The core of the so-called Maker Movement is open access to design, prototype, manufacture and knowledge exchange possibilities. Within this movement, the institutions of Makerspaces exist.
Matthias Friessnig and Christian Ramsauer
Institute of Innovation and Industrial Management, Graz University of Technology
The core of the so-called Maker Movement is open access to design, prototype, manufacture and knowledge exchange possibilities. Within this movement, the institutions of Makerspaces exist. Makerspaces are locations in which individuals, like entrepreneurs, can connect to like-minded persons, use manufacturing infrastructure provided, and obtain support from operational staff to develop new products. As seen in the past few years, the connection between the Maker Movement, entrepreneurs and product development already exists, although it has not yet been scientifically investigated. This paper detailly describes the ecosystem and elements of the Maker Movement. It is shown that a proper ecosystem helps to solve critical tasks in product development. The results push awareness about supportive resources within the Maker Movement and can be used by Makerspace operators, general users, entrepreneurs, and also decision makers. Furthermore, best practice examples are examined in this paper.
A large number of Makerspaces have been established in the past decade. The widespread access to capabilities for designing, manufacturing, and product development know-how in these locations enables so-called Makers to invent and build hardware products themselves. As a result, Makers can bring their ideas from zero to market maturity. Various players such as MakerFaire, Hackster, Arduino and Etsy support Makers in realizing their projects and new players are evolving daily. Despite this development, as yet there is no clear picture of the players in the Maker Movement. However, a framework or a taxonomy is a central aspect to support the conceptual and scientific discussion of an emerging phenomena like the Maker Movement [1]. Also, little knowledge on the requests entrepreneurs in the Maker Movement are making is available yet. Entrepreneurs have identified a new opportunity to start a business and are pursuing that opportunity regardless of the resources they currently have available [2]. New opportunity and products are always the reason for business success and economic development. Product development includes, in the context of this paper, ideation, creation of product concepts, technical designs, necessary preparations for manufacturing and the integration of the outcomes of individual disciplines into a new product.
This research study clarifies the view of the Maker Movement and introduces, based on the findings, Maker Movement elements. A Maker Movement Element is defined as a collection of players, activities, companies, non-profit organizations or platforms that hold a supportive role within the Maker Movement. Several Maker Movement elements are categorized in subsystems. On this basis, a Makerspace is a physical location offering a decent amount of Maker Movement elements to individuals. Herein, this paper aims to describe and structure the Maker Movement. Based on the data gathered, Maker Movement elements are identified, described, analyzed, and categorized according to their similar roles and functions.
This paper is structured in three main segments: The first describes the scientific approach for the identification and classification of Maker Movement elements. The second lays down all the information gathered, which is then synthesized to Maker Movement elements and subsystems. The third gives insights into the usage of Maker Movement elements by questioned entrepreneurs.
This empirical study for the development of the Maker Movement Element framework relies on the identification of players. A player is an activity, company, non-profit organization or platforms that hold a supportive role within the Maker Movement. First, players within the Maker Movement are identified based on a literature review (e.g. scientific publications) and an Internet search with the keywords such as “Maker Movement”, “Fab Lab”, “Makerspace”. Second, observations and interviews in more than 25 Makerspaces in the USA, the EU and China were conduct by the authors. Based on the data collected, all players were described, analyzed, and later categorized to Maker Movement elements according to similar roles and functions. Having a worldwide focus for data collections should lead to a collection of as many different players and Maker Movement elements as possible. Finally, entrepreneurs working in selected European Makerspaces are questioned in semi-structured interviews to gain quantitative data on the knowledge of Maker Movement elements in general and qualitative data on usage of specific Maker Movement elements.
Hatch described the Maker Movement with the following nine principles in his work: make, share, give, learn, tool up, play, participate, support, and change [3]. These nine principles give this research, which was conducted from March 2016 to October 2016, study a first structure.
