The story, that I am about to relate, might seem, somewhat, apocryphal, but I am assured by someone, who was, actually, present that it is, entirely, true.
During my employed career, I spent four, extremely interesting and productive, years as the Group Training Manager of a large Paint and Protective Coatings company. The company operated five factories, throughout the UK. Each factory was responsible for a specific sector of the company’s product range. One of the factories, in the North, was dedicated to the development and production of all the company’s marine products.
A major problem, encountered by marine shipping, is that the hulls of vessels become encrusted with clinging sea-creatures, like barnacles, limpets etc. In order to reduce the amount of marine life building up, an anti-fouling compound is applied to the hull, requiring periodic spells in dry dock. A number of Paint and Protective Coatings’ organizations compete to supply the required compound, to the Marine Maintenance Industry.
As a major ‘player’, in the Sector, my company had spent a great deal of time and money, on the research and development of a new anti-fouling compound. They were confident that it could outperform anything that the Competition had to offer. To provide a ‘live’ trial, the hull of a large oil tanker was treated with the new compound, prior to a transatlantic round trip. The vessel was removed to dry dock on its return to its home port.
The results, of the trial, were viewed by senior representatives from the shipping line, the hull refinishing company and members of our research team, who had developed the product. There was, clearly, no evidence of any build-up of marine life on the hull. From that standpoint, the anti-fouling compound was a complete success. However, there was, also, disturbing evidence of ‘mottling and layering’, where the compound had been applied to the hull. It was a clear indication that, over the course of the voyage, some of the compound had, progressively, faded; or, to put it more bluntly, had, literally, ‘come off’! You can imagine the consternation of the assembled group, particularly from the research team. There was stunned silence.
As you would expect, somebody from the hull refinishing company, eventually had to say, “I’m afraid, it looks as if the paint is coming off.” Almost immediately, a member of the research team responded, “No it’s not, it’s smoothing itself!”
Later research showed that, over a period of time, the new compound did, indeed, fade from the hull. However, the process was extremely slow and, in no way, compromised the compound’s superlative anti-fouling properties. It only occurred below the waterline and so did not affect the vessel’s aesthetic appearance. It was, also, determined that the intervals between repainting were exactly the same and so no extra dry dock and repainting costs would be incurred.
An unexpected ‘payoff’, identified by a member of our research team, was that the ‘smoothing’ character, of the product, actually, enhanced the compound’s anti-fouling properties. It, also, contributed to the lowering of the vessel’s drag coefficient, through the water. Later trials showed that the vessel’s fuel bill was reduced, overall, by a staggering 12%!
Here is a case where an evaluation, by a creative mind, saw an opportunity, where others only saw a problem.
It’s all a matter of perception.
This story of the Sea is contributing to the Session Package, ‘Creative Thinking and Brainstorming’, presently, in development.