Mattel's New CTO Wants All Kids to Be Inspired by Tech Toys

In improver to new toys, Mattel also brought its new CTO, Sven Gerjets, to Toy Off-white 2022. The company has actually never had a CTO before; Gerjets thinks he may exist the only 1 in the toy industry. He's now dividing his fourth dimension between transforming Mattel'south IT operation and developing a connected-toy strategy. At Toy Fair, he sat down with PCMag for a chat about tech toy trends and how toys tin inspire STEM involvement in children. Here are some lightly edited highlights.

---

Carol Mangis: What'south your role, as you meet it, at Mattel?
Sven Gerjets: I wear 2 hats, essentially. We've had CIOs in the past who accept been focused solely on the business systems, and the connected infinite has been more within the brands and been done very brand-focused. Then nosotros're trying to effigy out, how do we wrap a strategy around that that really moves the needle for u.s.?

Different brands have taken different approaches, and and then on some level, we're learning a lot about the toy space and connectivity.... I recall function of information technology is figuring out, how do we digitally enhance play? I call back a lot of companies out in that location are putting tech in toys for tech'south sake.

We've got this amazing cadre Dna of concrete play. How do we enhance skills and develop children, and how do we keep that DNA, but raise the digital? I think it'due south a much more interesting and much more engaging and appealing space. And so, nosotros're focusing on that, and also focusing on aspects of Stem, and how do we inspire kids towards Stem careers? And how does this become more than inspirational for the broad grouping of children who use our products across these very various brands?

Every toy visitor seems to be saying, 'Nosotros accept toys that will inspire Stalk skills or STEM interests!' So how are you taking an approach to being conscious nearly that, instead of just maxim, 'In that location'southward technology in the toy?'
One of the things that I'1000 finding is that at that place'southward a lot of engineering toys out there that say they inspire Stalk, but my stance... they're focused on kids who already desire to be engineers. When I was a child, I was a tinkerer. I had to be a mechanic or an engineer or something, considering it was just how I was wired.

No pun intended.
Aye, exactly. And I read your article, actually, on STEM toys. You lot know, when you lot go through that, there's some actually interesting things, but they're kind of geared to that child who is going to be an engineer. Yous know they're going to be an engineer. And, I call up the problem with it is, those kids are ofttimes the ones that are tearing your Tv set apart, they're going to Fry's to get a lath... They don't need a toy to do that.

One of the things that we're trying to pivot to is, how do we actually make STEM accessible and interesting and inspiring to broader kids? So information technology'southward non, how practise you create the tinker toys of an electronics lab, merely how practise you inspire kids that are broader? So nosotros're doing things with Tynker...a platform for teaching kids how to program. I don't know if you've seen it, but nosotros're using our brands to kind of inspire kids.

We're doing a big launch with the Barbie character... to inspire kids to acquire how to program. And I think that's a great example of inspiration versus engineering science toys. And that was a little bit of what I've learned coming in, too, considering I love to play with the engineering toys, only I think Stem... is much more about inspiring kids that peradventure aren't wired that way.

They need those skills, likewise.
Did yous guys await at the Kamigami, Jurassic [World] Kamigami? We launched a Kamigami bug last year, nosotros've got the Jurassic, and then nosotros have another one that we're not talking nigh quite all the same that's coming out. Those products are bully examples [where yous] don't have to exist a roboticist to build it, but y'all get to build your own robot, you get to program it. It's super attainable.

Then what's motivating a kid to play with Kamigami if they're not already oriented toward coding and engineering?
I think it'south super-compelling physical play, which is the DNA of the company. And I think that'south the difference. If yous can make something super compelling for a kid, in a play design that they recognize and know, and then enhance it in a way that'southward inspiring to get: 'What's that adjacent step? How do I take the next leap? This is actually fun, I congenital my ain robot, what's next?'