Hagel, Brown and Kualasooriya conducted a study of the Maker Movement from the perspective of a Maker’s product development process. They split up the process into three steps: Zero to Maker, Maker to Maker and Maker to Market. Different players in the Maker Movement are described in line with these three steps, e.g. reinforcing partners and centralized platforms. According to their study, the Maker Movement itself could not have a significant impact without supporting these elements [4]. All by them described players were recorded for the to be developed Maker Movement Element framework.
Van Holm mentions that especially Makerspaces can offer multiple resources, like coworking spaces, open access of tools and skills, with the potential for impact on the quantity and nature of entrepreneurship. He believes that the costs for prototyping, in particular, can be cut significantly due to the access to manufacturing facilities provided [5]. Also, Hlubinka et al. argue that Makerspaces and certain elements grant the opportunity to speed up prototyping in addition to easier sourcing of parts and the direct distribution of physical products online [6]. Those resources are documented as players and Maker Movement elements.
Many Makers and Makerspaces serve as active agents and movers in the local entrepreneurship scenes. For instance, the founder of the Makerspace Szoil describes their concept and offerings as a location for individuals who make, exhibit and even sell products and can thus be a perfect entry point for starting one’s own business [7]. Hence, Makerspaces also facilitate networking with potential cofounders and strategic partners. People can connect while working and learning together rather than when interacting in business conferences [8]. Socializing platforms for funding, learning, and accessing tools are crucial for cutting development and production costs. Besides, finding access to a supplier and distribution network is more likely. Kalish stated that Makerspaces often receive grants and thereby can promote a variety of activities, hence in such an environment, entrepreneurs have the chance to be more easily noticed by potential investors [9]. Venture capitalists and investors are eager to see the status of the product creations at first-hand. For example, UnternehmerTUM Makerspace is teaming up with companies such as BMW and with private investors to support entrepreneurs [10]. Zwilling concluded, therefore, that Makerspaces tend to be a new kind of business incubator or accelerator [8]. Those statements show that the Maker Movement is not limited to access to tools and machines only. As a consequence, many players within the Maker Movement are included for community building and learning in this study.
Maycotte stress that Makerspaces and elements within the Maker Movement have the potential to increase the likelihood of individuals becoming a successful entrepreneur, those time and costs can be saved by means that are available in the Maker Movement. Access to technologies help to get ideas off the ground, and the support and the collaboration in such Makerspaces advances the development of the product idea [11]. Finally, the Maker community can facilitate the funding of projects and help to recruit talented employees.
Generally, in Makerspaces, personal support and methodical tools are offered which go far beyond basic idea creation activities. On the other hand, equipment such as 3D printers, laser cutters and milling machines provide the capability to create prototypes in a short time, enabling a faster visualization and conception and therefore, an improvement of the continuous development process of products [12].
The field research of this study has a worldwide focus and was conducted in the USA, EU and China in 2016 and 2017. Makerspaces, plus hardware start-up support centers were investigated to identify as many players within the Maker Movement as possible. The following have been visited:
Fab Lab: Aalto FabLab (Finland), FabLab London (United Kingdom), HappyLab Wien (Austria), FabLab Graz (Austria), FabLab IAAC (Spain), FabLab Shanghai (China)
Hackerspace: NYC Resistor (USA)
Techshop/ alike models: TechShop Arlington (USA), Artisan’s Asylum (USA), NextFab (USA), Machine Room London (United Kingdom), UnternehmerTUM Makerspace (Germany)
Makerspaces at a library: Techcentral Makerspace (USA)
Academic Makerspace: CEID (USA), Columbia Makerspace (USA), Miters (USA), MakerWorks (USA), MakerLodge (USA), Design Factory Aalto (Finland), ADD (Finland), Design Factory Tongji (China)
Makerspace at an established company: Autodesk Build Space (USA)
Hardware start-up support centre: BuildIt! (Estonia), WorldMaker Shenzhen (China); HAX (China), Troublemaker Shenzhen Maker Space (China), MakerCollider (China)
Every visit consisted of an upfront Internet search, a tour and an interview with the local staff. First, the Makerspace website was accessed to identify elements. During the tour through the space, the existence of specific players was checked. Finally, the local staff were questioned about what they have to offer, and new players were may discovered.
