Research in Engineering Design

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 122–137 | Cite as

A scenario-driven conceptual design information model and its formation

  • Kei KurakawaEmail author
Original Paper


This study describes a scenario-driven conceptual design information model and its formation from the viewpoint of the designer’s cognition, which is a fundamental part of practical design support tools. Four design meetings were observed in a company, at intervals of several weeks, in order to derive the model. The model consists of information elements generated through the cognitive design problem-solving process, which is a basic design process defined in this study. The study describes the relationship among these information elements, which illustrate the design information model and its formation. The model described in this study is based on scenarios, which promote the evolution of product design. Examples of designers’ discourse in the design meetings are presented to validate the model.


Conceptual design Design process Designer’s cognitive process Scenario 



I am grateful to Dr. Yasuyuki Yamagiwa and the SONY DAC team for their help and support.


  1. Bødker S (2000) Scenarios in user-centred design: Setting the stage for reflection and action. Interact Comput 13:61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carroll J (2000) Five reasons for scenario-based design. Interact Comput 13:43–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cross N (1994) Engineering design methods: Strategy for product design, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Cross N, Christiaans H, Dörst K (1996) Analyzing design activity. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Eodice MT, Leifer LJ, Fruchter R (2000) Analyzing requirements: Evolution in engineering design using the method of problem-reduction. J Concur Eng Res Appl 8(2):104–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. IDEO Product Development (1998) IDEO University, Engineering Innovation WorkshopGoogle Scholar
  7. Lamsweerde van A (2000) Requirements engineering in the year 00: A research perspective. In: Proceedings of 22nd international conference on software engineering, ACM Press Limerick, Ireland, pp 5–19Google Scholar
  8. Odell J, Parunak HVD, Fleischer M, Breuckner S (2002) Modeling agents and their environment. In: Giunchiglia F, Odell J, Weiss G (eds) Agent-oriented software engineering (AOSE) III. Lecture notes on computer science, vol 2585, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 16–31Google Scholar
  9. Pahl G, Beitz W (1996) Engineering design: A systematic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Pugh S (1990) Total design. Addison-Wesley, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  11. Roosenburg NFM, Eekels J (1995) Product design: Fundamentals and methods. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Takeda H, Hamada S, Tomiyama T, Yoshikawa H (1990) A cognitive approach to the analysis of design processes. In: Rinderle JR (ed) Design theory and methodology—DTM’90. ASME, Chicago 27:153–160Google Scholar
  13. Tomiyama T (1998) General design theory and its extensions and applications. In: Grabowski H, Rude W, Grein G (eds) Universal design theory. Shaker, Aachen, pp 24–45Google Scholar
  14. Ullman D (2002) Toward the ideal mechanical engineering design support system. Res Eng Des 13(2):55–64Google Scholar
  15. Weiss G (1999) Multiagent systems: A modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Wooldridge M (2000) The computational complexity of agent design problems. In: Durfee E (ed) Proceedings of the fourth international conference on multi-agent systems (ICMAS 2000). IEEE, New York, pp 341–348Google Scholar
  17. Hubka V, Eder WE (1996) Design science: Introduction to the needs, scope and organization of engineering design knowledge. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nara Institute of Science and TechnologyGraduate School of Information ScienceIkomaJapan

Personalised recommendations