A Study On The Thinking Path Model

INTERNATIONAL DESIGN CONFERENCE - DESIGN 2002
Dubrovnik, May 14 - 17, 2002.
A STUDY ON THE THINKING PATH MODEL OF

CREATIVE DESIGN PROCESS
Hisataka Noguchi and Yukari Nagai
Keywords: Design process, creative thinking, experiment,
observation, tacit knowledge
1. Introduction
Recently, researches on the creative thinking have been increasing especially in the field of design
science.
In this flow, several researches with experimental studies have been made remarkable results such as
Goldschmidt, Purcell and Gero, Dorst and so on [Goldschmidt 1991][Purcell&Gero 1998][Dorst
2001]. Before these researches, Finke, Ward and Smith made famous research on creative cognition,
in which they had experiments of invention using several geometrical shaped parts [Finke, Ward &
Smith 1996]. Those experiments had also been verifications of the Geneproa model which was
hypothetical model of inventory thinking proposed by Finke. In their experiment, the subjects were
observed in the tasks of combining the parts that resulted some inventive discoveries. Finke, Ward and
Smith did not focused on the subjects drawings. On the other hand, Goldschmidt, Purcell, Gero and
Dorst focused on the subject's drawings. However, their experiments were put emphasis on the
analysis of subjects protocols, and drawings were treated as a reference for the analysis of thinking
process.
We assert that, in analyzing the design thinking process, to know creative thinking paths in the
searching space is important [Maher, Poon & Boulanger 1996]. However, to do it, the observation
should be put focus on the subjects drawing process and behaviors rather than the protocols. Because,
in design experiment, the protocols often do not reflect the contents of subjects thinking process. In
that case, the experimenter should slip into the subjects mind and should infer his/her thinking
process as if the experimenter were dwelled in the subjects mind. The thinking path of creative design
could be represented as a model by using this standpoint. In following sections, we introduce this
experimental study.
2. Experiment
2.1 Procedure of the experiment
We think that the most generalized representation of design thinking process is translation of design
purpose (expressed in linguistic mode) to visuo-spatial outcomes of it. Then, we had an experiment to
know the real time thinking process in which designer translate the design purpose (expressed by
words) to drawn sketches as the final ends.
The experiment was held at Musasino Art University between June and July of 2001. The subjects
were 4 students of 3rd and 4th year of under graduate design course: 2 students from an engineering
oriented university and 2 students from an art oriented university.
The each subject was, at first, assigned to design a beautiful shaped (we call this first keyword) tape
DESIGN RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
217
dispenser and after while (about 5~7 minutes after the start) he/she was assigned to make it gives soft
image"(we call this second keyword) as a sub-concept of beautiful shape. Our intention of giving 2
staged keywords was that it might make easier to see how designer changes his/her thinking mode
during the design task. The subject was given about 20 minutes to accomplish the assignment.
The subjects behaviors during design task were recorded by two video cameras: one camera recorded
drawing from over head of the subject and the other camera recorded the subjects performances
(including expressions and protocols) in front of the subject.
After finishing the design task, the experimenter conducted the subject to speak his/her thinking
process under watching play backed video movie (retrospective protocols).
2.2 The results of experiment
We put the observed data together and analyzed each subjects thinking process as follows.
(1) The subject 1: A 4th year student of art oriented university (visual communication design).
After started the task, he was sunk in thought about 40 seconds and fingered soft rubber eraser. Then
started drawing with thin and weak lines then, in a moment, stopped drawing and erased it. He
frequently repeated this behavior. After 1 minute and 40 seconds has passed, he started his first sketch
with thin lines in not so quick movement. After 4 minutes have passed, his drawing was gradually
changed to bold lined and put shade. After about 7 minutes have passed, he finished the first drawing
and turned page of sketchpad. Then he started perfectly different sketch than the first one.
At this moment, the second keyword "soft imaged" was given from the experimenter and he stopped
all movements. After a while, he started drawing and said, "Just I think it resembles to a snail" and
turned the page of sketchpad. He moved hand and took aim at the sketchpad with untouched line (we
call this pre-drawing). Again, he frequently repeated erasing and redrawing. After 13 minutes have
passed, he started his 3rd sketch. He gradually drew a whale-like shape in frequently tracing lines.
After a while, he started to deform the whale-like shape and redrew curved lines with changing
proportions of the shape. After fixed the shape, he put shades to his sketch. After 18 minutes and 30
seconds have passed, he turned again the page and started to draw his 4th sketch. This time he drew
quickly, elaborately and without erasing sketch. During the task, he did not make so many talking
except when he explained some metaphors emerged in drawings. In the retrospective protocols, he
took a lot of times to explain his thought on the functions of tape dispenser.
(2) The subject 2: A 3rd year student of art oriented university (visual communication design).
After started the task, she was sunk in thought a few minutes, and began drawing. After 4 minutes
have passed, she concentrated to drawing. After 5 minutes have passed, she began 2nd drawing and
seemed to be in deep thought while drawing. After 7 minutes and 15 seconds have passed, the
experimenter gave her the second keyword "make soft imaged". After a few moments being sunk in
thought, she started her 3rd sketch. After about 10 minutes have passed she started to draw her 4th
sketch and at 40 seconds have passed she turned the page of sketchpad. Then, she started to draw
perfectly different shape but suddenly stopped drawing and discarded it by cross lines. After a few
minutes thinking, she started to draw perfectly different shape, then modified it into a shape like liquid
drops. She concentrated to drawing this sketch until 15 minutes 40 seconds have passed. Then, she
turned the page of sketchpad. Her final drawing was started with "pre-drawings" and drew similar
shaped sketch as the 3rd one but in large scale this time. She finished final sketch with elaborate line
drawings and shadings. She was almost very quiet during the task, but in the retrospective protocols,
she turned to talkative. She made detailed explains about her drawings shown in video screen.
(3) The subject 3: A 4th year student of engineering oriented university (industrial design).
As soon as the first keyword was given, she started drawing. At right side in the page of sketchpad,
she drew a lined frame, at first, and then began to draw basic shape of existing tape dispenser in it.
She drew next to next cartoon like sketches in talkative attitudes with quickly moving hand. After 1
and half minutes has passed, she gradually concentrated to drawing and became quiet. After 3 minutes
have passed, she explained her sketches in answering the experimenter's question. During the
explanation she did not stop drawing and sometimes added ideas into the drawing. After 7 minutes
have passed, she became concentrated again after a moment of pre-drawing, and then she started
drawing at slow speed. After the second keyword, she sunk in thought a moment and made quick pre-
218
drawing, then immediately started drawing. She made a number of sketches one after another rapidly,
and seemed to generate the next idea during the drawing. She often generated new shapes by
combining geometrical forms. At the final sketch, she used the eraser and finished it more elaborately.
During the task, she had been talkative and seemed to be avoided stress by talking. Her attitudes were
stable through the experiment and kept drawing continuously. As the result, she made the largest
number of sketches (19) among 4 subjects.
In retrospective protocols, she spoke with not so many words concerning metaphors but spoke with
words directly connected to geometrical forms in her 20 minutes talking.
(4) The subject 4: A 4th year student of engineering oriented university (industrial design).
After first keyword was given, several times, she made questions on the task, and then drew frame
lines at first. She repeatedly drew thin lines on the frame lines and put shadings with rhythmically
moved hand. She scarcely talked during the task except several times talked about trivial things of not
concerning to the sketches. While she were in drawing, if the experimenter talked to her, she only
responded "mm..." and never turned her eyes from the sketches. Every time before she drew new
sketch, she did pre-drawing and then drew frame lines. When she moved to next sketch, she took a
little thinking time, and then started to draw quite different form. She drew nicely varied sketches with
big stroke and quick moving of pencil. As drawing was progressed to some extent, she sometimes
tried to retouch and put brushing up to her sketches.
After second keyword was given, she had a few thinking time, then repeated pre-drawings and drew
curved lines into an integrated shape. She scarcely erased her drawing but often reviewed her
precedent sketches when she moved to draw another sketch. She seemed to be interesting to the task.
In the retrospective protocols, she talked a lot on her sketches connecting to some metaphors.
Figure 1. The subjects sketches (left to right: subject 1, subject 2, subject 3, and subject 4)
3. Discussions on the method of analysis