The literature review, Internet search and field research resulted in a long list of players within the Maker Movement, as shown in Table 1. A syntax is defined for the development of the Maker Movement Element framework: subsystems are functions, described by a noun and a verb; elements are nouns, which include various players of the Maker Movement. In the field research, it was evident that certain Makerspaces have a specific focus and therefore have unique players/elements on offer.
Players within the Maker Movement have been combined to elements based on their similarity. The gathered elements were analyzed again, checked for duplicates, and finally categorized. One hundred twelve players are identified based on the literature review and the Internet search. Twenty-seven visits to Makerspaces plus interviews are conducted, which lead to the identification of 53 additional players. In total, 165 players are documented, which are then synthesized and categorized in 33 Maker Movement elements and nine subsystems.
Table 1: Overview of players within the Maker Movement and synthesized Maker Movement elements
The Maker Movement elements are categorized in nine subsystems: connect with others (physical/live), connect with others (online/virtual), gather knowledge and skills, use of open-source, access to prototyping/ fabrication/ manufacturing facilities, use of CAx software, access to international shipping vendors, get seed capital funding, and get immediate customer feedback. Those subsystems and their relevance are described in detail in the following sections.
According to Inkpen and Tang, networking provides organizations with access to knowledge, resources, markets, or technologies. The key argument to establish a network is that repeating and enduring exchange of relationships create a potential for knowledge acquisition and exchange. Within such networks, the transfer of knowledge manifests itself through changes in the knowledge or performance of the recipient. In contrast, knowledge, especially from outside, can be an essential stimulus for change and organizational improvement [13]. In the Maker Movement, networking is a crucial area that needs to be tackled during the establishment of each Makerspace [6].
A survey conducted in 2015 of 97 Makerspaces in the UK discovered that the most important reason for people to use the Makerspace was socializing (mentioned by 41% of responses) and not making (mentioned by 33% of responses), as might assumed [14].
One Maker Movement element in this subsystem is fairs/events such as MakerFairs, CES or Hackathons in general. This element is especially vital on the one hand to meet potential customers, and on the other to gather inspiration for new product ideas. A different element within this category is the maker-related facility database itself. An online database or a map of these facilities, such as provided at Maker’s Row or fablabs.io, is helpful to increase the likelihood of collaboration occurring between Makers. Another element is the expert roundtable on a specific topic such as the Internet of Things (IoT) developments. Companies, like Meetup, promote expert roundtables.
Technology and globalization affect every aspect of our lives, and the Internet, in particular, gives Makers the possibility to connect worldwide. On websites such as Instructables or Hackster, the Maker community generates a large body of content themselves to provide a way to discover, access, and learn new skills and to exchange information on their latest product creations, summarized in the crowd-based instructions element. Permanent access to open and collaborative networks of educators and Makers worldwide who share ideas, insights, and best practices can generate a significant momentum in product development. This thought is also right for the element discussion forum, in which Makers get answers on their product development issues form a worldwide community.
The open file repository element, like GrabCAD or Thingiverse, describes a related concept. Individuals share their designs with others mostly for free, and everyone can download the files, develop them further and use them in their products.
A different aspect of online communities is included within the community order platform element. Companies like OSH Park give Makers the possibility to upload their printed circuit board (PCB) files. At the same time, other community members can agree to order the same PCB, and later a bigger batch of the PCB is ordered, which leads to cost reduction for every community member.
Most Makerspaces have established a culture that fosters and facilitates knowledge sharing. Learning, networking and obtaining support is already included in the subsystems described. However, knowledge gathering can also be done in a one-to-many style, covered in the online blog that inspires, teaches skills, and helps to solve problems, such as Hackaday. The Fictiv Hardware Guide or the Make: magazine describe in various articles written by experts, design guidelines for specific projects, summarized in the online collection of resources element. The element books/printed magazine can also provide Makers with the possibility to learn new skills. The webinar/workshop/open online course element describes, for instance, detailed video tutorials for specific equipment or material sometimes offered also by companies such as Formlabs.
