don’t consider the constraints of manufacturing ahead of time, you may develop a solution that is unfeasible, impractical, or too costly to produce.\nThe sooner you begin thinking about manufacturing, the better. As soon as you have a potential solution in mind, ask these five questions to make sure it is worth pursuing.\n#1: Who is going to make the solution?The first question is simple but also critical: Who is going to manufacture the solution? If you’re working in a corporate setting, you may have access to in-house manufacturing capabilities. Or your company might have designated partners or contractors it works with.\nFor start-up innovators, you will be responsible for contracting and coordinating all your own manufacturers. You may need to go overseas and use different manufacturers for different pieces. There are a lot of moving parts in the manufacturing process, and the earlier you get started, the less overwhelming it will be.\n#2: What are the manufacturer’s capabilities?Once you’ve identified the manufacturer(s), you can identify any potential limitations you must account for. If your solution is already within your manufacturer’s capabilities, fantastic! But what happens if you need something the manufacturer cannot make? For start-up innovators, it’s often best to go back to question #1 and try to find a different manufacturer who does have the required capabilities. In the worst-case scenario, you may discover that no manufacturer can do what you want at your given price point and time frames, in which case it’s back to the drawing board for your solution.\nFor corporate innovators, start by understanding what you can and cannot make in-house. Most large corporations engaging in new product development have the ability to manufacture, but maintaining the facilities, equipment, and staff needed to produce every possible part needed is too costly and complicated. For example, if your company specializes in bending and welding steel, it’s probably not going to start fabricating electronics from the ground up. They would need completely different equipment and experts on staff to do so.\nWhen something is outside of the company’s wheelhouse of manufacturing, you have to go outside of the company. In some cases, companies will acquire, contract, or partner with another company in order to gain the required manufacturing capabilities. They may also invest in developing the capabilities themselves. For example, we once worked on a project where a solution required a part that could only be made through 3D printing. So the company bought the needed 3D printer. It was a $500,000 investment, but the ROI was worth it. Sometimes, though, the company will choose to abandon the solution entirely, particularly if the cost, time, and logistics of figuring out the manufacturing do not outweigh the potential rewards of the innovation. For both start-up and corporate innovators, you may need to design your solution with the manufacturing limitations in mind. If that’s the case, it’s best to discover it early, before you expend a lot of resources developing a solution that cannot be manufactured.\n#3: Can you make the solution reliable?On December 17, 1903, at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, the Wright brothers flew an airplane for the first time for twelve seconds. The first flight of over an hour would not occur until six years later, in 1909, and the first transatlantic flight would take another ten years, occurring in 1919.\nA working prototype is great, but a reliable solution is even better. This is where the rubber meets the road. Once you’ve established that your solution will work, can you make it in a way that it will work forever (or as long as possible)?\nThis question is usually closely tied to manufacturing. The more precise and accurate you can be in manufacturing—in terms of materials, dimensions, etc.—the greater the reliability of your solution.\nOf course, the tighter the specifications, the more expensive it’s going to be to manufacture. That’s just the way it is. So that takes us to our next question.\n#4: How much will manufacturing the solution cost?You can create an incredible solution that solves a real problem people care about, but if it costs $1,000 when people are only willing to spend $100, it’s not going to succeed. The manufacturing costs will determine the price, so you need to estimate how much the solution will cost to manufacture.\nOne of the biggest mistakes innovators make is assuming their solution can be made cheaper than it actually can be. Do the research to come up with an accurate estimate. Consider the cost of materials (keeping reliability in mind) as well as the cost of the manufacturing.\nBased on the estimated price of your solution, will people be willing to buy it?\n#5: How much time will the manufacturing take?Another mistake innovators make is underestimating the time required for manufacturing. It almost always costs more and takes longer than expected. Manufacturing is rarely a simple plug-and-play model. You need specific parts, and they all take time to produce.\nHere’s how it usually plays out. You need a motor, so you order from a Chinese supplier. It takes forever to arrive. Then you test it, and it doesn’t work. So you go back to the supplier and get a new one sent. This next one works. Okay, great! Now you need the drive circuit to go with the motor. You order, wait, and finally get it, and it won’t fit into your specified dimensions! Back to the drawing board to configure another setup. You finally figure that out, and now you need to work on battery management. Turns out that is extraordinarily difficult. You need a battery manager chip in every battery pack to make sure the batteries are balanced. So you order, wait, and rinse and repeat.\nAll of this can take weeks, months, and even years to work out. On one of our projects, the company converted from a brushed motor to a brushless DC motor, and it took them nine months to get the right motors and drives. In manufacturing, a variety of issues will inevitably pop up. Each issue takes time to resolve, and often, one thing relies on another, so you must solve these issues sequentially, not concurrently. The fact that manufacturing can be such a lengthy process is another great reason to start thinking about it early. From Afterthought to ForethoughtAs Benjamin Franklin said, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” Manufacturing is a critical factor in whether your innovation will be successful, and it is rarely as easy and straightforward as you might hope. Start thinking about it now so that you will be prepared.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/5-manufacturing-questions-to-ask-now-not-later/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"5 Manufacturing Questions to Ask NOW, Not Later","type":"blog"},{"content":"8 Questions to Mitigate the Risk of Innovation\nThere’s a big, obvious reason more companies don’t innovate: risk. Too often, people’s advice is to embrace risk, which is basically like saying, “Oh, you’re scared of risk? Well, stop being scared of it.” As if that’s going to help. Instead of embracing risk, what if we mitigated it?\nStarting from scratch to releasing a viable new product in the market, what do you think the probability of success is? Online, you’ll find many claims that 80 percent or more of new products fail, but as researchers George Castellion and Stephen K. Markham outlined in the Journal of Product Innovation Management, this is a myth. Empirical studies since 1977 place the true product failure rate at 40 percent or less. With a solid innovation process, you can drop that statistic further, to 30 percent or less.\nInnovation doesn’t have to be as risky as you might expect, with a big caveat: you need to do it the right way.\nAfter decades of experience in product development, we’ve created a process to minimize the risk of innovation. The secret? Knowing. Every step of our process is about knowing, because knowing mitigates risk. These six questions function as knowledge gates (as opposed to stage gates), helping you to spend your time and money wisely.\n#1: Problem Seeking: Do you have a good problem to solve?You always have to start with the problem. If you start with the wrong problem, nothing else matters. You could develop the most innovative solution in the world, and it will be useless. Solutions only have value if they solve something people care about. Too often people rush over this step. As soon as they identify a problem, they dive into solutions. Take the time to brainstorm and consider lots of problems. Look for the pain points to figure out what is needed: a real problem that, if solved, would improve people’s lives.\n#2: Problem Seeking 2.0: How will you sell a solution to the problem? Identifying a good problem is only part of the challenge. You need to not only solve the problem, but also sell your solution. If you’re going to invest in developing a new product, you need a return on investment. Don’t wait until after you’ve already developed the product to figure out how to sell it. Do initial market research with potential customers. How important is the problem to customers? Important enough that they would buy a solution? Where would they buy such a solution?\nThat leads into the second key component of problem seeking: distribution. How will you get the product to customers so they can buy it? Too often we meet innovators who think if they create a great product, they can just call up Walmart HQ and get it placed on the shelves. It’s not that easy. If you don’t have a clear picture of how you’re going to distribute the product, you shouldn’t be in the business. #3: Support System: Do you have a partner you can rely on?We tend to glamorize individual inventors, but duos have been responsible for some of the most impactful innovations. The Lumière brothers gave us movies, the Wright brothers gave us the airplane, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs gave us the Apple computer.\nParticularly today, innovating has grown more complex. Success rarely happens alone. You need at least one business partner—somebody you share your soul with who can help shoulder the load. You will face challenges. If you don’t have a partner to pick you up when things are down, you’ll be far more likely to quit.\n#4: Solution: Which solution is most promising?When you first brainstorm potential solutions, ignore risk. Throw out lots and lots of ideas and fragments of ideas. The next step is to write concept sheets, detailing how you might implement the idea. This is a good time to reference patent archives. At this point, you’re less concerned about potential patent infringement and more interested in learning from what came before and stimulating outside-of-the-box thinking.\nThen it’s time to funnel your ideas down to the top three, and this is where risk mitigation comes in. You build a multidimensional matrix ranking based on a number of risk factors: the feasibility and difficulty of the solution, the potential payoff, the alignment with your particular expertise, and so on. After choosing the most promising solutions, you can proceed further in development.\n#5: Scientific Feasibility: Is the solution possible in theory?We once worked with a company that wanted a door that generated electricity when it was manually pushed. The energy would then be stored in a battery, to be used to open the door automatically when the handicap-accessible button was pressed. We built a prototype, and it worked: every seven manual pushes generated enough electricity for one automatic open. The company then told us they were expecting it to be one-for-one. Well, that is simply not scientifically possible, because of friction and energy loss.\nBefore building a physical prototype, you need to start with a mathematical model that proves the solution is feasible. Don’t invest in anti-gravity, perpetual motion, and other impossibilities. Only pursue solutions you know can work. #6: Protection: Can you patent some part of the solution?Let’s say you go through all the work of product development and create an amazing, successful product. Great! But what’s to stop another company from coming in and copying your product, reaping all the benefits without any of the work? Nothing—unless you have a patent. You need to be able to patent some part of the solution to protect yourself.\n#7: Market Validation: How will customers respond to the product?With a feasible solution in mind, it is time to do more-detailed market research. The initial market research determines potential. This market research validates. Through focus groups and customer surveys, work to answer these questions:\nDoes the product solve the problem?Does the product have a competitive advantage?How much are people willing to pay for the product?What are the required features to get people to buy the product?Market validation provides the needed information to decide whether to proceed with development. #8: Logistical Feasibility: Is the solution possible in practice?Sometimes a solution is possible in theory but too expensive or logistically challenging to be practical. Consider the logical feasibility of the solution, from development to distribution:\nCost: How much will it cost to develop and produce the solution? Is the forecasted value of the product worth the cost?Regulations: Are there regulatory hurdles? What will it take to overcome them? Manufacturing: Where will you get the materials to produce the solution? Do you have the manufacturing capability to actually produce the product?It’s easy to put off these questions until you’re forced to deal with them, but by then, it may be too late. Plan ahead.\nIncreasing the Odds of SuccessInnovation is inherently risky. You will never be able to eliminate the risk entirely, but you can increase your odds of success. With each knowledge gate, you learn enough to make an informed judgment call: Should we keep investing in this innovation?\nAt PCDworks, by using this approach, we\u0026#x27;ve successfully developed innovative solutions for fifty-plus companies across a range of industries, racking up more than thirty patents along the way. This is what embracing risk is really about. You don’t embrace risk by ignoring the potential dangers and plowing forward anyway. That’s stupidity, not bravery. Embracing risk means facing it head-on with a step-by-step approach to gain knowledge, replacing uncertainty with certainty.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/8-questions-to-mitigate-the-risk-of-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"8 Questions to Mitigate the Risk of Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"I am first and foremost an epistemologist, which means I’m interested in the study of knowledge and the all-important question: “How do we know what we think we know?”\nThere’s a great joke about epistemologists that goes like this: While on a trip to Scotland, an engineer, a physicist, and an epistemologist spot a black sheep.\n“Look!” the engineer says. “The sheep in Scotland are black!”\n“No, no,” counters the physicist. “At least one sheep in Scotland is black.”\nThe epistemologist considers for a second, then says, “Well, at least one sheep is black on one side.”\nMaybe epistemologists aren’t the most fun at a dinner party, but they’re great when it comes to problem-seeking, because they avoid jumping to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions is one of the biggest issues in problem-seeking, so we can learn a thing or two from epistemologists. Specifically, we can use the concept of a nomological network to help dig past surface-level knowledge and reach greater understanding, which will lead to more effective innovation.\nWhat is a Nomological Network?Nomological network is a term from cognitive psychology. Courtesy of Wikipedia, it is “a representation of the concepts (constructs) of interest in a study, their observable manifestations, and the interrelationships between these.” A nomological net might look like this:\nIn psychology, the purpose of a nomological net is to demonstrate construct validity, or how well a test/study measures the construct (a concept that cannot be directly observed or measured—e.g., conscientiousness or self-esteem) it was designed to evaluate.\nMore simply, for our purposes, a nomological net is a way to view the layers of information. The purpose is to help you move from surface-level truths (observations) to deeper-level truths (constructs), while also seeing the interrelationships between the observations and constructs. Often, in problem-seeking, what we come up with are just excuses, meaning a justification without clear evidence for the validity of the attribution. What we need are explanations: valid attributions. This is what a nomological net can help us reach.\nLet’s look at a simple example. Say you have a friend who is very anxious, and he claims, “I’m this way because my mother dropped me on my head.” He is attributing his behavior to his recollection that his mother dropped him on his head. Is that what’s really causing the behavior? Maybe. Maybe not. Right now it’s just an excuse for his behavior, because we have an observation that he believes to be true (his mother dropping him on his head), and he is attributing his behavior to that with only recalled evidence. Before we make a conclusion, let’s gather more observations. Was the friend dropped on his head accidentally, or was he abused? Were there other incidents besides being dropped on his head? Let’s say yes. Now we’re starting to build a nomological net and getting a fuller picture of the truth. We could build this out even further. For example, maybe the friend had untreated dyslexia and was belittled every time he did poorly in school, which could lead to another construct of “low self-esteem” that also impacts his anxiety today. For now, you get the point: a nomological net is a way of mapping out everything you know so that you get a fuller, more nuanced understanding of the situation.\nHow Can We Use a Nomological Net in Innovation?Okay, so now let’s look at how we can apply a nomological net to innovation. We’ll use the Chrysler minivan as an example. Before creating the minivan, Hal Sperlich and his team conducted many interviews with customers to identify problems. One of the things many people said was that sedans were too cramped when traveling with their kids. If we stopped at that surface-level truth, then we would come up with an excuse: sedans aren’t big enough. So then our solution likely would’ve been to make a bigger sedan. Not very innovative. Let’s dig deeper with a nomological net, laying out all the common complaints people gave to Sperlich and his team:\n‍\nNow we have a much more complete picture. We can see all of the problems customers have and how they’re related. The fact that vans are awkward to drive is part of why they’re so challenging to park. While customers want more space, when space increases, maneuverability is impacted. Likewise, accessibility is affected by space as well.\nI have no idea whether Sperlich and his team used a nomological net, but I bet they did something similar, even if they didn’t have the psychological term for it. They looked at all the information to figure out the true problem. The deeper-level problem wasn’t that sedans were too small or that vans were too cumbersome. It was that current vehicles did not meet customers’ needs. They needed an entirely new vehicle—not a car or a van. A minivan, a hybrid between car and van.\nKnowledge to Understanding to WisdomA nomological network is a tool for innovation, and like most things in innovation, it goes back to the fundamental idea of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. Observations can become knowledge. They’re the facts about the problem—e.g., “I know” loading things in and out of a car is a pain.\nConstructs represent understanding. You derive constructs by integrating the knowledge into a whole that makes sense and allows you to make decisions (predictions) from that understanding—like the need for space, accessibility, and maneuverability.\nWisdom is how you apply the nomological map in the real world, leveraging your understanding (both the explicit knowledge that you have gained from the immediate problem analysis and the tacit knowledge that you have accumulated over the years) to find insights and make smart decisions. Wisdom is taking everything customers said and deciding to build a minivan, even though no one explicitly asked for it.\nKnowledge to understanding to wisdom: this is the most important secret of innovation. If you can get this right, everything else falls into place more easily. So if you find yourself getting stuck in surface-level knowledge, try using a nomological net to dig deeper to wisdom.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/a-cognitive-psychology-technique-for-better-innovation-unlock-wisdom-with-the-nomological-network/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"A Cognitive Psychology Technique for Better Innovation: Unlock Wisdom with the Nomological Network","type":"blog"},{"content":"In September 1820, on the steps of the Old Salem County Courthouse, Colonel Robert Gibbon Johnson decided to do something many believed insane. He was going to eat a tomato. This may not seem particularly noteworthy, but this beloved, ubiquitous plant was once feared among Europeans and Americans, even earning the nickname “the poison apple.” The tomato plant is part of the nightshade family, which also includes potatoes, eggplants, and chili peppers, but when you think of nightshade, you most likely think of Atropa belladonna, deadly nightshade. It is one of the most toxic plants known to exist, the one rumored to have killed Emperor Augustus, the founder of the Roman Empire. Small wonder then that people were suspicious of the deadly nightshade’s cousin, the tomato. So when Johnson declared that he would eat a tomato, nearly 2,000 spectators crammed into the square to watch. The atmosphere was surprisingly jovial. A band played, and the crowd cheered as Johnson mounted the steps with a basket of tomatoes. He spoke to the crowd about the history of the tomato and the potential for it to be a bumper cash crop for the state. He painted a compelling picture, but it was not enough to tell them the benefits of tomatoes. He had to show them that tomatoes were safe. He carefully selected a ripe tomato from the basket at his feet. A hush fell, and he took a bite. A woman screamed and fainted, but Johnson simply took another bite. The silence was broken as the crowd erupted into cheers once more. He had done it! He had eaten a tomato and survived to tell the tale!\nWhile it might be hyperbole to say that Johnson changed the course of history, he did change the course of American cuisine. Because he took a chance and ate that tomato, we now have pizza, pasta sauces, and more. Now, this story is likely apocryphal, but there’s a reason such stories catch our imagination and withstand the test of time. They contain seeds of truth—lessons to be learned. So what’s the lesson we, as innovators, can learn from the story of Johnson and the tomato?\nFirst Adopters Are EssentialThis is the lesson: in order for something to take hold in a wider consciousness, somebody has to first take a chance on it when it is unknown and untested. If you can get one person to take a bite of that tomato, you can get others to eat it as well.\nAs an innovator, you probably have big dreams. You want mass adoption. Maybe you want your product stocked on the shelves of Walmart and sitting in every home, or perhaps you want to form partnerships with big-name companies. We support such dreams, but accomplishing them tends to be a marathon, not a sprint.\nInnovations are risky, not only for the inventor, but also for the consumer. You’re asking them to take a chance on something that hasn’t been proven yet. You’re asking that they eat the tomato before they know it’s safe to do so. While consumers may not be putting their life on the line when they try an innovation, they are putting their money on the line. This means that you need to find first adopters: those consumers who are willing to take a gamble. These people recognize that with risk comes the potential for high returns. For Johnson, who was a farmer, he recognized that by eating the tomato, he could introduce a new cash crop for his state. Your job is to show the first adopters that the potential reward is worth the risk. They need to know why they should take the chance.\nOnce you secure first adopters, you prove the viability of the innovation. Note, however, that Johnson didn’t eat the tomato in the privacy of his own home. He did it in a public space, so that others could witness it. You need to show other potential consumers the success you’ve achieved among first adopters. By communicating their positive experiences and reviews, you will get others interested. As an added bonus, those early adopters can provide invaluable feedback, guiding you on what works and does not work, so you can refine your innovation for the mass market. Metaphorically, as you gain adopters, people will start to realize that not only are tomatoes safe to eat, but delicious. At that point, with your innovation’s value proven, the big players will want to become fast followers and buy it too. Securing those crucial first adopters is the key to success. Sometimes, all you need is for one person to take a bite, and then the rest is history.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/a-man-a-tomato-and-a-lesson-about-how-to-sell-your-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"A Man, a Tomato, and a Lesson About How to Sell Your Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"We’re big science fiction fans here at PCDworks. Our founder and chief innovation officer Mike Rainone once made his son a replica of a phased plasma rifle from Terminator for Halloween. Despite being made out of wood, it was so realistic people stopped them and checked to make sure it wasn’t real!\nThe antagonist of Terminator is Skynet, an artificial intelligence. From 2001: A Space Odyssey to Westworld, sentient AI has long been a common theme in science fiction. Today, with everyone talking about ChatGPT, it feels like we are closer than ever to science fiction becoming reality.\nBut as advanced as AI has become, it just can’t think in the same way as a human brain. New research published this month gives us some clues why.\nThe human brain contains approximately 80 billion neurons. Scientists have now discovered that within those neurons, there are 3,000 different types of cells. While our brains share similar patterns of cells, every brain is unique, just like a fingerprint. Interestingly, you can even have the same type of cell in different regions of the same brain, and it will function differently, based solely on location!\nIt’s not just the type of cell that makes a difference. A comparison of cells in human vs. nonhuman primate brains revealed that while we share a lot of the same types of brain cells, how those cells form connections and communicate is different. Scientists now believe that our language abilities are not the result of different cells, but different wiring between cells.\nWith this research, we now have the largest-ever map of the human brain, which could help us treat Alzehimer’s, depression, and schizophrenia.\nThis is only the beginning. Who knows what new discoveries the future holds. One thing is certain, though: the human brain is almost unfathomably complex. We have a suspicion that even if you built a supercomputer with a trillion transistors, it would be missing that human spark that makes innovation possible.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/ai-vs-human-the-complexity-of-the-human-brain/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"AI vs. Human: The Complexity of the Human Brain","type":"blog"},{"content":"‍\nThe telegraph. The telephone. The incandescent light bulb. The airplane. What do they have in common? All were created or made practical by American inventors. Throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, America was the undisputed world leader of innovation. Today, we have lost that title. For thirteen years in a row, Switzerland has dominated the #1 spot in the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Global Innovation Index. The United States has been bumped back to #3, behind Sweden, with China closing in at #12 in the world.\nA Brookings Institute report revealed that since 1973, American innovation, as measured by total factor productivity growth, has dropped by more than half, from an annual rate of 1.9 percent to just 0.7 percent. These statistics point to an alarming trend: we are losing our innovative edge. Here’s another statistic to consider: an IBM study found that organizations that embrace open innovation had a 59 percent higher rate of revenue growth. Innovation has also been linked to greater economic growth, higher wages, and improvements in both life expectancy and quality of life. A decline in innovation is a problem not just for companies, but the country as a whole. To reclaim our position as the global leader of innovation, we first need to understand how and why innovation has changed. How Innovation Has ChangedIn the past, innovation was largely driven by inventors operating independently. By 2000, per the Harvard Business Review, almost 80 percent of patents went to inventors associated with corporations. Scientific and technological advancements have necessitated a shift to larger teams, so corporations themselves are not the problem. The problem is how corporations approach innovation.\nUp until the 1970s, many leading American corporations had dedicated research and innovation centers: AT\u0026amp;T had Bell Labs, which brought together theoreticians, materials scientists, metallurgists, engineers, and even telephone-pole climbers, with fourteen Nobel Prize winners and five Turing Award recipients among its alumni. Resulting innovations included the transistor, information theory, the first practical silicon solar cell, and the laser.Xerox had the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), which developed laser printing, ethernet, the graphical user interface now used on personal computers, and more.DuPont had their Central Research Department, which published more articles in the Journal of the American Chemical Society than MIT and Caltech combined in the 1960s and brought us nylon, Teflon, and Kevlar.Then things changed. In 1996, AT\u0026amp;T spun off Bell Labs. Xerox did the same with PARC in 2002. By 2011, DuPont was no longer publishing any articles, and in 2016 they closed their central R\u0026amp;D lab.\nThe decline in dedicated innovations teams was matched, unsurprisingly, by a decline in innovation. One study found that Fortune 500 firms won 41 percent of innovation awards in 1971, but only 6 percent in 2006.\nA “Just Buy It” MentalityWhen it comes to innovation, instead of “Just Do It,” corporations have a “Just Buy It” mentality. Rather than invest in innovation, they wait for the true innovators (typically start-ups) to do the hard work of innovation, and then they sweep in and acquire the company.\nThere are three reasons for this change, the three things that drive nearly every corporate business decision:\nMoneyTimeRiskThe way corporations see it, it is less expensive, time-consuming, and risky to buy innovation than drive it.\nSo why is buying innovation a problem?\nWell, first, as soon as a corporation acquires a start-up, what do you think happens to the inventors, the people who brought that innovation to fruition? Those inventors don’t want to be stuck inside of a corporation, subject to the micromanagement and bureaucracy that kills innovation. So they jump ship. The corporation acquires only the static innovative product, not the dynamic innovative thinking behind the product.\nSecond, innovation is meant to start with a simple question: “What is the problem?” By starting from the problem, you guarantee that the solution will have value. When you instead go out and buy innovation, you’re starting with a solution and have to figure out how to apply it to your problems. Yes, it’s innovation, but it might not be the innovation that is most valuable to your company. It’s the difference between clothing that has been custom-made and tailored to you versus something you buy off the rack in hopes that it fits.\nFinally, start-ups are biased toward a certain kind of innovation. According to data from PwC Moneytree, information and communication technologies (ICT) and life-science startups received around 83 percent of all VC investments between 1995 and 2019. If you want to acquire innovation outside of those categories, your options will be much more limited. In the short-term, buying innovation seems like less risk, cost, and time, but it comes at the expense of quality.\nReviving American InnovationFixing American innovation is simple, though not necessarily easy: companies need to invest in doing innovation, not just buying it. We have to escape the trap of short-term thinking. Instead of looking at the next fiscal quarter, we have to look five, ten, even twenty years into the future. We have to spend money knowing that the return might not come right away.\nBut the return will come. I’ve been working in innovation my entire life. I’ve seen many changes over the decades, but one thing has always remained the same: innovation is the lifeblood of a company, the most competitive advantage you can have. Yes, innovation costs money, takes time, and is risky. But it’s also worth it. ","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/american-innovation-is-broken-heres-why/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"American Innovation Is Broken: Here’s Why","type":"blog"},{"content":"Thomas Edison famously said, “Genius is 1 percent inspiration, 99 percent perspiration.” The same is true for innovation, because innovation is simply genius applied to the world’s problems.\nThis quote is more than a pithy saying you might hear from a motivational speaker. It’s part of the foundational mindset necessary to be a successful innovator. To get the most value from Edison’s genius ratio, you need to dig beyond the surface.\n1% InspirationLet’s start with the 1% inspiration. Sometimes people speak of inspiration like being struck by lightning. A great idea suddenly comes to them or clicks on like a lightbulb. However, rarely does lightning strike the same spot twice. Instead of waiting around for the spontaneous generation of an idea, a true innovator seeks out their own inspiration. Anyone can stumble upon a single great idea. That is luck. Repeatable, consistent inspiration is far more difficult—and valuable. That is skill.\nSo, how do you find your next great idea? To answer that, we must first answer a different question: Where does inspiration come from? Entire books could be written answering this question, but I will condense it down to a single sentence: Inspiration is the intersection of curiosity and empathy.\nIn its simplest form, innovation is the solving of problems. Solving a problem is only possible when you first recognize the problem. In some cases, the problem you seek to solve may be a problem you experience yourself. In the vast majority of cases, though, that will not be true. Recognizing the problem thus requires empathizing with those experiencing it. Curiosity makes us ask, “Why?” and “How?” Empathy pushes those questions a step further: “Why do people have to do that?” and “How can we do it better?”\nA great example of the power of empathy and curiosity is the washing machine. Before the washing machine, laundering was a painstaking process. First you had to fetch and carry the water, often by hand. Then you had to boil the water and pour it into tubs. Next you soaked and scrubbed, beating the laundry using rocks, paddles, or washboards. Then you had to rinse, wring, and dry. It was an all-day affair of backbreaking, hand-scarring work, primarily completed by women. Fortunately, starting as early as the seventeenth century, innovators looked at that work and thought, That is horrifying. What can we do to fix that? The inventors who helped develop the washing machine did not do laundry themselves, but they had empathy for the suffering of those who did and curiosity about other potential methods. Sometimes, inspiration will strike unexpectedly, but remember: those who seek inspiration are far more likely to find it.\n99% PerspirationInspiration is exhilarating. For most of us, it is probably what got us into innovation in the first place. You cannot innovate without initial inspiration. However, inspiration is useless on its own. It is like a shiny watch that does not keep time. Perspiration is what makes the watch tick. It is what separates dreamers from innovators, and it is the single most important factor in your success or failure.\nThis is not some closely guarded secret. Everyone knows that hard work is required to succeed. The secret, which I’ve learned after decades of doing this work, is this:\nInnovation never stops being difficult.