Abstract
The purpose of the study is to model the micro-scale process patterns which can be identified during team conceptual design activities. A state-transition model has been developed and used to empirically investigate the patterns of design operations during two types of team conceptual design activities: ideation and concept review. The presented work builds on the perception of design problems as ill-defined and implies that conceptual design activities involve the simultaneous development of problems and solutions using three distinctive design operations—analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The three design operations have been defined as fine-grain design steps performed by design teams when exploring the content of both the problem and the solution dimensions of the design space. Moreover, design operations have been conceptualised as transitions between states of the explored design space, thus providing a basis for the state-transition model. The model’s ability to map and visualise proportions of design operation sequences emerging during ideation and concept review has facilitated the identification of both the activity-specific patterns and patterns that were likely to appear during both types of empirically investigated activities. The two activities exhibited similar patterns, such as alternation of solution synthesis and analysis, sequences of synthesis, analysis and evaluation within solution space, and the potential co-evolution episodes. Nevertheless, divergent traits have been identified for ideation, and convergent traits for concept review, based on the significant differences in proportions of design operations and their sequences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams RS, Cardella M, Purzer S (2016) Analyzing design review conversations: connecting design knowing, being and coaching. Des Stud 45:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.03.001
Afacan Y, Demirkan H (2011) An ontology-based universal design knowledge support system. Knowl Based Syst 24(4):530–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2011.01.002
Andreasen MM, Hansen CT, Cash P (2015) Conceptual design: interpretations, mindset and models. Springer, Cham
Asimow M (1962) Introduction to design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Aurisicchio M, Bracewell RH, Wallace KM (2013) Characterising the information requests of aerospace engineering designers. Res Eng Des 24(1):43–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0136-y
Ball LJ, Onarheim B, Christensen BT (2010) Design requirements, epistemic uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design. Des Stud 31(6):567–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2010.09.003
Bender B (2003) Task design and task analysis for empirical studies into design activity. J Eng Des 14(4):399–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820310001606894
Brissaud D, Garro O, Poveda O (2003) Design process rationale capture and support by abstraction of criteria. Res Eng Des 14(3):162–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-003-0038-0
Cardoso C, Badke-Schaub P, Eris O (2016) Inflection moments in design discourse: how questions drive problem framing during idea generation. Des Stud 46:59–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.07.002
Casakin H, Badke-Schaub P (2015) Mental models and creativity in engineering and architectural design teams. In: Gero J, Hanna S (eds) Design computing and cognition’14. Springer, Cham, pp 155–171
Casakin H, Badke-Schaub P (2017) Sharedness of team mental models in the course of design-related interaction between architects and clients. Des Sci 3(e14):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.15
Cash P, Maier A (2016) Prototyping with your hands: the many roles of gesture in the communication of design concepts. J Eng Des 27(1–3):118–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2015.1126702
Cash P, Štorga M (2015) Multifaceted assessment of ideation: using networks to link ideation and design activity. J Eng Des 26(10–12):391–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2015.1070813
Cash PJ, Hicks BJ, Culley SJ (2013) A comparison of designer activity using core design situations in the laboratory and practice. Des Stud 34(5):575–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2013.03.002
Chakrabarti A, Morgenstern S, Knaab H (2004) Identification and application of requirements and their impact on the design process: a protocol study. Res Eng Des 15(1):22–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-003-0033-5
Cross N (2001) Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In: Newstatter W, McCracken M (eds) Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 79–103
Cross N, Clayburn Cross A (1995) Observations of teamwork and social processes in design. Des Stud 16(2):143–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(94)00007-Z
Deken F, Kleinsmann M, Aurisicchio M et al (2012) Tapping into past design experiences: knowledge sharing and creation during novice-expert design consultations. Res Eng Des 23(3):203–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-011-0123-8
Dinar M, Shah JJ, Cagan J et al (2015) Empirical studies of designer thinking: past, present, and future. J Mech Des 137(2):021101. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4029025
