Browsing by Author "Clarkson, P. John"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Comparative study of design with application to engineering design.
    (Design Society, 2005) Earl, Christopher; Eckert, Claudia; Bucciarelli, Louis; Whitney, Daniel; Knight, Terry; Stacey, Martin; Blackwell, Alan; Macmillan, Sebastian; Clarkson, P. John
    A recent exploratory study examines design processes across domains and compares them. This is achieved through a series of interdisciplinary, participative workshops. A systematic framework is used to collect data from expert witnesses who are practising designers across domains from engineering through architecture to product design and fashion, including film production, pharmaceutical drugs, food, packaging, graphics and multimedia and software. Similarities and differences across domains are described which indicate the types of comparative analysis we have been able to do from our data. The paper goes further and speculates on possible lessons for selected areas of engineering design which can be drawn from comparison with processes in other domains. As such this comparative design study offers the potential for improving engineering design processes. More generally it is a first step in creating a discipline of comparative design which aims to provide a new rich picture of design processes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The lure of the measurable in design research.
    (Design Society, 2004) Eckert, Claudia; Stacey, Martin; Clarkson, P. John
    Beginning design research projects by defining success criteria, judged by numerical measurements, is a very attractive idea. But defining a priori success criteria is problematic, as is using numerical metrics to assess the success of a new method or computer tool. The paper points out some pitfalls of using metrics for success. It argues from experience of studying design processes that projects should begin with objectives derived from research questions, but these objectives should be revised as needs and opportunities emerge. Success criteria for of new methods and tools should be derived later from a detailed specification of requirements. Researchers should aim first for understanding their effects, and derive evaluations from that.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Risk across design domains.
    (Professional Engineering Publishers, 2005) Eckert, Claudia; Earl, Christopher; Stacey, Martin; Bucciarelli, Louis; Clarkson, P. John
    Design processes involve risk: to life and limb if the product is unsafe, to the financial health of the company if the product is late, unsuccessful or simply the wrong product, as well as to the emotions and careers of the designers. Many of the risks are shared universally by all designers, but each different industry and each different project faces its own spectrum of serious and minor risks. Different industries have put their methodological effort into finding ways to mitigate the risks they recognise as important. As part of the Across Design project exploring similarities and differences between design processes in different industries, this paper examines how risks are perceived and handled in different types of design process, and proposes that designers and managers can usefully look to other industries for ways to handle risks that are more central for those other industries.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The spiral of applied research: a methodological view on integrated design research.
    (Design Society, 2003-08-15) Eckert, Claudia; Clarkson, P. John; Stacey, Martin
    Design covers a wide range of human activities. It is inherently multi-facetted, multi-layered and complex. Design research serves the dual purpose of understanding the phenomenon of design and improving particular aspects of design. Understanding design requires multi-disciplinary research drawing on such diverse fields as psychology, sociology and computer science. This paper proposes a framework in which design research can be carried out in big research teams. It contains eight major stages. Four fundamental research efforts drawing on different domains (Empirical studies of design behaviour, Development of theory, Development of tools and procedures, Introduction of tools and procedures). It emphasises the importance of separate evaluation after each stage. Individual projects can contain any number of these stages, provided the researchers are aware of the bigger picture. The paper concludes with a comparison with DRM.