Where do professionals find sustainability and innovation value? Empirical tests of three sustainable design methods

Abstract

Recommendations of sustainable design methods are usually based on theory, not empirical industry tests. Furthermore, since professionals often mix components of different design methods, recommending whole methods may not be relevant. It may be better to recommend component activities or mindsets. To provide empirical grounding for recommendations, this study performed 23 workshops on three sustainable design methods involving over 172 professionals from 27 companies, including consultancies and manufacturers in three industries (consumer electronics, furniture and clothing). The design methods tested were The Natural Step, Whole System Mapping and Biomimicry. Participants were surveyed about what components in each design method drove perceived innovation, sustainability or other value, and why. The most valued components only partially supported theoretical predictions. Thus, recommendations should be more empirically based. Results also found unique and complementary value in components of each method, which suggests recommending mixed methods for sustainable design. This may help design professionals find more value in green design practices, and thus integrate sustainability more into their practice.

ValueD: a model of cognitive value determination in design

“…However, none of these approaches comprehensively describe the elements fundamentally involved in value and its determination. Design process value management considers specific techniques to increase design process value in terms of needs, objectives, and success criteria (Ashworth and Hogg 2000;Cather et al 2001;Faludi, Yiu, and Agogino 2020). Though some of the process value approaches consider the relationship between specific elements (e.g.…”

Construction of the Mapping of Corporate Social Responsibility Issues That Can Be Managed During the Design Process - Application in the Automotive Industry

“…As a result, DFS approaches are much more developed in theory than practically adopted. Faludi et al (2020) recommend that the field of sustainable design "should rely less on theory and more on empirical testing of sustainable design methods". Empirical testing is also a way to make "industry designers, engineers, and managers consider environmental and social implications of their products more than they otherwise would" (Faludi et al, 2020).…”

Creativity in successful eco-design supported by ten original guidelines

“…However, while creativity is not totally neglected in eco-design (Sierra-Perez et al, 2016), the development has not taken place of bespoke and largely adopted methods and tools for leveraging creativity potential to trigger eco-innovation (Gagnon et al, 2012;Vallet et al, 2013). This takes place despite the design and ideation of environmental friendly products can avail of a large number of methods (Faludi et al, 2019, Faludi et al, 2020Pigosso et al, 2015) and stimulation mechanisms (Tyl et al, 2018). On the other hand, the application of generic methods for stimulating creativity resulted in the generation of sustainable ideas to a limited extent (Maccioni et al, 2017).…”