\nIt doesn’t matter how much experience you have. Even if you have successfully innovated 1,000 times, that 1,001st time will still be a challenge. There will be unforeseen costs, humbling delays and missed timelines, and unexpected roadblocks and potholes. The effort to bring a product to market is terrifyingly difficult, impossible to predict, and can take you to the edge of psychological ruin. How fun. Hopefully you’re a masochist! To innovate, you must be prepared to sweat (and possibly bleed and cry too). I do not say all of this to scare you away. The exact opposite, in fact. If you set out to climb Mount Everest expecting it to be a hard two-day hike, then you will be sorely disappointed—and woefully unprepared—when you discover it actually takes two months. When you embark upon innovation knowing perspiration is required, then you are more likely to persist instead of quit when difficulties arise. In fact, I would argue that Edison seriously underestimated the inspiration-perspiration ratio in many cases. In my experience, particularly since the rise of the Internet of Things, which requires every new innovation to have no less than a billion sensors, the ratio is more like 0.01 percent inspiration and 99.99 percent perspiration. So expect a long journey, with twists and turns.\nA Process of Inspiration and PerspirationWhile innovation never stops being difficult, it can get easier and more consistent—with a process. By having a process and structure for innovation, you can avoid dead ends and stay on track, making the most of your hard work. At PCDworks we’ve developed our own step-by-step, multifaceted process of perspiration that is designed to turn inspiration into successful innovation. Contact us to learn more. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/an-innovation-lesson-from-thomas-edison/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"An Innovation Lesson from Thomas Edison","type":"blog"},{"content":"","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/announcements/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Announcements","type":"categories"},{"content":"Knowledge is looking at one sparkly, colorful pebble in the mosaic. Understanding is looking at the whole of the mosaic and seeing its wholeness as a mosaic. Wisdom is taking a step back to look at the big picture created by all the shards you’ve collected over your lifetime and grasping the implications of what the mosaic is teaching. Wisdom is the ability to use your knowledge to live a good life and make a positive impact on the world.\nKnowledge leading to understanding which can lead to wisdom are all invaluable for personal and professional growth, and understanding their distinctions is essential for decision-making and problem-solving.\nThe Difference Between Knowledge vs. Wisdom\nKnowledge is the accumulation of facts and data about the world. It\u0026#x27;s what you learn through education, reading, and experiences. Understanding is the integration of knowledge into a whole that makes sense and allows one to make decisions (predictions) from that understanding. In contrast, wisdom goes beyond just simple understanding of how fact-derived knowledge becomes understanding. It’s how you apply that understanding in real-world situations, demonstrating sound judgment, comprehensive understanding, and, often, a deep level of insight.\nWisdom allows you to recognize and manage uncertainty, while being agile and flexible enough to come up with solutions to difficult, complex problems. You see the layers of an issue and slice it multiple ways to predict the implications of each solution. You’re aware that each situation requires contextual understanding and deep curiosity about underlying motivations rather than judging it at perceived face value.\nKnowledge Is Knowing What to Do. Understanding is Understanding Why You do It, Wisdom Is Discerning When and How to Do It.\nA doctor may have extensive knowledge gained in medical school, but may not be wise enough to make the best decisions for their patients. A straight-A student could have gained perfect test scores in a subject and still lack the wisdom to apply that knowledge in a real-world setting. Conversely, you don’t need a formal education to become wise, but you do need a broad and deep understanding of the world and to be able to exercise good judgment. ‍\nDifferent types of knowledge are the building blocks of wisdom, mainly explicit, implicit, and tacit knowledge.\nExplicit Knowledge: Clearly Defined and Easily Shared\nExplicit knowledge is based on straightforward data that can be understood, interpreted, formalized, codified, and explained. This type of information is simple to store and share. In a business context, this may include operational processes, employee expectations, or industry-specific vocabulary that can be communicated via datasheets, handbooks, instruction manuals, and white papers. Explicit knowledge is the basic foundation, accessible to everyone, and fairly easy and quick to absorb.\nImplicit Knowledge: Applying Theory to Real-World Settings\nImplicit knowledge, also known as conceptual knowledge, is the application of explicit knowledge in practice. As you become familiar with a new position, for example, you’ll learn how to use your explicit knowledge in the new environment. You’ll figure out which methods or techniques work best on a day-to-day basis, understanding the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches, and making decisions on how to complete tasks most efficiently.\nImplicit knowledge often happens by accident, through trial and error, and experimentation. It involves synthesizing explicit knowledge and improving upon it through practical experience. Implicit knowledge can transfer between situations, industries, and environments.\nTacit Knowledge: Grasping the Intangible\nTacit knowledge is gained through experience and practice like implicit knowledge, but it’s extremely situation-specific and much harder to grasp. It can be understood almost as a subconscious type of knowledge creation which is very difficult to articulate and communicate. Because it’s gained through informal means, it’s challenging to quantify and often too expansive or complex to verbalize, document, visualize, or share with others. Tacit knowledge is highly subjective and specific to an individual or environment. Tacit knowledge includes intuition which is an innate ability to understand situations and circumstances without using logic. It’s obvious in star athletes like Tom Brady, who intuitively know where to throw the ball without the ability to use rational thought in the moment. You may have noticed it in yourself or other entrepreneurs who have a gut feeling about when to launch a new product or start a risky marketing strategy because you have a sense of the outcome that’s beyond available data. Many people aren’t aware of the tacit knowledge they possess or how it could benefit others. And even if they are, it can be nearly impossible to teach or share. Because there is no formalized structure to share tacit knowledge, it’s left up to the individual to pass on their internal wealth. Because tacit knowledge is so important it’s worth the required time, space, practice, and in-depth explanations to communicate. How to Become Wise\nThough often associated with age, wisdom is a trait that can be cultivated at any stage in life. Focusing on the process rather than outcomes, learning from mistakes, and developing genuine curiosity to listen and learn will build the depth of self-awareness and genuine understanding of other people and the world that are the foundations of wisdom. Put yourself in the proximity of wise people. Get a mentor. Learn a new skill. Listen to someone with a completely different background. Challenge your own assumptions. These efforts can all result in elevating your critical thinking skills, self-reflection, and ability to see patterns and themes. Most importantly, always consider how your developing wisdom can benefit your life, your community, and the world as a whole.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/beyond-knowing-the-subtle-art-of-transforming-knowledge-into-profound-wisdom/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Beyond Knowing—The Subtle Art of Transforming Knowledge into Profound Wisdom","type":"blog"},{"content":"","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/case-study/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Case Study","type":"categories"},{"content":"People work with other people, not businesses. So, if we don’t get along, working on an intensive innovation project will quickly turn into a raging dumpster fire and add misery to a task that’s already difficult. This is especially true for startups, but even in a corporate team, chemistry is important. If you’re looking for a creative collaborator to help bring an idea to life, you must do what you can to ensure it’s a great match. Launching a business or new product line is challenging enough. Make sure you have a partner by your side who complements your strengths and compensates for your weaknesses. In startups especially, you’re essentially committing to a long-term relationship, so it’s crucial your values and goals are aligned with your partner. When we talk to prospective clients, we look for this alignment early on to determine whether we’re a good fit. Here’s a quick gut check on the ideal clients we’re best equipped to help on their invention journey:\nTeam Dynamics\nWe work best with small but mighty teams of at least two people, rather than solo entrepreneurs. If you’re a pair who’ve already worked through past challenges and came out the other side, you’re more likely to succeed in the high-pressure innovation space. You probably picked each other because your skill sets and strengths complement each other. You’re likely committed to working out difficulties because you’ve had to consider each other’s priorities and collaborate with at least one other person on a project that’s important to you individually. This is a great foundation for navigating the rollercoaster of innovative product development.\nCulture Vibes\nWe once worked with a steel company that brought their entire 16-person team to our campus for a brainstorming session. They’d been working with each other for years, because the company had refused to lay anyone off in their entire history. They’d earned the trust of their employees, and it showed. Everyone appreciated each other’s skill set, expertise, and ideas.\nAnother time we worked with a huge corporation that sent a small delegation. For two entire days, they barely talked because they were too scared to speak up in front of the dictatorial manager in charge of the project.\nOur proprietary process includes creating an atmosphere of psychological safety to foster creativity. How long this takes and how effective it is heavily depends on each company’s culture and willingness to engage. The more supportive and open your existing culture, the more productive our collaboration will be.\nCoachability Quotient\nOne entrepreneur came to us for help creating a device to observe a horse’s gait and predict whether it would go lame in the future. The idea was solid, but when we asked them if they’d done any industry research, or talked to any equine organizations, stables, or experts in the field, the surprising answer was ‘no.’ When we strongly recommended prioritizing market research to ensure real demand, they refused. Sometimes, entrepreneurs are so invested in their ideas they refuse to seek or accept information that may not confirm their inherent bias. They lose the necessary curiosity about the science, technology, and market needs that take a new product from ‘meh’ to breakthrough.\nAs partners in innovation, we don’t expect a client to do as we say or defer to our judgment. However, if a client comes to us for expertise and advice and then roundly dismisses it, there is no hope for productive collaboration.\nBusiness Sense\nComing up with whacky ideas is easy. Making solutions happen is hard. You need to be creative and business-minded (or have someone on your team who is).\nAside from the innovation itself, most of our startup clients struggle with finances, marketing, and distribution. If you’re not the right person to apply for grants, talk to angel investors and venture capitalists, or enter your company in start-up competitions, you must hire someone who is. You’ll need to think about how to market and distribute your innovation sooner rather than later, because innovation is not a ‘build it and they will come’ situation. Beyond envisioning and designing your solution’s prototype, PCDworks can help with small manufacturing runs. We also provide referrals and connections, advice and insight based on our experience working with large corporations and small startups alike. Product Prowess\nProblem? Check. Idea? Check. A roadmap to success? Err... that’s where PCDworks comes in. We love helping you solve extremely difficult problems, especially if you have an idea of the direction, but don’t know which process to use, which components you need, or how to make it all work in the real world.\nWe might not be a good match if you’re innovating in these three fields:\nToys (play is essential, but we’ve made a commitment to stay away from inventions that will end up in a landfill).Automotive (mostly a game of ‘follow the leader’ with Japan spearheading the parade).Home building (convincing a change-resistant industry to adopt an innovation is not our jam).At PCDworks, we strive to be both visionaries and practitioners. We take it all the way to the edge creatively while staying deeply rooted in reality when it comes to execution. Sound like a match made in innovation heaven? Got a colossal idea brewing? Let’s talk!\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/client-chemistry-101-are-we-the-perfect-match/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Client Chemistry 101—Are We the Perfect Match?","type":"blog"},{"content":"Imagine your partner returns home soaking wet. Possible explanations might be that they jumped into the community pool in their clothes or ran a marathon in 90-degree heat drenching them in sweat. But the most plausible explanation? The torrential downpour visible from your living room window. You can be reasonably certain that’s the explanation for your partner’s current soggy state, and pretty accurately predict the same would happen to you if you stepped outside your front door. What’s Your Best Guess?\nThis example is straightforward for argument’s sake, but formulating hypotheses in service of innovation isn’t much different. At the heart of every great idea, there\u0026#x27;s a strong hypothesis – an informed prediction based on available data, past knowledge, or observation that can be tested. It sounds fancy and complicated, but it isn’t. Basically, a hypothesis is somebody saying, hey, I bet this is going to happen, and then checking if they gambled correctly.\nA hypothesis is only a hypothesis if it can be tested and proven right or wrong. Otherwise, it is meaningless and falls outside the realm of scientific investigation. Conversely, you must formulate a hypothesis before you set up an experiment or build a prototype. Otherwise, what’s the point? Without a hypothesis, experiments would resemble a game of hide and seek where no one knows what they\u0026#x27;re looking for.\nThe PCDworks Difference\nTucked away in the heart of East Texas, our 80-acre campus has been designed to foster hypothesis-driven innovation. Here, we cultivate a generative environment for deep work and innovative thinking during our Immersive Innovation™ sessions. We brainstorm potential solutions that inform preliminary hypotheses, then devise effective ways to test them, bringing in our mathematical modeling, electronic design, mechanical engineering, and finite element analysis (FEA) experts. Our clients have access to our expert team plus 20,000 sq ft of resource buildings, including our brainstorming studio, several labs fitted with proprietary testing tools, and a prototype shop. Multiple 3D printers, two CNC machines, and a small foundry to cast metal, are available around the clock. You can even access our pick-and-place machine to populate your own PCBs. In short, if your hypothesis is testable, we likely have the facilities, staff, tools, and expertise necessary to create an experiment, collect observations, and analyze data.\nLearning from Failure\nEven if a hypothesis is disproven, it\u0026#x27;s not a setback but a step forward in refining our understanding. The beauty of scientific innovation lies in its capacity to weed out what doesn’t work and narrow the scope. The fact that a hypothesis can be proven false is part of what gives science its power: this process of elimination helps identify the most viable solution.\nContinually formulating, testing, and re-calibrating hypotheses protects us from starting or continuing with unfounded assumptions. This iterative process keeps our egos in check, our curiosity piqued, and our focus sharp.\nAvoiding Confirmation Bias in Innovation\nYou may think this is obvious, but we’ve worked with a few clients who invested so much time, energy, and money in one solution that they became blind to other, more effective, cheaper, faster, and more sustainable options. Our brains evolved to recognize patterns and predict future events, which can lead to confirmation bias - cherry-picking information that aligns with our existing beliefs. To foster innovation, we must remain open-minded and follow where the data leads, not where we wish it would.\nFrom Concept to Prototype: Hypothesis Testing in Action\nPrototype building and testing are critical components of our innovation process. These practical steps help test hypotheses to see if our idea stands up to the laws of nature. We build preliminary and partial prototypes to test individual hypotheses before integrating them into a complete prototype.\nFormulating a hypothesis is simply making an educated prediction that can be put to the test. It\u0026#x27;s something we\u0026#x27;re constantly doing in all aspects of our lives. Our brains are always hypothesizing, i.e., trying to predict what will happen next. When we consciously apply this to innovation, we add a method to the madness of creativity.\nAfter we ask our clients to engage in the risky innovation process and come up with the most disruptive ideas, we now turn to de-risking the most promising solutions. Hypotheses lead to new data, which we distill into knowledge about the subject, which in turn reduces the risk of the proposed solution. Every time we formulate a new hypothesis, test it, gather data, and translate the information, it becomes knowledge that informs our next steps. We’ve found another puzzle piece to show us which innovative path is the least risky. Over the years and decades this knowledge becomes wisdom. Instead of attaching knowledge to a single piece of data, experts with vast experience see patterns that transcend fields of study. PCDworks team members make connections rather than looking at a solution in a vacuum, because we understand that all things are interrelated. As a knowledge building company, when you work with us, you not only access the obvious skills and expertise of our team, but also the undercurrent of wisdom, the deeper insights culled from decades of innovation that are not immediately accessible but brought to the surface during our innovation process. If you’re curious about how our hypothesis-driven innovation process works, you can read more here. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/cracking-the-innovation-code-the-power-of-iterative-hypothesis-formulation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Cracking the Innovation Code—The Power of Iterative Hypothesis Formulation","type":"blog"},{"content":"Working with clients on innovative prototypes often requires high-quality parts immediately accessible on location. That\u0026#x27;s why PCDworks just got a brand-new Essentium 3D printer, capable of rapid, large-scale production with high-strength materials. The Essentium can create intricate, durable parts for industries such as aerospace, automotive, and medical, at record speeds, unlocking unprecedented possibilities in 3D printing.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/essentium-3d-printer-added-to-pcdworks-state-of-the-art-facilities/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Essentium 3D Printer Added to PCDworks' State-of-the-Art Facilities","type":"blog"},{"content":"At PCDworks, we love to nerd out over how our brains work, for obvious reasons. Simply put, without the brain, there\u0026#x27;s no innovation. The deeper our understanding of our mental processes, the more efficiently we can harness our creativity, leading to groundbreaking solutions to complex problems.\nAn enlightening episode of PBS NOVA titled \u0026quot;Your Brain: Who\u0026#x27;s in Control?\u0026quot; highlights a key concept that guides our Immersive Ideation™ sessions: The brain\u0026#x27;s self-monitoring function is crucial for everyday life, but it also places a leash on our creativity.\nThat\u0026#x27;s why we take our clients out of their regular routine, environment, and physical space and invite them to our serene campus, where they can fully immerse themselves in a completely different state of mind. Why? Because…\nConscious Control Might Be Killing Your Creativity\nThe prefrontal cortex, nestled in the frontal lobe of our brains, plays a significant role in maintaining control over our thoughts and behaviors. From impulse control to strategic thinking, it keeps us on track, making us functional, social beings. This control is critical in numerous contexts but doesn\u0026#x27;t always gel with creativity.\nTo be truly innovative, you must relinquish your focus on control and evaluation (that critical voice telling you that your ideas are stupid and would never work anyway). The prefrontal cortex\u0026#x27;s controlling, analytical, and critical features can make us too self-conscious, insecure, and cautious. Excessive self-monitoring can leave us feeling nervous, second-guessing every thought and interaction—especially in the presence of peers or self-assured “experts” who might judge us for potentially unorthodox ideas. This heightened self-consciousness stifles the creative process.\nThe Creative Sweet Spot for Innovation\nOften, conscious control makes us perform worse, especially in situations where it is normally second nature to us and we enter a flow state. Do you think a Jazz musician can come up with these riffs on the spot by overthinking or by letting the music grab them and simply following where it leads?\nCreativity thrives on playfulness, improvisation, surprise, and making unexpected connections. Some research suggests that reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex may be associated with increased creative output, possibly because it allows more spontaneous and less constrained thinking. A study by Charles Limb and Allen Braun found that when jazz musicians improvise, they show deactivation in the prefrontal cortex and increased activation in the motor and sensory areas of the brain. This suggests that releasing conscious control (linked to the prefrontal cortex) fuels creative expression. Limb also participated in the PBS NOVA special where he explained that this is true for musicians as well as athletes whose physical high performance has become subconscious and second nature: \u0026quot;Free throw shooters that are able to shoot 99% free throws, all of a sudden, when you tell them you\u0026#x27;re going to get a million dollars if you make the next one […] you\u0026#x27;re more likely to choke. If you inject conscious control over something that\u0026#x27;s much better just to be left to its own subconsciousness, your performance gets worse.\u0026quot; When we fear being judged, we feel threatened and afraid of failure and rejection, which can put us in a fight or flight state. The more threatened we are, the more anxious and overwhelmed we get, which can lead to a total shutdown. Nothing kills creativity faster. Real innovation is risky, because it requires us to put ourselves out there in front of peers and opens our ideas up for ridicule and dismissal. At PCDworks we address this barrier to innovation by creating an environment of psychological safety that encourages participants to let go of self-monitoring and embrace their creative flow. When clients arrive at our campus, we start with a family style dinner and drinks to get to know each other as people. We create a non-threatening atmosphere that’s conducive to leaving our egos at the door and engaging with humility and curiosity. Our immersive ideation sessions on the PCDworks campus create the conditions for creativity helping clients give up some of their conscious control in exchange for entering a flow state encouraging creative release. Our prototype shops and labs stimulate experimentation and improvisation, offering opportunities to test ideas in a low-risk setting. Our campus and facilities provide opportunities to relax and disconnect from our regular schedules to foster more spontaneity and deep work. The journey from the structured order of the prefrontal cortex to the wild spontaneity of creativity can be a daunting one. At PCDworks, we make that journey not only accessible but deeply rewarding, opening up new avenues for innovation. Understanding our brains allows us to leverage our mental processes for maximum creative output, transforming ideas into truly disruptive solutions.\n‍\nPS: We\u0026#x27;re not hating on the prefrontal cortex. It\u0026#x27;s essential for sifting through and rigorously evaluating all the \u0026quot;out there\u0026quot; ideas we come up with in our immersive ideation sessions. It’s a matter of order, not importance. First, we ideate, then we let our analytical prefrontal cortex poke holes in everything, so we\u0026#x27;re only left with the solutions that will work in reality.\nYou can learn more about our innovation process here. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/from-constraint-to-creativity-overcoming-the-brains-barriers/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"From Constraint to Creativity: Overcoming the Brain's Barriers","type":"blog"},{"content":"There’s a big difference between a prototype and a product. To be considered successful, a prototype simply needs to work. A product, on the other hand, must make a profit, which means it must be optimized.\nTo turn a working prototype into a successful product, you cannot simply reproduce the prototype at scale. You must consciously design for manufacturing, to ensure a baseline of quality while minimizing costs. This part of the innovation process is often given short shrift, but it is absolutely necessary. Your prototype may be a success, but without proper design, your product will fail. These 5 questions will help guide you through thoughtful product design. #1: How Will You Package Your Solution?On the surface, packaging your solution seems simple. Just go to any store, buy a container off the shelf, then stuff your solution inside, right? Wrong. This is actually one of the hardest aspects of manufacturing.\nYou’d think it would be easy, but boxes are a pain to get. Premade ones in various sizes, configurations, and materials exist, but they almost never exactly fit the modifications you need. You might find the right shape but not the right size, or you’ll find the right size but in the wrong material. It’s like trying to find a needle in a haystack.\nUsually, you end up having to order customized containers from China. You must consider exactly what you need. The size, shape, and material of the container will often be dictated by the specifications of the project or the requirements of the solution. For example, perhaps the solution is part of a larger device, and you know it needs to fit into a 12 inch by 12 inch space. Or maybe you know your solution needs to be protected from electrical interference, requiring a certain material. #2: How Will Everything Interconnect?When people put together the different pieces of their solution, they often think, “Oh, we’ll just throw it together, and it’ll work.” No, that ain’t gonna work. You have to work hard to fit everything together in your solution, especially when you’re working with tight specifications. Figuring out how everything interconnects is another deceptively simple task. It’s not like a game of Tetris, where you simply need to fit each piece into the housing. More factors than just size and shape are at play here. For example, how will you route the circuits so the wires don’t rub or cause interference? Or if one piece gets hot while another needs to stay cold, how will you handle it? Maybe you’re using lead acid batteries, and you know what lead acid batteries give off when they’re charged? Hydrogen. How does hydrogen act in an environment where there are sparks or super high voltage?\nThe interconnections and the packaging are often related, so think about them simultaneously.\n#3: How Will the Solution Be Assembled?You must also consider how each piece and the connections will be assembled. This impacts both the solution’s user friendliness and its reliability.\nFirst, how will you set up the solution so that putting it together and using it is easy? How will people know how to plug it together correctly? How will they know which side is down? Design the product in a way that its assembly and use are as intuitive and clear as possible.\nNext, how will you ensure the solution is reliable after assembly? Every connection needs to be secured: either snapped and locked into place or glued. Otherwise, parts are liable to fall off or slip out of place, and then the solution won’t work. Try to make the assembly as easy and straightforward as possible, because “easy” in manufacturing equals cost savings.\n#4: How Will the Solution Handle Real-World Conditions?While a prototype just needs to work, the product must work in real-world conditions. To design a prototype for manufacturing, you need to account for those real-world conditions.\nThink about all the things the solution is going to be subjected to. Cold? Heat? Pressure? Moisture? Physical jostling? Shipping by the lowest-cost, least-predictable, ham-handed shipper (read USPS)? Based on the real-world conditions, how will you manufacture your solution accordingly? Are you going to seal it? If it’s in a dusty environment, how do you exchange air without the solution getting full of dust? How waterproof does it need to be? Does it need to be moisture-proof or submersible? What about the weather? Be sure to consider the safety—and the stupidity—of the user. Are there certain user behaviors you need to prevent? For example, putting a car into reverse while driving is terrible for the transmission, so many newer cars have features to prevent this. Or if you’re dealing with high-voltage, high-current electricity, you need to really pay attention to how you’re managing that, or someone will get knocked on their ass.\n#5: What Will the Solution Look Like?They say not to judge a book by its cover, but the reality is that looks matter. As the Fernando rule says: it’s better to look good than be good.\nImagine you’re trying to sell your product to a client or trying to secure funding from a VC. Do you want to show them a piece of junk that looks like it was glued together by a child with a bunch of wires hanging out? Or do you want to show them a polished, sleek product that makes it look like you know what you’re doing?\nPeople might say they don’t care what a solution looks like, but that’s a lie. Everybody cares what it looks like. Even if only subconsciously, the look of a solution changes people’s perception of it. It doesn’t need to be gold and encrusted in diamonds, but it needs to be presentable. The Power of Product DesignMost project plans wait until the last minute to think about design for manufacturing, and most people do not like to spend the required amount of money to ensure proper product design, to their own demise. A great project can be killed by waiting too late to focus on the mechanical aspects of the design. On the flip side, with thoughtful consideration of your solution’s packaging, interconnections, assembly, real-world requirements, and aesthetics, you can turn your prototype into a product that delivers results. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/from-prototype-to-product-5-tips-to-design-an-innovation-for-manufacturing/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"From Prototype to Product: 5 Tips to Design an Innovation for Manufacturing","type":"blog"},{"content":"In the early 1900s, Thomas Edison and his researchers were trying to develop a new kind of battery. They had been working on the problem for more than five months when Edison’s long-time associate Walter S. Mallory came to visit.\nAs Mallory recounted, he found Edison at a long bench covered with hundreds of test cells. The researchers had done more than 9,000 experiments with such cells, but still they had not found a working solution.\n“Isn’t it a shame,” Mallory said, “that with the tremendous amount of work you have done you haven’t been able to get any results?”\nEdison turned and shot back, “Results! Why, man, I have gotten a lot of results! I know several thousand things that won’t work.”\nOver the years, this anecdote has evolved into the famous quote: “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won\u0026#x27;t work.”\nIn innovation, failure is not just unavoidable, but desirable. You want to fail, because failure is how you learn. If everything works, it’s not actually as helpful, because you don’t necessarily know why something worked. It could have been a fluke. Under what conditions won’t it work? You don’t know.\nOf course, anyone can create prototypes that fail. The real talent is finally landing on that 10,001st attempt that works. This 3-step cycle of prototyping will help you learn from your efforts so you can adapt and modify, getting closer to a working solution.\nStep #1: Gain Knowledge—Test, Test, TestThe entire purpose of a prototype is to test your theories. The first step is thus to gain knowledge: facts and data about what works and what doesn’t work. Get as much objective, quantitative information as possible. The more hard data you have, the more you can learn. At PCDworks, this is one of the reasons we use LabVIEW so much. LabVIEW is an instrumentation system that allows you to measure a massive number of metrics: displacement, forces, electricity, and so on. Try to mimic real-world conditions in your tests, and remember that in the real world, conditions are rarely perfect. Your product may have to survive extreme temperatures, long runtimes, user mishandling, and more. So subject your prototype to as much abuse as you expect the device to suffer in real application. A single successful test does not mean a successful prototype. It only means a successful prototype under a certain set of conditions. So conduct many tests under a variety of conditions to get the most knowledge. Step #2: Understand Why—Isolate the Problem and Question Every AssumptionOnce you have knowledge, you can reach understanding, which means integrating the knowledge to see the whole. Essentially, you know what works and doesn’t work. Now you work to discover why. Start by isolating the things that do work from the things that don’t. Then do a deep dive on all the parts and pieces, questioning every assumption.\nEvery aspect of human perception and cognition is a moment to moment building of the world, which allows us to predict what comes next and make the best decisions, minimizing risk and the chances of making a mistake. Our brains are constantly processing information and making hypotheses on a millisecond basis. Every decision we make is a hypothesis, and every hypothesis is built on assumptions, based on (1) prior experience, what we have learned from the past, and (2) the conditions at that exact moment, what we are faced with in the present. If I need eggs, I will turn left out of my driveway because I have a hypothesis, based on experience, that this is the fastest route to a grocery store. That hypothesis is built on assumptions: that the road is not blocked due to construction, that no new stores have opened up closer, that eggs will be in stock, and so on.\nWhen you come up with a concept (a.k.a., a hypothesis) for how to solve your identified problem, you must test that concept. To test a concept, you must build a “prototype.” And I rarely mean a physical prototype, initially. Every prototype should begin with a mathematical model. When a prototype doesn’t work the way you expect, then somewhere there is a hypothesis that is invalid. The first assumption to question is whether you understand the engineering physics that pertain to the model. Perhaps you miscalculated friction or didn’t factor in the unique properties of a certain material: those are the hypotheses that must be tested as an initial reality check.\nIf you can’t find any errors, consider redoing tests. A couple of successful tests may have lulled you into a false belief.\nBy questioning your assumptions, you will eventually unearth the reason for why your prototype doesn’t work.\nStep #3: Act with Wisdom—Determine Your Next StepsSo now you have knowledge of what works and doesn’t work, and you have the understanding of why things don’t work. Now it’s time for the final question: What should you do next? This is a question of wisdom. Wisdom is the judicious application of understanding and knowledge, both the explicit knowledge you have about the current situation and the tacit knowledge you carry with you from years of experience. That tacit knowledge may not be foremost in your mind. It is almost by definition hidden, but it is nevertheless there, ready to come to the fore by the stimulation of all that you come to understand about the current problem. With wisdom, you decide how—or whether—to continue down a particular prototyping path.