Dorst K, Cross N (2001) Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem-solution. Des Stud 22(5):425–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6
Dorst K, Vermaas PE (2005) John Gero’s function-behaviour-structure model of designing: a critical analysis. Res Eng Des 16(1–2):17–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-005-0058-z
Eckert C, Clarkson J (2005) The reality of design. In: Clarkson J, Eckert C (eds) Design process improvement: a review of current practice. Springer, London, pp 1–29
Eckert CM, Stacey M, Wyatt D, Garthwaite P (2012) Change as little as possible: creativity in design by modification. J Eng Des 23(4):337–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2011.639299
Eisenbart B, Gericke K, Blessing LTM (2017) Taking a look at the utilisation of function models in interdisciplinary design: insights from ten engineering companies. Res Eng Des 28(3):299–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0242-3
Ensici A, Badke-Schaub P, Bayazit N, Lauche K (2013) Used and rejected decisions in design teamwork. CoDesign 9(2):113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2013.782411
Eris O, Martelaro N, Badke-Schaub P (2014) A comparative analysis of multimodal communication during design sketching in co-located and distributed environments. Des Stud 35(6):559–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.04.002
Fiorineschi L, Rotini F, Rissone P (2016) A new conceptual design approach for overcoming the flaws of functional decomposition and morphology. J Eng Des 27(7):438–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2016.1160275
Frankenberger E, Auer P (1997) Standardized observation of team-work in design. Res Eng Des 9(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01607053
Gagniuc PA (2017) Markov chains: from theory to implementation and experimentation. Wiley, Hoboken
Gero JS (1990) Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Mag 11(4):26–36. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v11i4.854
Gero JS, Jiang H (2016) Exploring the design cognition of concept design reviews using the FBS-based protocol analysis. In: Adams RS, Siddiqui JA (eds) Analyzing design review conversations. Purdue University Press, West Lafayette. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284315931
Gero JS, Kan JWT (2016) Scientific models from empirical design research. In: Cash P, Stanković T, Štorga M (eds) Experimental design research. Springer, Cham, pp 253–270
Gero JS, Kannengiesser U (2014) The function-behaviour-structure ontology of design. In: Chakrabarti A, Blessing L (eds) An anthology of theories and models of design. Springer, London, pp 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_13
Gero JS, Jiang H, Williams CB (2013) Design cognition differences when using unstructured, partially structured, and structured concept generation creativity techniques. Int J Des Creat Innov 1(4):196–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.801760
Goldschmidt G (2014) Linkography: unfolding the design process. The MIT, Cambridge
Goldschmidt G (2016) Linkographic evidence for concurrent divergent and convergent thinking in creative design. Creat Res J 28(2):115–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1162497
Gonçalves M, Cardoso C, Badke-Schaub P (2014) What inspires designers? Preferences on inspirational approaches during idea generation. Des Stud 35(1):29–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2013.09.001
Harvey S, Kou CY (2013) Collective engagement in creative tasks: the role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Adm Sci Q 58(3):346–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213498591
Hatcher G, Ion W, Maclachlan R, Marlow M, Simpson B, Wilson N, Wodehouse A (2018) Using linkography to compare creative methods for group ideation. Des Stud 58:127–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.05.002
Hay L, Duffy AHB, McTeague C et al (2017) A systematic review of protocol studies on conceptual design cognition: design as search and exploration. Des Sci 3(e10):1–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.11
Howard TJ, Culley SJ, Dekoninck E (2008) Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Des Stud 29(2):160–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.01.001
Howard TJ, Dekoninck EA, Culley SJ (2010) The use of creative stimuli at early stages of industrial product innovation. Res Eng Des 21(4):263–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-010-0091-4
Hultén M, Artman H, House D (2018) A model to analyse students’ cooperative idea generation in conceptual design. Int J Technol Des Educ 28(2):451–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9384-x
Jiang H, Gero JS, Yen CC (2014) Exploring designing styles using a problem-solution division. In: Gero JS (ed) Design computing and cognition’12. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 79–94
Jin Y, Benami O (2010) Creative patterns and stimulation in conceptual design. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 24(2):191–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060410000053