I retrieve it'due south almost making it much more than accessible and much broader and appealing... Sometimes I find when I look at toys out there, when yous're trying to create a whole kind of new play design, it'southward really geared towards kids or adults that like that play pattern... The Tynker project is almost giving kids unlike aspects, like there'southward a music aspect, there's pet vet, there are these different skills. And so if somebody wants to exist a veterinarian, they come up in and they learn how to program. If somebody loves music, they come in and they use music to learn how to plan. Information technology'due south much more open and accessible. It'due south not like, allow's try to cram them into a box.

Now, does Mattel do whatever kind of research on its own in terms of discovering what kind of engineering to integrate into toys to create that involvement? Or are you looking to other research?
So we're doing a picayune scrap of both. But I recollect nosotros beginning at what's inspiring, and what kind of play is interesting. And from at that place, we effigy out, how do we brand the product accessible from the technology standpoint? Because honestly, in my mind, the technology is the easy office. The problem is, yous tin brand information technology way too expensive, inaccessible... So nosotros do piece of work with partners; we do a lot with the startup customs, we work with other tech toy companies to reuse capabilities that they've got, but the focus that we're trying to lay down is how exercise we keep it in an attainable toll range? A $250 play computer with a bunch of gadgets, information technology'due south only not attainable, and I think the problem is, until the child plays with it and starts using it, you don't know if they're going to get bored with it. So, y'all know, y'all're going to put down $200 on something or $50 on a buildable robot, and encounter if they are fifty-fifty interested in robotics.

I imagine that holds parents back a lot.
I recall and then.

We've seen a lot of really amazing, beautiful robots that I couldn't afford.
I think that'south admittedly right… And part of the interesting thing in the space is that, nerds similar me love to put tech in toys. There'due south such a kind of a cool prepare of things out there, especially from the inventor community considering I'thou like, 'I'k going to grab an Arduino board, and I'm going to put some code on it, and I'm going to claw it to some things, and hey, I congenital my ain autonomous RC automobile.' So there's a lot of innovation happening, which is awesome, and I think we have to look at how exercise nosotros and so take that innovation and make it accessible and inspiring.

So I guess you probably practise focus groups with kids?
Yeah, we do a lot of that. Particularly, in the early concept phases, and actually throughout design. We continue to test interest price points, and examination experiences. We as well work with pattern-thinking companies that help us to do some of that every bit well.

A lot of companies, I'm noticing lately, are hitting the consumer market with these kinds of toys, but they're too going to the education market and providing classroom tools. Is that something that Mattel is thinking?
Yeah, part of our Tynker partnership—they're actually in a third of schools in the US. Part of our strategy with Tynker is to examination and learn and grow. So we've actually been partners with them since 2022, and I think we've put 4 million kids through the program. We're reinvigorating that, really focusing... I think that if we tin can create actually compelling consumer experiences, that kids will want to learn in the classroom, and nosotros can have a company like Tynker that we piece of work with to partner in that infinite. I retrieve there's a at that place in that location.

I think that might be really compelling, considering your toys and brands are so familiar.
I call back the big affair with digital, with AI, with all of these aspects—it's all user experience. I mean, AI is a swell example. AI is not super compelling unless you've got a bully user experience and a bang-up utilize case for it. So information technology goes back to what my career'due south been all about. How do you make technology useful? Whether it'southward a business arrangement, whether it's when I was at DirecTV building applications for our 15,000 call center agents or when I was at Pearson doing educational products. It'due south actually about finding the sweet spot of compelling user experiences, and then technology'due south an enabler.