\nFirst, determine if a solution is even possible. Is there a way to fix the problem you have identified? It may take some time to figure out the solution. Do not give up prematurely. As Edison said, “Many of life\u0026#x27;s failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.” If you’re stuck, consult with an expert. You don’t know what you don’t know. An expert brings valuable explicit and tacit knowledge to the table.\nSometimes, though, there is truly not a solution, and you need to go back to the drawing board. Other times, a solution may be theoretically possible but impractical. Remember: this step is about wisdom. Sometimes that means recognizing that a solution is too expensive or will take too much time for the reward to be worth the effort. Each step of the innovation process should bring you closer to objectively determine whether you go on. As much as possible, take the emotion out of the decision and use wisdom to determine your next steps.\nLearn, Adapt, Try AgainI’ll leave you with one final Edison quote: “Genius is 1 percent inspiration, 99 percent perspiration.” That battery he and his developers were working on? They succeeded, patenting and commercializing nickel–iron (NiFe) batteries, which are still in use today.\nAll things yield to persistence. Prototyping is a process of failure and learning, a continual answering of three questions: What works, and what doesn’t work?Why doesn’t it work?What should you do next?Through these questions, you learn, adapt, and try again, until you land on that 10,001st attempt that works.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/get-ready-to-fail-the-3-step-learning-cycle-of-prototyping/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Get Ready to Fail: The 3-Step Learning Cycle of Prototyping","type":"blog"},{"content":"What do NASA, a hydraulic fracturing company, and a steel fabricator have in common?\nWhen faced with a problem, they knew they needed to innovate. What’s more, they were able to convince the powers that be—the decision makers that control the purse strings—to invest the needed resources to develop that innovation.\nIn our last blog, we talked about the ugly secret of innovation, which is that it doesn’t matter whether you are right—it only matters if you can convince others that you are right. So now we’ll discuss that all-important skill of convincing others that you are right. We’ll look at three organizations that chose to invest in innovation and why, so you can learn from their example to secure resources for your own innovation projects.\n#1: NASA—The Power of Competition On July 20, 1969, nearly 600 million people were glued to their television sets as Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon and uttered his famous quote: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” The moon landing was a watershed moment for innovation in America, and it did not come cheap. Total, Project Apollo cost about $25.8 billion between 1960 and 1973 (the equivalent of about $257 billion today).\nWhy did we invest so much money into something many believed wasn’t possible?\nSimple: Sputnik.\nYes, you could argue it was about the advancement of science and exploring new frontiers, but at the end of the day, if Russia wasn’t advancing into space, then we never would have either. This is one of the secrets to innovation in business: most often, only when a company is threatened will they begin to innovate.\nHere’s the thing: companies are always under threat. There are always competitors looking to take your market share. Your job is to make that threat concrete for upper management. Think about questions like these:\nWhy do customers choose your competitors over you? What does the competition have that you don’t? What do they do better than you? What competitive advantages do you currently have over your competitors? How secure are those advantages?What new technology is on the horizon that could disrupt your business?Point out the competition and emphasize that the only way to stay ahead is to innovate.\n#2: Hydraulic Fracturing—Money, Money, MoneyWe recently did a brainstorming session with a hydraulic fracturing company. The way their business model works is that they only make money when they are pumping. This company pumped about eighteen hours a day, while one of their competitors had found a way to pump twenty-one hours a day. At first, three extra hours of pumping a day may not seem like a lot, but let’s put it into dollars. Note that these numbers aren’t entirely accurate, as they don’t factor in the extra cost of running all the equipment necessary for pumping. But just for simplicity, let’s say each hour of pumping produces $15,000 of revenue. So that’s $45,000 every single day, multiplied by 365 days in a year, and we’re talking about more than $15,000,000 in revenue each year! Given gains like that, investing in innovation to increase the pumping time was a no-brainer.\nEven when you can point to a credible threat, the decision makers in a business often speak one language and one language only: money. Everything is about the bottom line, so show them how innovation moves the needle. What’s the predicted return on investment in cold hard numbers?\nKeep in mind that businesses tend to fixate on quarterly returns. They often place higher value on money now versus money years down the line. So you have to offer compelling numbers. Think about every potential benefit of the innovation: increased efficiency, fewer accidents, new customers, greater customer loyalty, being able to charge a higher price point, etc. Then translate it all into dollars and cents. #3: Steel Fabricator—Priceless BenefitsOne of the most rewarding projects we’ve ever worked on was with Vulcraft. They hired us to design a method to prevent their welders from being stuck by a hot tip of a MIG welding gun. If you look at things like lost work time and workers’ comp, reducing injuries has a monetary benefit. But that’s not what this company cared about. They cared about their employees’ safety. In their many years of business, they had never laid off a single person, and they were immensely loyal to one another. These were their friends, and they didn’t want to see their friends hurt.\nAs much as possible, you want to make the ROI of innovation tangible, but don’t overlook the intangible benefits. These benefits are priceless, meaning (1) you can’t assign a clear dollar value to them but also (2) they have a value beyond price. Priceless benefits include things like:\nSafetyEnvironmental impactReputation and brandingEmployee engagementCustomer goodwillThe value of these benefits may be obvious to you, but not necessarily to the decision makers. So tell the story, paint the picture, and explain why these things are so important.\nMaking the Case for InnovationGetting upper management to invest resources might be the most annoying job in innovation. I’m sure that, as an innovator, you would rather spend your time actually innovating. But as annoying as this job may be, it is absolutely critical, and it’s a skill you can build. So the next time you have to make your case for innovation, keep these three tips in mind:\nPoint out the competition.Show them the money.Explain the priceless benefits.With these strategies, you can better communicate the value of innovation and secure the resources you need to do what you do best: innovate.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/get-your-company-to-invest-in-innovation-3-strategies-for-success/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Get Your Company to Invest in Innovation: 3 Strategies for Success","type":"blog"},{"content":"You’ve identified a problem that needs to be solved, and you’ve brainstormed potential solutions, narrowing them down to one that seems promising.\nSo now what? How do you get from a hypothetical solution to an actual product?\nIt’s time for prototyping!\nPrototyping is one of the most exciting but also challenging stages of product development. If all goes well, you will get to see your idea come to life and begin reaping a return on your investment. If it doesn’t go well, you’ll have wasted a lot of time and money. Many times the difference between prototyping going well or going off the rails is a single, critical step: mathematical modeling. A mathematical prototype provides proof of concept. It gives you the knowledge to proceed with confidence, so you don’t needlessly waste time and money. Too often people make the mistake of skipping this step. Don’t be one of them. Follow these three guidelines to develop a mathematical model that keeps your prototyping on track.\n#1: Start from First PrinciplesAll product design is based on first principles. First principles are the fundamental aspects of engineering: the scientific laws of physics and mathematics. First principles include things like fluid mechanics, laws of conservation, thermodynamics, friction, and so on. A mathematical model must always start from first principles for two big reasons.\nIf a product does not abide by first principles, it will not work. This seems obvious, but you would be surprised how often otherwise-intelligent people have asked us for physically impossible solutions. Remember: the key purpose of a mathematical model is to show concept feasibility, that what is in mind does not violate basic laws of physics.Starting from first principles increases innovative thinking. Think of first principles like LEGO blocks. If you have LEGOs already built into an airplane wing, you are limited in what you can do. Chances are, you’re going to end up with an airplane. However, if you break those LEGOs apart and start with the individual blocks, you open up far more possibilities. Likewise, when you start from first principles, you can discover innovative solutions you didn’t expect.First principles tell you what is possible. As long as your mathematical model is based on first principles, you will know a physical prototype is theoretically possible (whether it’s possible in practice is another story, for our next article). So start from the mathematical and engineering roots of the solution.\n#2: Break the Solution DownNowadays, nearly any product you develop is going to be complex, with multiple interacting components. This can make mathematical prototyping overwhelming. To make it more manageable, break the solution down into smaller steps.\nFor example, we worked with a major fast-food chain that wanted to cook burgers in a healthier way, with less char and less fat, in less than 90 seconds. Specifically, they were interested in an alternate technology to atmospheric open-flame burners.\nOur proposed solution was an infrared broiler. We’d never built a broiler before, so we broke it down into smaller steps. For example, we would need a conveyor to move the burgers through, a reliable energy source for infrared heat, and a producer of infrared that would happily run continuously for hours on end at 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. These smaller steps were all things we knew how to tackle.\nWhen you break solutions down into smaller pieces, you often find that you know more than you realized. Even more importantly, you discover what you don’t know yet, which leads us to our final tip.\n#3: Work on the Hardest Problem FirstThere’s a saying, often attributed to Mark Twain: “If it\u0026#x27;s your job to eat a frog, it\u0026#x27;s best to do it first thing in the morning. And if it\u0026#x27;s your job to eat two frogs, it\u0026#x27;s best to eat the biggest one first.” The point is that you always want to work on the hardest problem first.\nIt’s tempting to work on the easy problems in order to rack up quick wins. But what happens if you do all the easy work and then face the difficult problem only to discover it’s not solvable? Now you’ve wasted time and money, and because you’ve invested so much already, you’re more likely to fall into the sunk-cost fallacy. You will be reluctant to abandon your idea, and you’ll likely sink even more time and money into a solution that will never work.\nIf something isn’t going to work, you want to know as soon as possible. Once you’ve broken the solution down into its components, work on the most daunting, uncertain aspect first. If you have no clue how or even if something is going to work, that is where you need to begin. In the case of our burger broiler, the big challenge was finding the right infrared-emitting material. We’d previously worked with a ceramic in infrared-driven camping stoves, but it was not robust enough for a fast-food restaurant’s needs. If the heat source wasn’t sufficient, then the entire broiler would be pointless. So we started with this materials problem and found a new generation of infrared-emitting material that worked well. Only then did we turn our attention to the easier problems, like the conveyor. In product development, we work at the border of the known and the unknown. Part of our job is discovering the unknowns as quickly as possible in order to make the best use of our resources. So eat the biggest frog first.\nYour Roadmap to a Physical PrototypePrototyping is the make-or-break point in product development. If you want to create a viable product, you need a viable prototype, and that starts with a mathematical model. A solid mathematical model is your roadmap to a physical prototype. The three guidelines for making a mathematical model will continue to help you throughout the prototyping process. When a prototype fails (which it will), return to first principles, break the issue down into smaller steps, and work on the hardest problem first.\nKeep following these three guidelines, and you’ll keep your prototyping on track to success.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/if-you-skip-this-step-when-prototyping-youre-doing-it-wrong/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"If You Skip This Step When Prototyping, You’re Doing It Wrong","type":"blog"},{"content":"On July 14th, PCDworks co-founders Donna Rainone and Mike Rainone hosted the inaugural event to launch an organizational effort for a regional innovation partnership. More than 30 guests holding positions in higher education, economic development leadership, and county and city governments came together to discuss how to drive economic rejuvenation, workforce development and attract new manufacturing to East Texas.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/inaugural-meeting-of-east-texas-innovation-partnership-collective/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Inaugural Meeting of East Texas Innovation Partnership Collective","type":"blog"},{"content":"One of the most valuable lessons I’ve learned about innovation came from a group of college kids. I was teaching an industrial design course, and on the very first day, I gave them an assignment: “Go home and ask your family, ‘What makes your life crazy?’ Then think about how you could solve that problem.”\nThey came back to class with all sorts of ideas, from special blenders to a hair bonnet that let you comfortably sleep with rollers in your hair. Holy crap, I thought. These are great ideas! Despite having no real-world experience in product design, the students had managed to come up with fifteen viable ideas in just a couple of days. At the end of the course, after they had designed and then beautifully prototyped their ideas, they had the opportunity to pitch to representatives of a major appliance company, who said they’d love to sell any one of them. This was the lesson: innovation begins with finding good problems to solve, and great ideas can come from anywhere. So if you want an innovative edge at your company, you must work to get everyone involved in problem-seeking. In particular, there are five types of people you should be consulting, with each one bringing unique strengths to problem-seeking.\n#1: CustomersA good problem is one that provides value if solved, so customers offer important perspectives in problem-seeking. One of the fundamental purposes of innovation is to find an unmet customer need and fill it, and who knows customer needs, whether stated or unstated, better than customers themselves? Not only can customers provide insight into the problems they face, but they, with careful discernment on your part, can also help you understand which problems they really care about—a.k.a., the problems that, if solved, they would pay money for.\nWhile customers have valuable knowledge, they typically struggle to articulate it. Most often they understand the need, but they don’t have the vision to hone in on the solution. As Hal Sperlich, the chief architect of the Chrysler minivan, explained, “No one asked us for a minivan.” It’s your job to extract the knowledge. To learn more about how to effectively do so, check out our previous blog, “Making the Most of Your Product Focus Group.”\n#3: Sales/MarketingI once joked with a director of business development, “You don’t want to go sell this product; you just want to take orders.”\n“Yeah!” he shot back immediately. “And I want it to be really cheap and work better than everybody else’s, so I don’t actually have to do anything.”\nIt was a joke, but really, it’s the truth. Every salesperson and marketer wants a product that sells itself. Who wouldn’t want to make their job easier? So salespeople and marketers have a strong incentive to help drive innovation, and they’re also well positioned to understand the problems to solve.\nSalespeople are constantly faced with the most pressing, important problems to customers—a.k.a., the problems that get in the way of a sale. More than anyone else in the company, salespeople are exposed to why customers don’t want to buy a product. Maybe it’s too expensive. Or too confusing to use. Or not sufficiently better than a competitor’s product. Whatever the problem, if the salespeople are engaged in active listening with the customer, they are the ones who will know. Like salespeople, marketers are important because they are clued in to what the customer wants from a more high-altitude viewpoint. Marketers should be focused on understanding the voice of the customer from a large-sample point of view, so they’ll be able to identify which problems would move the needle if solved.\nWhile each customer understands his or her own problems, salespeople and marketers see the bigger-picture trends across customers, which helps them identify the problems that have the most impact.\n#3: The People in the FieldLike customers, the people in the field—the ones involved in day-to-day operations—are critical in problem-seeking because they’re the ones with problems to solve. We recently consulted with a retired surgeon who wanted to design a better cast. In her work, she saw time and again that traditional casts were lacking. They’re heavy, bulky, and uncomfortable, and they can’t adapt to the patient’s process of recovery, which can lead patients to do things they shouldn’t be doing that could interfere with healing. Then, by the time the cast is ready to be removed, it stinks to high heaven, and it’s a pain to get off, requiring a saw, which makes them one-time use. When she puts it like that, yes, those are important problems to solve! Since I’m not a surgeon, I never would’ve been able to identify these problems, and would have accepted that reality as just the way it is, but for her, they were obvious.\nThe people in the field are the ones living the problems day-to-day, so they will have key insights. Essentially, you want to ask the people in the shit what kind of shovel they need to dig themselves out!\n#4: ExecutivesThe fundamental question of problem-seeking is “What do we need to do to beat the competition?” The executives of a company are the ones who should be most keyed into that strategic question.\nUnfortunately, in my experience, executives are often the ones who say they want innovation while getting in the way of actually doing innovation. Usually, the best thing they can do is simply get out of the way and delegate others to do the work of problem-seeking (and problem-solving).\nHowever, executives should have one big strength in problem-seeking: a big-picture view of the competition and current environment, both external and internal. They should understand the overall industry and trends. At minimum, one person in the C-suite should be dedicated to competitive intelligence and plotting on how to catch up or surpass the competition. “Our competitor has X, and we don’t” is a great problem to solve. However, and more importantly, they should also be scouting the world for the things (like new technology and supply side, financial, and demographic trends) that will get them ahead of the competition, not just meet it. While executives are often too far from the problems to identify them, they can help point people in the right direction when they recognize it.\n#5: EngineersI’ve saved engineers for last because it’s usually better for them to take a back seat in problem-seeking. It’s nothing against engineers—I’m one myself. Engineers are simply better equipped to solve problems, not necessarily to find them. That said, engineers do play an important role in problem-seeking: being up to date on new technological developments. Some problems are eternal in product development:\nCostReliabilitySpeedUser friendlinessCustomers (and thus companies) always want things to be cheaper, more reliable, faster, and easier to use. These are all “problems,” but they’re not good ones, because they’re too vague and open-ended to drive innovation effectively. This is where engineers come in. Sometimes, the way you specify a problem is by discovering a way to do something better. For example, say your engineers learn about a new alloy that is incredibly strong and flexible. Now they’ve identified a specific problem to solve: the material currently being used is not as effective as it could be. Not only have they identified the problem, they also already have a good path to a solution.\nSo your engineers should be on the leading edge of technology, paying attention to what new developments are coming down the road. Finding the Next Great IdeaSuccessful problem-seeking comes from having a network of folks all rowing in the same direction. They all have to be listening to the customer, anticipating the customer’s needs, and looking for the right problem to solve. With everyone rowing in the same direction, you can discover new, unexpected paths of innovation.\nTo innovate, you need to do things differently than others, and you need every advantage you can get. You never know where the next great idea will come from. So get everyone involved in problem-seeking; it must be part of your corporate culture.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/innovative-problem-solving-starts-with-problem-seeking-so-whose-job-is-it/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Innovative Problem-Solving Starts with Problem-SEEKING: So Whose Job Is It?","type":"blog"},{"content":"In 2006, the US Marine Corps posed a problem that we thought was important. When moving cargo between warships and shore, their load and unload times were too long, putting the crews at risk. They wanted us to help find a solution that would decrease load and unload times, reduce cargo damage, and minimize crew involvement.\nThe Marine Corps has about 180,000 active personnel and an annual budget of about $50 billion. So why would they come to a company like PCDworks, with a staff of only 10?\nThey came to us not despite our size, but because of it.\nCompanies are increasingly relying on larger teams, but this is a problem for innovation. According to research published by the Harvard Business Review, an analysis of over 65 million papers, patents, and software products revealed an interesting insight: while large teams excel at developing existing ideas, small teams are the ones to innovate, coming up with new ideas and opportunities.\nHere are three reasons why smaller teams (approximately 7-13 people) are not only better at innovating but also faster and cheaper than their larger counterparts.\n#1: AgilityAgility is the ability to move and adapt quickly. It is crucial to innovation because nobody innovates on the first try. Innovation is a process of ideation: try, fail, learn and adapt, try again. The faster you move through that process, the faster you innovate. Compared to small teams, large teams will always be slower for several reasons:\nLarge teams come with bureaucracy. The more people you have on a team, the more (usually unproductive) meetings you will have. Getting everyone to agree on a course of action can take weeks, months, and even years, so you spend the majority of your time talking instead of doing.Large teams are prone to groupthink. If you have thirty people in a room, they will talk themselves out of innovation every time. They will naturally align and agree with the majority opinion, which is rarely the creative, outside-the-box thinking you need for innovation. Large teams tend to be more risk-averse. Nothing kills innovation faster than having to prove the ROI of an idea before you have a chance to explore it. But this is exactly what many corporations do. They set up proof barriers and only invest in sure bets.Because large teams are slower, they’re also more likely to fall into the sunk-cost fallacy, becoming unwilling to abandon an idea and try something new because of the time and resources they’ve already invested. Think of it like rolling a large boulder: it’s extremely difficult to get it moving, and then once it’s moving, it’s hard to stop it or change directions.\n#2: TeamworkSmall teams tend to have better teamwork than large teams. Small teams simply “click” in a way that large teams don’t. When you get together every day and work cheek to jowl with the same people, you fall in sync. A lot of this comes down to trust. As you forge into the unknown, you need to know you can rely on your team. That can be difficult in larger teams, because there is a diffusion of responsibility. It’s not always clear who is supposed to do what, so when something goes wrong, it’s easy to shift blame. And blame does happen, because large groups are often a “team” only in name. In reality, they are individuals acting in their own best interests.\nIn a small team, there’s no hiding. Everybody knows who is supposed to do what, so there is clear accountability, which lets you trust that everyone is doing their job. With trust comes mutual respect. Everyone has a clear role and value, and you learn to leverage each other’s strengths and offset each other’s weaknesses, leading to a stronger, unified team.\n#3: WisdomThere’s an old parable about a group of blind men who come upon a strange object. The first man touches it and says, “Ah! I know what it is. It is a snake.”\nThe second says, “No, it is definitely a tree.”\n“What are you talking about?” asks the third. “This is most certainly a wall.”\n“No,” says the fourth. “It’s a spear.”\nSo what in the world did they find? An elephant. The first man touched its trunk, the second its leg, the third its side, and the fourth its tusk. This is exactly what happens in a large group as well. Each person sees different pieces of the problem, but not the whole. Previously, I wrote about transforming knowledge into wisdom. There are three layers of knowing:\nKnowledge: the accumulation of facts and informationUnderstanding: the integration of knowledge to see the wholeWisdom: the judicious application of implicit and tacit knowledge in real-world situationsInnovation requires wisdom, but large groups get stuck in the knowledge. They have all the pieces but struggle to integrate them into the whole for understanding, which blocks them from wisdom. In small teams, each member is responsible for more and thus builds greater understanding of the whole, giving them the building blocks for wisdom. Small Teams Get ResultsWe tend to think more is better, but when it comes to innovation, it’s the opposite: less is more.\nThe proof is in the results. The Marine Corps’ problem I mentioned? With our 10-person team, we were able to create a solution. We developed a lightweight, semi-automated system to simultaneously secure and release cargo loads. It reduced load and unload times by 20 percent while reducing cargo damage and requiring minimal human involvement. This technology is now coming on the market for trucking, nuclear waste transport, rail shipping, and aircraft lashing.\nIf you want to innovate—and do it as quickly and affordably as possible—you need a small, dedicated innovation team. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/less-is-more-3-benefits-of-small-teams-for-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Less Is More: 3 Benefits of Small Teams for Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"If you want to develop a successful product, one person’s opinion matters more than any other’s. The customer. To develop a product that not only works but also sells, you need a product customers want. Focus groups can be one of the most effective ways to tap into the voice of the customer, helping you understand their needs. Or focus groups can be a colossal waste of time, giving you no new information or, worse, sending you down the completely wrong path.\nThe difference is up to you. To get the most out of your focus group, avoid these four common mistakes.\nMistake #1: Expecting Confirmation Instead of Searching for InspirationThe number one mistake is expecting participants to tell you exactly what to do. Too many companies use focus groups as a way to cover their asses instead of looking for opportunities. That’s not how focus groups work. You can get information. You can get ideas. You can get enlightenment. What you can’t get is confirmation.\nConsider the Chrysler minivan. When it was released in the 1980s, customers loved it. It was exactly what they wanted. But as Hal Sperlich, the chief architect of the project, explained, “No one asked us for a minivan.” Instead, customers talked around it. They talked about how traveling with kids in a sedan was miserable and cramped. They talked about how full-size vans were awkward to drive and park. They talked about the difficulty of loading things in and out of a car. Sperlich and his team then took all that information and created the minivan.\nIn a focus group, people can tell you what they don’t want, but they can’t tell you what they do want, because it doesn’t exist yet. In short, customers don’t know what they don’t know—until you create it for them.\nMistake #2: Relying on Focus Groups AloneThe second mistake is thinking a focus group alone is enough. Focus groups are a qualitative tool. They can provide the initial inspiration and direction, but a focus group is a small sample size. Confirmation is only possible through good, solid quantitative analysis. Several decades ago, I was involved in a focus group on steam irons. One woman was adamant about not wanting the cord to wind up into the iron. Because of that one woman’s opinion, the company scrapped the idea. Now here we are forty years later, and guess what: lots of irons come with retractable cords because it turns out many customers want that feature. Don’t make the mistake this company did. Five people’s opinions do not make a guarantee. To evaluate a product, you need quantitative studies. Nowadays, with the internet, it’s easier than ever to do large-scale customer surveys. So make sure to do follow-up your focus group with quantitative analysis.\nMistake #3: Blindly Trusting the CustomerThe next mistake is taking everything the customer says as fact. After all, the customer is always right! Except when they’re not. Remember: customers don’t know what they don’t know.\nOnce, I was doing a focus group for folding walkers. One of the participants really liked his walker. “It’s great!” he told me.\n“Does it need anything?” I asked.\n“No, no,” he insisted. “It’s perfect.”\nBut when I looked at his walker, I discovered that he had duct-taped a cup holder, a phone holder, a book bag, and a flashlight to it. Not so perfect after all!\nWe call this compensatory behavior, and it is more common than you might expect. People naturally modify the things that don’t work for them into things that do work, without even realizing that the product was inadequate in the first place.\nA focus group should be more than just talking. Ask customers to actually use the product, so you can see for yourself. As Yogi Berra said, “You can observe a lot by just watching.” Listen to what participants tell you, but also pay even more attention to what they show you. Mistake #4: Letting the Participants Run the SessionThe final mistake is taking a backseat and letting the participants run the session. To be most effective, a focus group needs to be guided.\nFirst, ensure that no single person dominates the focus group. There’s always going to be one or two people who are extra vocal. If you’re not careful, they will take over the discussion. Everybody else will go along because they don’t want to argue, and you’ll lose out on the quieter but still valuable perspectives. Encourage balanced sharing by inviting specific people to speak. Second, guide the discussion to be more constructive. Sometimes the discussion is simply “I don’t like X” or “Y is bad.” That’s important information, but too often the discussion stalls there and never evolves. Try asking, “How would you make this better?” and “What do you wish the product could do?”\nBy thoughtfully leading the focus group, you’ll get more and higher-quality information from the participants.\nBetter Focus Groups = Better ProductsToo many people treat focus groups like something to check off the to-do list as opposed to the valuable tool they are. The bottom line is: the better you get at conducting focus groups, the better products you’ll be able to develop. Focus groups can increase knowledge, and knowledge is always the gateway to successfully developing a better product.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/making-the-most-of-your-product-focus-group-4-common-mistakes-to-avoid/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Making the Most of Your Product Focus Group: 4 Common Mistakes to Avoid","type":"blog"},{"content":"In 2013, we hired Berry Irrigation to install a watering system for our landscaping on the PCDworks campus. Brett Berry, the owner, had to dig a trench from the water supply to the building to install the flow sensor. He commented half jokingly that he figured at this point someone would have come up with a more elegant, convenient solution than digging trenches. “Why isn’t there a wireless option for this yet?” Brett asked out loud, and in true PCDworks fashion we responded: “Let’s build one!”\nListening to people’s pain points is the most effective way to identify real-world problems that need solving. It’s so ingrained in our team at PCDworks that we can’t help but notice any comment that points toward a problem we could create a solution for: “Someone should really come up with a better fix for X” or “If only there was a way to do this faster/cheaper/more sustainably” or “This is the worst/most inefficient/most painful part of the project.”\nWe partnered with Berry Irrigation to do just that - relieve the most frustrating pain point of installing a new system for him and everyone else in the industry. Brett told us exactly what he needed and we provided the proof of concept, testing and engineering to make his ideas for real-time, wireless water management a reality. Of course, the effort and financial expenditure of solving a complicated problem only makes sense, if you know the problem is big enough to result in significant demand for your solution. As an industry leader, Berry Irrigation knew that a wireless, real-time water management system would not only be the solution to the tedious and expensive trench digging for the company, but also provide convenient system monitoring to save their customers money while preserving a precious resource. According to the EPA, as much as 50 percent of the water we use outdoors is lost due to wind, evaporation, and runoff caused by inefficient irrigation methods and systems. A household with an automatic landscape irrigation system that isn\u0026#x27;t properly maintained and operated can waste up to 25,000 gallons of water annually.\nThis is an expensive waste of resources as water rates have increased 43% over the last decade, more than any other utility bill (Bluefield Research), especially considering that two-thirds of the world’s population may face water shortages by 2025 (WWF). The worldwide concern has already led many state and city governments to institute hefty fines for broken sprinkler heads causing leaks and wasting water. In cities such as Dallas in PCDworks’ home state of Texas, you won’t only be on the hook for additional water bills if your system springs a leak, but fined between $250 - $2,000 per incident. We knew our solution could have a potentially significant impact, but before we really dug into problem-solving mode, we first reviewed existing patents in the space to make sure our idea was truly novel and there weren’t competitors developing a similar product. To our surprise, nobody was addressing this issue, so we got to work.\nThe Berry Irrigation team came to our campus for an innovation session exploring all the parameters and specifications the solution would need to meet. Did most customers use Wifi already so we could use it as the basis for our communication? What was the minimum range required between the controller and flow sensor? What should the size, weight, and material specifications be for the flow sensor based on where it needed to be installed?