3.1 Protocols did not indicate thinking process
In this experiment, we intended to know the designer's real time thinking processes but the subjects
protocols were perhaps not available to know it. The subjects were reticent when they sunk in thought
and generating image of target object. In contrast, the subjects became talkative when they explained
their sketches after finished the tasks. Usually, the protocol analysis put weight on the subjects talks
and explanations. In that case, retrospective protocols were adopted as the most significant clues to
know the creative thinking process. However, the retrospective protocols do not give real time
thinking process They give only past explanations of the thinking process as the results of creative
thinking. To know how creative idea was generated, the real time trace should be adopted based on the
common basis of the subjects thinking situations. Therefore, we needed another method to know their
creative thinking process as follows.
3.2 Dwell-in observation
When we analyzed the subjects creative thinking process, we had to infer it by way of as if we were
slipped into the subjects mind. We named this way dwell-in observation depending on the Michael
Polanyi's words. Polanyi said that to understand tacit dimensions of ones knowledge, we needed to
put our thought into ones mind as if we dwelled in it [Polanyi 1966]. To do this, the experimenter
needs to have a common ground with the subjects situation. In this experiment, fortunately, the
experimenters have experiences of design works, so that they could understand the subjects thinking
processes with the dwell-in observation. To do the dwell-in observation, the experimenter should
have similar experiences of the task, which is given to the subject.
219
4. The analyzed results

On the basis of the dwell-in observations, we analyzed the subjects creative thinking processes as
follows.
4.1 Two parts in the description of design goal
We inferred, as mentioned in another presentation, that designer usually recognizes the description of
design goal as two parts: for example in case of design goal described as Design modern chair,
chair is recognized as the subjective word and modern is recognized as predicative word. Then,
designer thinks separately of the subjective part and the predicative part of design goal.
In this experiment, we observed the subjects thinking process with keeping this thought in minds.
The design goal of this experiment was Design beautiful shaped (and gives soft image) tape
dispenser. The subjective part was tape dispenser, and the predicative part was beautiful shaped
and then gives soft image.
From the observation of the subjects drawing processes, all the subject of this experiment were
seemed to think separately the subjective part and the predicative part of the description of design
goal.
4.2 Searching modes observed in the experiment
Through whole tasks, we observed that the subject changed his/her thinking mode in several times.
In another presentation, we pointed out that there were two kinds of thinking modes: F (Form making)
mode and M (Metaphor) mode. However, we found, in this experiment, that both thinking modes
could be decomposed into more numbers of searching modes. Just after the first keyword was given,
some of the subjects confirmed the subjective part (tape dispenser) of the goal description by drawing
typical model of it. Then in next step, he/she searched metaphors by which he/she could interpret the
first keyword (predicate part of the goal description). We can see it in the subjects protocols. We call
this thinking process as interpretative search. In case of the subject 2, she searched things connected
with the keyword make soft imaged in her memory. We call this recollective search. After this,
the most of the subjects tried to decompose the parts of the prototype and recombined or modified
them into a fitted form to the keywords (beautiful shaped and makes soft imaged) under considering
that it could perform the function of tape dispenser. We call this process as semantic generation
search, because, translating keywords into image was the process of generating meanings. In case of
the subject 3, she tried to make forms of tape dispenser by repeated recombination of the geometric
forms. We call this combination search. At the latter process of the design task, most of the subjects
tried to figure out their internal image of designed object onto the sketchpad. We call this process as
depictive search. At the final stage, most of the subjects tried to refine and put shade on their
drawings. This final process was not a searching process but the process of making up reality of
drawings.
4.3 Pre-drawings as an important searching mode
We took notice on the pre-drawing actions of the subjects.
The subject often moved his/her hand as if he/she was drawing something but did not touch pencil on
the paper. We named this action as pre-drawing. Almost every time when the pre-drawing was
emerged, the subject became reticent and seemed to be sunk into deep thought, and then he/she started
to draw new shapes with thin lines but soon erased it. This action was repeated until the new form was
fixed on paper.
We thought that when the pre-drawing was emerged, the subject was generating his/her new image of
target object in mind but it was not fixed yet as a figure of being able to draw with clear outlines.
Therefore, we believed that the pre-drawing was the crucial key to know the creative thinking in
design process. While doing the pre-drawing, the subject must have been searching clear image of,
which was interpreted from the description of design goal. Although an image was in his/her mind, it
was not so easy to decide the figure of the image. Then he/she repeated the pre-drawing and thin lined
drawing with frequent erasing. He/She had no confidence to draw by steady and bold outlines. We call
220
this behavior of the subject as pre-drawing search. The pre-drawing search might be included in the
depiction search, but it was important that the designer was searching a figure fitted to the design goal
by moving his/her hand as if he/she were in drawing actions. It implied that the physical moving was
needed to designers creative thinking process before getting visible form of design object.
4.4 Thinking path model as the trace map of thinking process
As the results, we tried to represent the subjects thinking processes as diagrams of thinking paths.
To do this, thinking process must be decomposed into several behavioral units. We extracted the
subjects behavioral unit not from observed outward appearances of them but from inferred processes
of their inner sides.
We adopted the standpoint that we thought as if we were doing the same task as the subjects, and
traced their thinking processes as possible as to have reality.
As the result, we presented a thinking path model of creative design process as shown in figure 2.
Thinking path of creative design process
High order semantic generation process
Stage of conceptual drawings
Recollective search + Combination search

Subjective part
Grasp basic type

of design object
Semantic generation search + Depictive search
Extract and
Reconstruct basic
components
Consider balance
of function and
form
Search metaphor of
predicative part
Bring metaphor
to image
Recollective search + Interpretative serach
Finish drawing
Expression
of fixed
image
Connect
subject and
predicate
Description of
design goal
Predicative part
Stage of form making drawings
Expression
of reality
Try expression
of unfixed image
( Pre-drawing search )
Final form of
design object
Figure 2. Thinking path model of creative design process

5. Conclusion and perspectives
5.1 Creative thinking needs long searching path
From this thinking path model, we found that creative thinking needs long searching path. The reason
of this is as follows.
In this experiment, the subject 4 seemed to take the most complicated thinking path and then she
brought the best results of design. The times taken in the thinking process are not related to the
distance of thinking path. For example, the subject 1 took long times in the stage of search of semantic
generation, but his thinking path was not so complicated. The numbers of idea sketches do not related
to the distance of thinking path. For example, the subject 3 generated the largest numbers of sketches,
but her thinking path was simple. In case of the subject 2, she took many times in the stage of
interpreting search, but her thinking path was also simple and the result was not so good in balance of
function and form.
The distance of thinking path is related to the times of changing search modes and the numbers of
searching modes used in the thinking process. We concluded that the designers made efforts to take as
many searching modes as he/she could for getting creative thinking. The creative result cannot be got
without taking effort to search the best clue of creation. In creative thinking process, designer must
take at least 3 stages of searching modes: interpretative search, semantic generation search and
depictive search. The best result can be got when the designer take adequate searching modes in
adequate times of dynamic situations of thinking process.
221
After this experiment and analysis, many things are left for future researches. The most important
thing is the method of analysis. To make more objectify the dwell-in observation, we should have a
systematic description tool of nonverbal behaviors in creative thinking process. To confirm the
relations between searching modes and creativity, we might need much more experiments. To clarify
the inner process of pre-drawing, several results of recent brain science might be significant. Even if
all things mentioned above might be done nicely, still the approach to clarify the mechanisms of
human creative thinking would need long way.
References
Dorst, K. and Cross, N.: Creativity in the design process; co-evolution of problem-solution, Design Studies,
22(5), 425-438, 2001.
Finke, R.A., Ward, T.B. and Smith, S.M.: Creative Cognition, The MIT Press, 1996.
Goldschmidt, G.: The dialectics of sketching, Design Studies, 4, 123-143, 1991.
Maher, M. L., Poon, J. and Boulanger, S.: Formalizing designs exploration as co-evolution: a combined gene
approach, Advances in formal design methods for CAD, Chapman and Hall (UK), 1996.
Polanyi, M.: The Tacit Dimension, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1966.
Purcell, A.T. and Gero, J.S.: Drawings and the design process, Design Studies, 19,4, 389-430, 1998.
Hisataka Noguchi, Prof. of Design Fundamentals
Department of Design, Faculty of Engineering
Chiba University
33, Yayoi-cho, Inage-ku, Chiba, Japan 263-8522
E-mail: noghisa@design.ti.chiba-u.ac.jp
Phone/Fax: +81 43 290 3100
222

