Tell us a little about yourself. How did you become interested in your field? What was your education like?

I studied and trained as a product design/development engineer. To my credit, I made deputy design manager at A.P Besson (a leading U.K. telecoms OEM) by age 21. Also at that time, I was lead design engineer for the world's first multifunctional telephone: the 'Venue 24E.'

Later, I had a spell in commercial lighting, taking on the dual role of design engineer and CAD/Concurrent Engineering project leader. I cut my teeth in project management during that tenure.

However, c.1992, I came across an opportunity in the aerospace industry that really appealed to me, and after five years, I made my way up to Aerospace Program director, driving the overall design, development and integration of new platform In-flight Entertainment Systems. I worked with dozens of aerospace companies. The more renowned include GEC, Rockwell-Collins, Boeing, American Airlines and British Airways. I thoroughly enjoyed that experience; the projects consisted of a diverse range of technologies, huge design and system engineering challenges, super-teams made up of hundreds of engineers, involving everything from systems analysis to mechanical engineering to industrial automation to product design to system integration, and more. The development labs looked pretty much like a scene from a Terminator movie.

But by around the turn of the millennium, it occurred to me "Well, I'm doing okay within the corporation, why not do my own thing?" So I decided to write a number of books and papers on system innovation and futures studies. From that, I dipped my toe in consulting, specializing in performance innovation and futuring. My company's brand is "Future First Consulting," an outfit employing three consultants and two researchers.

To be clear, it was inevitable that I would do my own thing as I have a rather inquisitive mind. I'm interested in a great many fields across science, technology, engineering and commerce. If I could give any advice to engineers today, it is to adopt a lifelong learning attitude and develop self-directed learning projects, raise your expectations and set ambitious learning goals, increase your learning bandwidth and most importantly, continue seeking the best, most advanced and most innovative thinkers and practitioners, both past and present.

Who in the field has been particularly influential to you?

There have been many weighty influences in my life. For example, I was extremely fortunate with regards to choosing my career path. At age nine, I entered a competition to design a stage set for a play being put on at the Unicorn Theatre in London. Thousands entered and to my surprise, I won. Then, on the opening night, sitting front row and center, the lights dimmed and the large golden curtains began to rise. Then, flash! The stage lights came on, and there it was.

What was an idea in my head was now in full view on the stage in front of 12 hundred people, "The Spell Bound Professor's Time Machine," flashing with hundreds of LEDs. At age nine, you might just imagine the impact it had. My path was set: I was going to be "a designer, an inventor, a professor." I've never looked back, or changed my mind about what I want to do since that night.

I've had many other cathartic experiences like that. I've also had many inspiring mentors. One of the most influential is Derrick Smith, engineering director at A.P Besson. A man before his time, back in the early 1980s way before Concurrent Engineering became vogue, he organized cross-functional team based product development. Even though I was barely out of my apprenticeship, he involved me as a key member of a vital company project. It was challenging, but I grasped the nettle, and had a number of successes. His belief in me took me to a new level.

These days, it's people such as Eric Drexler, the inventor of, and main protagonist in, the nanotechnology world, and Paul Moller, CEO of Moller International, Inc. and his Skycar concept (imagine, no more traffic jams?). All of these people are revolutionaries, rebels with a cause. It goes without saying you can learn a lot from these guys.

For the past five years, you have been working for the government. How did you come to work there and do you plan on staying?

It all began quite by chance. A government mandarin (in the U.K, mandarin is often used as metaphor for a senior civil servant) had read one of my books, Hyperinnovation, and a number of papers on futures studies. Then, out of the blue, she called me at home. However, I thought that it was my little (six-foot-six) brother, winding me up. He's a real prankster. As you might imagine, I threw an expletive or two (@*!&??), and put the phone—quite gently—down. I then got slightly anxious and dialed '1471' (the U.K.'s last caller number), and got a London number.

"Gulp!"… You might just well imagine the hole I had to dig myself out of. But the Mandarin saw the funny side. So from that lighter side, my work within government began. I was asked to get involved in a number of projects within a number of strategic think tanks, in the role of foresight/insight provider. "So what?" you may ask?

Well, one overriding factor that think tanks and governments have to contend with today is that there is now overwhelming evidence that the rate of technological innovation is accelerating. So it occurred to me that instead of term-based thinking, governments had better start thinking longer-term - 20 years ahead and more. It just so happened that this was a notion a senior cabinet minister was keen on. So I became involved in setting up a new cross-government mandarin department, branded foresight.

The branch is tasked with so-called broad spectrum horizon scanning. There are a number of live projects, ranging across genomics, sustainable energ y, nanotechnology, quantum computing and the future of obesity in the U.K.

