Use Design Performance Based on Use Requirements

Communication plays a pivotal role in design teams and can impact team dynamics and design outcomes. Understanding the relationships between design communication and design trajectory can significantly improve our ability to track and optimize design processes. While prior work has investigated design convergence, there is limited work on how team climate and communicative patterns impact the design process. This study investigates the interactions between team climate, communication, and design actions. We estimate team climate as an individual’s perception of their team’s psychological safety, or how comfortable they feel sharing thoughts and ideas freely. Design actions were measured using a behavioral coding schema and audio recordings of design team interactions. In this work, 28 participants and 5 design thinking experts engaging in a design thinking workshop were studied to understand the relationship between design communication, process, and team climate. Contrary to expectations, this mixed-methods study found no significant correlation between perceived psychological safety and design behaviors in engineering design teams, challenging prior research suggesting a positive link. This finding highlights the complexity of team dynamics and underscores the need for further exploration to understand how psychological safety, conversational behaviors, and design actions interact to shape collaborative processes and innovation in design teams.

This article is a case study of the efficient implementation of design processes in Warta. It accounts for the perspective presented by Anna Kuczyńska, now a CX manager in the Warta Insurance and Reinsurance Association, and by Weronika Rochacka-Gagliardi, a service designer and leader of design team. In reference to their collaboration of a few years, it describes the process of designing a customer journey of filing a claim, considering both the needs of policyholders and the efficiency of business and technological processes. At the end of 2020, Warta set a goal of simplifying the claim service process. Over four months, a process was designed to unify internal procedures and communication with customers. In six months from its launch, the company noted particular financial savings and improvement of customer experience. Next to the very process of claim service, Warta conducted a number of operations to build empathy and customer-centric attitude in its employees. In 2023, the company collaborated with the service design team again in order to assess changes in the process from the perspective of customers and employees. The result was the implementation of new solutions, accounting for the past experience. The article refers i.a. to the issues of design efficacy measurability, assessment of the effect of changes on users behaviour, design process management, as well as models of collaboration with businesses and building the awareness of the role of empathy in organisation. Keywords: service design, customer experience (CX), corporate empathy

This study examines an ongoing design process, monitoring a use-case in a metalworking company aiming to digitalize a product storage area for enhanced product and stock traceability. Two research questions were defined: i) what perspectives and concerns drive the design team’s discussions regarding the new work situation? ii) how is the work of operators who interact with the products in the storage area and their experience and potential for skills development considered in this design process? Data was collected through the monitoring of the design team meetings, work observation moments, and meetings with members of the design team to promote reflection and discussion of results. Findings suggest that the design team's concerns are exclusively driven by technical concerns with variation in the perspectives privileged between operational management and technology designers. This leaves aside concerns regarding the operators’ development in their work situation, the possibility to debate the actual work and the problems that are recognized by the workers and how they can provide key criteria to design future work situations. The originality of the study lies in the external monitoring of an ongoing design process by a research team, aiming to contribute to setting a “dialogical debate” between all actors involved in the design and implementation of I4.0/I.50 technologies. This will allow the definition of guidelines for decision-makers following a participatory approach and promoting a dignified and sustainable management of the design process.

Product design tends to be more complex and needs the effective cooperation among multidisciplinary designers and engineers. An ideal product design environment, which is both collaborative and intelligent, will be much appreciated. Agent technology is an innovative and promising approach to implementing distributed systems and is becoming popular in various areas of computing in recent years. In this paper, the dynamic nature of collaborative design process and the representation of collaborative design knowledge are presented. In order to model constantly evolving design process and the rationales resulted from collaboration, a Collaborative Product Data Model (CPDM), which extends traditional Product Data Model (PDM), and a constraint-based Collaborative Design Process Model (CDPM) are proposed. These are intended to facilitate the management and coordination of collaborative product design process and knowledge management. A design example is used to illustrate CDPM. While the system is being implemented, the architecture of our agent-based collaborative product design environment based on CPDM and CDPM is described.

Knowledge management is the knowledge-centered management, which has been appearing with the adaptation of knowledge economy age and aims at improving enterprise core competition and reaction to knowledge attainment, sharing, appliance and creation. The development of furniture design is one complicated movement of knowledge, which is one course of the relative members obtaining knowledge, and applying the knowledge to meet the needs of each stage, each stage will be finished through the knowledge collection, storage, transformation, sharing and creation. It is important to improve the knowledge management that it is necessary to have the knowledge shared by the enterprise and ensure more successful products design and maintain the designers smart creativity as well. The article analyzed the design process of furniture, the knowledge management of each stage of the process. It also points out that integrated knowledge management is the strong assurance of successful development of furniture design.