ETHICS IN INDUSTRIAL
(GOOD, GOODS AND GODS)
PRODUCT
DESIGN
A. Can zcan
Keywords: ethics
1. Prologue
The lack of ethical side and its possible reasons in our professional designer lives is the main theme of
this presentation. For the basic principle is good for ethical existence, we usually avoid asking ethical
questions in our professional design activities. We prefer principles of professionalism or codes of
conduct. Though the whole design culture of past, present and future have been and will be
abstractions of human mind, yet we find ethics too abstract for design practice. We seem to prefer
designing for the sake of designs own sake and never asking ethical questions like is it good? Of
course there comes a time for all of us to ask ethical questions and it usually happens when the going
gets tough. When somebody reproduces a sheep genetically, when a couple of designer-scientists get
close to apply human DNA into computer processors, when we start watching planes crashing into
towers just like a movie or a war just like a computer software, or when we see our children getting
more violent in front of actual or fictional terror in our designed environment, then we start asking
ethical questions as it is nowadays.
I have always been fascinated by the fact that the term good has been used for also utilitarian
products. Though I could have preferred many of the designed objects never gone into production
there was a spiritual side in calling things not only as things or objects, or products but also as
goods. May the reason be lying in our ever forgotten design consciousness that designing means
bringing good things to life? Rather than introducing it as an ethical principal I would like to present
the word good as a practical term in relation to design profession and its special kind of outcomes
called as goods.
The most distinctive characteristics of goods are their anonymous design facilities. When we say
goods we mean anonymous, almost illegal, nameless, faceless design entities. We never name Starck
designs or an Alesi kettle, or a Colani device as goods. Goods generally signify a negative category in
our professional, or academical, or artistical design terminology. None of ourselves want to be known
as designing goods. We want to be product designers or a brand on products if we can. We do not
care about goods. They appear as non-qualified objects that we use in our non-conscious (or at least
semi-conscious) everyday life.
Giving birth to a baby and designing in industrial (or psychologically we may prefer post-industrial in
this new millennium) context are too much alike. Whilst only two are enough for the former action, a
crowded mass of people participate in the latter one. Only two people (of different sexes of course)
can start a life which seems to be the most miraculous event in the known limits of the universe. On
the other hand for realizing a product, a group of authorized and qualified experts in their fields come
together where it is not easy to distinguish who is doing what and to who. Engineers, planners,
designers, medical experts, psychologists, sociologists, ecologists, technicians, administrators, market
researchers, pr experts, and not only individuals but also institutions and associations join the design
and production orgy, users and clients are no exception. This overintercourse ends with a baby called
223
product and designers seem to be the most insistent group of people that they are the real parents of
the baby and they have the right to give it a name. Usually designers do not have any clear idea about
themselves whether theyre the fathers or mothers. In fact it is not possible to predict the nature of
either the baby or the product from the way it has been created. Bad seeds may come out of love
marriages, and fine characters may come out of prostitution in whatever the century is. And design is a
significant and unique concept that we can analyze the quality of our culture for its cooperative
character. I always tell my students that our designs reflect the character of our cooperative
consciousness and mind. If anything goes wrong with our designs there must be a problem in our
minds.
Two important trends under different names seem to be shaping the world of today and tomorrow
which also bring out new concepts like co-designing to an ideal state of our practice. One is
globalization while the other is specialization. Though I have definitely a positive approach to a
multi-disciplinary design comprehension I do not share the same optimism for these two concepts and
I remember a post-it sticker trend is not destiny.
2. Ethics of Globalization
One of the popular terms of our day is globalization. My personal belief is that if a word is being
pronounced too often there must be something wrong with it. Take AIDS for example. If we had a
cure for it we could have never talked about it that much. An AIDS with no cure creates a selfmaintaining system of its own and a cure appears to be a thread for this existence, just like lack of
enemy makes military useless and meaningless. Though it means different things to different people
the term globalization is a little bit like AIDS I think. It is not a cure but a kind of disease for what it
represents.
Globalization does create two different designer characteristics depending on two different
understanding of globalization. According to Victor Margolin the term globalization represents an
equilibrium model of the world to some people while an expansion model to the majority of its actors.
The expansion model of the world under the term globalization moves designers work for markets
rather than people. Designers see themselves as strategic businessmen. The designed objects forget to
be goods and turn out to be tokens of economic exchange [Margolin 1998]. A brand car designed in
Italy gets assembled in Turkey while the components arrive from the rest of the world. The word codesigning finds a practical area of use in this model and design becomes a manipulative term of
economic cost/benefit arguments and the concept of design management overshadows design as a
result. According to John Heskett , rather than designing goods, designers function as follows in this
global business:
generating new product concepts
customer focus
speed to market
ease of manufacture
reducing product costs
reducing process costs
differentiating products
adding value to products
extending product life-cycles
innovation opening new markets [Heskett 1998]
The equilibrium model of the world in globalization discourse appears as a counter ideal opposing the
basic dilemma in expansion model. In fact this paradoxial dilemma has been depicted in different
formats against industrial capitalism. The survival of industrial or global capitalism depends on
continuous and ever increasing production and consumption without any limits which sounds like the
expansion model we have discussed. But as it has been expressed in many formats, resources are
not limitless in human reach. Equilibrium model depicts a world order which depends on the balance
of limited factors: resources, needs, population, environment, etc.. The equilibrium model represents
the awakening of subconscious conscience under serious threats. Widening gaps between economical
224
and social parties, destruction of nature, increasing social and psychological disabilities really
threatens the whole system in the world. But the equilibrium model does not have the courage to spell
the underlying truth that it is the expansion model that creates the threats as well as the increasing
wealth and status of designers under its wings. Designers trying hard to find solutions under terms
like sustainability, or sustainable product development are the victims of equilibrium state of mind
under expansion and limitless economy. It is like fighting for peace, making love for virginity.
One of the apparent efffects of globalism on design profession can be observed in the unification of
big companies, that I call re-creation of gods. This unification can be in the form of happy marriages
or one company devouring another. Bosses, strategies, target markets, design understandings, brand
characters change suddenly. A Scandinavian Volvo turns out to be a Ford-ian Volvo, a postVolkswagen Skoda (e.g., Octavia model) is never the Skoda we have known for decades. Basic
evolutionary principles of wild nature gets applied to the whole world: Those who are fit survives and
evolves, those who are not become extinct (not virtually, but actually). The same rule applies not only
to companies but also even to countries and even geographies. It reminds me of a softer racism in
disguise. "If you are poor, crowded and technologically underdeveloped, then die. Because I will never
use my wealth and technology to solve your problem, rather I will see you as a problem for me to get
wealthier, and technologically much more developed.." [zcan 1997]. Even the standarts being
emposed to design profession (ISO, ASA, DIN etc.,) in the majority of the world do not improve
design ability but put an end to available and sufficient productivity and industrial design life.
Designers are being forced to become not good designers but powerfully equipped strong competitors
as if in a wild jungle where a slight misjudgement turns out to be tragedy in chain reaction where
measure of everything is numerical. What about the design objects i.e., the goods?.. Who
cares?...Production/Consumption Rates and Purchase Figures tell it all. We have stopped thinking
about quality since the end of history [Fukuyama 1989].
Robert Maynard Pirsig has spent most of his life thinking about quality without reducing it into
quantitative figures. He ends up explaining the evolution chain without quantitative terms. Inorganic
quality, biological quality, social quality and intellectual quality are his terms to define the
evolutionary process which can only be explained as development [Pirsig 1991]. But the last stage of
