Collective design in 3D printing: A large scale empirical study of designs, designers and evolution

Özkil, Ali Gürcan

doi:10.1016/j.destud.2017.04.004

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent years witnessed an increased focus on the “entrepreneurial university” that emphasizes alternative ways of teaching and learning, free tinkering, and entrepreneurship (Etzkowitz et al , 2000). Combined with the rise of the maker movement and collective design (Blikstein and Krannich, 2013; Halverson and Sheridan, 2014; Martin, 2015; Özkil, 2017), the need for catalyzing student innovation activities manifested itself in terms of FabLabs, makerspaces, and innovation hubs in academic institutions all around the world.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What difference does an academic makerspace make? A case study on the effect and outreach of DTU Skylab

Özkil

Jensen

Hansen

2020

AIEDAM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the rise of the “Maker Movement” and the entrepreneurial university, academic makerspaces became widespread. These facilities provide tools and machines that enable making and tinkering; and while the offerings, organizational and operational models, and outreach of the academic makerspaces can vary widely across institutions, their common value proposition is enabling innovation, entrepreneurship, and hands-on project-based learning and these studies are largely qualitative and exploratory by nature. Through a case study, this paper presents an in-depth analysis and insights on the users and usage of an academic makerspace. Using the data generated by and collected from the users of an academic makerspace, we evaluate the effects of having access to the makerspace on users' teaching and learning experiences, and their satisfaction with the offerings. Our results show that attracting courses and educators to the facilities played a strong role in growing the user base, courses and teaching activities introduced new teaching and learning activities to adopt the offerings, group and project work is positively impacted, and the users are very satisfied with the facilities and having the access to its offerings. The analysis also showed that the demand for the offerings can be challenging to manage during certain periods, most of the users come from three departments (mechanical, electrical, civil engineering), and the diversity of the users could improve with the introduction of new offerings, such as a wet lab for bio/chemistry experiments and a food lab to tinker with food processing and preparation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What difference does an academic makerspace make? A case study on the effect and outreach of DTU Skylab

Özkil

Jensen

Hansen

2020

AIEDAM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent advancement in rapid prototyping tools (Camburn et al. 2017) and collective design platforms (Özkil 2017) have made it possible to present high resolution ‘looks like’ prototypes in cheap and efficient ways. The results of our study document that campaigns with design for manufacture deficiencies are unlikely to deliver products in a timely manner.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying challenges in crowdfunded product development: a review of Kickstarter projects

Jensen

Özkil

2018

Des. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an empirical review of the reward-based crowdfunding platform Kickstarter.com, with the aim to explore and identify challenges in crowdfunded product development, which consequently can lead to failure of the crowdfunding campaign. The review was based on the analysis of a total of 144 successfully funded ‘technology’ campaigns, which all concerned the creation of physical consumer hardware preordered by campaign backers. The analysis was built around a failure mode model, which was established through a pre-study. The study reveals that (i) no more than 32% of the campaigns managed to deliver the crowdfunded products on time, and, if campaigns are delayed, (ii) there is a significantly higher probability that the delivered products might lack expected attributes. The causes for delay have many reasons, but (iii) a set of particular product development issues were identified as the main challenges. A better understanding of crowdfunded product development can help researchers and practitioners to better understand and utilize the opportunities of this new product development paradigm.

show abstract

“…That the open design of vehicles is so compelling is also noteworthy, being the focus of four papers (Malinen, Mikkonen, Tienvieri, & Vadén, 2011;Müller-Seitz & Reger, 2010;Richardson, Vittouris, & Rose, 2010;Seidel & Langner, 2015). Thingiverse also featured as a subject of four studies, which examined the designs or business strategies (Kuk & Kirilova, 2013;Kyriakou, Nickerson, & Sabnis, 2017;Özkil, 2017;West & Kuk, 2016). Rather surprisingly the open design of fashion did not feature highly, even if it is a popular topic in non-academic literature and among practitioners.…”

Section: General Description Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…repositories) (e.g. Özkil, 2017;Tamminen & Moilanen, 2016); industrial networks or clusters (e.g. Balka, Raasch, & Herstatt, 2010;Rebensdorf, Gergert, Oosthuizen, & Böhm, 2015); communities FIGURE 6.…”

Section: General Description Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing Open Design through Theoretical Concepts and Practical Applications: A Systematic Literature Review

Bakırlıoğlu

Kohtala

2019

Human–Computer Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports on the results of a systematic literature review on 'open design' in academic fields including and beyond design and HCI. The review investigates how studies are framed as open design and open-source design (including 'open hardware'): how researchers contribute to conceptual theorizing about open design or study its practical operationalization, in do-ityourself 'making,' manufacturing and practices in-between these domains. Most of the papers reviewed were empirical studies from diverse fields. Open design was analyzed not only as contributions and solutions, but also as open-to-participate processes, openly shared processes, and open, closed, and modular (open and closed) outcomes. Various research fields presented an open design framing as an alternative to the status quo: new ways to do business and/or to foster socio-environmental sustainability. On the manufacturing side, open design was sought especially to accelerate innovation cycles; on the making side, it was espoused to foster democratization. However, the studies reviewed indicated that companies do not appear to develop much beyond business-as-usual. From the research perspective, the conceptual potential of open design to promote sustainability saw little practical exploration. Additionally, issues around open design community governance Yekta Bakırlıoğlu

show abstract

Collective design in 3D printing: A large scale empirical study of designs, designers and evolution

Cited by 29 publications

References 36 publications

What difference does an academic makerspace make? A case study on the effect and outreach of DTU Skylab

What difference does an academic makerspace make? A case study on the effect and outreach of DTU Skylab

Identifying challenges in crowdfunded product development: a review of Kickstarter projects

Framing Open Design through Theoretical Concepts and Practical Applications: A Systematic Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About