\nAfter the initial discussions, our team at PCDworks started designing and building a prototype to test. Because our process is iterative, every testing phase brings up more questions: What natural and human-made barriers would block the signal between the controller and flow sensor? How could we make it easier for the installers to manipulate parts for set-up? Where would the power supply come from? How could we most efficiently hook the flow sensor into the controller? How would we make the dashboard for relaying data as user-friendly and easy to access as possible? Only after answering all these questions and testing our preliminary prototype for performance and reliability, were we ready to create the final manufacturing design.\nThe SolutionAfter intense innovation and design efforts, we introduced the solution - the H2O Flow Pro - to a number of beta testers in 2020. These original devices were tested by several locations of Brookshire Brothers grocery stores and Christus Health Systems. We protected our intellectual property by patenting the underlying technology of our wireless water management system that allows customers real-time monitoring of daily water consumption.\n‍\nOur patented technology used a two-way mesh radio for real-time communication and irrigation system monitoring, allowing remote operation for shutting off the system in cases of emergency or equipment failure, potentially saving customers from financial losses, property damage, flooding, fines for overwatering, soil erosion, and wasting precious resources.\n‍\nThe H2O Flow Pro controller is inserted into the zone wiring for the existing irrigation controller. The transmitter relays flow measurements to the controller, which documents normal flow for each zone, then switches to monitor mode. H2O Flow Pro integrates with Exosite, an Internet-of-Things (IoT) platform that collects and transmits the water usage data in real-time from your irrigation system to your internet-enabled devices (cell phone, desktop, laptop). Whenever the controller detects a high or low flow, it sends an alert and shuts off the zone in case of a high flow. The alert notifications are sent to the customer via email. The dashboard is mobile-friendly and a full mobile app is currently in development. ‍\n‍\nH2O Flow Pro integrates with any existing irrigation or sprinkler system, lowers water bills and conserves resources, and reduces energy use. The system’s easy installation allows data collection to start within minutes of set-up. Users can set monthly budgets for water usage and alerts when reaching 50% and 75% of the monthly budget respectively. ‍\n‍\nCovid-19 Pandemic Setback‍\nShortly after our original prototypes were deployed to customers, the Covid-19 pandemic hit and the world shut down. One of the lingering effects were significant logistics and supply issues and we were unable to source the parts we needed to assemble more devices. ‍\nWe went back to the drawing board and completely re-designed the solution with different parts. It was a difficult time full of uncertainty but the results were well worth it. The newer parts boast even more capabilities such as full bi-directional communication between the controller and water flow sensor. We’ve also incorporated a new type of valve that allows a complete shutoff for maximum safety in case of damage or leaks. Finally, we decided to move from Wifi-based communication to utilizing more reliable cell phone networks.\n‍\nThe new systems are being tested in June 2023, after which they’ll go through a software debugging phase that can last up to three months. Once we’re completely satisfied with the performance, we’ll order a run of 100 parts and cases to assemble before making them available for purchase. For commercial properties such as apartment complexes, healthcare facilities, or store chains, the H2O Flow Pro is a small investment, compared to its outsized benefits. One of the keys to great innovation is ensuring the solution is accessible and affordable. At a price point of around $1,000, the H2O Flow Pro only costs the equivalent of a few broken sprinkler head fines, while saving money, time, and energy – and, of course, the most important resource our planet has to offer humanity.\n‍\nHave you identified a significant, real-world problem you want to solve? Give us a call at +1 903 549 2056 or contact us to learn more about how we can collaborate.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/new-case-study-h20-flow-pro-wireless-water-management/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"New Case Study: H20 Flow Pro - Wireless Water Management","type":"blog"},{"content":"Parched for Progress: Confronting the Innovation Drought\nA 2023 article in Science Alert explains a trend we\u0026#x27;ve been seeing in the innovation space: \u0026quot;The rate of ground-breaking scientific discoveries and technological innovation is slowing down despite an ever-growing amount of knowledge, according to an analysis released Wednesday of millions of research papers and patents.\u0026quot; Lead author Michael Park at the University of Minnesota\u0026#x27;s Carlson School of Management spearheaded the study published in the journal Nature.\nThe inherent risk and uncertainty of innovation, paired with the looming threat of a recession, has been causing ripples across the country and the world. Many big corporations have stopped doing fundamental research and development because they believe it\u0026#x27;s cheaper to simply buy innovations from smaller companies. When the biggest concern is the shareholders\u0026#x27; requirement for quarter-over-quarter profits, instead of investing in R\u0026amp;D that won\u0026#x27;t generate a profit for years or decades, this greed will have us race to the bottom fast. \u0026quot;While previous research has shown downturns in individual disciplines, the study is the first that \u0026#x27;emphatically, convincingly documents this decline of disruptiveness across all major fields of science and technology,\u0026#x27; lead author Michael Park told AFP.\u0026quot;It\u0026#x27;s a difficult spot to occupy for new agile innovators and entrepreneurs. VCs and big corporations are often too risk-averse to fund these small shops, which is why it\u0026#x27;s PCDworks\u0026#x27; focus to help startups with everything from innovating solutions to finding funding, commercializing, and marketing their new products. PCDworks is committed to addressing the innovation drought one disruptive solution at a time.\nGot a problem you want to talk about? Call us at (903) 549-2056 or drop a line at hello@pcdworks.com.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/parched-for-progress-confronting-the-innovation-drought/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Parched for Progress","type":"blog"},{"content":"In a recent Lab to Startup podcast episode, “PCDworks: Hardtech Base Camp Incubator for Building Hardware Products,” PCDworks’ co-founders Donna Rainone and Mike Rainone, dove into the history and future of the company with the podcast’s host, Dr. Naresh Sunkara.\n‍\nAs described by Lab to Startup, a podcast that showcases what’s needed to translate lab research to startups, “PCDworks is a technology development company that helped develop hardware for over 50 big companies in the oil and gas, transportation, healthcare and several other industries; and now helping startups with a new incubator model.”\n‍\nDuring the podcast, Donna and Mike discussed their past work with large companies and now their focus: startup product development. They shared the processes through which they guide startups, starting at their HardTech Basecamp in rural Texas and then along the climb to bring their concept and company to reality. ‍\nThe entire podcast can be heard here: https://www.labtostartup.com/pcd-works-hardtech-basecamp-incubator-for-building-hardware-products/\nInterested in learning more about PCDworks’ and our HardTech Basecamp? Reach out.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/pcdworks-featured-on-recent-episode-of-lab-to-startup/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"PCDworks Featured on Recent Episode of Lab to Startup","type":"blog"},{"content":"PCDworks co-founders Donna Rainone and Mike Rainone had an opportunity to be part of Capital Factory’s “Start Up Week” a few months ago. During the panel discussion, they discussed how to best survive the product development process. The presentation gave an overview of PCDworks\u0026#x27; approach, including the importance of the six essential Ps when developing a product: partnership, process, passion, persistence, precision, and place. Want to learn more about how PCDworks creates success for our clients? Contact us.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/pcdworks-presents-at-capital-factory/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"PCDworks' Presents at Capital Factory","type":"blog"},{"content":"A friend of mine designed a split-vamp tennis shoe with two sets of laces, a lower and an upper set. Cheerleaders in particular loved the shoes. With the jumps, tumbling, and stunts they do, a securely fitting shoe is vital, and having two sets of laces allowed them to customize their fit.\nWhen it came to manufacturing, my friend didn’t know what he was doing. He was a former Catholic priest, and this was his first foray into the world of innovation. With a clear market need, though, he was able to raise the money needed to begin mass production. He hired a company in China to manufacture the shoes and sent them a check for $2 million.\nA few months later, my friend received his order of shoes, but there was a problem. The company had indeed produced $2 million worth of shoes, but only left shoes. After investing $2 million dollars, my friend did not have a single pair of shoes he could actually sell.\nThe whole situation was a mess. My friend required a bailout, and even so, he never got the money he was owed.\nThis is unfortunately the reality for many innovators. You may successfully develop a solution to a real market need, but when it comes time to manufacture that solution, everything can quickly fall apart. Here are three tips to protect yourself.\n#1: Hire a Third-Party RepresentativeMost manufacturing nowadays is done overseas, requiring you to navigate a different culture and language. You need somebody on your side: a third-party representative who can serve as your proxy and provide a bridge between you and the manufacturer. Middlemen sometimes get a bad rap, but in this case, they are worth their weight in gold. They can prevent miscommunications and ensure the manufacturing process goes as smoothly and efficiently as possible. Whenever I need manufacturing done in China, I have a trusted consultant I work with. He was raised in Hong Kong, so he knows how to get around and speaks Mandarin. He serves as a translator of not only the language but also the local customs and manufacturing processes. He is able to get stuff done in a way that I simply would not be able to because he knows the culture and he’s actually there to organize and oversee everything.\nHiring a third-party representative will cost you a bit more money, but it’s the safest way to handle manufacturing. If my friend, the former Catholic priest, had a third-party representative to make sure his order was properly done, he would have saved himself far more money and time in the long run.\n#2: Never Pay UpfrontOne of the best ways to protect yourself in the manufacturing process is to never pay the full amount upfront. Only pay when you receive the order. Many manufacturers will cheat or cut corners to save money, especially in countries like China, where there’s a cutthroat, race-to-the-bottom competition on pricing among manufacturers. In other countries, if something goes wrong, you often do not have the same legal recourse you would in the United States. In China, for example, it is nearly impossible to successfully sue manufacturers. To hold manufacturers accountable, you need some other form of leverage: a.k.a., money. If you’ve already paid the manufacturer, they have little incentive to correct issues for you. By withholding payment until completion of manufacturing, you place contingencies on their behavior. If, for example, they produce only left shoes, you can insist that they correct the mistake before you pay them. While you may need to pay a deposit upfront, you should never pay the full amount. It’s simply too risky.\n#3: Conduct Quality AssuranceIf a manufacturer tries to cheat you or makes a mistake, you first have to catch it before you can hold them accountable. That means you must do your own quality assurance. You need to confirm for yourself that what you’ve ordered is up to the standards and quality you specified.\nOn one project at PCDworks, we required parts made from a particular type of steel to ensure adequate strength. The manufacturer claimed they’d used the right steel, but when we tested the parts, we discovered the material was wrong. We had to go back to the manufacturer and say, “We’re not paying you for anything unless the parts are manufactured as specified.” (This is why tip #2 is so important. If we had already paid, we would not have had enough leverage to force the manufacturer to correct their mistake.)\nBe sure your testing is thorough. We were once working with a shape memory alloy. Our first shipment passed our tests with flying colors, so we ordered a second shipment. A couple of weeks later, we were banging our heads against the wall because the gadget we were building had stopped working. Finally, we went back to test the second shipment and discovered that only about 50 percent of the shape memory alloys were to the right specifications. Don’t let a few successful tests lull you into a false sense of security. Often, consistency is the big issue. The manufacturing process requires oversight. You have to keep their feet to the fire. From Idea to RealityYou cannot overlook the importance of manufacturing in the innovation process. No matter how good your idea is, if you cannot manufacture it, it will fail. With these three tips, you can reduce the risk involved in manufacturing and increase your odds of success.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/ready-to-manufacture-your-innovation-3-tips-to-protect-yourself/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Ready to Manufacture Your Innovation? 3 Tips to Protect Yourself","type":"blog"},{"content":"We throw around the term “problem-solving” as if we all knew exactly what it was, even though there is no universal understanding of its nuances. The way our brains problem-solve alone and in collaboration is slightly different for everyone.\nThe art of problem-solving, especially when it relates to innovation, requires diverse perspectives and approaches. When we innovate solutions to difficult problems at PCDworks, we pay special attention to fundamental research and functional decomposition. It’s not as complicated as it sounds:\nBuilding a Robust Research Foundation\nOur first step is to delve deep into comprehensive research, analyzing patents (both active and expired), scientific literature, white papers, studies and especially what the client has already tried. This isn’t just an exercise to avoid patent overlap, but a way to learn from the past. Even if a patent has expired or been abandoned, that information can clue us in on why other potential solutions were unsuccessful. Knowing what the customer has tried, and how they failed is most important. Looking at old patents sparks new ideas.\nThis historical insight is a fertile ground where new, groundbreaking ideas take root, often setting the stage for connections with international experts in their respective fields. We’re always standing on the shoulders of giants, and these giants are often more than happy to help us expand upon their work.\nHow Do You Actually “Think Outside the Box?”\nWe think of it as an extreme ‘zoom out,’ then ‘zoom in’ process. Our brains are excellent at pattern-seeking and big-picture vision. It’s an evolutionary survival strategy that serves us well in many ways. It helps us look for patterns in problems, too. Think of it as zooming out to grasp the issue in its entirety, enabling us to unravel the fundamental physics underlying a problem. From this bird’s eye view, we can understand the basics of the process, structure, and history of the problem. Let’s say, for example, we’re working on a pump system. Our big-picture approach includes understanding all types of existing types of pumps regardless of where they are used, or even evolved to be used, their applications, benefits, and limitations. We immerse ourselves in the depth and breadth of the problem, gaining a nuanced understanding that transcends superficial knowledge. While an expansive view is crucial, true innovation arises when we pair it with a \u0026quot;zoomed-in\u0026quot; perspective, a process we refer to as functional decomposition. It’s essentially distilling a problem to its essence.\nFunctional Decomposition—a fancy term for “reducing the problem to what it’s doing”\nWe strip down the problem to its fundamental elements. With the pump example, we reduce the whole system to its core function and think of it in terms of “moving fluids from one place to another.” Suddenly, we have a much broader variety of processes that apply to our pump problem. We no longer only think of hydraulic pumps in aircraft or centrifugal pumps used in oil drilling. We consider the human heart moving blood around the body. We debate the difference between humans and other mammals.\nHow does a human heart pump differently from a giraffe heart that requires blood to travel a much farther distance to the brain? Giraffe hearts don’t have valves like human hearts. Why not? What are the benefits and drawbacks of that, and how might it inform our specific pump problem?\nIn this way, reducing the problem to what it’s doing doesn’t narrow our focus but expands it, paving the way for pioneering innovation by blending insights from different industries and fields, the plant world, and the animal kingdom. This is where true problem-solving happens.\nCurious how this innovation process applies to your idea? Let’s talk!\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/redefining-problem-solving-the-pcdworks-way/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Redefining Problem-Solving the PCDworks Way","type":"blog"},{"content":"In 2021, 11.6 percent of people lived below the poverty line in the United States. In Palestine, Texas, the home of PCDworks, a staggering 18.8 percent of the population lived below the poverty line, which is, simply put, too many.\nEast Texas, particularly Anderson County, has long faced economic challenges. Historically, the region has relied on three industries: oil and gas, timber, and agriculture. As these industries declined, unemployment and underemployment rose.\nPCDworks is a part of this community. We live and work here, and we know firsthand how much potential the region holds as an innovation hub. The region has been underutilized, and we aim to help change that, through the East Texas Technology and Innovation Coalition (ETTIC).\nWhat Is ETTIC?ETTIC’s mission is simple: to be a catalyst for regional economic development and technological innovation. The coalition is composed of East Texas’s finest innovators from business, local government, and higher education. Our members include engineers and scientists, teachers and mentors, CEOs and leaders. Currently, ETTIC is led by two areas businesses, PCDworks and the advanced manufacturing company Essentium, which specializes in 3D printing. Higher education partners include: University of Texas at Tyler (UT Tyler)Cybersecurity Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CyManII), out of the University of Texas at San Antonio.Trinity Valley Community CollegeTyler Independent School District Government partners include: Anderson County judge and commissioner East Texas Council of Governments (ETCOG) Palestine Economic Development CorporationTyler Economic Development CouncilPalestine Municipal AirportOur GoalsETTIC’s mission breaks down into two major goals: Advanced manufacturing business developmentWorkforce developmentThese two goals are interconnected, building on one another. Advanced manufacturing business development leads to more and better jobs, which helps to attract and retain talent, which leads to a larger, more skilled workforce, which attracts more advanced manufacturing businesses, and on and on. The end result is economic development and technological innovation.\n‍\nAdvanced Manufacturing Business DevelopmentWhile East Texas has not historically been a hub for innovation, it has many qualities that make it attractive to advanced manufacturing businesses:\nNatural resources (timber and water bodies)Vacant industrial spaces suitable for redevelopmentA pool of untapped semi-skilled labor (including graduates from the UT Tyler engineering school)Connectivity to main interstate highwaysBusiness-friendly state lawsLow cost of livingETTIC seeks to leverage these assets and fill in resource gaps to achieve four sub-goals of business development:\nRetain and support existing businesses.Support start-ups and help them grow.Attract new businesses.Create tools and infrastructure (like improvements to the Palestine Municipal Airport) to support economic development.Of these, the one PCDworks will be most involved in is #3. In 2022, we started our HardTech Basecamp nonprofit, a new kind of start-up incubator. The vast majority of incubators focus on software and app development, or the business side of a start-up. There are far too few resources for people who want to develop an actual physical product, with a focus on engineering and development. Our HardTech Basecamp offers a place for these people to be mentored and bring their ideas to life. We’re currently interviewing candidates and hope to announce our next participants soon. Workforce Development Of course, for businesses to thrive, they need talent, which leads to two sub-goals of workforce development:\nAttract and retain talent. Reskill the workforce with advanced manufacturing, technology-based training.The first goal is largely achieved through business development. High-paying jobs naturally attract and retain talent.\nReskilling the workforce is key to ETTIC’s mission. Our goal is not to become another Silicon Valley, where the average person is pushed out and cannot afford to live. We want to bring the community with us, increasing the quality, access, and variety of STEM education. After all, a rising tide should lift all boats.\nOur partner CyManII will play a big role in this goal. They recently received congressional funding to help bring manufacturing back to the United States. They provide on-demand cybersecurity training, including bringing live instruction to underserved and underrepresented populations, like people in remote locations, veterans, and women.\nHow You Can Get InvolvedWe’re still in the early stages of establishing ETTIC, so now is the perfect time to get involved. From business to government to higher education, we welcome everyone interested in innovation.\nIn the coming months, we will be pulling together a small working group to organize and lead the coalition. Our first priorities are developing a website and starting fundraising. We have big goals, and big goals require money—and time. To really become a driver of economic development, the coalition will need funding for a dedicated staff, including a program director and supporting personnel.\nWe’re excited to get started on our mission of supporting start-ups and businesses, employing locals, and boosting the economy. If you’re interested in joining and giving back to our East Texas community, reach out to us at apyle@pcdworks.com.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/revitalizing-our-community-the-east-texas-technology-and-innovation-coalition-ettic/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Revitalizing Our Community: The East Texas Technology and Innovation Coalition (ETTIC)","type":"blog"},{"content":"A long while back, CBS Sunday Morning aired a great segment on how many of today’s most interesting products came from accidents. “Serendipity refers to looking for one thing and stumbling over something else that proves to be of greater value,” said Dr. Morton Meyers, author of Happy Accidents: Serendipity in Modern Medical Breakthroughs. “What serendipity means is misadventure, an inadvertent observation, a happenstance that a sharp, open mind can exploit to find its true benefit.” I am not so sure that there is any misadventure about it, frankly. Contrary to popular belief, serendipity does not have to be accidental; it can be planned, prepared for, and thereby enhanced. There is no better proof of this than the invention of the ubiquitous Post-it note.\nA Solution Without a ProblemHere at PCDworks, we love Post-it notes. They’re convenient and versatile and excellent for brainstorming. And they almost didn’t exist. In fact, when the Post-it adhesive was first developed, it was the exact opposite of what the inventor wanted.\nIn 1968, 3M scientist Dr. Spencer Silver had been tasked with developing new adhesives: specifically, in his words, “bigger, stronger, tougher adhesives.” Instead, what he created was a very weak, rather puny adhesive. The adhesive had an interesting property, though: it retained its stickiness, which made it reusable. It could be stuck, removed, and re-stuck, all without leaving a residue behind. Silver was convinced he’d stumbled upon something great. He spoke of it often to his colleagues. “I came to be known as Mr. Persistent because I wouldn\u0026#x27;t give up,” he said. Despite Silver’s efforts, for many years, the adhesive remained “a solution without a problem.” Serendipity StrikesFlash-forward six years. In 1974, another 3M scientist, Art Fry, had a problem. He was part of his church’s choir, and at practice each week, he used little scraps of paper to mark the hymns they would sing at the upcoming service. When Sunday rolled around, though, he often discovered that his bookmarks had fallen out, leading to confusion and frantic riffling of pages.\nThen serendipity struck. Frustrated with his itinerant bookmarks, Fry recalled one of Silver’s seminars and had a eureka moment. Fry had a problem, and Silver had the solution. This moment of serendipity was not the result of happenstance, but of two open minds and a whole lot of preparation. When Silver first created his “failed” adhesive, he did not dismiss it as a failure. He remained open-minded. While he did not know what problem this adhesive could solve, he believed that such a problem could exist. So he worked to spread knowledge of this new innovation. In this, he planted the seeds for serendipity.\nThen Fry came along and harvested those seeds. Fry’s bookmark problem was really no more than a minor frustration, but with a curious, open mind, he wondered, “What if there was a better way?” Because he’d previously attended Silver’s seminar, his mind was prepared to make that critical “aha” connection.\nBecause of Silver and Fry’s open-mindedness and preparation, the Post-it note went on to become one of the most profitable products ever produced.\nWhere Preparation Meets OpportunityThe Roman philosopher Seneca said, “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.”\nMuch of success in innovation is owed to luck, but that doesn’t mean you leave your success to chance. Unlike Dr. Meyers, I believe most serendipity comes from well-intentioned pursuits, not misadventures. What is required is a sharp, open, prepared mind that recognizes that somewhere in the results of that pursuit, something else and more important lurks. Be prepared, so when opportunity knocks, you can create your own serendipity.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/serendipity-is-no-accident-what-the-post-it-teaches-us-about-luck/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Serendipity Is No Accident: What the Post-it Teaches Us About “Luck”","type":"blog"},{"content":"Springtime here in east Texas is an explosion of bird song and blossoms, and the perfect time to share the latest updates to the PCDworks website. We\u0026#x27;re excited to be able to share more of what we\u0026#x27;ve been working on, and how our company is growing and adapting to the changes in the marketplace. We\u0026#x27;ll be sharing news about upcoming events, projects, and opportunities to connect, so come back often and thank you for your interest in our little corner of the internet. ","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/spring-cleaning-a-new-website-for-pcdworks/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Spring cleaning: A New Website for PCDworks","type":"blog"},{"content":"Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: How Experts Can Help You Innovate\nIsaac Newton famously said, “If I have seen further [than others], it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”\nIn innovation, we are always standing on the shoulders of giants. Only by leveraging others’ knowledge and discoveries can we continue to push the boundaries of what is possible. At PCDworks, we don’t pretend to know everything, but even when we don’t know something, we know we can find someone who does. One of our greatest strengths is our ability to find and recruit the help of experts. Consulting experts can save you a lot of time, money, and headaches in the innovation process, so let’s talk about the best way to get a leg up from these giants upon whose shoulders we stand.\nWhy You Need an ExpertFirst, let’s clarify what an “expert” is. An expert is someone world-class, at the top of their field. Their knowledge is both specific and incredibly deep. They don’t just know a little something about the designated topic. They have lived and breathed it for many years.\nAn expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field.\n—Niels Bohr\nWhat makes experts so valuable is their tacit knowledge. Anybody can access explicit knowledge with some work and research. Tacit knowledge, on the other hand, must be earned over time and with experience. It can be the hardest knowledge to tap into because those who possess tacit knowledge are often not conscious of it. You’ve probably heard the saying, “You don’t know what you don’t know.” In the case of experts and tacit knowledge, they don’t know what they do know, because it is so ingrained and innate that they don’t realize how valuable it is.\nTacit knowledge is absolutely crucial to innovation. It’s like a cheat code or a shortcut. It can prevent you from wasting resources on impractical solutions and enlighten you to new possibilities you didn’t know existed. When to Ask for Expert HelpExpert help is almost always welcome, but there are three specific times when you should consider actively searching it out: During solution ideation: After you’ve identified a good problem to solve, you can begin brainstorming potential solutions. Your success in this phase largely depends on your ability to broaden the solution set. The more ideas you can come up with, the greater your odds of discovering one that is both innovative and achievable. Think of your solution set like a Venn diagram. All of your knowledge represents one circle. By bringing in an expert, you add another large circle to your solution set. There will be some overlap in the knowledge, but the expert will also bring new knowledge, and you might just find your solution in that area.When you have a dominant know-it-all: Innovation is a collaborative process. Sometimes, intellectual bullying occurs. Someone who thinks they know it all will dominate conversations, stifling innovative thought. Bringing in an outside expert can disrupt the dynamic. When faced with a guru, the know-it-all will be dethroned from their self-appointed leadership position, allowing others to come forward.When you get stuck: When you hit a wall, instead of beating your head against it, consult an expert. They can often help you get unstuck.How to Get Expert HelpWe’ve found that experts are often more than happy to help us expand upon their work. The key word there is expand. You can’t go in expecting an expert to start from scratch with you. They’re more likely to help you if they’re interested in the topic of conversation, and the basics are not interesting to an expert. Before you reach out to an expert, you need to be fully prepared to speak their language. Always research the problem on your own first. Not only will this help you speak the language, but it can also help you identify which experts to contact. Try to get as specific as possible. For example, on one project, we wanted to use a linear motor, which we had never designed before. We first called up the University of Wisconsin, because they have one of the best motor programs in the world. Our contact there explained, “We do rotating motors. You have to go to Europe for linear motors.” So we did more research and found an expert based in Romania who specialized in linear motors.\nBe humble and respectful when you reach out to an expert. As part of your research, study the expert’s published papers and books. In your conversations, demonstrate your knowledge through thoughtful questions, so they know you’re not wasting their time, but don’t forget who the real expert is. To Succeed, Ask for HelpSteve Jobs once said that one thing separates those who do from those who just dream. Those who do are the ones who ask for help.\nGiven the state of our civilization’s intellectual and technological advancement, it is nearly impossible for one person to possess all the knowledge needed to innovate. The question isn’t if, but when you will benefit from expert knowledge. Don’t hesitate to ask for help. It may make all the difference between success and failure.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/standing-on-the-shoulders-of-giants-how-experts-can-help-you-innovate/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: How Experts Can Help You Innovate","type":"blog"},{"content":"Almost every company wants to innovate (or at least says they want to innovate), but too many make the mistake of expecting innovation to just happen on its own. If you want innovation, you have to drive it.\nThe good news is you can start driving innovation in just three days. At PCDworks, we have developed a tried-and-true process we call Immersive InnovationTM. The process itself is simple:\nDay 1: Brainstorming the what—the problems to be solved and what you want to achieve (i.e., “I wish we could …”)Day 2: Brainstorming the how—potential solutions and their strengths and weaknessesDay 3: Funneling the ideas down to the three most promising options Here’s the catch. The special sauce is not the process, but the execution. One Fortune 500 company came to the PCDworks campus to learn our process and then tried to replicate it back in their offices. Though they used the same timeline and the same exercises, it just didn’t work.\nHere’s what makes Immersive Innovation so special.\nNo More Distractions and InterruptionsIn a typical innovation session, a company will stick everybody in a room with a whiteboard. Twenty minutes in, someone knocks on the door to ask a question. Then someone has to step out to take a phone call. Someone else gets an urgent email requiring immediate response. Before you know it, it’s lunchtime, and little progress has been made.\nInnovation doesn’t happen with surface-level thinking. It requires deep, focused attention, which requires stillness. Constant interruptions and distractions make it impossible to build momentum and dig deep into the problems to be solved.\nAt an Immersive Innovation session on the PCDworks campus, there are no interruptions. You don’t have people coming into your office and bugging you, and we don’t use cell phones or computers outside of designated break times. Outside of group sessions, we assign short homework exercises to keep participants immersed. For three days, we eat, sleep, and breathe innovation. By eliminating interruptions and distractions, we get the ball rolling and ensure it keeps rolling.\nGetting Out of the OfficeHave you ever walked into a room and immediately forgotten why you’re there? This is an example of the doorway effect. We have episodic memory, which means we link memories to a particular time and place. So when you have a thought in one room and then leave to another room, poof—the thought can disappear.\nThe point is that location has an effect on how we think. We suspect this is one of the reasons innovation can be so challenging in an office environment. Certain ways of static, routine thinking get linked to our office building. Usually that thinking serves us well, but it can stifle innovation.\nA change in environment can open up new ways of thinking and encourage creativity. Studies have found that natural environments in particular boost creativity. According to UC Berkeley’s Greater Good Magazine, time in nature reduces stress and relieves attention fatigue, which allows for greater concentration and curiosity: the building blocks to innovation. Our campus sits on 80 acres in the quiet hills of the Piney Woods region in East Texas. Between sessions, participants are invited to walk and enjoy the nature to recharge and be inspired. Sometimes, the only way to think outside the box is to physically go outside of the box that is your usual office. Collaboration from a Place of TrustEach Immersive Innovation begins the night before with a team dinner. We eat delicious food, have engaging conversations, and blow off steam before diving into work. It’s a lot of fun, but it also serves an important purpose: collaboration.