Learning has become a critical aspect for understanding and adapting to the ever-increasing speed of change. Organizations and individuals need to systematically integrate learning into all work routines because organizations that learn faster will be able to adapt more quickly and thereby achieve significant strategic advantages [15]. The Maker Movement has high potential to influence learning by improving engagement through hands-on and experience-based learning. Tinkering, failing, and rapidly iterating in a Makerspace allow Makers to gain a better understanding of product development processes as well as provided technologies, show new perspectives on for example the usage of materials, and may change the understanding of customers, consumers and creators [16].
The combination of open-source software and hardware can boost product development because a functional prototype can be realized in a much shorter timeframe. The integration of technology is made easy by pre-packed kits with a standardized set of tools, and advanced kits with expansion modules. The open-source software framework element describes various companies and organizations, which publish code snippets or software frameworks free. The open-source hardware element includes products like Arduino or RaspberryPi.
Access to tools for making is an integral part of the Maker Movement itself. Makers today have easy access to industry-standard production facilities provided Makerspaces. The Maker Movement elements within this group are structured along the equipment on offer: digital prototyping machine, woodshop, metal shop, electronics lab, textiles area, and testing equipment for electronics. Affordable access to a cloud computing platform is gaining ever more importance in new product, in addition to the physical infrastructure mentioned. Another element in this subsystem is the possibility of renting a microfactory for small-batch size production, such as the facility at FirstBuild in Louisville, Kentucky.
Computer-aided software for designing and simulating (CAx) is much more affordable today, and Makers can use this on standard computers. This subsystem includes Maker Movement elements such as free 3D design software (e.g. SketchUp or Fusion360, 2D design software (e.g. Inkscape), simulation software (e.g. SimScale) and design software for electronics (e.g. Upverter, KiCAD or Fritzing).
Access to lower-cost, small-batch manufacturing, located mainly in hotspots such as Shenzhen (China) has increased, which makes small-batch production for businesses more economical and viable [4].
The contract manufacturer for low volume element includes, for instance, Seeed Studio, a Shenzhen based company. Seeed Studio has specialized its offer to custom-made PCB and PCB assembly for low volume projects at an affordable price, giving the possibility to test their product in a bigger customer group without the need for significant financial backing.
Another element is a platform for distributed manufacturing such as Fictiv, Hubs [formerly “3D Hubs”] or Protolabs. On these platforms, entrepreneurs instantly get on the one hand a quote for a specific part and on the other hand, they can order the part made from any desired material. These platforms typically do not own any production machinery themselves but have access to a diverse network of companies willing to produce parts even for a tiny batch size. Thanks to these platforms, entrepreneurs can either start their production without taking a significant financial risk or also move up to bigger batch sizes. This type of production can easily be scaled when involving more than one supplier.
Starting from a broad availability base for open-source hardware components, various suppliers for these parts plus extension modules or pre-assembled sensor modules, are now available. These suppliers, such as Sparkfun or Adafruit, are summarized in the element online distributor of electronic components.
Obtaining the right raw material for products can be difficult for an individual because in some cases the correct raw material is unknown and most raw material suppliers ship only to other business partners or/and in big batch sizes. Therefore, players within the element of raw material in low volume/material library are crucial for projects. For example, the German-based company Modulor sells over 30,000 different articles in small batch sizes and also runs material libraries in Makerspaces.
The element crowdfunding describes platforms such as Kickstarter or Indiegogo. Kickstarter is a tool for entrepreneurs to obtain feedback on their ideas, and if they share them, they may be able to get financial support to produce them. In the past few years, over 15m people supported projects with total investment of over USD 4bn [17]. Through crowdfunding, entrepreneurs also get feedback on whether there is any demand for the product they are making based on the amount of committed customers [18].
Another element is crowd investing. In contrast to crowdfunding, crowd investing focuses on equity. Investors provide investment capital for a business and receive ownership of a small piece of that business in return for their money. Companies such as Companisto, Crowdcube, and Seedrs, collect cash investment from the crowd for a project. When it is successful, supporters earn a return on their initial investment.
The human-centered design processes, like Design Thinking, describes ongoing feedback, recommendations, and adaptions of product creations as essential for the success of a project [19].