the evolution, the intellect, is now threatining its pro-stages it can only exist on, i.e., the nature, the
biological human being and the society . In a personal letter, he has told me his appreciation that Ive
been using his books in design courses. What he mentioned in that letter was also the fact that ...many
people who talk about quality in Industrial Design define quality in terms of serving an intended
purpose, but of course that says nothing about the quality of the purpose or whether there is quality
to be found outside the purpose. Goodness is a purpose and how can you figure out good in numbers,
statistics, unless you do not have that basic sense of quality, unless you do not see the world as
hardware and globalization as the software running on numerical codes but can only work well by the
sacrifice of abstract, spiritual, ethical, aesthetical, logical, active and alive side of human side i.e., the
source of designing goods as well?
3. Ethics of Specialization
R. Buckminster Fuller warns us by giving two independent studies one from biology on the extinction
of species and one from anthropology on the extinction of human tribes, concluding that specialization
is a way to extinction, and our society is thus organized [Papanek 1972]. As the world situation
continues to inbreed specialization as it is now, general adaptability which is the basic advantage of
human beings will be lost.
Human being refers to a general natural entity, a biological term and we rarely use this term for
ourselves. In social context we call ourselves as citizens, people, community, humanity, society,
culture... For us the designers, we are classified as specialists in this world scale mechanism of
interactions: producers,consumers, users, etc. The era we are living in can also be described as the era
of not professions but also specialists. Who are you?, I am a digital interface designer I am a
theatre architect... I am a gynocologist... I am a divorce attorney. They all also mean that I am a
designer designing for you and its my way of existence not everybodys or anybodys to design the
goods you use for your own sake, or, I am an architect who has taken the licence and knowledge of
225
building your own living spaces out of your hands and mind, or, I am the doctor and you do not know
what to do when something happens in your body, or, I am the one who can defend you and your
rights better than you, and we all need another specialist to change the taps in our bathrooms. This
era, in contradiction with the fact that over-specialization leads to extinction and generalization is the
advantage of human beings, shows specialization as the only way of existence, but it starts to create its
contradictions. For everybody is a specialist in something, it becomes impossible to realize the whole
as in the case of designing products, especially when everything is bound in global scale with written
and non-written rules.
I will always ask the question if being a designer is a professional status or more or less a humane
ability.
Its no surprise that the Rolling Stones song Satisfaction has been awarded by the authorities as the
song of the last century. The lyrics I cant get no satisfaction not only defines the beat of our life
styles, but also motive the designers to fulfill this sense of dissatisfaction while keeping and expanding
it. If we loose the perception of our lives as a whole we can get no satisfaction out of it, but try to
substitute it with a consumerism out of control. My people in Turkey can not help changing their
mobile phones frequently, a five years old car is an old car, last years model is out of trend, and the
song of the century says I cant get no, satisfaction!. Satisfaction of a need with a design should
bring material satisfaction along with spiritual satisfaction. But any satisfaction appears as a threat for
the system being executed all over the world.
Its been a couple of years that Ive been studying bicycles as a professional designer. Though the
main design features of a bicycle have slightly changed for about 150 years Its getting harder and
harder for bicycle manufacturers and designers each year to design another model for its turning out
to be an iron bound business and inevitable dependance on experts of any detailing on more than 300
years old bicycle. This company has been specialized on front fork systems while that company is an
expert on rear suspension. You find the best chain wheels and cranks in Taiwan while the fittest
saddles have been designed in Italy. You find the same brand on the majority of bicycle gear
components and I can count not more than five professional manufacturers for wheels. It would be
possible to be a bicycle designer twenty years ago, but you can only be a saddle designer and a bicycle
co-designer nowadays.
Now think about the satisfaction of an independent designer who is witnessing the realization of his
design turning into a physical entity under total control on every detailing, and think about the other
one feeling like a compulsory contributor into an inevitable out of control activity. Whats good for a
designer?.. Freedom or dependance? I am sure that a bicycle getting assembled at the garage is much
more satisfactory than depending on international trade and production unions. Same for the users:
Its being estimated that there will be justa a few companies producing automobiles for the whole. It
means that there will be less designers and design activity for more and more consumers in the near
future. And for designing will be a professional activity, one of the main features of human brain,
designing through abstraction will no longer be a basic and general humane activity.
4. Epilogue
As Victor Papanek puts it as the first sentences of its first chapter of his first book, all men are
designers and all we do almost all the time is design, for design is basic to all human activity [Papanek
1972]. Victor Margolin classifies the active engagement of human beings with design in four basic
ways [Margolin 1995]:
1. they design products for others
2. they design products for themselves
3. they use products designed by others; and
4. they use products they design for themselves
Years have been passed since this classification and its still but a diminishing hope to consider design
activity as a practice of human beings. Globalization and specialization hand in hand are trying hard to
conquer and take it away this basic human ability from inside, with the help of profeesional designers.
The basic principle for ethical abstraction lies in the term "good". If we do not have a sense of what is
good and what is not then it means that we've lost our ethical abstraction ability. You can not replace
226
the qualitative answer for good and not good with quantitative factors. Ethical human existence can
not get satisfied with quantitative answers. We must have a basic ethical abstracion for our design
practices. We must ask ourselves if it is good to depend on nuclear energy, and must find an answer
apart from quantitative reasoning. We need ethical answers for questions like "is it good that the
technology I create can make a majority suffer in favour of a minority's wealth?" or "is it good that
the technology I am creating is making a lot of human being useless, or just giving them a sense of
uselessness? or, "is it good that I lost all my communication with my neighbour but I can
communicate with the other side of the world through my computer?", or "is it good that while my
kitchen is getting technologically well equipped my food is getting tasteless, and I am getting fatter?"
I always think that semi-god Prometheus was a designer and the fire he brought to humans was design
ability. Now he is embarrassed and bringing the fire back to gods with a job application in his hands.
By sacrificing the human side he thinks that he will be accepted among gods.
Can I be considered to be pessimistic about design activity today. No. I enjoy practicing and teaching
industrial design.
References
Fukuyama, Francis., The End of History, The National Interest, 16, 3-18, 1989
Heskett, John., The Economic Role of Industrial Design, In: Balcolu, Tevfik (ed) The Role of Product Design
in Post-Industrial Society, Middle East Technical University Press, METU-Kent Institute, Ankara, 1998, 77-92
Hoffman, K., "Technological Change in Telecommunications; Implications for Industrial Policy in Developing
Countries", New Technologies and Global Industrialization Prospects for Developing Countries, PPD, 142, 13
November 1989
Illich, Ivan., Tools for Conviviality, Fontana/Collins, England, 1975
Margolin, Victor., The Product Milieu and Social Action, In: Buchanan Richard, Margolin Victor (eds.)
Discovering Design, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1995, 121-146
Margolin, Victor., Design and The World Situation,. In: Balcolu, Tevfik (ed) The Role of Product Design in
Post-Industrial Society, Middle East Technical University Press, METU-Kent Institute, Ankara, 1998, 15-34
zcan, A. Can., Progress Depends on Unbalance and Disorder, ISTAS 97, International Symposium on
Technology and Society, Institution of Electrical Engineers, University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland,
1997
Papanek, Victor., Design For The Real World, Granada Publ., New York, 1972
Papanek, Victor ., The Green Imperative, Thames and Hudson, 1995
Pirsig Robert M., Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, An Inquiry into Values, Vintage, 1972
Pirsig Robert M., Lila, Bantam Books, USA and Canada, 1991
Rams, Dieter, The Responsibility of Design in The Future, In: Balcolu, Tevfik (ed) The Role of Product Design
in Post-Industrial Society, Middle East Technical University Press, METU-Kent Institute, Ankara, 1998, 15-34
Can zcan,PhD., Assistant Professor of Industrial Product Design
Izmir Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Design
YTE Kampusu, Gulbahce mevkii
Urla 35430, Izmir,Turkey
Tel: + 90 232 4987066, Fax: + 90 232 4987012
Email: cozcan@likya.iyte.edu.tr
227
228