\nAn international study by Google and the Future Foundation found an 81 percent correlation between collaboration and innovation. The easiest way to get people to collaborate is to stick them in a room together. That’s still not a guarantee, though. Ego often comes into play. People don’t want to be humiliated, especially among their peers and in professional situations. If they feel like they will be judged, they won’t share their ideas as freely, afraid of ridicule and dismissal. Real innovation is risky. It requires trust, and trust is built and solidified through connection. During Immersive Innovation, the group stays on the PCDworks campus the entire time. There’s not only a shared dining room, but a gym and a game room to go along with eight guest rooms with private bathrooms. The close proximity allows for spontaneous social interactions and greater connection, and with connection comes a reduction of risk of humiliation and an opening of the parts of the mind that allows for innovative thoughts.\nBy creating an environment of psychological safety, we can all leave our egos at the door and start innovating, with humility and curiosity.\nA Quiet Place for People to Come ThinkThe idea for the PCDworks campus was first planted in a Dodge minivan. As founders Mike and Donna commuted from Toledo to Detroit, they talked: about innovation and their plans for the future. They knew if you wanted to innovate, you needed to get people out of their glass towers to someplace that allowed focus, creativity, and connection. The dream was simple: a quiet place for people to come to think. Today that dream is a reality. PCDworks’ peaceful, remote 80-acre campus is a place for focus, creativity, and connection. Welcome to innovation.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/start-innovating-in-just-3-days-with-immersive-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Start Innovating in Just 3 Days with Immersive Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"Let’s say two inventors have the same idea at the same time. The only difference is their location. One is based in Ohio, and the other is based in Texas. Who will be more successful? If you look at patent numbers, the data favors Texas. According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, across a five-year period, just three states—California, New York, and Texas—accounted for more than one-third (36.5 percent) of all the nation’s patents.\nIn a way, this question of Ohio versus Texas is exactly what the PCDworks founders, Mike and Donna Rainone, faced more than twenty-five years ago. Mike and Donna lived in Ohio when they first dreamed up the idea for PCDworks, but when it came time to start realizing that dream, they chose to build in Texas.\nWhy? Because location matters. Geography influences innovation in a number of ways, from the concentration of talent and intellectual capital to financial investment to the availability of entrepreneur/innovator support systems. Much has already been written about these factors, so let’s focus on the other subtle but powerful element at play: geographic mindset.\nWhere You Are Influences How You ThinkWith an area of almost 3.8 million square miles and more than 330 million people, the United States is the fourth largest country in the world by area and the third largest by population. With so many people spread across so much land, distinct regions have naturally formed. From food to accents to dominant industries to mindset, where you are in the United States has an impact.\nWhat do you think of when you think of Texas? Perhaps cowboys or the Alamo or wildcatters hoping to strike it big with black gold. Historically, Texans are known for being wild, resourceful risk takers. The state has built a mythology around this image of the maverick, which has led to a regional mindset perfect for innovation. Consistently curious and persistently passionate, that’s the Texan—and PCDworks—way. Perhaps this is why when you look at lists of the most innovative cities in the world, you’ll usually find three Texas cities near the top: Houston, Dallas–Fort Worth, and Austin. And in the middle of all three, you’ll find PCDworks.\nThe Texan Innovative SpiritThere is an innovative spirit inherent to Texas. A perfect example is Jack Kilby, who worked for Texas Instruments. You may not have heard of Kilby before, but you are benefiting from his invention right now. He designed the world’s first integrated circuit, or microchip. In 2000, he won the Nobel Prize for his contributions. So when you think of Texas, you should think of not just cowboys, but also innovators. If you want to experience the Texan innovative spirit for yourself, drop us a line at hello@pcdworks.com.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-geography-of-innovation-everythings-bigger-in-texas-including-the-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Geography of Innovation: Everything’s Bigger in Texas, Including the Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"In fables and fairy tales and most novels, there’s always an antagonist. For now let’s call them the Big Bad Wolf, a clear antagonist that must be reckoned with. Always, the first step to defeating the Big Bad Wolf, as Little Red Riding Hood would tell you, is recognizing it.\nSo, what is the Big Bad Wolf of innovation?\nI have worked in the innovation space for many decades now, and based on my experience, there is not one single thing you can point to as the Big Bad Wolf. Rather, the Big Bad Wolf is an overarching “innovation hesitation” mindset that has become ingrained in many companies and our country at large. It’s a mindset that claims to treasure innovation but hesitates to actually innovate. This mindset breaks down into three core issues.\nIssue #1: We have become a zero-sum society.In a no-holds-barred competitive environment, those at the top believe that if the competition wins, they lose, and in many cases they are right. In some cases, competition increases the size of the market, but that is often hard to see from the C-suite. Regardless, big corporations are forced to worship one god: profit. As much as corporations may say they want to innovate, actions speak louder than words. All they really care about is the bottom line and how it reflects on their stock price. So they slash wages, keep production costs at a minimum, and in general try to milk every last ounce of profit. Everything is about “maximizing” and “optimizing,” and they dare not engage in anything that risks the ire of the stock analyst. This kind of environment leaves little room for innovation.\nHere’s the great irony: some things in business are a zero-sum game, and innovation is key to winning that game. The market, in general, is only so big, and other companies are constantly looking to take your market share. There’s constant pressure to keep up and stay ahead. If you’re not innovating, you can be sure that others are, and they’ll surpass you.\nIssue #2: We have become beholden to the fiscal quarter. The IBM Institute for Business Value found that organizations that embrace open innovation (meaning innovation that takes advantage of the collective intelligence of the entire business ecosystem, not just internal company knowledge) have a 59% higher rate of revenue growth. A 2021 Deloitte study similarly found that organizations with a leading innovation maturity were almost twice as likely as the average to have revenue increase by more than 20%. Innovation (particularly mature, established innovation) equals more money and faster growth\nHere’s another great irony, though: while innovation is good for the bottom line, few companies embrace and invest in open innovation. Part of the reason is the zero-sum mentality, which leads to secrecy and silos instead of the sharing of knowledge. The other part of the reason is an obsession with the fiscal quarter.\nOur zero-sum society is also a short-sighted one. Corporations don’t just want profit; they want profit right now and always. Corporations do want innovation, but they want those innovations to simply appear as positive cash flow to the bottom line within a few short quarters. They want all the rewards of innovation without any of the costs. The reality of innovation is that it requires both time and money. It’s not a get-rich-quick scheme. It’s a long-term investment. When the biggest concern is the shareholders\u0026#x27; requirement for quarter-over-quarter profits, instead of investing in research and development (R\u0026amp;D) that may not generate a profit for years or decades, this single-minded obsession with the quarterly return will have us race to the bottom fast.\nIssue #3: We have become increasingly risk-averse.As a society, we have also become increasingly risk-averse. This should not shock us. The 2007–2008 housing crash and financial crisis destroyed our comfortable belief that whatever the bump, our major investments, like our houses and retirement, would see us through. Then the COVID-19 recession upended everything we thought we knew about work. Now we face a coming AI revolution and increasing effects of global climate change. Is it any wonder that people are scared? We are scared for our jobs, for our retirement, for our children. What’s not to be scared of?\nOf course, scared people do not take risks. What little we have, we simply want to hold on to. This applies to corporations as much as people. Corporations have been risk averse for years. Investors reward the bottom line, not risky innovation. So corporations opt to let others innovate, and when those others succeed, they’ll simply buy up the solution. It’s cheaper, or so they think, to let someone else take the risk out of innovation and then pick up the low-hanging fruit of the breakthrough. They overlook the fact that the low-hanging fruit of someone else’s risk is usually the fruit smashed and rotting on the ground.\nThere is no innovation without risk, and in a risk-averse society, that means there is little innovation.\nThe Big Bad Wolf of InnovationThis hesitant innovation mindset has put innovators into an impossible position. It’s a catch-22. You must innovate, without being given the environment needed to innovate properly. You must produce results, without incurring any costs. You must forge into the unknown, without taking any risks. Faced with the Big Bad Wolf, many will fail to innovate. They might try, but like in “The Three Little Pigs” fable, they will build shoddy houses of straw or sticks that fall at the first wind and leave them open to being eaten. In the end, though, the Big Bad Wolf doesn’t win. He is outsmarted and outmaneuvered by the third little pig. As innovators, we must resist taking the easy path and innovate anyway. We must build a brick house, so that no matter how much the Big Bad Wolf may huff and puff, he won’t blow our house down.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-innovation-hesitation-mindset/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Innovation Hesitation Mindset","type":"blog"},{"content":"I’ve worked in innovation for more than thirty years now, and I have more than forty patents to my name. I can confidently call myself an innovator. Looking back, though, the moment I became an innovator was actually long before my first job in innovation and before my first patent. My innovator “origin story,” so to speak, started with lasers.\nToday, lasers are commonplace. They are interwoven into our daily lives. Barcode scanners, fiber-optics, laser surgery, optical disc drives—they all use lasers. You can buy a basic laser pointer for under ten bucks. For about twice that, you can get one powerful enough that it can temporarily blind airplane pilots. (This is why you should never point a laser at the sky, unless you want to commit a federal crime and face fines up to $11,000.) Not that long ago, though, lasers were a theoretical dream. The theoretical groundwork for lasers and masers was laid by Albert Einstein in 1917, when he predicted the phenomenon of stimulated emission of electromagnetic radiation. For more than forty years, the laser remained simply a theoretical possibility. Then, in 1960, Theodore Maiman at Hughes Research Laboratories built and operated the first functioning laser. Several other research teams were close behind, each using a different method, and there was an explosion (metaphorical) of lasers: solid-state, gas, and semiconductor lasers in just about every color imaginable. I was eleven years old when the first laser was invented. At that age, I wasn’t reading scientific journals—surprising, I know. A few years later, though, at fourteen, I had to write a paper on something scientific to earn an A+ for my math class. I chose lasers, and I was hooked. Got that A+ too, for what it’s worth.\nA couple of years later, with a few more math and physics classes under my belt, I was thinking again about Maiman’s laser. His laser worked using a flashtube (a glass tube filled with gas that allows you to produce a brief intense flash of light) and a ruby crystal.\nThat’s a stupid way to use a flashtube, I thought. The flashtube pulsed light, and some of it went into the ruby crystal, which reflected the light back and forth, until it escaped in the form of a coherent beam. However, the majority of the light from the flashtube went everywhere other than into the ruby. Why don’t you surround the thing with another housing? I wondered. Then you silver it on the inside so that none of the light can escape, but rather bounces around inside, and you’ll have a higher probability of more light ending up in the crystal, thus lasing. This seemed like a great idea to me, so my next thought was, I should patent this! As a first step, I called up a physics professor at the University of Texas at Arlington (then called Arlington State College). I told him my idea, and he essentially said, “That will never work. Goodbye.”\nWell, guess what. A year or two later, a research team filed a patent for a laser exactly like I’d proposed. That meant they had probably gotten started on the concept and worked out the kinks long before I had the initial idea. I wasn’t disappointed or upset—the exact opposite, actually. I was thrilled. I had an idea I thought was innovative, and the United States Patent Office agreed.\nThat experience, though it never manifested in a patent or product, was a pivotal moment in my life. It was the first innovative spark. Obviously, the fact I turned out to be right was vindicating. (Take that, Professor Ulrich!) But it wasn’t being right that made me an innovator. It was asking the right questions:\nHow does this thing work?Why do people do it that way? Why don’t they do it another way?How could we do it better?No two innovators are exactly alike. That is part of what makes innovation so powerful. However, innovators typically do share common characteristics. As my experience with the laser idea taught me, innovation starts with mindset. At seventy-five I’ve really changed a lot from that seventeen-year-old kid, but one thing has remained the same. I’m still passionately curious and manically persistent. That is what it means to be an innovator.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-patent-that-never-was-an-innovator-origin-story/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Patent That Never Was: An Innovator Origin Story","type":"blog"},{"content":"A psychologist, an architect, and an engineer walk into a bar…\nWhat sounds like a great set-up for an excellent punch line is part of the magic of PCDworks. Our co-founder Mike Rainone just happens to be all three and leverages his background in psychology, architecture, and engineering to ensure \u0026quot;PCDworks solves problems others can\u0026#x27;t,\u0026quot; as James Wardlaw, Former New Products Development Manager at Ingersoll-Rand, has said. As a one-of-a-kind innovation firm, we\u0026#x27;ve been in the business of solving the unsolvable for over two decades.\nYou need more than a fancy pitch deck.\nMany incubators and accelerator programs do a fantastic job of helping startups articulate their ideas and communicate them compellingly during pitching competitions and practice sessions with investors. Selling your idea and getting buy-in from mentors and funders is essential. Yet, we\u0026#x27;ve seen too many companies with truly mindblowing ideas get initial momentum only to fizzle out in the long run because they can\u0026#x27;t turn their ideas into reality. We leverage our experience working with large multinational corporations to support startups in addressing that critical gap between theory and practical application.\nHardtech - Making tangibles beyond apps and software code\n‍\nBig companies are great at making stuff if they know what they\u0026#x27;re making. That sounds obvious, but it isn\u0026#x27;t. While these corporations have financing, sourcing, manufacturing, marketing, selling, and distribution locked in, they often lack the agility and hunger of entrepreneurs trying to figure out the next groundbreaking invention that will finally address a far-reaching problem. Especially if the potential solution isn\u0026#x27;t software code or an app that can be built at desks anywhere in the world, companies are at a loss of where to go for their hardtech needs.\nThis is our sweet spot at PCDworks. We have the team, experience, and facilities to not only help you identify the problem, but test the hypotheses of potential solutions, build and rigorously test preliminary prototypes, and design final prototypes for mass manufacturing.\nJohn Dreu, VP of Global Strategic Development at Elrad International, agrees: \u0026quot;If your company is truly committed to groundbreaking technology development and innovation [...] look no further than PCDworks. The in-house technical team is the best combination of scientists, engineers, and problem solvers I have ever seen. They don\u0026#x27;t take any challenge at face value. [...] PCDworks is the partner you want if the goal is to create something game-changing in your industry.\u0026quot;\nWhat\u0026#x27;s your problem? No, really.\n‍\nDedication to your ideas and belief in your possible solution is essential, but so are the laws of physics. We clarify your core problem by deconstructing and interrogating it from all angles. We help you ask the right questions and apply the technology underlying your potential solutions. Scaling technical hurdles, testing hypotheses, and refining prototypes repeatedly until we\u0026#x27;ve figured out exactly what will work, why, and how, is where we excel. ‍\nIt\u0026#x27;s a team effort, so you\u0026#x27;ll get your hands dirty (and possibly wet).\n‍\nOur team has compared how human and giraffe hearts pump blood while designing a new pump system, developed a subsurface safety valve by working with a world-class expert in Romania, and raced styrofoam and egg carton boats in our pond during an innovation session. Fun is fundamental to creativity, and our team\u0026#x27;s relentless curiosity allows us to combine this playful enthusiasm with the dedication and skill to solve the hard part first. Wharton School Professor Ethan Mollick calls it \u0026quot;solving the salient\u0026quot; that\u0026#x27;s holding back the entire system\u0026#x27;s development. For example, focusing on the sleek, futuristic design of electric cars is meaningless if the battery only allows you to drive for a few miles between charging.\n‍\nHow do we help you solve the hard part?\n‍\nImmersive Environment + Industry-Leading Experts + Disruptive Approach = Magic Sauce for Innovation\nWhen you stay at our peaceful, remote 80-acre campus in the quiet hills of the Piney Woods region in East Texas, you\u0026#x27;ll find everything you need to build anything. Yes, anything. You\u0026#x27;ll have access to our expert team plus 20,000 sq ft of resource buildings, including a guest house with a gym, offices, our brainstorming studio, several labs fitted with proprietary testing tools and apparatuses, and a prototype shop. Multiple 3D printers, two CNC machines, and even a small foundry to cast metal that Mike built himself, are available around the clock. We recently added a pick and place machine to populate our own PCBs to be more independent from supply issues brought on by the pandemic. From mathematical modeling to electronic wiring, mechanical engineering, and finite element analysis (FEA), our team and facility offer comprehensive ideation, creation, testing, and design capabilities.\nWhat makes the PCDworks process truly disruptive and innovative?\n‍\nWhen we invite new clients to our immersive ideation™ process on campus, the first order of business isn\u0026#x27;t business at all. It\u0026#x27;s sitting around a kitchen table and sharing a home-cooked meal with you and your team that our co-founder, president, and design maven Donna has prepared from scratch. (Yes, we\u0026#x27;re all multi-hyphenates). But why the family-style meal? Creativity can only flourish in an atmosphere of psychological safety. In Mike\u0026#x27;s words, \u0026quot;You can\u0026#x27;t innovate if you\u0026#x27;re afraid to look stupid.\u0026quot; While having dinner together might seem like a superfluous icebreaker, it\u0026#x27;s the foundation that precedes all the work to come. It\u0026#x27;s an exercise in leaving big egos at the door and level as humans and colleagues. Creativity needs flexibility and playfulness, so sharing some good food, drink, and conversation is essential in setting a collaborative tone before diving into addressing high-stakes problems. Once you hit the inevitable snag in any project, the gloves will likely come off unless you\u0026#x27;ve already established relationships of mutual trust and respect. Our team of industry-leading scientists and engineers always remembers that our creativity and innovative spirit come from our humanity, not our technical skills. Technical excellence is mandatory, but what sets us apart is generating that elusive synergy to create a \u0026quot;whole greater than the sum of its parts.\u0026quot; ‍\nCONTACT Email PCDworks to set up an introductory, zero-pressure meeting to learn more about how we can collaborate.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-pcdworks-approach-proves-american-ingenuity-isnt-dead/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The PCDworks Approach Proves American Ingenuity Isn't Dead","type":"blog"},{"content":"At PCDworks, for more than twenty-five years, we’ve been developing innovative solutions across a range of industries. From oil and gas to healthcare to transportation, from start-ups to Fortune 500 companies—we’ve seen it all.\nEvery project is different, but no matter the industry or the size of the company, innovation is founded on what we call the triangle of success: people, place, and process. If you want to innovate, you must start here.\n#1: The People: Build the Right TeamInnovate is a verb, which means it requires people—the right people—to do it. Usually, as much as companies might say and believe otherwise, innovation is treated as an afterthought. Case in point: innovation is almost never employees’ primary responsibility. Rather, within their forty-hour workload, they are given an hour here or there—perhaps an entire day if they’re lucky—in which to “innovate.” Innovation is simply one more task on their already-full plates. It’s like clipping a bird’s wings and then demanding it fly. Innovation is a different way of thinking, and it is not so easily switched on and off. It is not a task, but a skill set, which is driven by a mindset and must be nurtured and developed. For this reason, the most innovative companies have dedicated innovation teams: people whose primary role is to innovate. By having a team dedicated to innovation first and foremost, you make innovation a true priority, and you give your employees the time and space needed to be innovative.\nIn an ideal world, every major company would have a dedicated innovation team. Realistically, though, we know that’s not likely. Many companies do not have the resources (or are unwilling to commit their resources) for such a team. That’s where PCDworks comes in. We seek to fill the gap, serving as your dedicated innovation team, working hand in hand with you to solve your problems. #2: The Place: Get Out of the WayFor an innovation team to succeed, they require inspiration, immersion, and psychological safety. All of which you are unlikely to find in a 6’x6’ cubicle.\nOur environment impacts us far more than we may realize. As Winston Churchill once said, “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.” The innovation environment will affect how your team thinks and thus will determine the level and quality of innovation you produce.\nThe ideal innovation environment is a quiet, isolated place that provides the mental space and immersion that is necessary for innovative thinking. Then make sure the corporate bigwigs don’t stick their noses in! Nothing kills innovation faster than having a bunch of pencil pushers interrupting your train of thought and breathing down your neck.\nCrafting the right environment has long been one of our strengths at PCDworks. Our campus sits on 80 acres of secluded piney forest, and for each client, we research the problem and then pack our brainstorming studio full of individualized materials to spark innovation. #3: The Process: Spend Your Resources WiselyFinally, the right team and the right environment need a proven process to innovate. Innovation is an art meant to be approached scientifically, because only through the scientific method can you “know” anything. Having a clear process to guide you helps you to spend your resources—both money and time—wisely.\nThe process we use at PCDworks has been evolved and refined over the years. It is founded on the cognitive processes that encourage innovation and the philosophical underpinnings of knowledge-based decision-making. In other words, it is all about iteration and gaining knowledge, as much and as quickly as possible so that you can make the most educated decisions about your next steps. You can learn more here: Our Approach.\nWithout a process, you’re not innovating. You’re guessing. You’re following whims in the hopes they lead somewhere productive. Innovation is too important to leave to chance. You need structure. Our process is not a rigid equation into which you plug black-and-white variables, but a well-vetted strategy that can be modified as the circumstances demand and wisdom allows. It is a combination of practical lessons and psychological theory. It shows not just how to do innovation, but how to think about innovation.\nThe 3 Ps of InnovationPeople. Place. Process. These three things are the foundation of all innovation, the prerequisites that form the triangle of success. Structurally, the triangle is the strongest shape. If you’re missing any one side, though, the triangle collapses. With the wrong people, place, or process, innovation becomes significantly more difficult. Shore up the triangle, and you increase your odds of success.\nInterested in working with us? Email us to set up an introductory, zero-pressure meeting to learn more about how we can collaborate.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-pcdworks-triangle-of-success/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The PCDworks Triangle of Success","type":"blog"},{"content":"A corporation with a strong focus on innovation was looking to relocate out of Seattle. An internal team was tasked with identifying the ideal cities based on a number of factors: cost of rent, availability of talent, proximity to key suppliers, etc. They narrowed the search down to about five options and, research in hand, presented their findings to the CEO.\nThe CEO took one look and said, “These are great places. But we’re gonna go to Chicago instead.” The internal research pointed to other locations as being a better fit for the company, so why Chicago? Because the CEO was from Chicago. You might expect critical decisions, like an organization’s location, to be made based on facts and evidence. Instead, in many cases, they are determined by whimsy—gut feelings, personal opinions, and unexplainable intuitions.\nInnovation occurs at the border of the known and unknown, which makes innovators particularly susceptible to whimsy. In innovation, whimsy has become a plague. If you’re not careful to circumvent it, it can infect and wipe out all innovation efforts at your company. The Problem with WhimsyAt some point in your life, you’ve probably been told, “Trust your gut.” Instinct and intuition do serve a purpose and can sometimes point us in the right direction. The problem, pure and simple, is that your gut is not always right. This is especially true in innovation. Your “gut feelings” are based on the past—a subconscious rendering of your past experiences and knowledge. Innovation, by its very nature, is about the future: new ways of solving problems. Your gut cannot know the right path. It can only make a guess, typically not even an educated one. Too often, that guess turns out to be wrong. There is already so much risk involved in innovation. Do not add to it by relying on whimsy.\nInnovation is expensive, time-consuming business. So when your guess is wrong, it is costly. Not only do you lose all the time and money invested in the failed innovation project, but you harm every future innovation effort. You become the boy who cried wolf. The next time you have an idea, even if it is a great one, no one will listen, and it won’t get funded. This is how you are punished for being overenthusiastic and overspending without any justification beyond whims.\nThe Solution: A Process of RigorInnovation requires guardrails. You need a rigorous process driven by knowledgeable people. (And you have to actually listen to those knowledgeable people!) Without rigor we have slop. Sloppy reasoning, unfounded and untested, places you surely on the road to perdition or at least abject failure. Without rigor, we do not adequately subject our hypotheses to the level of testing to actually “know” something. Go ahead and listen to your gut, but recognize that your gut isn’t saying, “Do this.” It’s saying “Investigate this.”\nA hypothesis—especially one made by your gut—must be tested for validity and repeatability (reliability). The most important of the two is validity. You must know whether your hypothesis is true and under what conditions is it true. If you test your hypothesis without the proper veridical conditions (without putting it into the most realistic conditions), then you increase the number of outside variables that can give false beliefs that the hypothesis is true when it is not. Without proper mathematical modeling for initial analysis or proper instrumentation on the initial first tests of a physical prototype, you have no science, only conjecture, which will allow for personal bias, wish fulfillment, and sampling error to enter into the decision-making process. Rigor does not guarantee success, but it does guarantee knowledge. From knowledge, you can achieve understanding, and with understanding, you can act with wisdom, making decisions based not on whimsy but on evidence.\nA Debt to the Truth Is Always Paid EventuallyLying to yourself—and make no mistake, that is what whimsy is—is a path that inevitably and eventually leads to failure. As the character Valery Legasov says in the HBO series Chernobyl, “Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid.” Whether about power plant meltdowns, product development testing, fibs to our bosses, friends, spouses or kids—all lies incur a debt that must be paid. The debt is paid in disappointment, distrust, and a loss of credibility. It is a debt we cannot afford to pay as innovators. Far better to adopt a process of rigor and seek the truth.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-plague-of-whimsy-in-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Plague of Whimsy in Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"Can’t. This one word can kill innovation before it even begins. As soon as you believe something can’t be done, it can easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy.\nBecause of this, the most creative, innovative problem solvers are often both naive and dilettantes. Dilettantes are “passionately curious,” as Albert Einstein claimed to be, about the world in its many facets and have developed a broad base of knowledge to draw from, but their knowledge doesn’t necessarily go terribly deep. Because of curiosity, dilettantes skim the surface of many subjects but, almost by definition, have holes in both knowledge and understanding. Naivete, on the other hand, comes when you wade into a pool of unknown depth and can’t swim; you are most certainly naive and probably a little nuts. But at least you will venture into the pool. When it comes to innovation, if you’re a naive dilettante, you see the pool but are not intimidated by the unknown depth, so you just jump in. In problem-solving, you know enough to come up with solutions but not so much that you immediately see all the reasons those solutions “can’t” work. With a little bit of naivete, the realm of possibility opens wide. We’ve seen it firsthand here at PCDworks. Naivete in Action: From Impossible to PossibleOne of the companies we incubated developed a scheme to repurpose old oil and gas wells into “gravity batteries.” We worked with the founders to design their system, which involves lifting and lowering a heavy weight to store potential energy that can be converted to electricity when the weight is dropped. One of the problems we faced was that we needed the weight to move at an optimum, rather slow rate when it was being dropped, to generate electricity. Our co-founder Mike Rainone, a self-professed naive dilettante, knew that a gear train (a collection of gears linked together) had to be a solution to changing the rotational speed of the lowering mechanism, perhaps at one meter per second (slow) to a higher speed (fast) that would generate proper waveforms for the grid. With a planetary gearbox, such an increase in rotational speed is possible.\nHowever, our engineers, with a better understanding of the physics behind gearboxes, were quick to correct him. A single planetary gear would not do that; a multi-stage planetary gearbox would be required. They also took great pains to tell him that there is no free lunch when it comes to energy, friction, and efficiency. They pointed out, with the mathematical analysis, that with a typical Chinese-made multi-stage planetary gearbox, because of the frictional losses, the efficiency is only about 60 percent, so that gear train wouldn’t be a viable solution.\nRight now, Mike’s naivete probably seems like a weakness, not a strength, but the story doesn’t end here. With some more research and digging, we discovered German gearboxes where the gear faces are ground so accurately that they remove a significant part of the friction. These gearboxes have an efficiency of above 90 percent. All of a sudden, the solution became feasible. And it all started with naivete. Don’t Assume It Can’t Be DoneHad Mike been a degreed engineer, conditioned by professors and industry, to “know” what was impossible, this solution may never have come to the surface. Just like our engineers, he would have thought, Oh, that can’t work, and we wouldn’t have explored the idea further. Thankfully, because of his naivete, he didn’t know enough to know that his proposed solution was “impossible.”\nA little naivete removes your biases and keeps you open to possibilities. As Mike says, “Don’t tell me why it can’t work; tell me five ways it could work. Even if those solutions are not feasible right now, they could be in the future. Technology is always advancing, and the impossible can become possible.” That’s exactly what happened with the gearbox. Now, this won’t be the case every time. Being a naive dilettante can also lead to impractical, impossible ideas. At the end of the day, reality (and physics) will win out. However, in the ideation stage, it is better to be naive and widely assume that most problems can be solved. Not every idea will be a winner, but that’s okay. You just need one viable solution, and you don’t want to miss out on it because you assume it can’t work.\nSo don’t assume it can’t be done. Embrace the power of naivete. When you don’t know everything (and none of us do), you don’t know what’s impossible, and that’s a good thing. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-power-of-naivete/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Power of Naivete","type":"blog"},{"content":"Hard tech is concerned with solving the most pressing innovation and engineering challenges facing humanity, consistently pushing up against the edges of our imagination. Hard tech is both difficult to create, and literally hard – a tangible device rather than software or code. At PCDworks we’ve developed a proprietary innovation process focused on hard tech – helping you solve the unsolvable. Is the PCDworks process right for you?If you’re wondering if working with PCDworks makes sense for your organization, feel free to reach out (we love one-on-one conversations), but here are some fundamental characteristics that likely make us a good fit for each other:\nYour idea or product is predominantly a physical “hard tech” product.Our expertise in electrical and mechanical engineering, material science, and mathematical and multi-physics modeling gives us the ability to conduct testing and certification up to (1A) Intrinsically Safe UL levels. We also provide Design for Manufacturing (DFM) experience and connections for sourcing and manufacturing in China, Romania, Germany, and the US.