Matt Dudas, a loyal reader of Shelf Impact! and a 17-year veteran in package structure, poses an interesting question. Why, in some product categories, does packaging innovation come only after tragedy strikes, he asks.

The focus of Dudas ’ question is over-the- counter drugs and prescription medicines, which have seen precious little package innovation in recent memory. However, the same thought could apply to other product categories.

An answer to his question isn ’ t obvious, but some examples illustrate exactly what Dudas is talking about. In the wake of the Tylenol scare 25 years ago, tamper-evident shrink bands were added to the necks of bottles for over-the-counter drugs. More recently, a young designer ’ s fears that her grandparents might inadvertently consume each other ’ s prescription medications the bottles looked exactly alike led her to design a more user-friendly pharmacy bottle.

Target modified the initial design and today the bottle is synonymous with the retailer ’ s in-store pharmacies nationwide.

But other examples are hard to come by, either on the structure or graphics side. Dudas puts forth a theory to explain why: When a market goes so long without change, complacency sets in. When consumers stop demanding change, product manufacturers stop providing it.

A plausible explanation might be that some categories see little innovation because the packaging focuses on product benefits rather than attributes that transform a product into a brand. Therefore, a product sits passively alongside its clinical-looking competitors, lacking the design that creates a meaningful difference. I ’ d welcome your thoughts. I ’ ll share them in a future issue.