Jin Y, Chusilp P (2006) Study of mental iteration in different design situations. Des Stud 27(1):25–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2005.06.003
Kan JWT, Gero JS, Tang HH (2011) Measuring cognitive design activity changes during an industry team brainstorming session. In: Gero JS (ed) Design computing and cognition’10. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 621–640
Kannengiesser U, Gero JS (2015) Is designing independent of domain? Comparing models of engineering, software and service design. Res Eng Des 26(3):253–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-015-0195-y
Khaidzir KAM, Lawson B (2013) The cognitive construct of design conversation. Res Eng Des 24(4):331–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0147-8
Klonek FE, Quera V, Burba M, Kauffeld S (2016) Group interactions and time: using sequential analysis to study group dynamics in project meetings. Group Dyn Theor Res 20(3):209–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000052
Kroll E (2013) Design theory and conceptual design: contrasting functional decomposition and morphology with parameter analysis. Res Eng Des 24(2):165–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0149-6
Kruger C, Cross N (2006) Solution driven versus problem driven design: strategies and outcomes. Des Stud 27(5):527–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2006.01.001
Kurakawa K (2004) A scenario-driven conceptual design information model and its formation. Res Eng Des 15(2):122–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-004-0050-z
Lawson B, Dorst K (2009) Design expertise, 1st edn. Routledge, London
Liikkanen LA, Perttula M (2009) Exploring problem decomposition in conceptual design among novice designers. Des Stud 30(1):38–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.07.003
Liikkanen LA, Perttula M (2010) Inspiring design idea generation: insights from a memory-search perspective. J Eng Des 21(5):545–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820802353297
Liu A, Lu SC-Y (2014) Alternation of analysis and synthesis for concept generation. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 63(1):177–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.094
Liu YC, Bligh T, Chakrabarti A (2003) Towards an “ideal” approach for concept generation. Des Stud 24(4):341–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(03)00003-6
López-Mesa B, Mulet E, Vidal R, Thompson G (2011) Effects of additional stimuli on idea-finding in design teams. J Eng Des 22(1):31–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820902911366
Macmillan S, Steele J, Austin S et al (2001) Development and verification of a generic framework for conceptual design. Des Stud 22(2):169–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00025-9
Maher ML, Tang H (2003) Co-evolution as a computational and cognitive model of design. Res Eng Des 14(1):47–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-002-0016-y
Maher ML, Poon J, Boulanger S (1996) Formalising design exploration as co-evolution: a combined gene approach. In: Gero JS, Sudweeks F (eds) Advances in formal design methods for CAD. IFIP—the international federation for information processing. Springer, Boston, pp 3–30
Mc Neill T, Gero JS, Warren J (1998) Understanding conceptual electronic design using protocol analysis. Res Eng Des 10(3):129–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01607155
McComb C, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2015) Lifting the veil: drawing insights about design teams from a cofnitively-inspired computational model. Des Stud 40:119–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.06.005
McDonnell J (1997) Descriptive models for interpreting design. Des Stud 18(4):457–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(97)00012-4
McMahon C (2015) Design informatics: supporting engineering design processes with information technology. J Indian Inst Sci 95(4):365–377
McTeague C, Duffy A, Campbell G et al (2017) An exploration of design synthesis. In: Maier A, Škec S, Kim H et al (eds) Proceedings of the 21st international conference on engineering design (ICED 17) vol 8: human behaviour in design. The Design Society, Glasgow, pp 279–288
Nikander JB, Liikkanen LA, Laakso M (2014) The preference effect in design concept evaluation. Des Stud 35(5):473–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.02.006
Petersson AM, Lundberg J (2018) Developing an ideation method to be used in cross-functional inter-organizational teams by means of action design research. Res Eng Des 29(3):433–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-0283-x
Quera V, Bakeman R, Gnisci A (2007) Observer agreement for event sequences: methods and software for sequence alignment and reliability estimates. Behav Res 39(1):39–49. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192842
Reymen IMMJ, Hammer DK, Kroes PA et al (2006) A domain-independent descriptive design model and its application to structured reflection on design processes. Res Eng Des 16(4):147–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-006-0011-9
Roozenburg NFM, Eekels J (1995) Product design: fundamentals and methods, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester
Sarkar P, Chakrabarti A (2014) Ideas generated in conceptual design and their effects on creativity. Res Eng Des 25(3):185–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-014-0173-9