\nYour idea has been externally vetted.You’re not the only one who thinks it’s a great idea, but have received some encouraging feedback participating in accelerator or incubator programs, award-based competitions, or have attracted funding such as grants or venture capital.\n3.\tYou\u0026#x27;re willing to put skin in the game.\nYou\u0026#x27;re able to come up with some initial funding which may be augmented by our investors, depending on where you are in your development process and the strength of your pitch.\nYou need help designing or building the prototype.This is where PCDworks excels. Big ideas only matter if they work in reality. This is what we help you figure out with our process. Does your idea work in the natural world or are you trying to bend the laws of physics? Can we find an adaptive fix to a similar problem that plants or other animals have already solved for us? Has someone used similar technology but in a completely different industry or through an entirely different methodology?\nFor an idea to become reality, we must imagine, design and build a solution that works within the laws of nature, takes into consideration chemistry, mathematical probability, and materials science, and works with the human psyche, while being ethical, sustainable, and profitable. It’s a tall order, but it’s exactly this confluence of hard but fascinating and interrelated issues we love to geek out over. The PCDworks Process\nWe gain our knowledge and reduce risk by forming a hypothesis and then testing the hypothesis, time and time again. We\u0026#x27;re committed to getting physical—fast.\nHere’s a quick rundown of our iterative, multi-step, proprietary process adapted from Toyota\u0026#x27;s Knowledge-Based System, as detailed by Ikujiro Nonaka’s “The Knowledge-Creating Company,” in Harvard Business Review.\nRelentless ResearchOur research goes deep and wide to illuminate all the angles of the problem you bring to us, covering everything from the fundamental science, patents, historical roots of the issue, past and current approaches, and competitors.\nIf we’re tasked with developing a new pump, we’ll consider how the human heart pumps blood versus how a giraffe’s heart does. What can we learn from nature, the world around us, even the universe, about the problem we’re trying to solve together? Our intense curiosity leads us down rabbit holes that often unearth the most fascinating insights and opportunities for creativity and innovation.\nImmersive Ideation SessionWe invite you to our 80-acre campus in East Texas for several days to fully immerse yourself in our creative process. You\u0026#x27;ll have access to our expert team plus 20,000 sq ft of resource buildings, including a guest house with a gym, offices, and our brainstorming studio. Together, we generate as many conceptual solutions as possible, then put them through our judgment funnel to reduce them down to the most promising three or four. Preliminary Proof of Concept Testing, Engineering Design, and PrototypingThis phase allows us to refine our concepts and utilize cheap ways to test engineering designs, first on paper, followed by mathematical models. Once we start testing every part of a concept in the real world, we rely on several labs fitted with proprietary testing tools and apparatuses, and our prototype shop. Multiple 3D printers, two CNC machines, and even a small foundry to cast metal are available to you around the clock. Plus, we recently added a pick and place machine to populate our own PCBs to be more independent from supply issues brought on by the pandemic.\nFull Concept Testing, Engineering Design, and Integrated PrototypingWe take everything we learned in the preliminary phase to build a testable prototype that incorporates our engineering design concept. While we were testing bits and parts before, now we’re ready to test a fully integrated prototype. We test the feasibility and reliability of the entire system in real-life conditions to prove out the entire solution. This prototype functions but doesn’t look like the end product. In other words, we only care if it does what it’s supposed to do, not that it looks sleek while doing it. Whether we’re developing an infrared burger grill to reduce grill time and fat content, or testing a solar-powered floating device for water quality testing, we have everything we need to help you build anything. Yes, anything.\n‍\n‍\nDesign for Manufacturing With a tested, working prototype, we now take our industrial design, the nuances of the market, needs of the audience, and budget requirements into consideration to develop the manufacturing design. That final design is once again tested for compliance and reliability with the goal to finalize a “go to market” solution that checks all those boxes and can be released for the first full production run.\nHow does this process separate us from the pack?Most incubators or accelerators provide office space and mentoring that target early business development challenges - things like market analysis, financial modeling, pitch development, and business model refinement. Those are all important.\nHowever, to maximize valuation, you must also make significant strides in developing your technology. Many companies and investors have shied away from hard tech, because it takes so much more time, effort, and money to develop, but at PCDworks the hard stuff is our sweet spot. We love getting into the weeds with you, so you can move quickly through technology readiness levels, develop robust solutions, and use capital efficiently.\nDevelopment and Commercialization Under One RoofOnce your initial prototype is built and tested, tap into our 25 years of commercialization experience to help bring your product to market. We’ve learned from our decades of experience that too many excellent ideas and hungry entrepreneurs fizzle out between building early prototypes and full commercialization (entering the market with a finished product). We’ve worked with large multinational corporations and small startups alike, so our process always includes mentoring from seasoned industry veterans who can advise you on how to combine the best practices of major corporate players with the agility and drive of a startup.\nWhen you partner with PCDworks, we throw all our weight behind you, including our technical skill, personal passion, network and industry connections, and guidance on everything ranging from pitching and marketing to attracting funding streams, sourcing vendors, negotiating contracts, navigating legal and regulatory issues, and protecting your intellectual property. ‍\n‍\nThink your idea and company are a good fit? We’d love to talk! Contact us.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-proprietary-pcdworks-process-that-promises-breakthrough-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Proprietary PCDworks Process that Promises Breakthrough Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"The Psychology of Problem-Seeking: Why It’s So Hard to Find a Good Problem\nProblem-seeking is the single most important step of innovation. Without a good problem, nothing else matters. It’s stupid to waste your time (and money) solving problems that are not important. It is the surest way to go belly up as a company. Yet people do it all the time. Why? Because they’re idiots, of course. But only in the way that we are all idiots. As humans, we have certain psychological tendencies that can lead to poor problem-seeking. The more you’re aware of these tendencies, the more you can combat them, so let’s take a look at the two big mistakes people make in problem-seeking.\nJumping to ConclusionsImagine you spend hours completing a 1,000-piece jigsaw puzzle only to discover that one piece is missing. Or you read a book to find the last page torn out. Or “Mary had a little lamb, little lamb, little—”\nIncompletion drives us crazy. We don’t like unknowns and uncertainties. We want to tie a neat bow onto everything. So we have a tendency to fill in the blanks and jump to conclusions. As soon as we find an explanation that makes sense, we accept it as truth. We hear thunder and don’t understand where it comes from, so we decide that it is the sound of angels bowling in heaven. Jumping to conclusions is especially prevalent in innovation. Problems don’t provide value and make money; solutions do. So people jump ahead and focus on the solution instead of giving the problem the time it needs and deserves.\nWhen we jump to conclusions, we fail to distinguish between fact (what we have observed and know to be true) and belief (what we infer or assume to be true). This can lead to misattribution. For example, let’s say you have two similar products at your company, one black and one silver. The silver one is selling more, so you decide the color is the problem. Customers just like silver more than black. Is that really what’s causing the behavior? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe the silver one is made of a different material, and the customers like how sturdy it feels. Or maybe it’s because of how the products appear in search results. Jumping to conclusions is making a guess. Sometimes we get lucky and that guess is right, but other times the guess is wrong and we end up focusing on the wrong problem. Confirmation Bias The two most beautiful words in the English language are: “You’re right.” We all want to be right, so we work hard to look for confirming evidence of our beliefs while ignoring the alternatives. This is why we have echo chambers and people will only hang out with a certain type of people, because they don’t want anyone to argue with or challenge them.\nThis is confirmation bias and selective perception in action: the tendency to both search for and interpret information in a way that reinforces our current beliefs.\nThe term “confirmation bias” was coined in 1977, in a study by Mynatt, Doherty, and Tweney published in The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. In the study, participants were tasked with discovering the rules governing a computer-simulated system involving moving objects. They had ten hours in which they could run experiments in the system to test their hypotheses. The researchers observed that participants were much more likely to run tests that would confirm their hypothesis, as opposed to falsify it. Even when participants were presented with contradictory information, they would often continue running the same tests.\nIn the end, none of the participants were able to figure out the rules of the system. This is what happens with confirmation bias. We get trapped in what we already believe, and it prevents us from seeing the whole, true picture.\nCombating Your Biases: Ask the Right QuestionsThe biggest problem in problem-seeking is not asking the right questions.\nWhen people engage in problem-seeking, they often start with “What do we know?” That’s a good question, but an even better question is “How do we know what we think we know?” This question forces you to question what is fact and what is assumption. It encourages you to figure out what is really true or not and can prevent you from jumping to conclusions.\nThe other tendency is to ask leading questions, which imply a certain “right” answer and reinforce our own beliefs (confirmation bias). This particularly happens in focus groups. For example, if you’re running a focus group on ironing boards, you might ask, “You don’t like the way that ironing board is tippy, do you?” Almost no one is going to respond, “Actually, yes, I do like how it is tippy.” They’re going to say, “No, I don’t like that.” You will then decide that tippiness is the problem. If you instead asked, “What do you think about this ironing board?” the participant might reply, “I wish it was wider.” Well, that’s a different problem than tippiness!\nAsking questions is the key to problem-seeking. However, it’s not enough just to ask questions; you have to ask the right questions in the right way. Ask questions about not just what you know, but how, and prioritize neutral, open-ended lines of questioning. That’s how you achieve not just surface-level knowledge, but deeper understanding of the right problems to focus on.\nGood Problems Lead to Good SolutionsProblem-seeking should not be overlooked. Good problem-seeking is part of the essence of how we innovate at PCDworks. Starting with good problems is why we have such a high success rate of solutions. To become a better problem-seeker, approach problem-seeking with an open mind, challenge your assumptions, and consider multiple perspectives to avoid jumping to conclusions and falling into confirmation bias.\nThere’s enough real problems out there in the world that none of us need to be wasting our time working on things without utility. So get seeking!\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-psychology-of-problem-seeking-why-its-so-hard-to-find-a-good-problem/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Psychology of Problem-Seeking: Why It’s So Hard to Find a Good Problem","type":"blog"},{"content":"All innovation begins with knowledge, a collection of facts and data about the world, from which we draw connections and germinate ideas in order to create something new. Our minds are constantly taking in information and filing it away for later usage. The victuals with which we feed our brains largely determine our innovative capacity. Thus, at the root of innovation is research.\nResearch is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose. —Zora Neale Hurston\nBy becoming more focused and intentional with our research, we become better innovators. Think of research like building a well. Instead of digging randomly in the hopes of finding water, we should first try to identify groundwater reservoirs, and then we can dig deep to tap into the water below. So let’s look at the metaphorical groundwater available to us as innovators and how to best tap into it in a way that leads to innovation.\nThe Patent Archives: What’s Already Been Done?Innovation is, by definition, the creation of something new. To ensure you are actually innovating, you must determine what has already been done. Therefore, once you’ve identified a problem to solve, the first thing to do, before you even begin developing a solution, is look through the patent archives, at both current and expired patents. There is no point wasting time and money to develop something that already exists. Researching patents helps you to avoid patent overlap. This is crucial to not only prevent patent infringement, but also to ensure that your own solution can be patented in some way. Patents are one of the most fundamental protections for innovators. If you cannot patent your solution in some way, then someone else can easily steal your idea and reap the rewards without having to assume any of the same risk and investment you did to create the solution in the first place. This isn’t just an exercise to avoid patent overlap. It’s also a way to learn from the past. Looking at old patents can spark new ideas. Even if a patent has expired or been abandoned, that information can be valuable, clueing us in on why other potential solutions were unsuccessful. This historical insight is a fertile ground where new, groundbreaking ideas take root.\nScientific Literature: What Do We Know?After the patent archives, the next big reservoir of information is scientific literature: white papers, studies, reports, and the other content that tells us what we currently know. We live at a time of access to a nearly incomprehensible amount of knowledge thanks to the internet. The sheer volume of information out there has made research both easier and more challenging. Your task as a researcher is not to learn everything, which is impossible, but to parse through the available information in order to uncover the most valuable insights and connections. Be prepared to dig. To a certain extent, research requires a grind. You have to painstakingly sort through the useless garbage to get the information you actually want. Google is your friend, but don’t assume it will give you what you need in the first few results. It may take forty slightly different, rephrased searches to unearth the exact information you need. Focus on the articles that are frequently cited by others. Scientific work often builds upon itself. By searching for the most-cited articles, you will find the crucial, foundational work from which other research has sprouted. Plus, you often must pay to access scientific literature, so you will save money by focusing on the most pivotal articles.\nGet to know the specific, relevant industry. From fluid mechanics to biochar to interfaces, nearly everything today has its own journal, which can give you a cutting-edge picture of what’s going on in the industry.\nDrill down to first principles, then think laterally. Industry-specific knowledge is important, but don’t limit yourself. There are basically only two ways to innovate: create something entirely new or take something that already exists and adapt or apply it in a new way. In practice, the second method is one of the most effective, efficient ways to innovate. Research is to see what everybody has seen and think what nobody has thought.\n—Albert Szent-Györgyi\nIdentify the core principles or concepts you want to understand, then look at those principles and concepts in other industries. For example, let’s say you’re tasked with developing a new pump. Well, there are pumps everywhere: in medicine, in the oil and gas industry, in wastewater treatment. There are even pumps in nature. A giraffe’s heart is a pump that manages to move blood all the way up its long neck. Octopuses and squids move via jet propulsion (a.k.a., pumps). When you research laterally, you can discover new ways of thinking about concepts, unearthing opportunities for creativity and innovation.\nKnowledge Never Ends, So Neither Should ResearchWhat we know today is not the same as what we will know tomorrow. New patents are constantly being filed, and science continues to march forward. Research is a perpetual pursuit. “Chance favors the prepared mind.”\n—Louis Pasteur\nYou never know exactly what piece of knowledge you will need or when, so try to stay up to date on the major developments in physics, chemistry, and materials science. The more knowledge you have from across a wide range of industries, the deeper the well you can draw from, and the more prepared you will be to innovate when the time comes. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-root-of-innovation-research-research-research/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Root of Innovation: Research, Research, Research!","type":"blog"},{"content":"Have you ever struggled with a problem and been unable to come up with a solution, then hours or even days later, the solution came to you like a light bulb? Maybe you were in the middle of a completely unrelated activity, like driving your commute, walking, or exercising. You weren’t consciously thinking about the problem, but your brain came up with a solution anyway.\nOften, this is how innovation happens. The solution isn’t obvious right away (if it was, it wouldn’t be innovative). Then something clicks, and the pieces start to fall into place.\nThe key factor is time. You need time to think about the problem, conduct research, and run experiments. Time is important for another reason too: rest. Rest can be crucial to innovation, not only because exhausted innovators come up with tired ideas, but because rest fundamentally alters the way our brains work. Let’s first look at the science behind why rest is so important, and then we’ll discuss a few ways to incorporate meaningful rest to improve your innovation.\nThe Magic of the Default Mode NetworkIn the words of our co-founder, Mike Rainone, “You cannot ‘grunt\u0026#x27; your way to innovation, no more than you can grunt your way to bowel regularity.” Innovation is not something you can force. Instead of beating your head against the wall and hoping that the wall eventually falls, it can be far more effective to rest. When you step back, you may suddenly discover there’s a crack in the wall, and with a lever, you can easily bring the whole thing crumbling down. Essentially, taking a break can lead to a breakthrough.\nThere’s a good reason for this. When we are at rest, our brains don’t shut off. Rather, a different type of brain activity—our default mode network—switches on. Studies with fMRI and PET scans have shown that when we stop concentrating on external tasks and shift to inward-focused thinking or allow our minds to wander, different brain areas become active.\nAs Alex Soojung-Kim Pang lays out in his book Rest: Why You Get More Done When You Work Less, by examining an individual’s default mode network, you can often predict a lot about them. Studies have shown correlations between the default mode network and cognitive abilities (like performance on fluid intelligence tests and language abilities) as well as levels of creativity and focus. The default mode network has also been linked to memories of the past and imaginings of the future. All of these abilities play a role in innovation, in which we must draw from a wide base of knowledge, make connections between different ideas, and envision new, better solutions to the world’s problems.\nThe default mode network is a relatively new idea in neuroscience, and not all scientists agree on its role. Some even argue against its existence. Research into the default mode network is ongoing, and there is much we still do not understand about our brains. However, the science that does exist is compelling, and we find it hard to deny that (1) our brains remain at work even while at rest and (2) the type of work they do is different from when we are actively focused on a task.\nThe point? Our resting brains are more active than we think, and also a lot more important than we may think, especially in innovation.\nMake the Most of RestNot all rest is created equal. The rest that benefits innovation is not the rest you get when you sit on the couch after a long day and watch TV or scroll your phone. You might be “zoned out,” but you’re still giving your brain a task to focus on. Rather, the goal is to rest in a way that allows your mind to recharge and/or wander, as these are the activities that lead to breakthroughs. For example, exercise, hobbies, and even commutes can be great opportunities to rest. At PCDworks, our favorite method of rest is one of the simplest but also most effective: walking. We have several nature trails that wind through our eighty-acre campus. When participants get stuck in a brainstorming session, we sometimes suggest a break in which they are free to explore these trails. Often, that simple act of resting and walking gets the innovative thinking flowing again. If you’ve been trying to grunt your way to innovation without progress, consider giving rest a try. It may be just what you need to inspire a new thought or to land on a critical connection between ideas. And if you’re interested in a fully immersive innovation experience that incorporates both rest and uninterrupted deep thinking in order to fast-track the innovation process, reach out to us at hello@pcdworks.com.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-scientific-reason-that-rest-can-increase-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Scientific Reason That Rest Can Increase Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"In theory, anyone can innovate. In practice, few do. What sets the innovators apart?\nAt PCDworks, we’re in the business of innovation, which means we’ve had to learn how to identify innovative minds. Usually, when hiring, people look at resumes and past experience. Innovation is hard to quantify, though. It is not simply an action, but a mindset—a way of thinking and looking at the world. In my experience as co-founder, instead of relying on resumes, you need to look deeper, at core character traits. If you want to innovate, you need curious generalists who aren’t fatheads. That’s the special sauce.\n#1: CuriousHanging on the wall of my office is a quote from Albert Einstein: “I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious.” This quote has defined my career as an innovator.\nWhen I was first starting out, Seymour, a housewares manufacturer, came to the industrial design firm I worked for and asked us to find a way to make their ironing boards more stable. Frankly, I don’t care much about ironing boards. I’d rather wear wrinkled clothes than pull out an ironing board. But I was curious. Ironing boards were notoriously awful and prone to tipping, which is not ideal when working with 400°F heat. Surely there was a better design. I started fiddling with some pipe cleaners, and I figured out a mechanism to make the legs spread out as you opened the ironing board, giving it a much more stable base. That was my first design to be patented. Over the years, I’ve filed dozens more patents, and the catalyst for each one has been the same: curiosity. Curious people look at the world and continuously ask questions to try to understand it: What? How? Why? Those questions develop into the questions of innovation: What if …? How could we …? Why not …? The essence of a curious mind is the awareness of problems that other people just adapt to. In the case of the ironing board, many users claimed that their boards were not tippy, as they unconsciously stood on the leg to stabilize it. This compensatory behavior is what the truly creative problem solver sees.\nCurious people naturally want to solve problems. If you pair curiosity with the right problems—problems that are exciting, for which the solutions actually matter—you unleash an innovative powerhouse, someone driven to find solutions. #2: GeneralistAs with any skill set, experience is valuable for innovation. Not all experience is created equal, though. Some people have twenty years of experience, and some people have one year of experience twenty times. Too often, particularly in engineering, people get pigeonholed. I saw this a lot in Detroit in the automotive industry. An engineer would focus their entire career only on differentials or steering columns or some other ultra-specific niche. They kept repeating the same year of experience over and over, which meant their knowledge went incredibly deep, but not wide.\nInnovation is often found at the intersection of different specialties, and it requires a flexibility of thinking. As opposed to specialists, you want generalists—specifically, you want “T” people, whose knowledge goes both deep (the vertical line of the T) and wide (the horizontal top of the T).\nSpecialists do have a place within innovation. At PCDworks, we frequently bring in experts as outside consultants. The best have tacit knowledge that even the most immersed engineer has not considered: essentially, you don’t know what you don’t know, until you bring in the expert. Realistically, though, it is not financially feasible to staff every single specialist you will need. With a generalist, even when they don’t know what they don’t know, they know the right people to ask and can pull the knowledge together into a cohesive solution.\n#3: Not a FatheadRecently my son and I were talking about thorium reactors, and we had a disagreement about how something worked. My son is an Army captain, while I’m an engineer, so I believed I had a better handle on the technology. Then I looked it up, and to my surprise, I was wrong. So what did I do? I said, “Okay, you’re right.”\nIt’s not the most dramatic story, but it demonstrates a key to innovation that many struggle with: not being a fathead. Fatheads are people with big heads, controlled by ego. Fatheads make terrible innovators for three reasons:\nCognitive rigidity does not lead to innovation. Fatheads think they always know best, but as soon as you start making assumptions about the “right” way to do things, you’re limiting your solutions. Innovation requires creative thinking and an openness to new ideas and ways of doing things.Innovation happens in teams. In the past, a single person could innovate alone, but we’re no longer inventing the wheel—we’re inventing complex, intricate, technical solutions. For success, you need a team, which means you need a baseline of collegiality. If you have a bunch of fatheads, they will inevitably butt heads, and progress will stall.Learning comes from failure. You don’t necessarily learn from successes, because it’s often not clear exactly why you succeeded. You learn from failures, where you can pinpoint exactly where you screwed up. Fatheads don’t like admitting their mistakes, so they are less likely to learn from their failures. That means they’re less likely to innovate, because ultimately, innovation is a process of repeated failure until success. For innovation, humility will take you much farther than arrogance.\nBottling the Special SauceInnovation takes place at the limits: the frontiers of understanding and capabilities. Curious generalists who aren’t fatheads are the people who thrive at the edges of knowledge. Curiosity drives them to define and explore the boundaries of what’s possible. As generalists, they can build bridges between different limits, and not being fatheads, they know that the limits are often an illusion and there is so much space for us to grow and learn.\nInnovation is not an exact science, but if you give me a curious, generalist non-fathead, I’ll bet on them every time.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-special-sauce-of-innovation-3-key-traits/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Special Sauce of Innovation: 3 Key Traits","type":"blog"},{"content":"Let me tell you a story about a man who almost saved countless lives.\nThe man was Hungarian doctor Ignaz Semmelweis. In 1846, he was appointed to the Vienna General Hospital and quickly noticed a problem. The hospital had two maternity wards: the first clinic, which was staffed by all male doctors and medical students, and the second clinic, staffed exclusively by female midwives. Pregnant women would often beg to be admitted to the second clinic instead of the first, for good reason. On average, nearly 10 percent of women died in the first clinic due to puerperal fever, while in the second clinic, fewer than 4 percent died. Some women actually chose to give birth on the street rather than risk the first clinic. (A surprisingly smart choice, because such women had a lower mortality rate than those in the first clinic.)\nObviously, something was wrong, and Semmelweis set about finding it. The Breakthrough: From Problem to SolutionSemmelweis tested several hypotheses. In the second clinic women gave birth on their sides instead of their backs, so he had the doctors at the first clinic do the same. No change. Next he theorized the priest giving last rites in the first clinic was terrifying the women, increasing their likelihood of contracting fever. So he had the priest change his route and stop ringing his bell.\nAgain, no change.\nThen a breakthrough came, in the form of a tragedy. One of Semmelweis’s colleagues and a good friend died after being nicked by a scalpel during a postmortem examination. An autopsy revealed that the doctor’s cause of death was similar to those of the women in the first clinic.\nThis was the missing link, the key difference between the two wards: autopsies. The doctors were doing autopsies, and the midwives weren’t. Semmelweis had at long last discovered the cause of the problem, what he termed “cadaverous particles.” What’s more, he also devised a simple, easy solution: handwashing. And it worked. After doctors and students began washing their hands and instruments in a chlorine solution, the maternal mortality rate of the first clinic dropped to just 1–2 percent.\nRemember, though: I said Semmelweis almost saved countless lives. Unfortunately, the handwashing procedures never expanded past Semmelweis’s hospital, and just a few years later, Semmelweis was dismissed from his post. What went wrong? This is the ugly secret of innovation: It doesn’t matter whether you are right. It only matters if you can convince others that you are right. This is where Semmelweis failed.\nThe Breakdown: From Solution to Status QuoToday, the germ theory of disease is commonplace knowledge. In the mid-nineteenth century, however, the medical community believed disease was caused by miasma (“bad air”). Semmelweis’s idea of cadaver particles contradicted what the doctors knew, and so they rejected it.\nWe could easily blame the medical community for not listening to Semmelweis. But put yourself in their shoes. You’ve been working as a doctor for decades. Then this young upstart, not even thirty years old, waltzes in and says that hundreds of years of medical science is wrong. Oh, and by the way, it’s your fault all those women died, because you didn’t wash your hands. Seen from that lens, it’s understandable why the medical community rejected Semmelweis’s ideas. Up against a powerful status quo, Semmelweis did not communicate his ideas as effectively as he could have. He expected the results to speak for themselves, and so he did not bother addressing valid questions: Why did handwashing work? And why did it sometimes not work? What other factors might be at play? In a way, Semmelweis’s idea of cadaverous particles was not a well-researched theory so much as a hunch that happened to be correct. As Professor Carl Edvard Marius Levy, head of the Danish Maternity Institute at Copenhagen, wrote, “His opinions are not clear enough and his findings not exact enough to qualify as scientifically founded.” Over the years, in response to the criticism, Semmelweis began writing open, increasingly vitriolic letters. To one obstetrician, he wrote, “You, Herr Professor, have been a partner in this massacre.” To another he wrote, “Should you, Herr Hofrath, without having disproved my doctrine, continue to train your pupils [against it], I declare before God and the world that you are a murderer.”\nUnsurprisingly, his letters did not endear him to his colleagues, nor did they succeed in convincing others to follow his handwashing procedures. Innovations Do Not Speak for ThemselvesThe conclusion of our story is a sadly ironic one. In 1865, after increasingly erratic and concerning behavior (speculated to be a result of syphilis or early-onset Alzheimer’s), Semmelweis was admitted to a mental institution. Two weeks later, due to a gangrenous wound on his hand, he died from sepsis—an infection not so different from those he had spent his career trying to prevent.\nI’d like to say we’ve moved past the time of rejecting new ideas and innovations simply because they contradict the status quo. If you’ve spent any time in the corporate world, though, you know that’s not true. As a society, we are more risk-averse than ever.\nThis means that, as innovators, one of our most important jobs is convincing others of the need to innovate. Innovations do not speak for themselves. We must speak for them, so we don’t end up like Semmelweis.\nStay tuned for our next blog, in which we will detail how you can make the case for innovation, securing the resources you need so you don’t almost change things but actually change them. To keep up to date and be notified of new content, follow PCDworks on LinkedIn or follow Mike Rainone on Medium.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-ugly-secret-of-innovation-how-one-doctor-almost-saved-countless-lives/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Ugly Secret of Innovation: How One Doctor ALMOST Saved Countless Lives","type":"blog"},{"content":"When someone comes to us with an idea for an innovation, we ask a lot of questions. Many of those questions are expected: What problem are you solving?What’s your solution?How does your solution address an unmet market need?How will you secure funding?There’s one question we ask, though, that often throws people for a loop: How are you going to sell your product?\nWe mean this question practically, not theoretically. It is not a question about marketing or consumer behavior, but a question about distribution. Logistically, how will you sell your idea? What distribution channels will you use to get your product into consumers’ hands?\nIt’s great to have ideas, but no matter how great your idea is, if you don’t have a way to get it into the hands of the user in such a way that it makes money, it doesn’t matter.\nDistribution is way harder than people think, and it has changed a lot over the years. So it’s best to think about it often and early. These three simple questions can guide you to an appropriate distribution strategy.\n#1: Who Is Going to Use the Product?Let’s start with an easy question: Who is going to use the product? List all the potential users. You probably already have a primary target audience in mind, but don’t discount secondary and even tertiary audiences as well. After considering the distribution channels, you might discover that it’s easier to reach a smaller subset of your audience first before expanding into a larger audience.\nGet as specific as possible. For example, perhaps your target user is farmers. Well, what kind of farmers? Industrial farmers? Organic farmers? Fruit farmers? Farmers in areas with late frosts, wildfire risks, issues of irrigation? The better you understand your target audience, the better you can strategize distribution channels.\n#2: Who Is in Charge of Purchasing the Product?This second question is key, because the end users and the people responsible for purchasing the product are not always the same. If you don’t properly target the decision-makers in your distribution strategy, your product will never make it into the hands of the users.