TOWARDS A FLEXIBLE AND ADEQUATE USE OF

METHODS IN PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
U. Pulm and U. Lindemann
Keywords: Design research, design theory, design science, design
methodology
1. Introduction
Design methodology has become a major part of research in the field of engineering and offers a large
variety of methods in order to establish effective and efficient product development processes [Ehrlenspiel 1995]. The main problem yet is that methods are barely used in practice or used in a wrong way.
Corresponding to observations in industry, a survey resulted that there is no continuous use of methods
in practice [Grabowski & Geiger 1997]. One of the main reasons for the insufficient use of methods
may be that there is a wrong understanding of methods and their meaning, which again may be
determined by a wrong design of methods. With this contribution we would like to present a more
appropriate view on methods and the consequences for their design, teaching, and industrial use, not
just to save design methodology in itself but to optimise development processes by effective tools and
strategies. In this context, a method is understood as any tool, strategy, or proceeding that supports the
solution of a problem or the achievement of an aim in general.
2. Current situation in design methodology

2.1 Reasons for the inadequate use of methods
The main reason for the insufficient use of methods seems to be that there is a wrong understanding of
methods and their meaning, and by that wrong expectations. Often enough, designers think that there
is or should be a method that directly leads to the desired result. If the desired result fails to appear, it
will lead to disappointment, to a general questioning of methods and the non using of them. The
results will not appear, if a method is understood as some kind of development process algorithm or
automation. This in fact cannot be due to the necessary creativity and innovation, which somehow
define design. By this, methods are used wrongly, both strategically or efficiently, i. e. which method
to use, and operationally or effectively, i. e. how to use it.
The wrong understanding of methods may be determined by a wrong design and description. It is
often discussed if methods prescribe a special procedure or describe a recommended or logical way of
problem solving, while actually these differentiation between description and prescription must not be
seen to narrow. The intention of describing phenomena in engineering design implies some kind of
prescription by showing best or worse practices. Vice versa, the way to prescribe processes,
methods, etc. is done by the description of an exemplary proceeding. To understand this is important
for understanding methods and their description itself.
Another reason for the wrong understanding is that methods claim to be complete and generally valid.
On one hand, these claims may be necessary in order to propagate the method and to gain a broader
acceptance. One the other hand, these claims lead to the fact that designers expect completeness and
general validity, which, again, cannot be fulfilled and leads to the above mentioned disappointment.
229
By the way, completeness means that each aspect of the regarded topic is comprised within the
method; this is strongly connected to the general validity and signifies the above criticised because not
possible automation of design processes. It somehow also negates other, contradictory methods, which
may be also valid by regarding the problem from another point of view.
In the same way completeness and generality are delusive, the negligence of the necessity of technical
knowledge is precarious. Methods do not claim to overcome technical knowledge, but they often lack
to explicitly refer to it. Methodology is not a substitute for specialised or technical knowledge nor an
alternative way of problem solving. It is the systematic general way to solve a problem that shall lead
technical knowledge in the right direction. In this sense, the aim of a method is not primary the final
result, but a structured and systematic proceeding to get there. When asked for methodical support,
this is not possible without the integration of technical experts. Methodical and technical experts either
have to work together, or there has to be a comprehensive methodical education.
Though most methods somehow attend to handle complexity, the problem of complexity itself is
barely regarded. Methods may be the theoretical right way to handle complexity, e. g. by showing all
relevant relations between the elements in a recommended representation. But how to regard really
complex systems, e. g. with myriads of elements and relations, is not described, or the method even
fails completely by handling them.
Talking of complexity, the amount of methods and problem solving approaches itself has become a
problem, since there is no standard method or solution for a specific problem. Here, methods and tools
in order to estimate the efforts of a method and to choose the adequate one are still missing. "Methods
to estimate methods" shows the redundancy of the topic and by that what methodology means: it is
mainly the self-reflection of one's acting. This means that there is always a superior level that allows a
more general, abstract regard of the problem. So e. g. there is the description of technical knowledge,
then the description of methods to handle this knowledge, and then the description of the flexible
adaptation of methods or their implementation. It is one aspect of the incompleteness or an
interpretation of the respective theorem, that this reflection will not end and by that no (meta) method
can be complete. This is another reason why there has to be unconscious and intuitive elements within
design processes [Wach 1994], either integrated in a general reasonable proceeding or not.
These and other reasons for an insufficient use of methods [Zanker 2000] can be rephrased as the
following requirements on methods:
concrete and specific formulation, not theoretical and complicated, practical
user friendly and up to date
no prescriptive character, regarding individual working stylea
regarding distributed development processes explicitly
regard flexible use in their description and offer methodical concept for their adaptation
clear connection and integration of methods, superior structure, continuous description
implementation strategies, as well as education, training, and coaching
clear target and way it works
reasonable and detailed classification of methods for a proper choice
reduced efforts for the use of methods with obvious benefits
no pressure to use methods, understanding their meaning.
Regarding projects in collaboration with industry and universities, it often seems that industry cannot
use the methods research has to offer while they have problems research cannot solve. This
discrepancy may be on one hand justified in research's objective to think far ahead. On the other hand,
it somehow shows the main problem of industry, that the will to solve a problem is more important
than the ability. A method is not the solution, it is just a tool.
2.2 First approaches for a better use of methods and the positioning of design methodology
There are different approaches concerning an abstract regard of design methodology. First, there is the
situative adaptation of methods. It bases on the model that methods consist of elementary methods
supporting elementary activities of the design process and that their character is specified according to
the boundary conditions, e. g. team or individual. The elementary activities are e. g. collecting, struc-
230
turing, separating, comparing, creating, or deciding. A complex method can be assigned to these elementary activities, elementary methods directly support these activities. Elementary methods are e. g.
matrices, portfolios, hierarchical trees, or flow-charts. Another basis of this approach is the
classification of methods concerning the criteria structure (used elements and classes like work steps,
priorities, hierarchies, etc.), formulation (principle, dialog, rule, etc.), representation (language,
diagrams, symbols), tools (hardware, software), media (paper, computer), and user group (individual,
team). These criteria can be regarded directly, and as superior criteria, where the mentioned
specifications are the actual criteria that have to be specified, e. g. individual can be a manager, a
designer, or a controller. The situative adaptation of methods now consists of the approaches: use of
elementary methods for elementary activities, adaptation of methods on boundary conditions, and
recombination of methods in large scale. The choice between these depends on the task's complexity,
its importance and the available capacities.
Another pragmatic approach is the method implementation in integrated product development [Stetter
2000]. The described proceeding consists of the steps initiation of a method implementation process
(identification of strengths and improvement potential, establishment of objectives, moderation and
team building, etc.), analysis of the product development system (collection of information, intensive
analyses of details, etc.), choice and adaptation of methods (choice of the appropriate method, adaptation of methods to individual and group prerequisites, etc.), the actual implementation of methods
(method teaching, coaching, etc.), and the evaluation of the impact (quantitatively and qualitatively).
There are, of course, approaches to define a generally valid, comprehensive methodology [Grabowski,
Rude & Grein 1998]. Such a design theory may serve as a discussion platform or a portal, but it cannot
be complete or even consistent, i. e. free of contradictories. This is due to the fact that each process is
different ant cannot be totally decomposed. This chaos or flexibility within the design processes is
necessary for continuous improvement and creativity or innovation at all. It may be also what has been
described as the discourse within the design process or the action orientation in design methodology
[Lindemann & Wulf 2001]. This means that new solutions are generated within a dialog an inner
dialog of one person or a dialog between a few individuals where analysis and solution are not
strictly separated and boundary conditions always change arbitrarily. There also has to be an
alternation of systematical (level of results) and associative (level of action) procedures. Though there
are both action oriented methods such as brainstorming or synetics (for teams), TRIZ and mindmaps
(for individuals), and description and documentation oriented methods such as functional structuring,
morphological matrices, evaluation methods, etc., it seems that design methodology focuses on
planning, directing, and controlling instead of thinking and acting.
For a clear understanding of design methodology, there shall be a description of its positioning within
product development as shown in Figure 1. Objective of each development is the product, placed here
on top and represented by different product models. Each model, requirement specification, functional
structure, CAD-data, etc., is a representation of the complete product, though of course not regarding
each aspect. The product is result and outcome of the development process, which is very fuzzy on the
above mentioned action oriented level, but can be described as a reference on the abstract level of
results by building blocks, tasks, milestones, etc. These processes run within specific resources and
boundary conditions represented in the bottom and influencing one another. These are the organization
of the enterprise, its culture and markets, its employees with their characteristics, money, time, as well
as methods and tools. These methods and tools can support single process steps concerning different
levels of the product representation. They cannot completely describe the whole process and do not
work without appropriate boundary conditions such as the company organization, experienced,
qualified, and motivated employees, and respective capacities [Pahl & Beitz 1996]. The results of the
process or single process steps are again the input of new processes or process steps and also influence
the boundary conditions and resources. The borders within this model are of course fuzzy, e. g. the
product representations are again steps or milestones of the process while the abstractly described
process can be understood as a resource of the enterprise. This model may give an impression of what
is covered by design methodology and shall help to understand the aim and integration of methods.
The emphasis is on a flexible description of methods for different design processes and methodology
know-how regarding employees as the companies' most important resource.
231
Product
Product
Product
Models
different product
representations
results
Output
Output
Input
Input
Process
Process
Models
Process
Process steps
steps &
&
building
building blocks,
blocks,
Actions,
Actions, Tasks
Tasks
action
supported by
methods etc.
Boundary Conditions & Resources

industrial
industrial
engineering
engineering
company
company
organization
organization
employees
employees
enterprise
enterprise
qualification
qualification
product
type
product type
etc.
etc.
culture
culture
market
market
money time
methods
methods
tools
tools
media
media
etc.
Figure 1. Model of product development
3. Further implications and conclusions on methods of product development

