BOX 2.1 The Robotization Design of Everyday Things

Abstract

Consumers often assess a product’s category and form expectations regarding its functions based on appearance. When the product’s actual functionality aligns with the expectations, the result is consumer satisfaction, but when it falls short, the results is disappointment. A robotic thing may fulfill consumer expectations generated by its appearance better than a human-like robot since its functionalities may not align with the expectations. Vacuum cleaning robots, resembling traditional vacuum cleaners, are categorized accordingly, with consumers expecting similar functions. Further, the integration of automation and robotic technologies often exceeds the expectations, promoting consumer acceptance. However, limited consumer acceptance of human-like robots can be attributed to two reasons. Firstly, categorizing these robots as living organisms leads to misaligned expectations with their actual functions, causing dissatisfaction. Secondly, difficulties arise when fitting human-like robots into existing product categories due to their human-like appearance. The expectation of versatile functions associated with humans complicates categorization, leading to dissatisfaction and hindered adoption. In this vein, we propose robotization of everyday things as a design approach that could enhance consumer adoption of robots. In this design approach, designers can explore where robotization is required by observing users’ way of living, including their usage patterns of everyday things; select the targeted everyday thing to robotize; choose the robotic technologies to apply for robotization; transform the everyday thing into a robotic thing by applying selected robotic technologies. A robotic thing that excels in categorization implies that its design is tailored to fulfill specific functions. However, such a specialized robotic thing may have limitations in comprehending user-contextual situations and offering multifunctionality in accordance with those situations. To address these limitations, two design strategies may come in handy: on the one hand, modularization of forms and functions can let the robot adapt and transform to different forms and functions based on contextual situations, to meet user needs. On the other hand, designing robotic things for reciprocal collaboration can provide multifunctionality. By working together, robotic things can offer a wide range of capabilities and cater to diverse user requirements.