\nTake medical products. Twenty years ago, a doctor would go to a convention, see a tool they liked, then go back to purchasing and say, “Buy that.” Then purchasing would do it.\nThen private practices began to disappear in favor of hospital groups, and doctors were folded into the corporate bureaucracy. Now, the doctors are no longer the decision-makers. The purchasing department, due to the exigencies of a shrinking health care budget, tells them, “You will use what we have, and if you don’t like it, too bad.” So now, if you want to sell a medical device, you’re better off targeting medical suppliers, not doctors. This disconnect between the user and buyer can apply to any number of products, including consumer goods. For example, think about the myriad products designed for children. The children might be the users, but it’s the parents who will make the purchasing decisions.\nFor successful distribution, target the decision-makers and the decision-influencers.\n#3: How Do the Decision-Makers Learn About and Buy New Products?Once you understand the users and buyers, you can determine the appropriate distribution channels. Where do the decision-makers go to learn about and buy new products like yours? A key distinction to consider is consumers versus businesses. With consumers, the most common distribution channels are direct sales via the internet (typically paired with social media marketing) and retailers (including physical box stores, e-tailers, and even shopping channels like QVC). Distribution channels for businesses can be trickier. One option is to identify key players in the existing supply chain. Distributing through a supplier who already has relationships with multiple businesses can be more efficient than trying to target each business individually. Also think about where the decision-makers physically gather—like conventions and networking events. This is one of the areas where who you know matters as much as what you know. Once you’ve identified the viable distribution channel(s), you can begin strategizing how to best leverage and gain access to those channels.\nA Path to DistributionThe specifics of your distribution strategy may change as you develop your innovation, but it is imperative that you identify a viable path to distribution early in the process. Otherwise, it’s like building a boat inside a workshop without considering how you’re going to get it into the water. After you spend months carefully constructing, sanding, and painting, you might discover it won’t fit through the door! Distribution might be one of the last steps of the innovation process, but you need to think about it up front to prevent major issues that undercut your efforts.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/the-unexpected-question-we-ask-start-up-innovators/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"The Unexpected Question We Ask Start-Up Innovators","type":"blog"},{"content":"How can you tell when an innovation will succeed and when it will fail? This is a question we’ve long wrestled with. There are no easy, black-and-white answers. In fact, our nearly three decades of experience at PCDworks working with start-ups has taught us that there’s a better question to ask instead.\nHow can you tell whether an innovator will succeed?\nWe’ve seen many great ideas fail to gain traction, and we’ve also seen rough, unproven ideas evolve into incredible successes. The better predictor of success is the people behind the innovations.\nSo, what is it that makes certain innovators more likely to succeed? To answer that, let us tell you about Sonia Dagan, PhD. She’s an innovator we’ve recently had the pleasure of working with, and from the first time we met her, we were certain: this is an innovator who will succeed.\nAn Innovative Vision: Save Crops and Protect PollinatorsSonia has a clear vision: save crops from harmful bugs using LiDAR. It’s an interesting problem—and one that matters. Few things are more important than food to human survival, and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations estimates that, globally, up to 40 percent of crops are lost each year due to plant pests and diseases. Solving this problem also comes with a clear financial incentive, as those lost crops translate to lost dollars. Invasive insects alone account for an annual loss of at least $70 billion. The traditional solution to bugs is pesticides. However, pesticides don’t differentiate between good and bad bugs. They kill both indiscriminately. They can also damage the environment, contaminating water and soil, and they have negative repercussions for human health, including increased risk of cancer. Sonia looked at the existing solutions and thought, We can do better. We can save crops and protect pollinators. The two are not mutually exclusive but interconnected. Pollinators benefit 78 percent of crops grown worldwide and contribute approximately $29 billion to US agriculture. By protecting pollinators, we help crops.\nShe came up with a compelling new solution: LiDAR. It Takes a Village As the proverb says, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” The most successful innovators, like Sonia, recognize that you need others’ help to innovate. Sonia received funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and collaborated with USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) groups, who provided a colony of 2 mm ambrosia beetles for her research efforts.\nAs Sonia reared the beetles in her apartment, she soon recognized a problem. Her PhD is in electrical engineering, not entomology. To create the best solution, she would need extensive knowledge of not just LiDAR, but also bugs. So she found and hired an entomologist, who would prove invaluable.\nThen she ran into another problem. To develop the technology, she needed to observe bugs flying in a controlled setting. She needed a wind tunnel. Like most of us, though, she didn’t have a wind tunnel lying around. She had something even better, though: a father who was an ingenious craftsman who could build anything. She told him about her dilemma, and he built her a tabletop wind tunnel.\nProblem-Solving in Action: Persist, Persist, Persist!No sooner had the problem of the wind tunnel been solved than another one arose. Sonia needed to study other insects besides ambrosia beetles. That meant she needed test subjects (a.k.a., bugs), which she didn’t have. Undeterred, she and the entomologist ventured outside and collected the needed insects themselves. On to the next problem: bugs are usually pretty small, and they clearly are not prone to following instructions. The entomologist taught Sonia about insect handling techniques she could use. They started with bumblebees they had captured. They chilled them in her home freezer to knock them out. Then the entomologist wrangled them to a lab table and carefully tied strings around them so Sonia could hang them in the wind tunnel. As they thawed and woke up, they began to fly to try to escape, and Sonia was able to bounce LiDAR off of them to gather the data she needed.\nThey repeated the process with several types of bugs, and then they faced a new challenge: fruit flies. Tying a string around a bumblebee is hard enough. Trying to tie one around a fruit fly is, well, stupid. It was time to get creative again. At the entomologist’s instruction, they got a little teeny toothpick, and with a little teeny drop of glue, they affixed it to the back of the little teeny fruit fly. They hung the toothpick in the wind tunnel, the fruit fly buzzed its wings, and Sonia was able to pick up the bounce of the LiDAR. In this way, she learned how to discriminate between the bug species by the unique signature of the wing reflections.\nDuring the course of this testing, they’d moved into a university lab on the same campus where the entomologist had a lab. Then COVID happened, and the lab was shut down. If it were another innovator, their research might have ground to a halt. Since it was Sonia, she called on her father’s help again, and he turned a basement space into a lab for them. They moved into the basement to continue their work. If there is one certainty in innovation, it is that problems will arise. Sonia’s drive and determination in the face of difficulties was the number one reason we were so certain she would succeed. The Key to SuccessSonia has now developed some of the most effective technology that exists today to identify and quantify insects in flight. So what is it about her that has led to success?\nShe had a great idea, but she didn’t just have a good idea. She is eaten up with the need to innovate, and no matter what problem comes up, she finds her way around it.\nIt comes down to mindset. Innovation is not simply an action, but a way of thinking and looking at the world. The innovators who succeed are the ones who are curious about the world and have the drive and persistence to creatively overcome challenges.\nIf that sounds like you, contact us to see how we can help bring your vision to life.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/this-innovator-is-working-to-save-bees-and-other-pollinators-heres-what-she-teaches-us-about-success-in-innovation/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"This Innovator Is Working to Save Bees and Other Pollinators: Here’s What She Teaches Us About Success in Innovation","type":"blog"},{"content":"Mike Rainone\nIn my last blog, I discussed the invention of the Post-it note, which came about after 3M scientist Dr. Spencer Silver stumbled upon an adhesive that was not very sticky. That “failed” glue was not what he was looking for at the time, but he recognized that it could be a useful solution—if they could just find the right problem.\nThis is an example of what I call bottom-of-the-funnel serendipity, because you look at the bottom of the funnel after a solution has dripped out and then see what you can do with it. The serendipity is in the recognition of a connection between the technology and a problem.\nThere is another kind of serendipity that is at the heart of what genius product creators do. I call it top-of-the-funnel serendipity, since getting the right solution to drop out of the bottom starts with what you put into the top. With just 3 steps, you can increase your odds of top-of-the-funnel serendipity. #1: Start with the ProblemWith the top-of-the-funnels serendipity, instead of starting with a solution and looking for a relevant problem, you start with a problem and search for possible solutions.\nThe best product developers start with a well-defined problem. Charles Kettering, inventor and head of research at General Motors, said, “A problem well stated is a problem half solved.” This is like shaping the funnel to seek the right solution.\nFor example, several years ago, we were working with a Fortune 100 company. They came to our campus here in East Texas for an Immersive Innovation session—three days of intensive brainstorming and collaboration. We began with the problem. They wanted one master key to open all the doors in a building while construction was ongoing. Once construction was complete, though, they didn’t want the key to work anymore. From the base problem, we dug deep into the challenges. For example, if somehow the key was lost, they needed to be able to quickly and easily ensure the key wouldn’t work anymore. Keep in mind that there might be hundreds, even thousands of doors in the building, so it wouldn’t be feasible to mechanically change the lock on each door. So we knew traditional lock systems would not be adequate.\nWith a well-defined problem in mind, we could move on to step #2 and start seeking solutions.\n#2: Be Open-MindedOver the course of our three-day brainstorming session, we unearthed several great solutions and a few wild concepts. The goal was to get the ideas flowing through the funnel, so we could see what would drip out. One of the ideas involved using light to recognize a key shape as it was pushed into a lock. As far as we knew, the technology to do this did not exist, but still, we did not discount this solution. This is absolutely critical. Too many times I have seen engineers toss a solution because they assume that a certain technology doesn’t exist or can’t work the way you want it to. They are unable to dig past the obvious solution and look for a twist. I am not always sure why hardcore engineers and those classically trained in the sciences are hell-bent on proving that something can’t be done, but it’s a major impediment to innovation.\nWhile I work in an engineering function, I was trained first as a clinical psychologist and later did doctoral work in test and measurement and cognitive science. A clinical psychologist never takes a patient’s words as absolutely true without question. They always look for meaning in a stated “fact.” Often, you discover that “facts” are really just disguised opinions or that they are only facts under certain conditions.\nIf your first reaction to something is “It can’t be done” or “That’s impossible,” take a pause. Dig deeper into why you think that is true. Over the years, as I’ve worked with engineers and scientists, I’ve discovered that the more I dig into their explanations on why something can’t work, the easier it is to prove them wrong.\nDon’t ignore the fundamental physics of the universe, but challenge yourself to believe in the possibilities.\n#3: Cast Out for SolutionsAfter the brainstorming session, at a convention a week later, I walked past a booth for a small electronics company. An optical sensor caught my eye, and a lightbulb went off in my head. I’d just stumbled on the technology that could make our idea for a light-based lock work!\nOften, the best breakthroughs are technology based. Having a wide repertoire of technologies to look at enhances the chance that a solution can be found. Working across industries, for instance, is a great way to look for “odd” solutions. The more things you can run through the funnel, the greater the chance the right solution will drip out at the end. So cast a wide net for solutions.\nThat convention had nothing to do with locks, but it provided the moment of serendipity I needed. I had gone to the convention looking for something. I didn’t know what, but by being prepared with a problem in mind and open to the possibilities, a solution appeared. As the Roman philosopher Seneca said, “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.”\nSeek and You Will FindOften, the only thing standing in the way between your problem and a solution is a moment of serendipity. By deeply understandinging your problem, having an open mind, and casting a wide net for potential solutions, you greatly increase your odds for serendipity.\nReally, this is problem-solving 101: figure out the problem, believe it can be solved, and search for potential solutions all around you. We all do this already in our day-to-day lives. Being conscious of the process will prime your brain to look for those moments of serendipity.\nGood luck and good inventing!\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/top-of-the-funnel-serendipity-a-3-step-secret-to-good-luck/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Top-of-the-Funnel Serendipity: A 3-Step Secret to Good Luck","type":"blog"},{"content":"Unlocking New Possibilities with Flexible Carbon Fiber Composites\nThe Stone Age. The Bronze Age. The Iron Age. We’ve often denoted historical time periods by the materials a society is able to produce. Continuing this naming convention, our current era may best be described as the Composites Age. A composite is the combination of two or more materials into something new that performs better or differently than either base material alone. In the same way that the use of stone, then bronze, and then iron revolutionized societies, leading to leaps of innovation, the thoughtful use of composites might be what leads to your own innovation. Composites can improve the effectiveness and longevity of solutions and even make what was previously impossible possible.\nSo let’s take a closer look at some of the most interesting composites being explored today: carbon fiber–reinforced composites. The King of Composites: Carbon FiberThe first composites might have been ancient mud bricks, which have been found with straw included as a reinforcement, ultimately increasing their loading capacity and durability. In modern times, the composites world is vast and varied, including polymers, metals, and ceramics being reinforced by any number of other materials. Chances are, there are composites inside your phone and car right now.\nOf the many composites, carbon fiber–reinforced composites are some of the most popular. Carbon fiber is extremely strong for its weight, resistant to chemicals, and able to withstand high temperatures. However, carbon fiber is almost never used by itself. Despite its many benefits, it does not have much structural integrity on its own. (Carbon fibers are just that: fibers.) You need another material to give it shape.\nCarbon fiber is a little like a cheat code, albeit an expensive one. While carbon fiber has gotten progressively cheaper over the past few decades, it is still pricey, easily costing ten times as much as steel. If you want to increase strength, lower weight, or tolerate extreme conditions, and the project can afford it, carbon fiber might be the solution. Carbon fiber composites have been used extensively across many industries, anywhere performance matters: from racing cars to golf clubs to aerospace vehicles. A carbon fiber composite—reinforced carbon–carbon (carbon fiber in a graphite matrix)—is one of the things that has allowed us to travel to space or, more accurately, to return from space. On re-entry, Space Shuttles reach speeds of 17,000 miles per hour and exterior surface temperatures of up to 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Reinforced carbon–carbon panels are able to withstand these extreme conditions and keep our astronauts safe. And the panels only need to be between ¼ inch to ½ inch thick!\nWhile carbon fiber can seem like a miracle material, there are some limitations beyond cost, specifically around flexibility. The Holy Grail of Carbon Fiber Composites: Flexibility In February 2003, the Space Ship Columbia disintegrated on re-entry. The tragedy was related to the reinforced carbon–carbon (RCC) panels. While RCC is incredibly hard and strong, it lacks impact resistance. A bit of insulating foam broke off and struck one of the RCC panels, damaging it. With the heat shield compromised, the metal substructure was heated to its yield point, and the shuttle broke apart. Typically, carbon fiber–reinforced composite materials are stiff—really stiff, which can also make them brittle. This can not only lead to damage but also limits the use cases for such composites. Imagine, though, if you could have the tensile strength, temperature tolerance, chemical resistance, etc., of carbon fiber but in a flexible material. For us, this is the holy grail of carbon fiber composites and what we’ve been developing. We have completely upended what others might think is possible when it comes to flexible carbon fiber composites by rethinking and experimenting with the types of material paired with the carbon fiber. We have pioneered applications for these highly flexible carbon fiber composites in personal protective equipment and in developing novel actuators. While these solutions are still on their way from the lab to the market, the potential is real and the results are scalable.\nThe Future of Flexible Carbon FiberWhile traditional carbon fiber–reinforced composites have been extensively used, flexible composites are still an emerging field. However, research and development efforts are accelerating the pace of innovation, and the possibilities are exciting to say the least. Sometimes the barrier to innovation is not in the idea, but in the materials available to you. In the Composites Age, who knows what is possible? Partner with PCDworks, and let’s find out.\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/unlocking-new-possibilities-with-flexible-carbon-fiber-composites/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"Unlocking New Possibilities with Flexible Carbon Fiber Composites","type":"blog"},{"content":"From LEGO Futura (LEGO’s product development department) to the 3M Innovation Center to big tech campuses stocked with slides, gyms, and nap pods—people have long sought the secret to building an innovation environment.\nIf you want to build a forward-thinking innovation environment, first look backwards, to Vitruvius. Vitruvius was a Roman architect and engineer. For the layperson, he may be best known for providing the inspiration for Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man. For architects, he is renowned for De architectura, the earliest treatise we have discovered on architectural theory, written during the 1st century BC. His work greatly influenced Renaissance architecture, and still today you can see his impact in modern buildings.\nVitruvius states that all buildings should have three qualities: firmitas, utilitas, and venustas. Firmness, commodity, delight. Or in some translations, strength, utility, and beauty. A building must be strong enough to stand up. It must work for people. And it must delight them.\nThis principle is the foundation for good design of not just buildings, but any environment meant to be inhabited by humans. Firmitas, utilitas, and venustas are the keys to creating a successful innovation environment. The Interplay of Firmitas, Utilitas, and VenustasThough this principle of architectural design may seem obvious, it is frequently overlooked, even by some of the most famous and respected architects.\nCompare two world’s fairs: one in Paris in 1889 and one in Chicago just a few years later in 1893. Both featured grand, beautiful architecture. The centerpiece of the Paris world’s fair was the Eiffel Tower, 330 meters of wrought iron that still stands today and has become the most iconic representation of France. The Chicago world’s fair saw the construction of the White City, with 14 “great buildings” and more than 200 buildings total. However, these buildings were never meant to last. Their white facades were made not of stone but of plaster, and they were derided as “decorated sheds.” The Eiffel Tower had firmitas—a lasting firmness, or permanence, not only physically but symbolically. The White City did not.\nIn the seventies, “the Whites” were a group of five ultramodern New York architects whose houses were pure aesthetic, pure form, and to emphasize their purity, always white. One of these widely renowned architects built a house for a client in which the stairs were reflected on the ceiling and the ceiling was really low. The stairs were structurally sound and breathtakingly beautiful, but as the client said, “Yeah, these are really cool—once you learn how to keep from banging your head.” Or consider Frank Lloyd Wright. He was short, so all of his doors tended to be short. He built firm, delightful houses, but if you were tall, you had to stoop through all the doorways. His chairs were also famously uncomfortable, because they were designed to be aesthetic, not practical. This is what happens when you have firmness and delight but not commodity. Instead of the environment best serving the users, the users must adapt to the environment (or bonk their heads and tweak their backs).\nWhen I was twenty-seven years old, I was enrolled in the Master of Architecture program at the University of Texas at Austin. I took many architectural design classes, and in one of these, there was a group project to design a combined condo/retail space sited on a lake. I pushed heavily for the prioritization of personal space, territory, and crowd control (security) issues. I missed the delight part. I was so rigid in my thinking that I forgot one of the most important things, and the project (and grade) was greatly diminished by my rigidity. Buildings should give you joy, though the art, through the surprise, though the unexpected. We are naturally drawn to and inspired by the things that give us joy. Who would want to spend all their time inside of a concrete box with no windows? (See Russian constructivism for examples of what I consider Gulag architecture.) A building can have firmness and commodity, but without delight, it is not a place people will want to inhabit.\nThere was an unexpected side effect to this design class failure, though. It was a turning point for me. In recognizing the importance of delight, I realized that I wanted to look at delightful, innovative stuff every single day. For me, what was delightful was innovation because it is unexpected, it is a surprise. Though I ultimately decided to leave architecture, my study of architecture did not go to waste. From my architectural school time I found the love of my life, the bearer of my children and the co-founder of PCDworks, Donna Rainone. She is the designer of all of the buildings on the PCDworks campus, landscape architect, den mother to a herd of children and engineers, and the president of PCDworks. We applied the principles we shared and the dreams that we built together and thoughtfully designed the PCDworks campus to be the ultimate innovation environment.\nApplying Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas to Innovation EnvironmentsSo, how can we apply this principle of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas to innovation environments?\nFirmness in an innovation environment is about predictable comfort, with no jarring surprises. When the environment is predictable, there is a sense of safety, stability, and long-lasting permanence. With predictability, you’re not worried about getting yelled at or the WiFi going out or your boss sticking their head in your cubicle. When you’re not wasting brain power on unproductive stress and worrying, you can instead devote your energies to thinking about the problem you want to solve. Commodity is a measure of usefulness and convenience. So ask yourself, “What tools, resources, and spaces will make it easier and more convenient to innovate?” Consider both the tangible and the intangible. For example, on the PCDworks campus, we have a state-of-the-art machine shop, several 3D printers, a pick-n-place machine to make circuit boards, prototyping equipment, testing hardware, and engineering software, so we can move ideas from the page to the real world. That increases the environment’s utility. However, just as, if not more, important is the simple fact that the campus is remote, free from distractions, allowing for uninterrupted deep thinking. That quietude is invaluable to a commodious environment.\nFinally, delight. Do not underestimate the value of delight, for delight and creativity often go hand in hand. As the Shining taught us: \u0026quot;All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.\u0026quot; If you try to think outside of the metaphorical box while stuck inside of a physical box, you will go out of your damn mind, being preoccupied with the minutiae of day-to-day nuisance. So find ways to incorporate delight into your environment, like access to nature or non-work socialization. This will help reduce stress, create the space needed for creativity, and keep you from going insane. We Are Designed by Our DesigningAs Winston Churchill said, “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.”.\nThe environments we design matter, because we are consciously and subconsciously influenced by our environments. The way you would behave in a grungy dive bar is very different from how you would behave in a sterile, brightly lit lab. Our environments have an impact not just on how we act, but how we think. So design your innovation environment wisely, with firmitas, utilitas, and venustas.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/what-architecture-teaches-us-about-innovation-environments-firmitas-utilitas-and-venustas/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"What Architecture Teaches Us About Innovation Environments: Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas","type":"blog"},{"content":"What Makes PCDworks Unique?\nInnovation is the lifeblood of a company, the most competitive advantage you can have, but it is difficult to do and even harder to do well. According to McKinsey \u0026amp; Company, 84% of corporate executives believe innovation is critical to achieving growth objectives. But only 6% are satisfied with their company’s innovation performance.\nWhile all innovation is a challenge, new product development is a beast of its own. It is one of the biggest drivers of growth and revenue, but it is notoriously unpredictable and risky. As McKinsey \u0026amp; Company found:\nMore than 25% of total revenue and profits come from the launch of new products.\nYet more than 50% of all product launches fail to hit their business targets.\nHere at PCDworks, we sit at the intersection of innovation and new product development. For more than twenty-five years we’ve been helping companies develop innovative solutions to their problems. We’ve been successful across a wide range of industries, from renewable energy to transportation to oil and gas to consumer goods. So what’s our secret? Why do we succeed where so many others fail? It comes down to three things:\nMindsetProcessKnowledge#1: An Innovative MindsetNothing is more important than mindset. Your mindset determines how you think. How you think determines how you act. How you act determines your success.\nOur mindset can be summed up in four words: consistently curious and persistently passionate.\nWe are constantly asking questions: What if …? How could we …? Why not …? Curiosity drives us to define and explore the boundaries of what’s possible. Thomas Edison said, “Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.” Successful innovation, particularly product development, requires a lot of persistence. The question isn’t whether you will hit obstacles, but when. One of our greatest skills is the ability to adapt, work through, and overcome the challenges that arise.\nCuriosity and persistence: that’s how we make the impossible possible.\n#2: A Scientific Process to the Art of InnovationHere is the real, fundamental issue of innovation:\nCompanies want to innovate. They just don’t know how to do it.\nConsistent innovation is difficult. Consistent is the key word there. Almost anyone can stumble across a single good idea, but continual, reliably successful innovation is a much harder nut to crack. It’s all about the process.\nInnovation is an art meant to be approached scientifically\nAfter a lot of trial and error, hypotheses and testing, we\u0026#x27;ve developed our own step-by-step, multifaceted process for innovation to maximize the odds of success. You can read more about our process here: Our Approach.\n#3: Specialized GeneralistsWe don’t specialize in just one industry because, to us, diversity is our strength. Innovation requires a flexibility of thinking. As opposed to highly specialized individuals, you want generalists—people with a wide base of knowledge to draw upon.\nWe consider ourselves specialized generalists. We’re specialized in innovation while being generalists at heart. Innovation is often found at the intersection of different specialties. The key that will unlock your solution could very well lie in another industry’s technology. We bring the full breadth of our knowledge to every problem, which lets us see solutions others can’t.\nA Dedicated Innovation PartnerInnovation is a skill, one we’ve been honing for decades. While innovation is difficult, it’s easier with a partner. To learn more about how we can help you bring your vision to life, send us an email at hello@pcdworks.com.\n‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/what-makes-pcdworks-unique/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"What Makes PCDworks Unique?","type":"blog"},{"content":"When a can of paint sits out for too long, the pigment settles to the bottom. If you’re a homeowner painting your living room, you can simply stir the can with a stick as needed. In industrial and commercial settings, though—like car manufacturers and autobody shops—you will have a large number of paint cans that need to remain properly mixed at all times. Therefore, you require a more efficient, reliable solution than stirring by hand.\nA company set out to solve this problem. Individual paint can stirrers already existed, so they decided to scale up that solution, creating a rack of multiple stirrers. To do this, a group of engineers put together a system of pulleys connected by a long belt. You turned the first pulley, and it turned the next, then the next, and so on down the line of cans, until each can was being stirred. They set up the pulleys, attached the motor, turned it on, and … nothing. The pulleys wouldn’t turn.\nOur co-founder Mike took one look at it and said, “Of course it doesn’t work.” He didn’t do the mathematical calculations, but he knew intuitively that with each additional pulley, the force required to turn each stirrer increased greatly because the frictional and viscous forces resisting the movement of the paddles accumulates. You might assume that if it takes .1 horsepower to turn the first pulley, it will take only 1 horsepower to turn all ten pulleys. In reality, because of accumulating friction and load forces, the energy requirement does not scale one-to-one. You need significantly more than 1 horsepower. The motor wasn’t strong enough, so of course the pulleys didn’t turn.\nMike had figured out in a few moments what a team of engineers hadn’t realized in the entire time they were developing the solution. Because of that, VP of Engineering, and Mike’s friend, Michael Docherty told him, “You’re the best mechanical engineer we have,” despite Mike not being a mechanical engineer at all.\nWhat Mike had that the trained engineers didn’t—the thing that made him the best engineer in the room—was a combination of naivete and wisdom and an innate sense of physics.\nThe Intersection of Naivete and WisdomSocrates said, “There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”\nWe’ve previously written about both wisdom and naivete and believe both are necessary in innovation. Yet they seem antithetical, one good and one evil, as Socrates says. How do we reconcile these two seemingly diametric ideas? The answer is found in another quote paraphrased from Socrates: “All I know is that I know nothing.” This is true wisdom: the recognition of the confines of one’s knowledge. Naivete, as we define it, is not the same as ignorance. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, which then creates a lack of understanding and wisdom as well. Naivete, on the other hand, is a lack of complete understanding. One still has knowledge and perhaps partial understanding. There are simply gaps and holes in the understanding. Rather than precluding wisdom, naivete can actually trigger it. While ignorance leads one to be close-minded, naivete emboldens one to open-mindedness.\nThe engineers had far more knowledge and understanding than Mike about pulleys and gear trains, but they lacked a more complete understanding of the physics of accumulating forces, and so they did not apply their knowledge properly. The engineers had immediately zeroed in on a belt drive as the best way to solve the problem without considering other factors, but Mike came in with naivete. He did not know what solution was “right” or “wrong,” which meant he was not biased toward any one particular solution. He understood, though, that physics is driven by forces, not mechanisms.\nThat naivete gave him the wisdom to go back to the drawing board. He started throwing ideas out. “Just how do you do that? Why can\u0026#x27;t you do that? What if we tried X? Or we could do Y.” The CEO of the company was in on the discussion, so he looked at Mike’s boss and said, “We could solve this if you let Mike work on it.”\nWith some work on the materials and configuration, they did end up solving the problem and created a working rack of paint stirrers. Knowing Just Enough to Be Dangerous—and InnovativeOften, having knowledge of something is better than having a complete understanding of it, because it is the belief that you have complete understanding that keeps you from exploring possibilities. Being innovative is about knowing just enough to be dangerous and not so much that you turn into a stiff paradigm of conventionality. The true nature of naivete is a lack of limits. When you don’t have complete understanding, and you almost never do, you don’t know what’s possible or not, and you have the wisdom to know that your knowledge may be incomplete. With no limits, you don’t have to color within the lines. You are free to innovate. ‍\n","date":"June 10, 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/blog/when-the-best-engineer-isnt-an-engineer-at-all/","section":"News","summary":"","title":"When the Best Engineer Isn’t an Engineer At All","type":"blog"},{"content":" About PCDworks Home\n/\nAbout\n/\nAbout PCDworks\nConsistently curious, persistently passionate. At PCDworks, it all comes down to knowledge—having a complete awareness of a situation by digging in and testing our hypotheses and testing them again. We're patient, looking at each facet and angle of a problem to understand the nuances. We're constantly looking to define the knowns and unknowns to minimize the risks that inherently come when exploring new territory.