Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:41:00.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IDENTIFYING REASONS FOR A LACK OF METHOD APPLICATION IN ENGINEERING DESIGN PRACTICE – AN INTERVIEW STUDY

Part of: Engineering Design Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

M. Eisenmann  and
S. Matthiesen
M. Eisenmann*
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
S. Matthiesen
Affiliation:
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
*
*[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Design methods are seldom used in engineering design practice. The presented study aims at finding the alternative strategies for situations with a need for methodological support. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten experienced design engineers to identify causes of and strategies for those situations. Three strategy clusters could be identified: generating information, experience and method application. As the individual's and the team's experience compete with the application of methods, they are seen as reasons for a lack of method application.

Keywords

human behaviourdesign strategydesign practicedesign methods
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 2495 - 2504
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ahmed, S. (2007a), “An Industrial Case Study: Identification of Competencies of Design Engineers”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 129 No. 7, pp. 709–716. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.27238070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmed, S. (2007b), “Empirical Research in Engineering Design”, Journal of Design Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 359–380. https://doi.org/10.1504/JDR.2007.016389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P. et al. (2014), “A Theoretical Approach to Intuition in Design: Does Design Methodology Need to Account for Unconscious Processes?”, In: An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design, Springer, London, pp. 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P. and Voute, E. (2018), “Design Methodology: Where do you go?”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 / 15th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 21-24, 2018, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 25–32. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckmann, G., Gebhardt, N. and Krause, D. (2014), “Transfer of Methods for developing Modular Product Families into Practice – An Interview Study”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 / 13th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 19-22, 2014, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 121–130.Google Scholar
Birkhofer, H. (2011), The Future of Design Methodology, Springer, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-615-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarti, A. and Lindemann, U. (2016), Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice, Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19449-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daalhuizen, J., Badke-Schaub, P. and Batill, S.M. (2009), “Dealing with uncertainty in design practice: issues for designer-centered methodology”. Proceedings of the ICED 09 / 17th International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 9, Human Behavior in Design, Palo Alto, United States, August 24-27, 2009, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 147–158.Google Scholar
Daalhuizen, J. and Badke-Schaub, P. (2011), “The use of methods by advanced beginner and expert industrial designers in non-routine situations: a quasi-experiment”, International Journal of Product Development, Vol. 15 No. 1/2/3, pp. 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2011.043661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daalhuizen, J. (2014), Method Usage in Design: How methods function as mental tools for designers, [PhD thesis], TU Delft. https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:4ac01165-c6b5-4057-a2fe-3418907f251eGoogle Scholar
Dorst, K. (2008), “Design research: a revolution-waiting-to-happen”, Design Studies, Vol. 29, pp. 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K. (1999), “Praktiker minimieren ihren Konstruktionsaufwand mit unbewußt erlernten Methoden”, In: Franke, H.J., Krusche, T. and Mette, M. (Eds.), Konstruktionsmethodik – Quo vadis?, Shaker, Aachen, pp. 31–42.Google Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K. and Meerkamm, H. (2017), Integrierte Produktentwicklung: Denkabläufe, Methodeneinsatz, Zusammenarbeit, Hanser, Munich. https://doi.org/10.3139/9783446449084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geis, C. et al. (2008), “Methods in practice – A study on requirements for development and transfer of design methods”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2008 / 10th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 19-22, 2008, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 369–376.Google Scholar
Germann, R., Jahnke, B. and Matthiesen, S. (2019), “Objective usability evaluation of drywall screwdriver under consideration of the user experience”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 75, pp. 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (2017), The Discovery of Grounded Theory, Routledge, New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grauberger, P. et al. (2019), “The contact and channel approach – 20 years of application experience in product engineering”, Journal of Engineering Design. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2019.1699035Google Scholar
Guertler, M.R. (2018), “How to design Methods for Application – Empirical Insights from Industry”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 / 15th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 21-24, 2018, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 1161–1172. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussy, W., Schreier, M. and Echterhoff, G. (2010), Forschungsmethoden in Psychologie und Sozialwissenschaften für Bachelor, Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34362-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jänsch, J. (2007), Akzeptanz und Anwendung von Konstruktionsmethoden im industriellen Einsatz: Analyse und Empfehlungen aus kognitionswissenschaftlicher Sicht, [PhD thesis], TU Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Jonassen, D., Strobel, J. and Chwee, B.L. (2006), “Everyday Problem Solving in Engineering: Lessons for Engineering Educators”, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 95 No. 2, pp. 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00885.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindemann, U. (2016), “Impact of Design Research on Practitioners in Industry”, In: Chakrabarti, A. and Lindemann, U. (Eds.), Impact of Design Research on Industrial Practice, Springer, Cham, pp. 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19449-3_14Google Scholar
Ling, T., Xiao, Y.G. and Badke-Schaub, P.G. (2014), “How Intuition affects Designers’ Decision Making: An Interview Study”, Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 / 13th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 19-22, 2014, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 537–548.Google Scholar
Matthiesen, S. (2011), “Seven Years of Product Development in Industry – Experiences and Requirements for supporting Engineering Design with ‘Thinking Tools’”, Proceedings of the ICED 11/18th International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 9, Design Methods and Tools pt. 1, Lyngby/Copenhangen, Denmark, August 15-19, 2011, The Design Society, Glasgow, pp. 236–245.Google Scholar
Mayring, P. (1991), “Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse”, In: Flick, U., Kardoff, E.V., Keupp, H., Rosenstiel, L.V. and Wolff, S. (Eds.), Handbuch qualitative Forschung: Grundlagen, Konzepte, Methoden und Anwendungen, Beltz, Munich, pp. 209–213.Google Scholar
Strauss, A.L. (1990), “Systematic Coding in Qualitative Research”, Bulletin de méthodologie sociologique, Vol. 27, pp. 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639002700103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. (1973), “The structure of ill-defined problems”, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 4 No. 3-4, pp. 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(73)90011-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yassine, A. and Braha, D. (2003), “Complex Concurrent Engineering and the Design Structure Matrix Method”, Concurrent Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 165–17610.1177/106329303034503CrossRefGoogle Scholar