Capacitive buttons are a bugbear of many modern interiors – but also an innovation that simply didn’t work
Who signed this off? You might well ask, as once again you accidentally trigger a capacitive button on your car’s steering wheel. It is a prime example of when the customer voice, engineering curiosity and financial targets become misaligned.
Jeff Bezos is credited with using an empty chair in Amazon board meetings to represent the customer view. A superb mindset, because all too easily decisions can be overly influenced by internal factors. That could be the pride of an engineering department which has developed a novel concept, or the finance execs chasing reduced costs.
One company CEO has publicly admitted that capacitive switches cost less, but this won’t be the only reason they crept into many car interiors. The theoretical advantage of packaging multiple functions within a single switch offers parts count reduction, too. There is also a consistency advantage. While OEMs strive to source similar components from one supplier, this isn’t always possible. In a car with push-push switches from different Tier-1 suppliers, harmony in travel, force, and tolerance is required to deliver a common brand ‘haptic’. That’s also true for capacitive alternatives, but removing the physical movement makes the job simpler.
There are many practical reasons, then, to opt for the innovation that makes a programme simpler and more profitable. But what does the customer want? Will they appreciate the ‘progress’? Manufacturers will often run a customer clinic, but with new technology there is a risk that respondents get swept up in the excitement of the newness and give their support to something, only to find that the novelty quickly wears thin.
Naturally there will be internal research: interior bucks, HMI rigs and eventually driving prototypes. The pros and cons will be weighed, but here is where bias can enter. Enthusiasm to develop something new, or to achieve a target, can be powerful motivators. Concerns may be voiced at early stages, but these can be lost in the momentum of positive energy.
But when the technology is finally in a road-drivable prototype, the problems emerge. Real-world driving is unpredictable, and drivers don’t always follow the logical process path set out in the lap tests. Now it’s clear that the exciting new technology has real downsides, and perhaps a rethink is required – which is exactly when it becomes clear that this will not be without consequences. Not because the technology has been purchased, nor because the old approach is no longer available, but because unless the programme has developed packaging designs and sourcing solutions for both options, the decision not to go with the new tech now risks a delay. Often the definitive Go/No-Go decision point can be opaque.
Avoiding such calamities requires a client-first mindset and a laser focus on who the car is being engineered for and how they will use it. Every person on the project needs this mindset, but the product manager is the cheerleader for the customer voice. They must think like the client, challenge internal agendas and constantly ask why a specific development is being pursued. This isn’t about killing ideas; it is encouraging teams to solve the problems that matter most to the client. When a team has a unified common goal, it makes the inevitable decisions on priorities easier to agree on.
Car development is long and incredibly complex, and that the buyer has so many high-quality options is testament to the teams that constantly challenge themselves to put the client first. To innovate without the occasional misstep would be unrealistic; capacitive buttons are simply the industry flight of fancy that got away.