The peer-to-peer e-commerce element includes websites such as Etsy or Shapeways. Entrepreneurs can start their webshop on those websites within minutes. Then customer feedback in terms of the number of articles sold and later in the form of customer reviews is received. These peer-to-peer e-commerce websites are also an advantageous opportunity for Makers to sell their finished product to a bigger market because of the internationality of visitors. Furthermore, these firms handle the customers’ payment process and the communication between customer and seller.
In various locations, the renting of a facility such as a shelf in an existing physical store to sell products is also popular among Makers, included in the element rent a physical retail space. Kaufhaus Kollective in Munich is an example of this initiative.
The knowledge and usage of the developed Maker Movement elements was checked through interviews with entrepreneurs in European’s leading Academic Makerspaces. These entrepreneurs have already established a company/start-up and worked at a Makerspace. All entrepreneurs questioned are currently working on physical products. Entrepreneurs at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), Graz University of Technology (TU Graz), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (ETH) and Aalto University in Helsinki were questioned. Thirty-two entrepreneurs have been interviewed in total.
All semi-structured interviews are conducted by the authors in person, by phone, or via a videoconference call during the period from April 2017 to July 2018. The guideline used in the interviews originates on the developed Maker Movement Element framework. If necessary, it was possible to deviate from the guideline in order to ask interposed or additional questions. All interviewees were encouraged to expand on their answers, thoughts, and opinions when necessary. All interviews were recorded by the researcher and then transcribed. The duration of the interviews ranged from just over 45 minutes to around 90 minutes. After an open discussion of such player/elements, the entrepreneurs are confronted with the concept of the Maker Movement Element framework for the first time. Each there named element was qualitatively discussed, a common understanding was reached, and it was noted whether a specific element is unknown, known or used in their projects. When a specific element was used, follow up questions were asked to learn more about the frequency of usage, the experience and benefits. Furthermore, the interviewee was questioned on the inclusiveness of the discussed Maker Movement Element framework.
In general, the interviews show that most Maker Movement elements and example companies for those are known and used by the entrepreneurs questioned. However, the actual term Maker Movement or the name of the element is sometimes unclear. It is evident in this context that access to tools and machines in a Makerspace is most widely known and used by entrepreneurs. However, other elements such as the concept of renting a microfactory for the assembly of a first batch are still hardly known. The interviewees’ perception of community order platforms is vast and differentiated. On the one hand, the cost can be reduced, but on the other hand, the timeframe for obtaining the ordered part is extended. Several interviewees see no explicit use case scenario in those platforms.
Open-source electronic hardware is also well-known and widely used. Nearly every entrepreneur interviewed mentioned using open-source hardware in their prototype or final product. Free CAx software, particularly for product design, is also widely used even though most interviewees stated that they do not use the free software offered in the long term because of the limited set of functions these software types provide. Due to the strong connection to a university, some entrepreneurs in the seed stage are still using an educational license for professional software. Free and easy-to-setup simulation software is hardly known and not used by the entrepreneurs interviewed. Surprisingly, fairs such as Maker Fairs are also little used and databases to find other Maker’s facilities are mostly not known, which is may because these resources still do not have many entries in Europe. Not used but known are funding platforms for seed capital and peer-to-peer e-commerce websites.
Besides, the interviews reveal that most players of the Maker Movement are covered within the developed element framework as each entrepreneur interviewed was asked whether any commonly used element was missing, but no new elements emerged directly as a result.
Entrepreneurs tick for each Maker Movement element if it is unknown, known or used. The responses are gathered, analyzed and presented in Table 2 and Table 3. Table 2 shows an aggregation of the derived data based on the described Maker Movement elements subsystems. Elements within the subsystem use of open-source, gather knowledge & skills, and access to prototyping/ fabrication/ manufacturing facilities are overall most used. Most known but not used are elements within the subsystem get seed capital funding.