As for what's next for me, well, it could go in any number of directions. The U.K. is about to get a new Prime Minister. A new man will be standing next to George Bush on those very august White House steps. So, I'll have to wait and see.

You write, lecture and consult on the New Industrial Revolution. What exactly is this and what do you think it has in store for the industry and for the world? When do you think it will come and what country will it affect first?

There are a number of new technologies beginning to enable this New Industrial Revolution ranging across biomanufacturing, micromechanicalelectronic systems (MEMS), ever refined cybernetics, strong artificial intelligence, immersive virtual reality and last but not least, nanofacturing (or molecular scale manufacturing). Nanofacturing potentially has a huge and flexible range of applications, not unlike the personal computer today.

To give an initial insight into the potential of, for example, Nanofacturing, take the humble grain of sand, which ranges in size from about 100μm to around 1mm. A nanoproduct the size of a granule of sand could contain five billion parts, many of which would be moving components. Following technological trend lines across price-performance, bandwidth, miniaturization, convergence and the rate of adoption, molecular manufacturing in the form of so-called nanofactories, will appear like a bolt of lightening, radically transforming what we now know as the RM industry and its related technologies. But what would this mean? Well, imagine what it would be like to fabricate, say, a new laptop super computer in the comfort of your own home? Imagine what such a capability will do for R&D, the OEM, goods distribution logistics, retail and consumer choice and power? Imagine what it would do for the environment or abject poverty in third world zones?

The New Industrial Revolution will also sweep in an economic meta-transformation. When full blown molecular RM arrives, the marginal cost of creating any possible physical product would be on the order of pennies per kilo - basically the cost of the raw material. Estimates of total cost for molecular-manufacturing is in the range of two pence and 10 pence per kilogram (approximately between four and 19¢), regardless of whether the products are clothing, massively parallel supercomputers or additional nanofactories.

The value-added, however, will be in the information expressing each product. That is, the software that selects the atomic weight and defines the geometry and molecular assembly process. In other words, the market value of all manufactured material objects will be based on information content.

This is obviously a trajectory we have today. More value-added comes from information-added products and services because the order of information embedded within a new product or service is increasing over time. Thus the technological innovations of the future will (1) mostly be information added, and (2) be exceedingly more complex than today. These will be key economic metrics of the future.

As for which country this technology will affect first, I think there are a number of variables involved: the magnitude of the population of a nation, capital investment in this technology and intellectual capital and smartness of a nation. In Europe, it's probably the U.K. and Germany. In the far-east it's probably China and Japan. On the American continent, it's probably the U.S. But who will be the overall winner? That's simply not possible to forecast at this time.

However, I would hope the R&D of this transformational innovation would be an international effort, where the huge benefits are shared all over the world—especially with nations that can't afford the technology. That will be a great event in the history of mankind because it would mean the end of material poverty and famine and perhaps a more peaceful world.

Your book Hyperinnovation sold overwhelmingly more copies in the Far East 85 percent in the Far East, 10 percent in the U.S and 5 percent in Europe). Why do you think this is? What does this say about the future of RM in these countries?

The main reflection is—as we know all to well—that it shows the magnitude of what's going on in Southeast Asia (especially). So, I thought it might be wise to focus marketing on Asia because of those dimensions.

As for your questions, we in the west must be mindful of the fact that East-Asian culture has Confucianism imbedded in it, which puts an extremely high value on learning; Taiwan, for example, has the highest literacy rate in the world. So this leaned culture tends to soak up knowledge and new ideas like a sponge. And when coupled with the fact that well over a billion literate, science-oriented Asians will enter the work force by year 2020, well, one might just imagine the potential.

As for RM and its rollout across different nations-states, I see indications that the market will tip in mainland China, before U.S. and European markets. The Chinese are not—because of the economic Imperative - afraid to take risks, and tend to overcome such risks by an ultra-deep pocket strategy. A billion dollars here and a billion dollars there is chicken feed. Even though the Chinese are slowing down economic expansion somewhat, the relative magnitude of the development is immense. They also tend to buy in batches. Rather than one tentative purchase of, say, a single 3D inkjet system, they are likely to buy a gross lot. That clearly gives them a better bargaining position. So I expect RM to become a mass market in China first, the U.S. second, then Europe.

Can you tell us, in a nutshell, what Hyperinnovation exactly is?

"Hyper" in the context of innovation, means "many interconnected dimensions" (not unlike Hypertext or Hyperlinks). One good definition of "Innovation" is "The successful introduction of novel ideas." So "Hyperinnovation" means the "Multidimensional interconnection and successful introduction of novel ideas." I can tell you that Hyperinnovation is happening everywhere within commerce and engineering.

