Perceptions of Industrial Design: The “Means” and the “Ends”

Abstract

It is widely accepted that industrial design can play an important role in the development of innovative products, but integrating design‐thinking into new product development (NPD) is a challenge. This is because industrial designers have very different perspectives and goals than the other members of the NPD team, and this can lead to tensions. It has been postulated that the communications between NPD managers and industrial designers are made more difficult because each group uses very different language. This research made the first empirical investigation of the language used by designers and managers in describing “good” and “poor” industrial design. In‐depth interviews were conducted with a sample of 19 managers and industrial designers at five leading companies. Multiple sources of data were utilized, including the repertory grid technique to elicit the key attributes of design, from the perspective of managers and designers. Using a robust, systematic coding approach to maximize the validity and reliability of qualitative data analysis, it was established that managers and industrial designers do not use a completely different vocabulary as previously supposed. Rather, it was found that managers and industrial designers use some common terms augmented by additional terms that are specific to each group: managers are commercially orientated in the “ends” they want to achieve and designers perceive more antecedents (“means”) necessary to achieve their “ends”—iconic design. This research led to a grounded conceptual model of the role of design, as perceived by managers and industrial designers. The implications of the results achieved are wide: they indicate how managers and designers can interact more productively during NPD; they highlight the need for more research on the language of designers and managers; and they point to issues that need to be covered in the education of industrial designers. Finally, this work suggests how managers and designers can engage in a more fruitful dialogue that will help to make NPD more productive.

Reconciling the tension between consistency and relevance: design thinking as a mechanism for brand ambidexterity

“…Increasingly, evidence suggests that designers frame brand and innovation challenges differently than marketers (Micheli et al 2012;Verganti 2008Verganti , 2011. Indeed, the ability to challenge existing ways of thinking and/or to force organizations to ask Bwhat if^type questions as a means of creating value is consistent with a design thinking approach (Liedtka 2004).…”

Resourceful Sensemaking: Overcoming Barriers Between Marketing and Design in NPD

“…A high level of interfunctional coordination (IFC) means that functionally specialized groups work towards accomplishing specific NPD tasks and, ultimately, create value for customers (Sarin, 2009). Innovation researchers have identified several barriers to IFC including differences in knowledge and practice (Calantone and Rubera, 2012;Dougherty, 1992;Micheli et al 2012). …”

“…for example, Micheli et al (2012) found that, despite using similar terms and sharing NPD goals, marketers and designers attributed very different meanings to the same words.…”

Visual aesthetics in product development: A balance between commercial and creative imperatives

“…It is stated that one potential conflict may exist in the collaboration between marketing and design since marketing often relies on a rational, scientific, and profit---based approach, while the designer relies on talent, creative skill, and intuition (Beverland, 2005). Conflicts are also described in terms of being caused by differences in interests, educational background, values and attitudes or by the different use of language (Micheli et al, 2012;Svengren Holm & Johansson, 2005). As a consequence, it is argued, marketers strive towards objectivity, seeking to rely on consumer research into explicit needs and desires, while designers tend to base their creations more on the non---explicit needs of their customers and on studies of their behaviours (Svengren Holm & Johansson, 2005).…”

“…The previous literature on design collaboration (e.g. Micheli, 2012;Svengren Holm, 2005) suggests that the relationship between a creative designer and companies' more commercially---driven functions may easily become tense and problematic, e.g. due to inherent cultural differences.…”