Once you know how you want the toy to piece of work, then you merely figure out how to make information technology do that.
And [y'all] think virtually creative ways to do it, in a fashion that's cheap and accessible. The Kamigami, I dearest. And so we worked with a company chosen Nuance Robotics, and they are a couple of robotics engineers that worked at Berkeley, and they were doing DARPA work. And they were like, 'Toys, that will be more fun!' (laughs)

It's definitely a unique production. I love the fact that information technology's this very inexpensive material and it just makes this great toy.
The really absurd thing, the thing I actually appreciate about information technology, is the biomimicry. The Kamigami bugs are interesting because they really are buglike. When nosotros talked to them almost the bipedal kind of nature, I was actually very skeptical. I was like, how practise you brand this matter piece of work, not tip over, y'all know? And these guys were really amazing. They came up with this product that I think is pretty unique. Then, the biomimicry, taking that kind of work that's being done at DARPA (laughs) and figuring out how to put it in a really cheap, inexpensive toy, that a child can build; that'southward really cool, I think.

You brought upward AI before, and we've seen some very nascent attempts for companies to build AI into toys, and it'southward never really been very successful. I think there's a lot of potential in that location. Is that something you've given some thought to?
Aye, y'all know function of the cool affair about being at a toy visitor is, when you lot think virtually kids playing with AI on Siri, or on Alexa or whatever, its such an open kind of environment. The absurd matter almost a toy visitor is we can actually create a walled garden which is much safer and private and really takes the considerations to the child into play.

That said, I think that the difficulty with AI is user experience. You can create amazing AI products, really super smart, really capable, only if they're not fun, right? And and so, if you look at our lineup, probably the best example of where it's worked well is in the Barbie Dreamhouse, the natural language processing [NLP] integration for [the Hello Dreamhouse], because it'south a play pattern that they empathize. It's a physical production that they can play with, and information technology's got an enhancement effectually AI.

Instead of information technology existence, 'I accept to interact with this toy as my way of having fun,' it's, 'I can play with my Barbie, and I can motility information technology around in the Dreamhouse, and and so I tin put it in the lift, and [tell the elevator to] become up.'

It's non like you're plunking down a agglomeration of money and hoping your kid wants to talk to information technology. You lot're spending coin on something that you know she wants, a dollhouse and information technology's got an enhancement.

Let's really use what we've got, which is bully toys. We've got a slap-up relationship with the parents; we've got great brands; we've got a ton of information on how children learn through concrete play. And then, how do we enrich it?

Yeah, that's a great approach, I think. And I liked seeing that in such a major brand also.
The overnice affair most Tynker is they've washed it from a curriculum standpoint... And you lot offset out with actually rudimentary—how practice I go forward, forward, forrad, jump? Then, it adds loops, and it adds less linear programming capabilities. They have the power to take you lot all the fashion to tech-schoolhouse programming... I don't know if y'all can phone call that 'gamified,' because it's supposed to be a game. In a really compelling digital game style, how do you take them from no understanding of kind of logic, linear logic, to being able to fully plan something.

In terms of taking one of these kids' coding languages and extending that into a real-life programming language, is that much of a leap?
No, information technology'due south non. I recollect the leap is, 'Is the child interested in it?' They may go through the digital aspects of it, and go, 'I'm done,' merely from that, you lot acquire logic. And logic is important in annihilation you practise. Whether you're trying to write an application or transform an organization, it's all about troubleshooting and agreement flows, and understanding how things fit together. Fifty-fifty if they go through aspects of it, then learn that they don't desire to be an engineer or a software developer, they're gonna acquire a lot from it, and they're gonna learn a lot that is very applicable in the Stem world. Because, frankly, I think everybody these days has to take some understanding of codes and apps.

It'southward not like back in the solar day when I was reading PC Magazine, and if you needed something, you came to the nerd closet and talked to us! At present, if you demand something, you talk to your child. And they probably know more than about it than the Information technology section does.

And so I recollect if goose egg else, I think out of that, nosotros'll inspire some kids to be engineers, and other kids volition know more about logic, and they'll get something out of information technology too. We're not trying to force them into it every bit much as only trying to educate them and simply help them recall differently and learn.

Source: https://sea.pcmag.com/news/19713/mattels-new-cto-wants-all-kids-to-be-inspired-by-tech-toys

Posted by: rollinsonews1937.blogspot.com

Share this post