For example, think of your very own handheld computer device. Is it a video camera or personal assistant; a music center or communications tool; a game console or Dictaphone; a book or television; a musical instrument or credit card; a remote control or word processor; a front door key or portal to the world? Ask Sony, Apple, Nokia etc. and they will give you a similar muse: As bandwidth grows and technology shrinks toward the invisible, both concept and functionality increasingly interconnects and expands toward the multidimensional.

If one looks at other industries and related technologies, it's the same topology. Think of the big energy corporations and multiutility: gas, electricity, hydrogen and water all bundled into one… retail banks are beginning to Hyperinnovate at pace, offering integrated bank accounts with free travel insurance, free air miles, automobile breakdown cover, monthly interest return, credit facilities with fraud protection and so on. Look at the foods industry, and so-called hybrid fruit: the 'Grapple' (grape + apple), the 'Peacotum' (peach + apricot + plum). Such Hyperfood is in the laboratories of C&O Nursery and Monsanto right now. And take the ubiquitous car. More ideas are being interconnected than ever before, evolving as an intelligent road navigator, interactive entertainment center, a broadband-video-voice-data communicator, a home from home, a playground, a workstation; add as your imagination thinks fit. In fact, look at most industries today and you will see the emergence of Hyperinnovation.

One thing that is now apparent, is that Hyperinnovation is both massively disruptive, and hugely transformative. Take the digital camera. What will happen to this market as the omnipresent cell phone develops and interconnects better performing camera technologies? The reflex might be that the cell phone and digital camera markets will converge. But that is not inevitable. Hyperinnovation is, after all, multidimensional. And that means an incredible potential for innovation and an amazing potential to transform the digital camera/cell phone market. With respect to my book Hyperinnovation, it outlines a new kind of management model designed to meet such challenges and opportunities head on.

You are just starting a marketing campaign in America. How is going and what do you hope to accomplish?

First, I'm an Englishman through and through. I can trace my family heritage back centuries. I'm related to the Wedgewoods, the white on royal blue pottery people, c.1720.

But I love America—your ideals, your ambitions, your values. In fact, I spent a lot of time in the States as a child. My father was an operations man for some very powerful banking families based in Florida and New York. Palm Beach is a second home to me. Dad also worked for merchant banking wizard Robert Frick, the former vice chairman and CFO of Bank of America, during the 1970s. They became good friends.

With regards to my American marketing campaign, I'm still at the strategy and planning stage. However, I've approached a number of magazines, which, so far, have been positive. In fact, I think another reason for why Hyperinnovation has not done so well in Europe and the States is that conceptually it was, marginally, ahead of its time. But now people are buying into the concept because there are more and more examples in the west. Hyperinnovation is enviable. Watch out! It's coming your way.

You've been invited to write an article for The Futurist magazine (>www.wfs.org/futurist.htm), which is a very prestigious opportunity. What do you have planned for it?

Let me tell you a little about Futurology. Future studies is now accepted as a branch of the social sciences, and because of the rate of technological change we are experiencing, seeing the future earlier has never been so important. In fact, these days an organization without a serious commitment to futuring, is the equivalent of speeding down a country lane at night with their head lights off.

I would say that most people are quite skeptical about predicting or making a projection/forecasting the future. But in fact some future events are highly reliable - the sun coming up tomorrow, for example. There are also reliable trends that can be tracked and projected into the future. For example, computer processing power, bandwidth, memory capacity, component miniaturization, technological convergence, product price-performance and the rate of total market adoption, have improved and accelerated along highly predictable lines since just after the second World War. And that means it's a high probability that many of these trends will carry on for some time into the future.

Let me give you a list of past and future trends that will have the significant implication for the RM industry over both the short and longer term:

• From micro to nano scale: Component miniaturization and finer resolution will continue to be two of the most dominant and uncompromising trends for the RM industry. But, in fact, the RM industry has no choice. If you look at where the majority of scientific and engineering research is going on and where the money is being spent, the mainstream of project work is at molecular scale. Contemporary RM is just not up to it.

• Price performance: As with all technology related to information, RM technology will follow rapid and significant priceperformance improvements over the next 20 years. In the year 2000, the lowest priced 3D printer was about $60,000. Now, in 2007, 3D Systems are about to launch "V-Flash," a fast, simple and compact office 3D printer for around $10,000. Continue this general industry exponential downward price trend, and by 2012+ expect to see professional 3D printers drop to around $5,000 and innovations in low resolution consumer desktop 3D printers at $999.

• Technological convergence: The RM industry will not escape this. It seems to be a universal constant within the world of technological innovation. The big trend here is that while the RM market will take off within the next five years, it will be closely followed by the convergence of RP and RM into integrated RM technologies.