3.1 Elementary methods and their integration
To have a methodology that is both continuous throughout the design process and manageable with
reasonable efforts, it is recommended to develop more elementary methods on one hand, and on the
other hand show their connection and integration in the overall concept. A lot of methods seem to be
self-contained within the design process, such as benchmarks, requirement lists, functional structures,
etc. Of course they are located within the design process, but the connection of the single methods and
their interaction are not formulated clear enough. Furthermore, depending on the scope of the method,
there are many redundancies, overlaps, and even contradictions within the methods, e. g. comparing
value analysis and the problem solving cycle, or e. g. matrices within the design structure matrix or
within quality function deployment. There are also many comprehensive methods or tools that are
only described as a whole barely manageable unit. Objective for design methodology as well as
each single method of any complexity is to offer single, manageable methods comparable to the
elementary methods described above but in a more concrete form (matrices, tables, diagrams, procedures, etc., together with their dimensions, parameters, characteristics, etc.). All these clear methods
have to be integrated in an overall context, i. e. it is to show how they work together and can be put
into a workflow. This may be possible by explicitly described connections, but not only input and
output. It shall not mean that there is one clear described design process, but it shall bring transparency
into design methodology and enable to find a reasonable way in development processes. Or in other
words, this shall not overcome single-standing methods nor complex methodologies, but it shall
emphasize and demand to always regard both aspects manageable methods and the overall context.
3.2 Constituents of a method or a tool
Next to the differentiation of elementary methods and their integration stands the aspect of the
constituents of any method (Figure 2). According to this, a comprehensive method shall have a
described process containing the respective work steps in their right arrangement, the language with
which it describes the product or the regarded aspects of the systems (graphical symbols such as in
UML or functional structures, matrices in QFD, etc.), tools that can be of any kind, either based on
paper or on computers, and finally rules both valid for the method and valid for the system regarded
with that method. The borders between these constituents may be sometimes blurred, but this model
shows the aspects that are to regard by building up a method.
232
Customer
Customer
wishes
wishes
gg
cc
Criteria
Criteria
m
m
Product
Product
Properties
Properties
ll
Correlations
Correlations
kk
jj
Critical
Critical
Properties
Properties
Range of
of
Range
Values
Values
bb
Correlations
Correlations
Parts/
Parts/
Assemblies
Assemblies ii
hh
Realization
Realization
ff
Relevance
Relevance
forCustomer
Customer
for
Baugruppe
AA
Baugruppe
Baugruppe
Baugruppe AA
Freiheitsgrad
Freihei
tsgrad 17
17
Freiheitsgrad
Fr eiheitsgr ad 17
17
Real.:
Modul
Real.:
M odul
Real.:
Real.: Modul
Modul
xx
44
x
44
yy x
3,57
3,57
3,57
y
3,57
zz y
42
42
42
zz
42
Kind
Kindof
of
Process
Process Realization
Realization
dd
Correlations
Correlations
XX
Kind
Kindof
of
Degree
Degree
aa
ee
Degreesof
of
Degrees
Freedom
Freedom
AA
Evaluation
Evaluation
FF
BB
nn
Language
Language
Critical
Critical
Units
Units
oo
Adaptation
Adaptation pp
Need
Needfor
for
Evaluation
Evaluation
Tools
Tools
Process
Process
Rules
Rules
I. 1
Te i l a uf g a b e n (Pr o d uk t u n d P ro ze ) fo rm u l ie re n
u n d se q u en ti e l l o de r p a ra l l e l a ba r be i ten .
I. 2
Z u er st d a s W ic h ti gs te (v o m W E SEN T LI C H EN z u m
W EN I G E R W ES EN TL I C H EN , v om
G R O B EN
zu m F EI N EN ).
I. 3
V o m RI S I KO RE IC H E N z um
I. 4
V o m C H AN C EN REI C H E N zu m C H A N C EN A RM E N .
I. 5
Z u er st d a s D r i n g l ic h st e .
RI SIK O A R M EN .
Figure 2. Constituents of methods and tools

It also helps to classify existing methods and identify potentials to extend them (e. g. QFD is focused
on the language, CAD on tools). This is represented by the graph in the middle of Figure 2, i. e. that all
four aspects shall be regarded nearly equally. This also implies that the 'method' behind a computer
tool has to be clear [Ambrosy 1997]. For a classification, there are of course more than these four
criteria (e. g. efforts, user group, targets). The aspects are iteratively connected to each other, e. g. one
step of the process is supported by a specific representation (language) or even again a method, while
a process also describes how to fill in the language, e. g. in form of a matrix.
3.3 Regard of methods as products
A pragmatic approach to improve methods is to regard them as products themselves. By that, a method
has to be developed, tested, offered, and sold, as well as there has to be a service and training for it. It
also implies that there may be different competing or alternative methods, that methods can have
success or not, which will only be shown by the market, that there is a life cycle of the method with
growing and declining, as well as also a final end of the method, to which another method may follow.
Comparing methods to products means also to refer to similar requirements, as there are e. g. an ease
of use, also if the product itself is complex, safety and reliability in its use, modularity and customers'
variability, fulfilling strategies like product families or platforms, etc.
3.4 Collaboration of industry, research, and education
Both the implementation of methods in industry and the closely connected need for methodology
know-how lead to a strong emphasis of the collaboration between industry, research, and education.
The need for knowledge in methodology shows the importance of the individual and the individual
education. This means in contrast to the before described regard of methods as products, that
methodology is closely bound to persons, as knowledge of it is by definition. This is on one hand the
main way of transferring methods into industry, when those individuals go into practice. On the other
hand it is one of the main that principles of methodology to instruct individuals to both dynamic and
systematic acting, just supported by methods. This is in student education as well as in the further
education integrated in graduations or dissertations regarding design methodology.
This collaboration benefits in the three dimensions learning, testing, and thinking ahead. Industry
learns new methods, proceedings, and techniques, i. e. method implementation, students learn about
praxis in early phases, and research learns about management and general problem solving. The
testing concerns new methods and proceedings, also for all three of those groups. This also refers to
some freedom in research and progress by trial and error, i. e. that not all results need to be economical
meaningful which otherwise could also be topic in industry. The thinking ahead is important for the
progress in industry as well as in research and in the personal development. Talking of collaboration,
research has a main part in the link between industry designers and software designers: industry can
233
often only show the need while software designers only see the implementation; the underlying and
linking methodology is part of research, which unfortunately sometimes seem to be competitor of
commercial IT-companies.
3.5 The narrow meaning of science regarding design methodology
Talking of flexibility in design methodology in order to cope with ever changing processes somehow
contradicts the main principles of design science or science itself: just to find the consistencies within
different systems, to 'define' in the meaning of differentiating things that actually belong together, all
in order to handle complexity and allow a precise acting. This is what methodology represents,
generally valid procedures or tools. But due to the fact that design processes are highly complex
systems, where an accurate comparison is nearly impossible, a method again will never be complete
and all someone can come up with. It is some kind of tightrope walk or dialectics between strictly
describing and prescribing methods for industrial product development and advocating flexibility
within design methodology. So both aspects are right, there is a need for a strict methodology in order
to have a platform for discussion and education as well as a reference for design processes, and there
is an even stronger need of understanding that design methodology is a very flexible and dynamic
instrument. This dialectics may show an aspect where design science has to go explicitly.
4. Summary
Though design methodology has become a major part of engineering science and industry is aware of
its need, the use of methods in practice still has to be optimized. It may be reasoned by a wrong design
of methods, that they are not understood und used properly. It is important to offer flexible and
manageable methods that are connected to one another along with clarifying that a method is just a
supporting tool, that it needs specialized knowledge, and that it is no design automatism. A strict
methodology e. g. in form of a design theory may be necessary for discussion and education,
which is in fact one of the major aspects of this topic since methodology is closely bound to
individuals. The dialectics between clear methods and their flexible use seems to become a main topic
of design science and shall be regarded in theses describing methods explicitly.
1.1
References
Ambrosy, S., "Methoden und Werkzeuge fr die integrierte Produktentwicklung", Shaker Aachen, 1997.
Ehrlenspiel, K., "Integrierte Produktentwicklung", Hanser Muenchen, 1995.
Wach, J., "Problemspezifische Hilfsmittel fr die integrierte Produktentwicklung", Hanser Muenchen, 1994.
Zanker, W., "Situative Anpassung und Neukombination von Entwicklungsmethoden", Shaker Aachen, 1999.
Stetter, R., "Method Implementation in Integrated Product Development", Dr.Hut Muenchen, 2000.
Lindemann, U., Wulf, J., "Action orientation in design methodology", Proceedings of the 13th Intern. Conference
on Engineering Design 2001. ImechE Glasgow, 2001, Vol. "Design Applications", pp. 131-138.
Grabowski, H., Geiger, K., "Neue Wege zur Produktentwicklung", Raabe Stuttgart, 1997.
Grabowski, H., Rude, S., Grein, G., "Universal Design Theory", Shaker Aachen, 1998.
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., "Engineering Design A Systematic Approach", Springer London, 1996.
Udo Pulm, Dipl.-Ing.
Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Institute of Product Development
Boltzmannstr. 15, 85748 Garching, Germany
Phone: +49 (0) 89 289 15155
Fax: +49 (0) 89 289 15144
Email: pulm@pe.mw.tum.de
234

REDESIGNING
PRODUCT
PROGRAMS
FOCUSING ON VARIETY, COMPLEXITY AND
COMMONALITY
J. Reitan, S. Stormo and K. Aasland
Keywords: Product development methodology, Product programs,
Multiproduct development
1. Introduction
During the last couple of decades there has been a change towards more and more customized
products within many industries. Since customers are different, with different needs and criteria for
choice, it has become more and more necessary for companies to offer a spectrum of models and
variants to satisfy various customers. Market demands have increased, and products market life spans
decrease. New products or new variants must be introduced more frequently than they used to. Product
assortments in companies are growing, which often leads to increased internal complexity.
On the other hand production and other internal stakeholders want less complexity and more
economies of scale. It can be a challenge to satisfy marked demand and at the same time make money.
To survive many companies are shifting from mass production strategy to a variety strategy. The result
of this conflict is increased turnover, but unfortunately reduced profit margin. [Schuh 1999]
Continuous product development activities, is a necessity for companies that want to be in the
forefront of development, and focus on multiproduct development instead of development of single
product is vital. One of the challenges for companies with high internal complexity is how they can
achieve mass production benefits and at the same time offer a variety of products. Managing
complexity with product modelling or configuration is one way another solution is reducing
complexity through means like standardisation, product platforms and modularization.
We are focusing on what we call a product program. A product program is a planned product portfolio
for a company, which considers both internal and external impacts of the products. The model for
improving product program complexity presented in this paper contains a framework, methods and
tools for reducing complexity, increasing commonality and increasing external variety.
2. Product Program Characteristics