1 Why Study the Design Process? 2 Describing Mechanical Design Problems and Process 3 Designers and Design Teams 4 The Design Process 5 Project Definition and Planning 6 Understanding the Problem and the Development of Engineering Specifications 7 Concept Generation 8 Concept Evaluation 9 The Product Design Phase 10 Product Generation 11 Product Evaluation for Performance and the Effects of Variation 12 Product Evaluation for Cost, Manufacture, Assembly, and other Measures 13 Launching and Supporting the Product Appendixes A Properties of 25 Materials Most Commonly Used in Mechanical Design B Normal Probability C The Factor of Safety as a Design Variable D Human Factors in Design E TRIZ F Belief Map Masters

Today’s markets impose wide sets of requirements for new products. The Process of New Product Design, has shifted from sequential Engineering to Concurrent Engineering, for low cost-early market entry. Design Teams must deliver highest quality within minimum time and cost and global crisis worsens things, by further reducing budgets. Prototyping within design processes has become crucial, whereas, available prototyping alternatives have increased. Decisions regarding the use of the most appropriate one, at specific design milestones, affects and much predetermines the success of the product. This paper addresses the problem of “design target”-based embracing of available prototyping alternatives into the tools pool of design teams, in a concise, integrated way. Considering product design teams are expert driven for specific product categories, the introduced approach records the verification intent of designers and binds it to structured Generic Levels of Technical and non-Technical Attribute clusters and associated Design Factors. Furthermore, prototyping experience, manufacturing capabilities and cost of the implementing organization, local industrial status and regulations, are also considered. Utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process a complete decision tree leads designers to select the most appropriate prototyping method per design stage. The proposed approach assists implementing organizations and design teams towards cost/time benefits, product risk reduction, decision repeatability and independence. A pilot-model has been developed with “Expert Choice” software and an application example is discussed.

Simulation based process design: Modeling and applications

About Our Authors

Using the concept of functions to help synthesise solutions provides many advantages over more intuitive approaches. By adopting the approach described, a broader solution field is generated, and designers are less likely to be constrained by existing solutions. The approach starts by defining the problem in a solution-neutral way, and this helps identify the overall function for the proposed product. From this starting point, a function structure is developed that consists of linked subfunctions representing the flows and conversions of energy, material and signals. Guidelines for handling the concept in practice are provided, along with examples. Using function structures assists the management of the design process, as subtasks are easily identified and assigned to individual team members. Planning time scales and milestones is also facilitated.

In FY 2004, JPL launched an initiative to improve the way it practices systems engineering. The Lab's senior management formed the systems engineering advancement (SEA) project in order to significantly advance the practice and organizational capabilities of systems engineering at JPL on flight projects and ground support tasks. The scope of the SEA project includes the systems engineering work performed in all three dimensions of a program, project, or task: 1) the full life-cycle, i.e., concept through end of operations; 2) the full depth, i.e., program, project, system, subsystem, element (SE Levels 1 to 5); 3) the full technical scope, e.g., the flight, ground and launch systems, avionics, power, propulsion, telecommunications, thermal, etc. The initial focus of their efforts defined the following basic systems engineering functions at JPL: systems architecture, requirements management, interface definition, technical resource management, system design and analysis, system verification and validation, risk management, technical peer reviews, design process management and systems engineering task management. They also developed a list of highly valued personal behaviors of systems engineers, and are working to inculcate those behaviors into members of their systems engineering community. The SEA project is developing products, services, and training to support managers and practitioners throughout the entire system life-cycle. As these are developed, each one needs to be systematically deployed. Hence, the SEA project developed a deployment process that includes four aspects: infrastructure and operations, communication and outreach, education and training, and consulting support. In addition, the SEA project has taken a proactive approach to organizational change management and customer relationship management - both concepts and approaches not usually invoked in an engineering environment. This paper describes JPL's approach to advancing the practice of systems engineering at the Lab. It describes the general approach used and how they addressed the three key aspects of change: people, process and technology. It highlights a list of highly valued personal behaviors of systems engineers, discusses the various products, services and training that were developed, describes the deployment approach used, and concludes with several lessons learned.

Chapter 2 - Design Teams and Project Management

New product design and new product process design are important attributes in order a company to survive and sustain in competitive market. However, many new products which have been developed from research and development cannot compete in world market due to product performance issue. In addition, design of new product is unable to cope with the process design and machine capability in manufacturing process. The aims of this study is to identify the relationship between new product design and new product process design on new product performance in manufacturing industry. Random sampling and survey have been used by distributing questionnaire to 400 respondents for final study. Finally 80 respondents had replied with the respond rate of 20%. The study result shows that the extent level in new product design and new product process design are moderate and high level respectively. Furthermore, there is a significant relationship between new product process design and organisational performance (r(80) = 0.570, p < 0.05) in SMEs. However, there are no significant relationships between new product design and organisational performance (r(80) = 0.092, p > 0.05). The study is important for SMEs to gain insight on the effect of new product design and new product process design towards organizational performance.

Multidisciplinary design for construction is a complex and iterative process. Because conventional planning tools cannot model iterations, a matrix-based methodology called design structure matrix (DSM) has been developed. Although this approach has shown the potential to model and manage iterative design processes, there is no widespread application. It has been documented that the formation of the DSM is a key limitation to its practical application. Furthermore, the findings of an action research–based investigation on implementing the DSM approach on multiple construction projects suggested the formation of a drawing-based DSM rather than the conventional activity-based DSM to improve applicability. The study also proposed a structured methodology called design interface management system (diMs) to form the drawing design structure matrix. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of diMs methodology and its implementation on the construction design processes. The testing was conducted through a comparative study of two design cases of a large airport design process. The performance of the design management process of the test group that used diMs was compared with the control group that used existing design management practices. The data for the comparative study were obtained through document and questionnaire–based assessment criteria. The comparison of these assessment criteria shows significant improvements in the design management process for the test group. The basis for these improvements was further evaluated through multiple sources of evidences such as focused interviews, physical visits, open-ended interviews, and participatory observations.

In the realm of product design, communication between designer, client, design team and future users is of great importance. Throughout the design process, ideas and concepts are generated and must...