Table 2: Responses on knowledge of Maker Movement elements summarized in subsystems: unknown, known or used, numbers are the amount of responses divide by amount of elements per subsystem
Shown data demonstrates that 33 out of 33 Maker Movement elements are at least known and that 32 are used in entrepreneur’s routines. A similar overall picture can be seen when comparing the results of each location with each other. These statistics indicate that the defined Maker Movement Element framework matches the work and needs of entrepreneurs in Makerspaces.
The most extensively used elements are online blogs that inspire, teach skills and help to solve a problem (30 out of 32 responses for used), and also digital prototyping machines, such as 3D printers, (27 responses), and metal shop (25 responses). As stated earlier, microfactories are mostly unknown. Other little-known elements are maker-related facility databases, community order platform, simulation software, and rent a physical retail space. Known but not used are elements such as crowdfunding, crowd investment and peer-to-peer e-commerce.
Electronics are essential for all entrepreneurs interviewed, and various elements are used intensively in this respect. These include open-source hardware (25 responses), electronic workshop (22 responses), testing equipment for electronics (20 responses), design software for electronics (16 responses), and online distributor for electronic components (24 responses).
Table 3: Responses on knowledge of Maker Movement elements: unknown, known or used, numbers are the amount of responses
This paper aims to identify, describe and define a structure for the Maker Movement. Based on desk research and various field trips, 33 so-called Maker Movement elements are named. After this, entrepreneurs in Europe’s leading Academic Makerspaces are questioned to learn more about the requests and the usage of certain Maker Movement elements. It is clear to see that many of the identified elements play multiple roles in the product development projects and the ecosystem.
Nevertheless, the structured Maker Movement elements are perceived as a valuable help, as discussed in the following: First, the Maker Movement elements can be a base for a classification of Makerspaces; all 25 in the field research visited Makerspaces can be classified based on the elements they offer, and specific patterns can be identified. Second, it can support initiators in setting up a new Makerspace; the Maker Movement Element framework presents a holistic picture of the Maker Movement, after defining a purpose and focus of a new Makerspace, a selection of specific Maker Movement elements can be made to match the targets and be implemented. Third, Maker Movement elements can be used to evaluate Makerspaces. Such an evaluation can be critical because resources are mostly limited, and a good match between specific elements and user needs is essential for promoting more powerful new product development projects. Requests for specific elements can be clarified through interviews with Makerspace operators and users. Makerspace operators will learn which needs exist and how a Makerspace can serve these. Fulling these entrepreneurs, as one user, are promoted in their product development. Finally, the Maker Movement Element framework can be used for visualization of offered functions within the Maker Movement, in general. This visualization is vital because the interviews conducted show that many elements are currently not known to entrepreneurs but would most likely have a positive influence on their product creations.
It was clear when analyzing the Maker Movement Element framework and visited Makerspaces that only 13 out of 33 Maker Movement elements are directly associated with an infrastructure investment such as the purchase of 3D printers or laser cutters. 6 out of these 33 elements are marked as mixed types meaning that they can be online but are also influenceable by Makerspace operations. These elements can, for instance, be filled with Makerspace’s information and hosted on a Makerspace infrastructure, but they are accessed via the Internet. 14 Maker Movement elements are only Internet-based and have no direct connection to infrastructure or the operation of a Makerspace.
A structured Maker Movement Element framework further provides a good guideline for upcoming research studies. A future research project could compare, based on the Maker Movement Element framework, a higher amount of and more diverse locations with each other. Locations, in which individuals do not have access to any Maker Movement infrastructure, should also be included. This cross-location synthesis can provide a universal understanding of the effects on product development as a result of local Makerspaces and ecosystems.
Based on several statements by the interviewed entrepreneurs time and cost in product development can be saved through the use of several available Maker Movement elements. Besides, the quality of the final product can also be increased in some cases. In today’s fast-changing economy, it is vital to reduce cost and time to market for the development of new products, and it is reasonable to assume that community-shared equipment, infrastructure and mutual interests offer a breeding ground for upcoming businesses. Within the past few years, several businesses have emerged successfully out of a Makerspace, and the chance to further prompt this development is given when the right set of elements is provided.
Table 4: Summary of the Maker Movement Element framework