The design process: properties, paradigms, and structure

Braha, Dan; Maimon, Oded

doi:10.1109/3468.554679

Cited by 104 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Terms like "iterative" and "creative" apply. Designers may start with one design, find it deficient in several ways, and then change it [Braha and Maimon, 1997]. Especially with novel products, designers learn much along the way about what will work and what will not [Nightingale, 2000;Petroski, 1985].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On customer value and improvement in product development processes

Browning

2003

Systems Engineering

115

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an effort to improve company operations and their results, more firms are applying the principles of Leannot only to manufacturing but also to systems engineering processes. Too often, however, this is done with a shallow understanding of Lean and/or without a systems view, in which case Lean creates new problems and tensions and may not deliver expected results. Lean is not about just minimizing cost, cycle time, or waste. Lean is about maximizing value. In systems engineering or product development (PD), maximizing value may require doing more activities, not fewer. Since a process is a kind of system, a systems view and systems engineering principles are helpful. As the value of a system is more than the value of its individual components, the value of a process is more than the value of its individual activities. Value is driven not only by the presence of necessary (value-adding) activities in the PD process but also by the way those activities work together to ensure that they use and produce the right work products, services, and information at the right time. This paper discusses how value is added in PD through work on activities and the production of deliverables. It integrates findings from several streams of research and provides bases upon which to build improved value models. It shows how the concept of Lean can broaden from asking What wasteful activities can we stop doing? to include insights from asking What helpful activities can we start doing, and when?

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On customer value and improvement in product development processes

Browning

2003

Systems Engineering

115

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…''emergence'' (Braha and Maimon 1997;Johnson 2005;Braha et al 2006;Maier and Fadel 2006;Bloebaum and McGowan 2010). This allows us to give more precise characterisations of how complex design problems differ from more traditional rational design problems or, in the case of quantitative characterisations, to treat terms such as ''complex'', ''simple'' and ''rational'' as a matter of degree.…”

Section: Complex Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This means that system elements (whether acting in isolation or in conjunction with each other) are well understood with respect to the roles they play in realising the system's functions (e.g. Yoshikawa 1985;Gero 1990;Pahl and Beitz 1996; also note that within the ''rational'' tradition, there still exist many different categories of design processes and paradigms, see Braha and Maimon 1997). While design principles across engineering domains might help to systematise thinking when approaching complex systems, traditional rational design approaches often fail to address the ''messiness'' of these systems.…”

Section: Complex Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Describing complex design practices with a cross-domain framework: learning from Synthetic Biology and Swarm Robotics

Chen

Crilly

2016

Res Eng Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on the development of a cross-domain framework for describing complex design practices. The framework is grounded in studies of two different complex design fields: Synthetic Biology and Swarm Robotics. In the first study, we interviewed practitioners in Synthetic Biology, identifying three essential aspects of complex design problems and practices. The first of these aspects is the characterisation of system complexity, the second is the design objective taken with respect to this complexity, and the third is the design approach applied to realise this objective. In the second study, we interviewed designers in Swarm Robotics, confirming the domain generality of the three aspects identified in the first study and permitting a comparison to be made of how the two fields differ from each other in these aspects. Considered together, the two studies provide the basis for building a cross-domain framework for describing complex design practices. Such a framework is presented here, not to exhaust all possible descriptions of complex design practice but rather to provide a structured yet adaptable way of highlighting the important aspects of these descriptions. Indeed, each aspect of complex design can be can be broken down into different elements depending on the design contexts under consideration. Having such a framework enables designers to identify fundamental similarities and differences both between and within fields.

show abstract

“…Greeno et al (1990) and Rowland (1991Rowland ( , 1992 for instructional design, Hamel (1990) in the domain of architecture, and Blessing (1994) in the field of mechanical engineering. Braha & Maimon (1997) compare the design process to scientific research.…”

Section: The Problem Solving Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Which events can cause iteration in instructional design? An empirical study of the design process

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Instructional design is not a linear process: designers have to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of alternative solutions, taking into account different kinds of conflicting and changing constraints. To make sure that they eventually choose the most optimal one, they have to keep on collecting information, reconsidering continuously whether their own decisions are still justified in the light of the latest insights. We have studied the role of iteration during instructional design. For our research, we have used an ISD-based method for the specification of training simulators. During our empirical evaluation study, we introduced five events that are likely to cause iteration. The results show that the quality of the designs is not directly related to the amount of iteration. We conclude that there are different kinds of iteration, triggered by different kinds of actions and events. We propose a list of triggers for iteration some of which originate from outside (new information, new opinions/arguments and acquisition procedures); others are caused by, or evolve from interaction with the design process itself (discovery of missing input, need to repair errors, new insights based on work later on in the design process, and new ideas of the designers).

show abstract

The design process: properties, paradigms, and structure

Cited by 104 publications

References 51 publications

On customer value and improvement in product development processes

On customer value and improvement in product development processes

Describing complex design practices with a cross-domain framework: learning from Synthetic Biology and Swarm Robotics

Which events can cause iteration in instructional design? An empirical study of the design process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About