The Absence of a Creative Focus in the Conventional Engineering Design Process: Identifying Research Opportunities to Address This

Abstract

This paper synthesises an overview of various models of the engineering design process with an overview of the most relevant theories within the field of creativity studies to conclude that (i) creativity plays a role throughout the engineering design process, and it is possible to incorporate creativity into the engineering design process in a systematic manner; (ii) doing so, at the very least, holds significant potential for economic benefit; and (iii) due to the complex interplay between creativity and the wide range of factors that influence it, organisational climates and management practices cannot simply be assumed to support creativity effectively. It is proposed that organisations be managed proactively to support creativity in engineering design. For this study, a structured literature search protocol was implemented to determine whether there is any evidence in the literature that engineering organisations are being managed proactively with this in mind; none was found. Two opportunities for future research are suggested based on these findings: (i) the development of a framework to guide the proactive management of engineering organisations to support creativity; and (ii) the development of mechanisms for measuring creativity in engineering organisations and engineering design. OPSOMMINGHierdie navorsing kombineer 'n oorsig van die verskillende modelle van die ingenieursontwerp-proses met 'n oorsig van die mees relevante teorieë binne die veld van kreatiwiteitstudies en kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat (i) kreatiwiteit deur die volledige gang van die ingenieursontwerp-proses 'n rol speel, en dit moontlik is om kreatiwiteit op 'n sistematiese wyse in die ingenieursontwerpproses in te lyf; (ii) so 'n benadering minstens die potensiaal vir beduidende ekonomiese voordeel inhou; en (iii) weens die komplekse interaksie tussen kreatiwiteit en die breë stel faktore wat dit beïnvloed, dit onakkuraat is om aan te neem dat organisasies se klimate en bestuurspraktyke noodwendig kreatiwiteit ondersteun. Daar word voorgestel dat organisasies proaktief bestuur behoort te word om kreatiwiteit in ingenieursontwerp te ondersteun. 'n Gestruktureerde protokol word gevolg om vas te stel of daar in die literatuur bewyse is dat ingenieursorganisasies tans so proaktief bestuur word. Geen bewyse word gevind nie. Twee geleenthede vir verdere navorsing word na gelang van hierdie bevindinge voorgestel: (i) die ontwerp van 'n raamwerk om riglyne te bied vir die proaktiewe bestuur van ingenieursorganisasies om kre`atiwiteit te ondersteun; en (ii) die ontwikkeling van meganismes om kreatiwiteit in ingenieursorganisasies en in ingenieursontwerp te meet.

Development and validation of the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design (COPED)

“…Several years later, Oosthuizen and Vlok () compared six ED process models. Their selection of models was grounded in the distinction of descriptive and prescriptive ED process models described by Cross (2008).…”

“…Their selection of models was grounded in the distinction of descriptive and prescriptive ED process models described by Cross (2008). They elected to use “some prominent linear prescriptive models” (Oosthuizen & Vlok, , p. 140) and identified 12 components of the ED process ranging from “identifying and understanding the need” to “documenting the design” to “handing the solution over to the market” (Oosthuizen & Vlok, , p. 142). Oosthuizen and Vlok () included far fewer models for comparison and referred readers to Howard et al () for a larger number of ED process models.…”

“…Beyond the ED process models identified by Howard et al () and Oosthuizen and Vlok (), additional models are detailed in science education policy documents, popular curriculum programs, and research studies. Science education policy documents converge on several essential components of ED process (Katehi et al, ; NGSS Lead States, ) including: a problem to be solved, criteria for success (specifications), constraints, and multiple possible solutions to test.…”

Towards a Framework for Systemic Creativity in Engineering Organisations

“…'n Literatuuroorsig van elkeen van hierdie sewe elemente word aangebied om (i) te bepaal of die element in die raamwerk ingesluit moet word; (ii) die element te definieer vir die doel van die raamwerk; en (iii) vas te stel of enige outeur 'n aspek van kreatiwiteit voorstel wat nie onder een van die sewe elemente soos wat hul hier definieer is bygewerk kan word nie. INTRODUCTION This article builds on earlier research [1] that made the case that (i) creativity plays a role throughout the engineering design process, and that it is possible to incorporate creativity into the engineering design process in a systematic manner; (ii) doing this at the very least, holds significant potential for economic benefit; and (iii) due to the complex interplay between creativity and the wide range of factors that influence it, organisational climates and management practices cannot simply be assumed to support creativity effectively. The article proposes that organisations should be managed proactively to support creativity in engineering design.…”

Consolidating engineering design and design thinking frameworks for teaching design to engineering students at liberal arts universities

“…The consolidated model is shown in Figure 1, and aligns with the model proposed by French [21]. More systematic and rigorous comparisons of various ED frameworks can be found in the literature [22,23,24]. A description of each stage is provided below:…”