Posts tagged in design process

Hales, C. (2000). Ten Critical Factors in the Design Process. ASME, Strongsville, Ohio, May 23 – 24.

Paper lists ten critical factors in the design process: defining the problem, a working design team, the right tools for the job, communicating effectively, getting the concept right, keeping it simple

Continue reading...Hales, C. (2000). Ten Critical Factors in the Design Process. ASME, Strongsville, Ohio, May 23 – 24.

Chao and Ishii (2007) Design Process Error Proofing: Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of the Design Process, Journal of Mechanical Design, 129, pp. 491-501

I was interested in this paper for the part that listed communication as one of the six potential areas in a design process. The other five areas were knowledge, analysis, execution

Continue reading...Chao and Ishii (2007) Design Process Error Proofing: Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of the Design Process, Journal of Mechanical Design, 129, pp. 491-501

Jarrat et al. (2011) Engineering change: an overview and perspective on the literature, Research in Engineering Design, 22, pp.103-124

Paper gives a good overall picture on research done in the area of engineering changes. I recommend it to everybody who has done or is interested in doing work in this

Continue reading...Jarrat et al. (2011) Engineering change: an overview and perspective on the literature, Research in Engineering Design, 22, pp.103-124

Boujut, J-F., Hisarciklilar, O., (2012) Using a semiotic classification to characterise objects involved in collaborative design, Journal of Design Research, 10 (3), pp. 155-169

In cooperative design communication shifts from asynchronous to synchronous. Paper studies annotations (mostly in 2D and 3D product representations) as means to support design communication. Segmentation between expertise (design & manufacturing)

Continue reading...Boujut, J-F., Hisarciklilar, O., (2012) Using a semiotic classification to characterise objects involved in collaborative design, Journal of Design Research, 10 (3), pp. 155-169

LETTL, C. 2007. User involvement competence for radical innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 24, 1–2, 53–75.

This paper discusses involving users into radical innovation (RI) process. The users may be incapable of contributing to RI due to functional fixations, inability to evaluate concepts without existing reference product

Continue reading...LETTL, C. 2007. User involvement competence for radical innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 24, 1–2, 53–75.

GOULD, J.D., BOIES, S.J., AND LEWIS, C. 1991. Making usable, useful, productivity-enhancing computer applications. Communications of the ACM 34, 1, 74

Gould, Boies and Lewis (1991) elaborate on their own rules by emphasizing the need to act out the design for usability principles as a process, and by adding a fourth rule

Continue reading...GOULD, J.D., BOIES, S.J., AND LEWIS, C. 1991. Making usable, useful, productivity-enhancing computer applications. Communications of the ACM 34, 1, 74

GOULD, J.D. AND LEWIS, C. 1985. Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM 28, 3, 300-311

Legends of UCD Gould and Lewis reported their famous Key principles for Design. These were later extended and adapted to most of our standards etc. I’d say a truly seminal work

Continue reading...GOULD, J.D. AND LEWIS, C. 1985. Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM 28, 3, 300-311

Medland, A.J (1992) Forms of Communications Observed During the Study of Design Activities in Industry, Journal of Engineering Design, 3 (3), pp. 243-253

Paper identifies four types of communication models within design process:

  • Delegation
  • Reporting
  • Awareness
  • Problem handling (of design conflicts)

With

Continue reading...Medland, A.J (1992) Forms of Communications Observed During the Study of Design Activities in Industry, Journal of Engineering Design, 3 (3), pp. 243-253

Greenberg, S. & Buxton, B. (2008) Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful (Some of the Time). In CHI 2008 Proceedings, pp. 111-120.

Greenberg and Buxton have listed in their paper a number of problems related to usability testing, and situations where usability evaluation can even be harmful ”if naively done ’by rule’ rather

Continue reading...Greenberg, S. & Buxton, B. (2008) Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful (Some of the Time). In CHI 2008 Proceedings, pp. 111-120.