• For one example, the Fraunhofer Institute for Production Technology are developing so-called "Integrated Multiplicative (IM)" RM systems, and will be ready for commercialization by 2015, maybe earlier.

 

• The kit is suited for the fast manufacture of components with three dimensional gradient structures. IM RM works by using independent, but closely coupled print nozzles, at the sub-micron level, at super high speed and in time, without any post processing. So, instead of fabricating a plastic housing and then arduously populating it with components, IM RM prints out a fully assembled product in one hit. IM RM has limits, as only fairly simple products, such as TV remote controls, torches or simple radios, can be produced. But this kind of technological convergence does indicate the shape of things to come.

• Rate of adoption: This is a key trend for the RM industry. Back in 1995, a mere 100 3D RP machines were sold, in 2000, more than 500 units and by year 2005, well over 2,000 systems were sold. Following this trend, by 2012, 10,000 high end units, and by 2015 100,000 units. By 2020, well, the number of units - in whatever shape and form - is anyone's guess.

But what's the overall potential market value? The value might be seen in the number of "indicators" that show that RM is nearing the take off point - the number of citations, investment in R&D, the increasing number of patents, the number of conferences, notwithstanding the immense curiosity with RM - is growing. However, improvements in terms of the above performance characteristics will enable RM systems to achieve more than one billion dollars in sales by 2012, tens of billions of dollars by 2015 and by 2020, innovative integrated and nanofacturing RM systems sales in terms of both the machines themselves and the bureau services will be at the very least a 50 billion dollar market worldwide. But let me be clear, even this 2020 fiscal projection is only the beginning. I think the three biggest industries in the world by 2025 will be (1) the financial markets, (2) the genomic markets and (3) the RM markets (potentially worth trillions of dollars).

As for the article for The Futurist magazine, it's a précis of my book Hyperinnovation. The Futurist magazine is published by World Future Society and is must read for any serious futurist.

What other books are you in the process of writing or are planning to write?

The Race to the Top: Instant Production Technology and the New Industrial Revolution is a work in progress. The book makes clear that we are in the midst of a New Industrial Revolution, depicting how - what I call 'Instant Production Technology' - will radically transform the way, speed, cost and even where artifacts are made. However, there's a tremendous amount of R&D involved in putting together the book because it ranges across more than a dozen - rapidly evolving - breakthrough manufacturing and production technologies.

There are a number of points the thesis makes. First, this new industrial transformation will take a mere 30 years (as opposed to the 300 years the first Industrial Revolution took). It also debates the significance of moving away from the Race to the Bottom, where companies outsource to the cheapest nations. Depicting that in the longer term, the Race to the Bottom is detrimental to both the global economy and the environment at large. The Race to the Top, however, is about innovating ever-higher value innovations, through these emerging Instant Production Technologies where cost containment of physical assets become much less of an issue, and where intellectual property and information content become the key to competitive advantage. But most significant of all, it will outline a strategy and timeline that shows how this technology will once and for all eradicate abject material poverty the world over for good.

What's next on your agenda?

Let me ask you something…how big an industry do you really think the RM ranch is going to be, say, within the next 20 years? The big guns are firing up their engines. Matsushita and Hewlett Packard (H-P) are deadly serious about RM. I hear that Canon, and even Honda are too.

HP, for example, is researching a low resolution 3D inkjet system, intended to retail around $1,000. They don't have a launch date, but following the above trend lines it'll be here before we think. HP's overall goal is to have one in every kid's bedroom, hobbyists den and school design lab; but ultimately, on every desktop…ring any bells?

One recent outstanding breakthrough in the RM industry is Nanorex's "nanoENGINEER-1." A new molecular mechanics and dynamics CAD system specifically developed for the purpose of simulating and analysing mechanical nanomachines. Nanodesign engineers use the kit not unlike microprocessor designers today. They state the general objectives, and the software works out the nano-details. Because of the potential complexity of end-products, designs will no doubt be counterintuitive and biological.

If engineers are interested in nanoengineering and eventual nanofacturing, the best thing they can do is to learn as much as one can in a great variety of fields: chemistry, physics, biochemistry, physical chemistry, mechanical engineering, computational chemistry, biology, robotics and so forth. Nanofacturing, when it begins to arrive in 15 to 20 years, will be a Hyperinnovation, and an extremely multidisciplinary field.

In fact, Microsoft and IBM are beavering away at the R&D of Nanofactories; and with their massive capabilities, there is little doubt that rapid molecular manufacturing will be here sooner rather than later.

As for me, I've been commissioned by one of the above companies to carry out a full blown futures study of the RM industry, looking out over the next 20 years. It's exciting to be part of the industry at this near take off stage. The rapid manufacturing market is potentially colossal.