\nFor a quarter of a century, we've developed innovative solutions for 50+ companies across a range of industries. And we've racked up more than 30 patents along the way. Our projects span industries including renewable energy, transportation, medical, oil and gas, food processing, military, and consumer goods. To us, diversity is our strength.\nMade up of a core team of passionate and experienced scientists, engineers, and technical development experts, we also call upon a global network of industry and academic resources with deep knowledge and expertise in their respective fields to bring together the right team for your particular project.\nWhen you're ready to get your idea out into the world, we've got the big brains (not to mention, small egos) to make it happen.\nPCDworks is ready to dive in—and deliver. Our team Donna Rainone, AIAPresident Mike Rainone, DPDP, IDSAVice President Bert Sackett, BSEE, MSEEPartner Gary AllbrittonElectronics Technician Scott BammelMachinist Taylor RamirezSoftware / Electrical Engineer Drew PyleProject Administrator Haley RainoneHuman Resources Irene RamirezTechnical / Marketing Specialist Calvin SchlauElectromechanical Engineer Luke DowneyMechanical Engineer Our advisory board Terry BussearB.S. Agriculture (Economics) Rik Heller, BSEE Michael Neal, BSME, MSME \"PCD... was instrumental in moving our intellectual property into the marketplace. PCDworks provided technical expertise and business acumen in a powerful combination exceeding that of any entity I have worked with in over 30 years in the technology transfer arena.\"\nDan G. Davis, CPADirector of Technology Development — Sam Houston State University Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/about/","section":"About PCDworks","summary":"","title":"About PCDworks","type":"about"},{"content":" Campus Home\n/\nCampus\nStep out of your box. Located on 80 secluded acres and nestled within the breathtaking, pine-covered hills of East Texas, the PCDworks campus provides a one-of-a-kind environment where your mind (and body) can freely wander. A spot where fresh air and fresh thought mingle.\nBut don't let the serene and majestic setting fool you. Our campus is home to a full complement of state-of-the-art engineering, prototyping, and testing facilities, and is staffed by some of the brightest minds in the business.\nWe've hosted scores of our proprietary Immersive Ideation™ sessions and have provided expertise in new product development to some of the largest companies in the world. Our quiet, isolated location is recognized as an ideal spot for fostering creativity and sparking imaginative ideation and collaborative thinking that yields accelerated breakthrough solutions.\nThe PCDworks campus sits on top of one of the highest hills in Anderson County in East Texas and is accessed from County Farm to Market Road 315, on the Texas Forest Trail.\nWe consider hospitality part of our core mission. Since our location is somewhat remote, we strive to make visitors and clients feel welcomed and inspired with overnight lodging, good food, and an environment that is peaceful and secluded. Many areas of quiet and inspiration can be found among the 80 acres of woods and walking paths.\nThe campus buildings include a prototype shop, an office with testing labs, a meeting studio, and a game room/exercise space. We can accommodate up to 10 overnight guests in our guesthouse, home, and studio. The campus is designed and developed to be peaceful and secluded from everyday distractions so our clients can focus on creative problem-solving with our team.\nVisitors are welcome to tour our campus. Simply request a tour on the contact page 48 hours in advance of your requested visit date.\nJoin us at our\nHardTech Basecamp The PCDworks campus also features our HardTech Basecamp for those who want to spend an extended period of time with us in a fully-immersed environment as you prepare, strategize, and launch a successful initiative. Here you can focus on the spirit of creativity, innovation, and camaraderie to accelerate your adventure—whatever it might be—to the next level.\nHARDTECH BASECAMP: LEARN MORE Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/campus/","section":"Campus","summary":"","title":"Campus","type":"campus"},{"content":" Cardiopulmonary Bypass System Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nCardiopulmonary Bypass System\nProblem Cardiopulmonary bypass surgery is a time-consuming operation. Every additional minute of surgery decreases a patient\u0026#x27;s chance of survival. Solution We collaborated with an industrial design firm to help our client simplify the bypass procedure by organizing pumps and tubes into a compact structure. We also created designs, developed prototypes, and assisted in preparing a unit that was ready to manufacture. Our team further improved speed and patient safety by inventing a Vacuum Assisted Venous Return (VAVR) which enhances venous flow and reduced the size of the necessary line. Results A cardiac bypass system that reduces the need for blood products, shortens surgery times, and offers greater fluid management options for the clinical team — all of which is proven to decrease morbidity. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/cardiopulmonary-bypass-system/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Cardiopulmonary Bypass System","type":"projects"},{"content":" Careers Home\n/\nAbout\n/\nJob Openings\nWe're looking for a few good people… We're a close-knit crew of professionals, focused on delivering best-in-class innovation and engineering services for clients all over the world. Come join us!\nCurrent Openings All Positions We're always looking for a few good people including mechanical engineers and electrical engineers.\nSubmit your resume if you think you'd be a great fit.\n\"PCD... was instrumental in moving our intellectual property into the marketplace. PCDworks provided technical expertise and business acumen in a powerful combination exceeding that of any entity I have worked with in over 30 years in the technology transfer arena.\"\nDan G. Davis, CPADirector of Technology Development — Sam Houston State University Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/about/careers/","section":"About PCDworks","summary":"","title":"Careers","type":"about"},{"content":" Contact Home\n/\nContact\nSay hello. It all begins with a conversation. Reach out with any questions, thoughts, or concerns and a member of our team will be in touch as soon as possible. Our Campus 410 Private Rd 8315\nPalestine, TX 75803 Working Hours 8:30 AM – 5:30 PM Central Time\nMonday to Friday\nSay Hello +1 903 549 2056\nhello@pcdworks.com Name Email Message Send Message ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/contact/","section":"Contact","summary":"","title":"Contact","type":"contact"},{"content":" H2O Flow Pro Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nH2O Flow Pro\nProblem Bret Berry, an irrigation contractor, was installing a sprinkler system at our location in Brushy Creek and asked what we do. Giving him our PCDworks “elevator pitch”, he responded with an “I wish” (wishes are also a meaningful part of the ideation process in our Immersion Sessions). Bret’s wish was to create a wireless controller that could learn normal flow rates, detect overflows, and allow for a remote shut off. He followed his wish with a question: “Could ya’ll do that?” Since Bret is deeply immersed in the irrigation industry as a contractor, this was instant validation of a market need, at least from one expert in the field, that no other irrigation supply company was addressing. It turned out that many other experts had the same wish. Solution In a partnership with Bret and an outside investor, PCDworks developed, tested, and refined this new product, which is now on the market, that can: Learn the normal flow for each zone, then switch to monitor mode When the Controller detects a high or low flow, the Controller: Shuts off the zone on a high flow Sends a high or low flow alert to Cloud Service Cloud service routes the alert from the Controller to the owner via email, enabling 24/7 system insights and control Results In our “Bridge Manufacturing” lab on the PCDworks Campus, we assembled the first 200 Flow Pro production units that can quickly and easily be integrated into existing irrigation systems. In addition to the wireless controller PCDworks was able to develop and deploy a cloud service that allows the H2O Flow Pro system to provide real time information and feedback about your irrigation system. By having access to timely system insights, contractors are empowered to detect leaks in a fraction of the time and deploy team members where it matters most. Having Flow Pro integrated reduces the need for onsite inspection by maintenance technicians, ultimately saving time, resources, and money. The H2O Flow Pro smart irrigation system monitor is now on the market and available for sale through regional distributors and the H2O Flow Pro Website For more information, check out their website\n‍\nLet's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/flow-pro/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"H2O Flow Pro","type":"projects"},{"content":" Hardtech Basecamp Incubator Home\n/\nServices\n/\nHardtech Basecamp Incubator\nMaking progress—side by side. A basecamp is a strategic spot on a mountain that gives the bold souls daring to reach the summit a place to prepare themselves and their gear for the journey. The basecamp doesn't get climbers to the top of the mountain, but instead prepares them for the trials ahead, de-risking the venture to ensure success. Just ask the founders of Renewell.\nYou'll find our HardTech Basecamp functions in much the same way.\nHere, you and your team will stay on an 80-acre campus in the quiet hills of the Piney Woods Region of East Texas, free from distraction. You'll work on your project in an equipment-rich environment with PCDworks innovation mentors, engineers, and tradesmen — each one available 24/7 to help you design and build your \"hard\" physical innovation. Every day, you'll learn, fail fast, and push forward while avoiding pitfalls.\nOur East Texas campus Since focused, full immersion is the fastest path to success, you can plan to stay a while. You'll dwell in a comfortable guest house on our beautiful campus where you'll live and eat with the founders and other entrepreneurs as family to foster team building and nurture creative problem-solving. The entire experience is designed to focus the spirit of creativity and camaraderie and accelerate your project to the next stage.\nWe strive to make campers happy HardTech Basecamp teams with PCDworks where our engineers work every day in the product development business. You'll have access to these professionals as well as to our facilities — a machine shop workspace, office space to continue to work on the \"paperwork\" part of your project, and conference rooms for team meetings.\nYou also have access to our engineering and office software, our video studio, 3D printing, prototyping equipment, and testing hardware, which can save you precious time and capital. There's even a gym and a game room to go along with 8 guest rooms with private bathrooms and queen-size beds. In short, we have everything you need to be a happy — and highly productive — camper.\nRenewell Case Study Renewell: A Basecamp Success Story What if abandoned oil wells could serve as energy storage units for renewables like wind and solar? Texas startup Renewell Energy saw an opportunity, and engaged PCDworks to help bring it to life. Here's what separates us from the pack Most incubators or accelerators provide office space and mentoring that target early business development challenges — things like market analysis, financial modeling, pitch development, and business model refinement.\nBut to maximize valuation, your startup must also make significant strides in developing your technology. HardTech Basecamp enables you to move quickly through technology readiness levels, develop robust solutions, and use capital efficiently.\nHow? With our expertise in electrical, mechanical, and software engineering, plus material science and mathematical and multi-physics modeling. With our ability to conduct testing and certification up to (1A) Intrinsically Safe UL levels. And with our Design for Manufacturing (DFM) experience and manufacturing and sourcing connections in China, Romania, Germany, and the US.\nOnce your initial prototype is built and tested, tap into our 25 years of commercialization experience to help with what Thomas Edison called the \"99% Perspiration\" part of innovation: bringing your product into the marketplace.\nThis broad set of capabilities, coupled with our diverse skill set, is what allows us to help you get your product to market fast.\nIs HardTech Basecamp right for you? Chances are we're a good fit, if: Your idea or product is predominantly a physical \"hardtech\" product, though we do electronics, hardware and software well. Your idea has been externally vetted (Accelerator, Award-based competition, Awarded a Grant, Other Incubator, Entrepreneurial Program). Your group has a vetted idea but needs help designing or building the prototype. You're passionate and motivated about innovation and technology. You're willing to put skin in the game, meaning you can come with some initial funding which may be augmented by our investors, depending on where you are in your development process and the strength of your \"pitch.\" Does this sound like you? Let's connect. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/services/hardtech-basecamp/","section":"Services","summary":"","title":"Hardtech Basecamp Incubator","type":"services"},{"content":" Health-monitoring Device Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nHealth-monitoring Device\nProblem Body temperature is one sure way of anticipating the onset of infections including COVID 19. A reliable, FDA-certified method of quickly measuring forehead temperature as a pre-screening measure is critical to slow down the spread of infections. Solution Our client had created an optical device for measuring the temperature of the glabella—the space between your eyes, and the place on the exterior of the body which is most representative of real body temperature. PCDworks has helped them over the years with enclosures, mechanical tilt mechanism, sensing methodology and software enhancements. Results A stand-alone kiosk that enables users to quickly and accurately confirm a healthy body temperature or inform of a possible infection. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/health-monitoring-device/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Health-monitoring Device","type":"projects"},{"content":" Immersion Sessions Home\n/\nServices\n/\nImmersion Sessions\nThe Catalyst for Breakthrough Innovation. An Immersion Session is an intensive, multi-day, off-site deep dive designed to focus on your most pressing technical problems. We collaboratively generate hundreds of ideas and identify critical, feasible solutions in a distraction-free environment.\nThe Three Pillars of Innovation Place The Optimal Setting Our sessions are hosted at our campus in rural East Texas. This beautiful and serene off-site setting is intentional: shared meals and a cohesive group environment block outside distractions, creating the optimal atmosphere for unfettered creativity and focus.\nProcess Scientifically-Based Creativity Enhancement Our immersive process is grounded in cognitive psychology, specifically engineered to enhance the creative process. We create the conditions for a free flow of ideas, allowing peripheral opportunities and serendipitous moments to emerge organically.\nPeople The Power of T-Types and Experts Our core team consists of \"T-Types\"—individuals with broad knowledge across many technical areas and deep expertise in select fields. We also bring in outside experts to provide fresh perspectives, serve as \"sanity checks,\" and significantly broaden the scope of idea generation.\nWhile Immersion Sessions are custom-designed for each visiting team, here are the simple building blocks:\n‹ › 1 2 3 4 Effectiveness \u0026 Results Immersion Sessions work because of the intentional blend of People, Place, and Process. PCDworks and customer teams routinely generate hundreds of high-value concepts during a session, leading to the selection of several feasible opportunities and solutions to immediately pursue.\nWhat Our Customers Say \"No barriers. Away from distractions.\" — Field Operation Manager, O\u0026amp;G Production Service company \"Freedom of concept generation.\" — Design Lead, Medical Products Industry \"The depth of knowledge brought to the table and the willingness to get outside the box.\" — VP of Engineering, Electric Frac Company \"Interaction, process \u0026amp; methodology of brainstorming, enthusiasm, open mindedness.\" — Business Owner, US-Based Manufacturer \"The dynamics provided by the different levels of execution gave important and influential insight.\" — CEO, Renewable Energy Storage Company \"Relationship building.\" — Production Supervisor, Steel Manufacturing Industry Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/services/immersion-session/","section":"Services","summary":"","title":"Immersion Sessions","type":"services"},{"content":" LEAP Pump Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nLEAP Pump\nProblem How to cost-effectively retrieve the final drops of crude from aging oil fields. Solution We developed the LEAP System, a single artificial lift system that can be used for the life of the well. This linear electromagnetically actuated pump is effective with wells producing as little as a single barrel a day and is seen as a potential replacement for the nodding donkey pump. Compared to the millions of dollars needed to drill a new well, adding artificial lift technology is a cheaper alternative to maintain production from older wells. Results We spent less than a year to design and deliver the 90Kw, LEAP tubular linear motor. Five months were spent in multi-physics modeling and another four months were spent building and testing this new, disruptive technology. ‍\n‍\nLet's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/leap-pump/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"LEAP Pump","type":"projects"},{"content":" Message Sent! Thanks for reaching out. We'll get back to you as soon as we can. Back to Home ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/contact-success/","section":"Message Sent","summary":"","title":"Message Sent","type":"contact-success"},{"content":" Our Approach Home\n/\nAbout\n/\nApproach\nMore Knowledge\n= Less Risk At PCDworks, every step of every problem-solving process is about developing knowledge. We gain our knowledge and expertise by doing research, forming a hypothesis and then testing the hypothesis, time and time again.\nWe've evolved and refined our approach, based on Toyota's Knowledge-Based System, as detailed by Ikujiro Nonaka in \"The Knowledge-Creating Company,\" Harvard Business Review. We employ an iterative, multi-step and knowledge-based process to guide you. No doubt, the best way to test a theory is to see it in action. That's why we're committed to getting physical—fast—and to extensive testing to validation through our multi-phase approach.\nThe PCDworks Approach PHASE 00 Research First, we dig into the technical details, working together to understand the problem at its root and to begin to push the boundaries of our thinking.\nWe study patents, historical roots of the problem, and ways that others may have approached the solution, as well as the fundamental science involved with the issue. Our persistent curiosity kicks into high gear and enables us to go deep into the fundamentals of the opportunity.\nPHASE 01 Immersive Innovation™ During our Immersive Innovation™ session, we delve into the nuances, details, mysteries, knowns and unknowns of the problem—as we wrap our arms and minds around the opportunity.\nThis proprietary approach typically includes three to four days on our campus, where we push everyone to increase risky thinking, thinking about the impossible, to push \"beyond\" out of the box.\nThe goal of the session is to generate as many concepts as possible, put them through a funnel of judgment, and then reduce the number of concepts down to three to further evaluate.\nPHASE 02 Preliminary Engineering Design \u0026amp; Concept Testing The task at this phase is to gain knowledge about possible solutions, to refine the concepts, get the initial engineering designs in place and find simple, inexpensive ways of testing our hypotheses.\nWe commit designs and ideas to paper and start to build out mathematical models and proof-of-concept tests of the most difficult aspects of the project.\nPhase 02A Proof of Concept Testing At every step, we test our design hypotheses in the crucible of the real world. Each design decision is tested to determine whether or not its hypothesis is viable, testing parts of the whole to ensure that viability.\nPHASE 03 Full Engineering Design \u0026amp; Concept Testing After Phase 2A, we have gained enough knowledge about possible solutions to be able to refine the concepts and get the full, integrated engineering designs in place.\nSuch a design is an integration of all that we have learned and leads to the development of a testable prototype.\nPHASE 04 Engineering Design Prototype During this phase, things come to life—your vision is becoming a reality.\nThe engineering design prototype is the manifestation of all of the knowledge about the solution made into a testable device.\nPhase 04a Engineering Design Testing The complete, integrated prototype is thoroughly tested to prove the validity of the design and to look for any issues that will affect the reliability of the solution.\nThe prototype at this phase is a \"function-like\", but not necessarily a \"look-alike\". The look-alike phase will come during the next phase, Design for Manufacturing.\nPHASE 05 Design for Manufacturing With a tested, working concept and prototype in hand, we then develop the full set of documentation for manufacturing.\nAt this point, we have integrated, sophisticated, well-thought-out Industrial Design into the prototype to create a \"go to market\" solution.\nNuances of the market, needs of the intended audience, and budget requirements are all taken into consideration, and we collaborate on the specifics to make sure we're still reducing risk as the vision from the initial phase comes to life.\nPhase 05a Final Manufactured Design Testing The complete, first run devices are fully tested for design compliance, confirming that they work as specified, and undergo reliability testing to ensure that they have the specified life as required. Only then are they released for the first full production run, at the completion of our final phase.\n\"I\u0026#39;ve worked with a lot of outside groups, but Mike Rainone and his team far exceeded my expectations. I was impressed by their talent and breadth of knowledge, and their ability to get things done quickly and cost effectively. If you\u0026#39;re looking for creativity, innovation, attention to detail and results—PCDworks has it all.\"\nTod ShultzFormer Director of New Business Development — Kimberly-Clark Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/about/approach/","section":"About PCDworks","summary":"","title":"Our Approach","type":"about"},{"content":" Projects Home\n/\nProjects\nThe impossible, made possible. The diversity of industries we work in is one of our greatest strengths. Our ability to cross-pollinate information, ideas, and insights from a wide swath of sectors leads to pioneering outcomes. Check out these customer success briefs to see how we found innovative solutions to some of their toughest problems.\n","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Projects","type":"projects"},{"content":" Railcar of the Future Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nRailcar of the Future\nProblem The mantra of shipping via railroad is “ship and pray” because once the cargo is loaded and the railcar is placed into the hands of the carriers, the shipper loses control over the shipment. As a result, most often any damage or loss that occurred during shipment, cannot be attributed to the carrier. Solution Taking end user requirements into account, we developed a suite of ruggedized sensors, some patented, that can detect impact, intrusion, theft, load level, possible contamination, hatch security, load environmental conditions, and along with location. Results Shipment info is available in real time via a PCDworks developed gateway, to the cloud, with some local data aggregation and analysis. In addition, PCDworks provides DFM, and supply chain procurement assistance. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/railcar-of-the-future/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Railcar of the Future","type":"projects"},{"content":" Resuscitation Device Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nResuscitation Device\nProblem When performing CPR on drowning victims and others with respiratory failure, it\u0026#x27;s difficult to maintain the proper lung inflation and rate of inflation, especially while alone. Providing oxygen instead of exhaled air is key to survival success. Solution PCDworks, along with its client, developed the first and only automated rescue breathing system that works on adults, children, and infants. It delivers 100% pure oxygen in the proper flow and pressure regimen for each, depending on the mask selected. Two patents pending. Results Proof of concept tests and demonstration completed within 6 months. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/resuscitation-device/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Resuscitation Device","type":"projects"},{"content":" Secureload Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nSecureload\nProblem Transporting and securing heavy equipment like tanks and humvees with manual chain binders is slow, dangerous, and unreliable. The Office of Naval Research realized that a faster and safer way of securing military equipment could be a game changer when projecting force on foreign soil. Even when tensioned, manual binders loosen as loads settle during transport—putting cargo, drivers, and missions at risk. Every extra minute tightening and re-checking chains puts timelines and people at risk. Solution PCDworks created a smart tie down for the Navy that checked all the boxes for a fast, safe, easy way to bind and release heavy equipment. PCDworks saw an opportunity to leverage the technology developed with a SBIR grant sponsored by ONR and fulfill a need in the private sector for an alternative to the manual load binder. Partnering with a group of investors, the SMART SecureLoad® Automatic Tensioner was developed to address this market. This breakthrough binder for the commercial hauler industry combines push-button simplicity, tension monitoring, and automatic re-tensioning during transit. Chains stay tight, loads stay secure, and safety risks were designed out of the process. Results Safety First: Push-button operation eliminates the injuries common with manual binders. Efficiency Gains: Secure or release a chain in about 10 seconds—saving hours across a fleet each week. Peace of Mind: Automatic tensioning ensures chains remain tight through the entire trip, even over rough roads. Lower Costs: Reduced insurance claims, fewer load checks, and improved driver productivity. Proven Durability: Engineered for all-weather use, with long-life batteries and rugged construction tested on thousands of highway miles. Rapid ROI: While the cost is more than manual binders, the value offered is far greater. The return on investment is short based on time saved, injuries eliminated, DOT compliance and increased fleet up time. For more information, check out their website.\nLet's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/secureload/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Secureload","type":"projects"},{"content":"","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/series/","section":"Series","summary":"","title":"Series","type":"series"},{"content":" Services Home\n/\nServices\nWe love what we do. No matter the discipline, we're always excited to take on new challenges and opportunities to create, explore, learn, and innovate.\nImmersion Sessions An Immersion Session is an intensive, multi-day, off-site deep dive designed to focus on your most pressing technical problems. We collaboratively generate hundreds of ideas and identify critical, feasible solutions in a distraction-free environment.\nRead More Electrical Engineering Because many of our solutions require electro-mechanical subsystems, we maintain strong electrical engineering capabilities across a range of disciplines including firmware design, software design, RF communication, and analog communication systems.\nMechanical Engineering With extensive engineering capabilities, we provide a full range of services, including 3D CAD layouts, electronic circuit design, analytical modeling, and multi-physics simulation. Our mechanical engineering team is dedicated to quickly producing strong designs and performing engineering calculations to verify your concept's validity.\nMathematical Modeling Mathematical modeling is a valuable tool to use when tackling problems that have plagued industries for years. It's especially beneficial for complex and high-risk new product development projects. After all, what we learn from mathematical simulations enables us to mitigate as much risk as possible before the design and building process even begins.\nSensors and IoT In our state-of-the-art research and development lab, it's possible to design, prototype, and evaluate concepts that enable devices and machines to communicate over the internet. We have the engineering and technological know-how to design sensors, gather and clean data, and develop the communication layers and user interface to create an IoT product from scratch.\nSoftware Engineering Our engineers can handle any type of problem from small time-sensitive embedded software to high-demand full-stack web applications. We can also provide cross-platform desktop applications for Linux, macOS, and Windows, as well as mobile applications for Android and iOS.\nPrototyping and Testing At PCDworks, we see prototyping as the method of testing the technical aspects of a product concept. We have the ability to design and build electronic circuits, machine parts out of anything, and produce 3D-printed parts using any kind of engineering-grade plastic. We also feature a full prototype test lab with a complete National Instruments LabVIEW setup.\nLet's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/services/","section":"Services","summary":"","title":"Services","type":"services"},{"content":" Subsea Safety Valve (SSSV) Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nSubsea Safety Valve (SSSV)\nProblem Down hole safety valves are a mission-critical application. Current valves are driven by hydraulics that threaten pollution when the hydraulic lines are ruptured. A non-hydraulic valve is needed. Solution We designed and built from scratch a linear magnetic motor to drive the valve open and a magnetic, low power hold open to ensure fail safe operation. Results Initial feasibility study was six months. First prototype was built within three months after go-ahead. Full-sized prototype took less than nine months from design to completion. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/subsea-safety-valve-sssv/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Subsea Safety Valve (SSSV)","type":"projects"},{"content":"","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tags","type":"tags"},{"content":" WASP Boat Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nWASP Boat\nProblem Our development partner realized that sending field techs out to gather water samples and then ship them off for laboratory analysis was slow, time consuming, and expensive, often leading to a number of challenges in gaining timely, accurate insights about water quality. Solution An autonomous, motorized boat that can be deployed on a body of water, measure various water quality parameters using a fully integrated electrochemical sensor suite, and is capable of sending collected sensor readings to a purpose-built database and dashboard. Results A robust, remote-operated system that enables real-time water quality awareness and data-driven decisions. New mission directions and instructions can be sent from the cloud-based dashboard, allowing for changes to be made to measurement time and locations without ever leaving the office. ‍\n‍\n‍\nLet's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/wasp-boat/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"WASP Boat","type":"projects"},{"content":" Water Cut Sensor Home\n/\nProjects\n/\nWater Cut Sensor\nProblem The flow parameters of a newly developed ratio of water to oil detection method needed to be understood to determine measurement efficacy. Solution Using sophisticated Computational Fluid Dynamics modeling software we determined our client\u0026#x27;s proprietary sensor would accurately measure the ratio of water to oil in production pipe for avery wide flow regimen. We then developed a tool that integrated the sensor into the tool for the downhole environment for “water cut” measurement. Finally, we built a complete flow loop simulator in two weeks, and then ran tests at Tulsa University to validate the modeling. Results Initial study completed in 30 days. Project completed in 6 months. Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/projects/water-cut-sensor/","section":"Projects","summary":"","title":"Water Cut Sensor","type":"projects"},{"content":" HARDTECH BASECAMP INCUBATOR™ What is Hardtech? Your journey to product success is about to begin.\nWork with us Learn more It is a long, arduous journey to turn an idea into a commercially viable product. We know — we've done it, both for our own portfolio and for some of the 50 clients we have served. We have the experience and stand ready to provide the resources to get through design, development, and testing. A typical incubator or accelerator provides office space and mentoring mostly for software development. They help aspiring entrepreneurs with market analysis, financial modeling, and pitch development to gain seed and angel funding. We, on the other hand, provide a nurturing environment and the equipment, space, and engineering mentorship dedicated to designing and building the \"hard\" physical innovations of this world — things like: Linear-motor-driven subsea safety valves The Mars Rover power-board design Swimmer-rescue rebreathers Cataract removal technology The connected railcar IA-certified sensors and gateway Downhole-motor-driven pumps Black water recovery system (Wall Street Journal Technology Award) Next-generation broiler for a major food chain Automated, smart tie-down for the US Navy hovercraft Harmonic drives Sensors and the accompanying communications and computer controls for all of the above Once the initial prototypes are built and tested, companies tap into our 25 years of commercialization experience to help with what Thomas Edison called the \"99% perspiration\" part of innovation: bringing a product into the marketplace.\nWho are we? PCDworks, the founder and driving force behind HardTech Basecamp, is an innovation think-tank situated on top of a secluded, pine-covered hill in East Texas. For the past 25 years we've developed innovative solutions for 50+ companies across 90+ HardTech projects. We have more than 30 patents either issued or in process. Projects span transportation, medical, oil \u0026 gas, military, and consumer.\nWe own parts of four companies that were developed through these HardTech projects, and bring expertise in electrical, mechanical, and software engineering, material science, and mathematical/multi-physics modeling. We conduct testing and certification up to (1A) Intrinsically Safe UL levels, and have extensive Design for Manufacturing (DFM) expertise plus manufacturing/sourcing partnerships in China, Romania, Germany, and the US. This breadth is what allows us to help startups get their product to market fast.\nHow the Basecamp works A basecamp is a strategic spot on the mountain that gives the bold souls daring to reach the summit a place to prepare themselves and their gear for the journey. The basecamp doesn't get climbers to the top of the mountain — instead, it prepares them for the trials ahead, de-risking the venture to ensure success. Your team will be housed and fed on an 80-acre campus in the quiet hills of the Piney Woods of East Texas, free from distraction, working in an equipment-rich environment with PCDworks innovation mentors, engineers, and tradesmen available 24/7.\nYour team will live in a comfortable guest house on the PCDworks campus where you'll live and eat with the founders and other entrepreneurs as family to foster team building and nurture creative problem-solving. The entire experience is designed to focus the spirit of creativity and accelerate the project to the next stage. Facilities include a machine shop workspace, office space for the \"paperwork\" part of the project, conference rooms for team meetings, a gym, a game room, and 8 guest rooms with private bathrooms and queen-size beds. The nearest town is Palestine, Texas — about 20 miles south.\nVISIT HARDTECH BASECAMP Let's start the journey—together. It all begins with a hello. Reach out to schedule a visit or a call. CONNECT WITH PCDWORKS ","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/hardtech/","section":"What is Hardtech?","summary":"","title":"What is Hardtech?","type":"hardtech"}]