Herman Miller Memo

...

TPU implementation is consistent with Herman Miller pushing industry boundaries. Maintaining higher standards than regulations require frees Herman Miller from the administrative hassle of having to worry about compliance in certain regions of the world with varying regulations which has its own cost. While this supply chain decision may be in conflict with Harmen’s operational lens (weeks/months) it is consistent with their Strategic (2-5 years) and Tactical (1-2 years) lens described at the beginning.

To “close the loop”, Herman must decide the manner in which chairs are collected and sent to materials recyclers. The collection options include Herman (lease possible), retailers or third-party organizations.

Herman is primarily a design and innovation firm whether that be with products, suppliers or the environmental processes they implement. The company is not set up to handle an entire returns and recycle program and doing so would impose significant costs on the company outside their core competence. That being said, one benefit for Herman with this approach is that they would be able to analyze and collect data on the Mirra’s durability and use patterns that could inform future design. This option also provides a touch point to reengage, inform and potentially retain customers.

Retailers, while possibly better set up from a supply chain standpoint, would need to be incentivized to take back Herman chairs where they are not doing so for any other company. While hard to quantify, there would be a cost to this and I cannot envision the benefit.

In this regard, I believe the choice is clearly third-party organizations which may include non-profits or recycling programs. The Mirra is designed such that the components dissemble easily and can be repurposed individually due to being entirely biological or technical. This is the most attractive option as it allows Herman products to have a second owner or enter back into the material lifecycle in an efficient manner.