One of the reasons why product variety has been a problem for many companies is that the new
products are not planned and considered in relation to the rest of the product assortment. This is why
the product assortment should be planned and coherent with the strategies of the company. The
product program should have positive effects on both the internal and external relations. Only by
fulfilling and co-ordinating these criteria consider it to be a product program. Product program
characteristics have been identified as variety, commonality, complexity and architecture [Andreasen
2001].
2.1 External variety
Is it necessary for the company to offer everything? We do not think so. But it is necessary to offer
235
exactly what the customers want. The company needs to focus on differentiating attributes in order to
offer distinct products and avoid cannibalisation. Variety should be related to the market strategy and
market segments.
Figure 1. Product program characteristics [Andreasen 2001]

Positive variety is defined as variation that is customer- driven and, as such, directly linked to
verifiable customer interest or demand; adds value and increases sales but does not add unwarranted
costs.[Galsworth 1994] What companies should strive for is not just product variety, but positive
variety to increase sales and profit.
2.2 Internal Commonality
Commonality can be introduced in the product itself, but also in activities or processes connected to
the company. Reuse, for example in the manufacturing process, can lead to reduced complexity and
reduced costs. Not all components should be reused if it is important for the customers that they are
distinct.
A platform is defined as a collection of values that share something common for a product. This could
be commonalty in components, processes, knowledge or staff and relationship. [Robertson and Ulrich
1998]
2.3 Organisational and product complexity
Because of the increasing variety and product complexity, a lot of companies experience increasing
organisational complexity. This complexity results in extra, unwarranted costs, both indirect and
direct, which is difficult to spot in traditional accounting principles.
Reducing organisational complexity can be done through standardisation and commonality principles
such as product platforms.
2.4 Product Architecture
Product architecture is defined as (1) the arrangement of functional elements; (2) the mapping from
functional elements to physical components; (3) the specification of the interfaces among interacting
physical components. [Ulrich 1998] An architecture can be modular (one to one mapping between
function and components) or integral.
Modularization is a way of organising the product architecture in order to achieve positive effects both
internal and external.
3. The redesign process

We have realised a need for a systematic approach for redesign processes, focus on internal
commonality and external variety. A model to improve and develop an existing product program has
therefore been developed. This model is both guidelines for development or redesign projects,
236
containing simple solutions and methods. The intention for this model is through a methodical way
increase internal commonality and at the same time increase external variety.
Compared with traditional models for integrated product development, these model focuses especially
on product program characteristics. This means according to the model, focus externally on variety,
internally on commonality and complexity and focus on the product architecture. These different
focuses are separated in the first phases, but should be considered throughout the process.
Figure 2. Model for redesigning product programs

The model is divided into 6 different phases, each containing different tools, and depending on the
performance. The tools itself is nothing new, just a collection of related methods. The methods are
inputs in a specific phase, considered from our view and needs, not considering the main purpose for
the methods.
3.1 Observe
The first step in this process is to observe and visualize/describe the existing product program. We
want to observe the products itself (components, modules, architecture etc.) but also the internal and
external circumstances (production activities, market segments etc.).
The observe phase is considered as a state of the art, where only available/written information is of
interest. This information, which is part of the strategies, is available in annual- and progress reports,
bill of materials and marketing material like product assortment lists and catalogues.
The outcome should be big sheets of paper, which visualises and describes existing product program,
but also emphasises the aspects which needs further analysis.
3.2 Analyse
In the same way as the phase above, this phase is divided into internal, product and external
considerations. The intention is to go thoroughly into aspects which is seen as defective from the
previous phase. It is important to mention that exactness in these two phases, is essential to make
correct recommendations.
3.3 Relate
The three considerations that were separated in the previous phases are related in this phase.
According to figure 1, product program characteristics [Andreasen 2001], there is a relationship
between product program characteristics. To focus on e.g. external variety itself, without concerning
on other product program characteristics, do not consider it to be a product program. All relevant
information from previous phases are input.
237
3.4 Restrict
In addition to product program characteristics, a product program is attached to a timeplan.
Requirements which regards product program development, should contain top level strategies (e.g.
corporate identity) but also future-oriented guidelines due to product program characteristics, in
addition to more traditional project depending specifications. [Figure 3] The guidelines should have
limited duration of e.g. 5-10 years.
Figure 3. Future-oriented plan for synchronising new products

3.5 Generate
The outcomes of the generation phase are new concepts of products or improved processes based on
the guidelines and strategies developed in previous phases. Due to product programs characteristic
these concepts do not need to be noticeable amendments for the customers, but e.g. merely internal
improvements.
3.6 Evaluate
This phase contains the same measures and visualising methods as in the first stages, and are used to
compare situations before and after. An evaluation, through fulfilled restrictions or not, it is
determined whether the concepts are ready for implementation or have to go one more lap.
3.7 Tools and methods
In table 1 different tools and methods are presented. We have implemented and tested some of these
tools in connection to the model. This is not a complete list, but some of the methods that can be found
in the literature.
Table 1. Examples of different tools applied to each phase
Phase:
Tools:
References:
Observe internal Variant tree (Variantenbaum)
[Schuh 1999]
product Part index
[Galsworth 1994]
external Product characteristic Merkmalbaum
[Schuh 1999]
Analyse internal Commonality plan
[Robertson ea. 1998 ]
VAT (Variety effectiveness process analysing tools)
[Galsworth 1994]
product Product family master plan (PFMP)
[Mortensen ea. 2000]
external Differentiation plan
[Robertson ea. 1998]
Competitor analysis
Relate
Relationship matrices
[Robertson ea. 1998]
Restrict
Generate
Traditional concept generating tools
MFD (Modular Function Deployment)
[Ericson ea. 1999]
Evaluate
QFD, evaluating indexes
238
4. Conclusion and further research

In this paper we have presented a model for improving existing product programs. The model itself is
just a guideline, including tools and methods for support. To develop product program and achieve the
benefits explained in the paper, a product program mindset (according to product program
characteristics) is needed.
Our intention for this paper was to present a case story from a kitchen manufacturer, where we have
used this model to support a process of improving the product program for this company. Due to
confidentiality issues the experiences of this project can not be presented in this paper.
The model seems like a plausible approach to develop and improve product programs. This research is
only implemented in one case study and need to be implemented on several projects to get some more
general results.
References
Andreasen, M.M,Hva pstr vi forskere at vi ved om multiproduktutvikling? Proceedings of
Produkutviklingsdagen, Multiproduktutvikling, DTU Copenhagen, 2001
Ericsson, A and G. Erixon Controlling design variants : modular product platforms Dearborn Mich 1999
Galsworth, G.D. Smart, simple design Oliver Wight Publications Vermont US, 1994
Mortensen, N.H, U. Harlou, M.P Nielsen and M..M. Andreasen, Procedure for modelling product families in
configuration systems, proceedings of Design for Configuration, Tampere, 2000
Robertson, D. and K. Ulrich Platform Product Development, Sloan Management Review, Vol.39 No. 4, 1998,
pp 19-31
Schuh, G. GPS Komplexittsmanagement GmbH, Variantenmanagement fr die Praxis, seminar, 1999.
Ulrich, K. and S. Eppinger Product Design and Development, 2000
Ulrich, K., Managing Product Variety: A study of the Bicycle Industry to be published in Managing Product
Variety, Ho T. and C. Tang (editors) Kluwer, 1998
Jarl Reitan
SINTEF, Industrial Management
S.P.Andersensvei 5, N-7465 Trondheim, Norway
+47 73 55 06 59, +47 73 59 36 70
Email: Jarl.Reitan@sintef.no
239
240

DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF

MODULAR FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT
Ctibor Stadler and Stanislav Hosnedl
Keywords: Modularisation, Design Science, Technical System,
Customer Requirement, Evaluation, Design Process, Knowledge
Support, Frame of Machine Tool, FEM
1. Introduction
Modular Function Deployment (MFD) is a method [Erixon 1998], which is based on the well-known
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) method. The QFD is more and more used because of its
orientation on customer requirements on technical products. It is assumed as one of the best Total
Quality Management (TQM) method. The goal of QFD is to ensure optimal fulfillment of customer
requirements on a single product only. The MFD enables above to ensure the same task by optimal
modular product or maybe its part composed only from the selected modules if required. This is
considerably more effective both for the producer and the customer.
According to the analyses performed MFD has, in spite of its very careful and detailed form, one weak
point. This is insufficient interconnection to a designed product. These relationships are largely
generally described in Design Science based on the Theory of Technical Systems (TTS) [Hubka &
Eder 1996]. One of the most significant results of this approach is that all phases of the Engineering
Design Process and their operations are systematically linked with general knowledge on any designed
technical product/system (TS).
2. Enhancement of MFD
2.1 Knowledge support of engineering design process
In general, knowledge support of engineering design process can be hierarchically structured into the
following three levels: intuitive, methodical and systematic one [Hosnedl, Vanek & Borusikova 2001].
The intuitive approach: We have no theories, no methods, only previously acquired general and
specialized knowledge and practical experience. In this case e.g. the scope of considered properties of
the TS depends only on intuitive decisions of engineering designers. The methodical approach: We
have prescriptive and normative instructions, which restrict space for creative design process, e.g. BS
2000, VDI 2221. According to our analyses MFD has been used up to now on this level. The flexible
systematic approach: We have moreover a system of pieces of engineering design knowledge and their
relations, i.e. Design Science, which enables to manage and optimally support creative engineering
design process. The MFD has been enhanced to this level with the use of the above-mentioned
theories.
The general structure of the engineering design process is shown in the Fig. 1. It represents synthesis
of the known design process models from Eekels, Koller, Hubka & Eder, Pahl & Beitz, VDI 2221, etc.
[Hosnedl 1997].
241
Figure 1. Structure of the engineering design process of the technical system

2.2 What is modularisation?
The modularisation is a decomposition of technical system into building blocks (modules). The
modules must have specified interfaces. We can distinguish three levels of modularisation according
to the structures of technical systems as follows: function, organ and constructional one. The
modularisation on the higher level always includes modularisation on all lower levels, i.e. organ
modularisation includes constructional modularisation and function modularisation includes organ and
constructional modularisation. A typical example of the function modularisation is a personal
computer (PC). The PCs can have e.g. CD-ROM device for reading of CD-ROM (one module),
graphical card for displaying of picture (another module) and sound card for reproduction of sound
242
(another module). These modules fulfil different functions. An example of the organ modularisation is
a car, which has relatively uniform function structure. The cars can have e.g. engine (module) working
on different principles (explosion or Diesel one). This module fulfils the same function. An example
of constructional modularisation is a rolling bearing, which has the same function and organ structure.
Rolling bearings can differ in sizes, shapes, etc., which fulfil the same functions performed by the
same organs.
2.3 Engineering design process with the use of enhanced MFD
We will proceed step-by-step according to the structure of the engineering design process (Fig. 1.)
with the use of MFD for organ modularisation of the designed TS.
2.3.1 Elaborating the assigned problem - design specification on properties of technical system
We use the theory of properties from the Theory of Technical Systems [Hubka & Eder 1996].
According to this theory the properties are separated into two basic groups as follows: external and
internal one. The external properties are required and judged by customer. The internal properties are
generated and controlled by engineering designer. Sometimes the customer has also requirements on
some internal properties. The external properties causally depend on the internal properties. Both
groups of these properties are separated into twelve classes as shown in the Fig. 2.
Figure 2. Classes of properties of technical systems (TS) and their basic relationships
To include all life cycle requirements on the designed TS the design specification should be created
with the use of these classes of properties. The enhanced MFD is an effective way, how to perform it.
This step is using the central organ of MFD, called The House of Modularity, as is shown in the Fig.3.
243
Figure 3. Design specification in The House of Modularity

2.3.2 Establishing the function and organ structure concept of technical system
Before establishing the function structure the main and assistant operational technical processes
related to the designed TS should be analysed. For example if we design a carriage for lathe we must
establish the operational processes for the lathe because in this case the technical process of turning is
running in the lathe. The carriage is a technical sub-system of the lathe only. The established
function structure can be represented e.g. in a form of hierarchical function tree. For establishing the
organ structure we can use e.g. the method of morphological matrix and/or TRIZ system. The
abbreviation TRIZ in the Russian language means Theory of Solution of Invention Tasks and TRIZ
system in form of a software product is called Tech Optimizer.
Figure 4. The House of Modularity

We then put organs for each variant of organ structure to The House of Modularity (Fig. 4) and
evaluate suitableness of their properties both for fulfilment of the given requirements and modular
design of the designed TS. The optimal organ structure from the viewpoints of design specification
and modular design can be then evaluated.
3. Concept and support of application

The application has been focused into the area of engineering design of frames for machine tools,
specifically on the development and evaluation of their optimal modules. The first problem here deals
244
with the identification of functions ensured by organs of the constructional structure. This has been
performed by evaluation of frame modules with the use of Finite Element Method (using software
MARC, ANSYS and I-DEAS).
A straight constructional module with rectangular cross-section has been designed because it has
different properties in all directions and is simple (Fig. 5). It is suitable for mutual comparing of single
properties of constructional variants of this module. The sizes of the cross-section have been
determined thus that the height is double of the breadth. The length of the module has been calculated
on the base of a theory of buckling thus that in case of compressive loading the module will be
strained by buckling. The material of module for determination of its length is isotropic steel because
it has the highest limiting depth-thickness ratio from current frame materials. The module for stating
its length is a plate one. The module is rigidly fixed at one end and loaded by forces and moments in
all three directions (Fx, Fy, Fz, Mx, My, Mz). Orientation of axial force has been chosen thus that the
module will be strained by tension.
Figure 5. Module for evaluation with loading

The sizes of cross-section:
b = 100 mm
h = 2 b = 2 . 100 = 200 mm
The limiting depth-thickness ratio:
m = 100
The limiting length of module (from the theory of buckling):
lm =
bm
48
100 100
= 1443mm
48
(1)
The chosen length of module:

l = 1700 mm
The values of loading:
Mx = 12 000 Nm
Fx = 500 kN
My = 7 000 Nm
Fy = 10 kN
Fz = 15 kN
Mz = 10 000 Nm
These values have been chosen thus that they would cause real strains within module.
Figure 6. Several types of modules for evaluation

Each variant of the module for evaluation have the same external sizes (breadth, height and length),
gripping and loading. The material or the internal structure of modules can be different. The solution
245
of the module will be performed by FEM software. The displacements of point in which the loading
has been will be read after the solution. Six stiffnesses (kx, ky, kz, ktx, kty, ktz) will be then computed
from loading and displacements as follows:
kx =
Fx
x
ktx =
Mx
x
(2, 3)
The answer to the question: Which organ of the module fulfils required function at the best? will be
found according to the computed stiffnesses of all the solved modules. If we would like to get other
results we will take the same modules and we can solve e.g. buckling, dynamics or durability. These
results will serve as a support for engineering design of optimal frame module for machine tools
according to the procedure, which has been described, in the previous chapter.
4. Conclusion
The paper presents flexible systematic procedure of engineering design of modular technical system.
The modular technical system is more and more important because joints together the process of
standardisation with multifarious solutions, which fulfil customer requirements at the best. The
modular solution also simplifies reconfiguration of TS if the customer requirements are changed. It is
achieved with the use of modules with clearly defined interfaces. The next advantage of a modular
solution is that producer or customer can accomplish the reconfiguration himself. The paper proves the
importance of application of the Finite Element Method for evaluation of different concepts of
modules for the design of frames for machine tools before the concrete constructional structure of its
modules is achieved. This evaluation answers the question which organ of the constructional structure
fulfils a required function at the best. These results can serve for the re-design of the developed
modular structure and its modules to fulfil the given requirements optimally. It will contribute to the
higher quality of engineering design of frames for machine tools and to shortening of the design time.
References
Andreasen, M., M. and Blessing, L., Proceedings of European PhD-Course Engineering Design Research
2001, Part I II, Vasteras SE and Magdeburg D, 2001.
Erixon, G., Modular Function Deployment A Method for Product Modularisation, ISSN 1104-2141, The
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm SE, 1998.
Hosnedl, S., Vanek, V. and Borusikova, I., Design Science for Engineering Design Practice, Proceedings of
ICED 2001. Glasgow UK, 2001, pp 363-370.
Hosnedl, S., The structure of diploma design projects, University of West Bohemia in Pilsen CR, 1997.
Housa, J., Design of highly dynamic machine tools and usage of laser in cutting, CTU Prague CR, 2001.
Hubka, V. and Eder, W., E., Design Science, Springer-Verlag London UK, 1996.
Ctibor Stadler M.Sc.
University of West Bohemia in Pilsen, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Machine Design
Univerzitni 8, P.O. Box 314, 306 14 Pilsen, Czech Republic
Telephone: +420-19-7491556
Telefax: +420-19-7423185
Email: stadler@kks.zcu.cz
246

A Study On The Thinking Path Model

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Study On The Thinking Path Model

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INTERNATIONAL DESIGN CONFERENCE - DESIGN 2002

Dubrovnik, May 14 - 17, 2002.