Sarkar P, Chakrabarti A (2017) A model for the process of idea generation. Des J 20(2):239–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1272244
Sauder J, Jin Y (2016) A qualitative study of collaborative stimulation in group design thinking. Des Sci 2(e4):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2016.1
Smith RP, Tjandra P (1998) Experimental observation of iteration in engineering design. Res Eng Des 10(2):107–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01616691
Smithers T (2002) Synthesis in designing. In: Gero JS (ed) Artificial intelligence in design’02. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0795-4_1
Snider C, Dekoninck E, Culley S (2016) Beyond the concept: characterisations of later-stage creative behaviour in design. Res Eng Des 27(3):265–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0218-3
Sonalkar N, Mabogunje A, Leifer L (2013) Developing a visual representation to characterize moment-to-moment concept generation in design teams. Int J Des Creat Innov 1(2):93–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.773117
Srinivasan V, Chakrabarti A (2010a) An integrated model of designing. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 10(3):031013. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3467011
Srinivasan V, Chakrabarti A (2010b) Investigating novelty-outcome relationships in engineering design. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 24(2):161–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S089006041000003X
Stempfle J, Badke-Schaub P (2002) Thinking in design teams—an analysis of team communication. Des Stud 23(5):473–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2
Stompff G, Smulders F, Henze L (2016) Surprises are the benefits: reframing in multidisciplinary design teams. Des Stud 47:187–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.09.004
Sung E, Kelley TR (2018) Identifying design process patterns: a sequential analysis study of design thinking. Int J Technol Des Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9448-1 (in press)
Toh CA, Miller SR (2015) How engineering teams select design concepts: a view through the lens of creativity. Des Stud 38:111–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.03.001
Toh CA, Miller SR (2016a) Creativity in design teams: the influence of personality traits and risk attitudes on creative concept selection. Res Eng Des 27(1):73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-015-0207-y
Toh CA, Miller SR (2016b) Choosing creativity: the role of individual risk and ambiguity aversion on creative concept selection in engineering design. Res Eng Des 27(3):195–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-015-0212-1
Toh CA, Miller SR, Okudan Kremer GE (2014) The impact of team-based product dissection on design novelty. J Mech Des 136(4):041004. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4026151
Vasconcelos LA, Crilly N (2016) Inspiration and fixation: questions, methods, findings, and challenges. Des Stud 42:1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.11.001
Visser W (2009) Design: one, but in different forms. Des Stud 30(3):187–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.11.004
Vuletic T, Duffy A, Hay L et al (2018) The challenges in computer supported conceptual engineering design. Comput Ind 95:22–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2017.11.003
Watts RD (1966) The elements of design. In: Gregory SA (ed) The design method. Springer, Boston, pp 85–95
Wiltschnig S, Christensen BT, Ball LJ (2013) Collaborative problem-solution co-evolution in creative design. Des Stud 34(5):515–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2013.01.002
Wodehouse AJ, Ion WJ (2010) Information use in conceptual design: existing taxonomies and new approaches. Int J Des 4(3):53–65
Wynn D, Clarkson J (2005) Models of designing. In: Clarkson J, Eckert C (eds) Design process improvement: a review of current practice. Springer, London, pp 34–59
Wynn D, Clarkson P (2017) Process models in design and development. Res Eng Des 29(2):161–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-017-0262-7
Wynn DC, Eckert CM (2017) Perspectives on iteration in design and development. Res Eng Des 28(2):153–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0226-3
Yilmaz S, Daly SR (2016) Feedback in concept development: comparing design disciplines. Des Stud 45(A):137–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.12.008
Acknowledgements
This paper reports on work funded by the Croatian Science Foundation MInMED (http://www.minmed.org) and TAIDE projects (http://www.taide.org). The authors would like to thank Philip Cash (TU Denmark) for providing the multimedia data of the experiment sessions.
Funding
Croatian Science Foundation project IP-2018-01-7269: Team Adaptability for Innovation-Oriented Product Development - TAIDE (http://www.taide.org).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Martinec, T., Škec, S., Horvat, N. et al. A state-transition model of team conceptual design activity. Res Eng Design 30, 103–132 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-00305-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-00305-1