Advertisement

Sources of creativity stimulation for designing the next generation of technical systems: correlations with R&D designers’ performance

  • Sara Saliminamin
  • Niccolo Becattini
  • Gaetano Cascini
Original Paper
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents the outcomes of an exploratory research to clarify the performance of R&D designers when involved in design task for the ideation of the next generation of a technical system. The research aims also at clarifying if creative stimuli play a role in supporting ideation after idea generativity decreases because of natural exhaustion or the emergence of fixation. The effect of precedents (singular as patents, and structural as technology evolution trends), as well as design strategies (in the form of a design procedure for inventive problem solving) on idea generation, is compared by means of an experiment involving 24 R&D Iranian engineers. Precedents demonstrated to be more effective than design strategies in supporting productivity in idea generation, while generally they are not effective enough to support the generation of candidate ideas for the next generation of a technical system with a robust repeatability. The main recorded lacks depend on the capabilities of creative stimuli to support the generation of novel ideas, as they are generally effective in providing good results with reference to technical plausibility and relevance for a target audience. The results of the experiment are also discussed with reference to the efficiency of the design process (number of generated ideas per time unit). The outcomes of such studies, as part of a broader research objective, serve as input to support the development of a serious game to support R&D engineers to face design tasks for the next generation of technical systems with higher motivation and engagement, providing them with an improved design experience.

Keywords

Technological shifts Radical innovation Novelty Creative stimuli Design precedent Design strategies Design models 

Notes

References

  1. Akin O (1978) How do architects design? In: Latombe JC (ed) Artificial intelligence and pattern recognition in computer aided design. North-Holland Publishing Co., New York, pp 65–104Google Scholar
  2. Akin Ö (2002) Case-based instruction strategies in architecture. Des Stud 23(4):407–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altshuller G (1988) Creativity as an exact science. Gordon and Breach, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson P, and Tushman ML (1990) Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of technological change. Adm Sci Q 35(4):604–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atman CJ, Chimka JR, Bursic KM, Nachtmann HL (1999) A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes. Des Stud 20(2):131–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becattini N, Borgianni Y, Cascini G, Rotini F (2015a) Surprise and design creativity: investigating the drivers of unexpectedness. Int J Des Creat Innov.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2015.1090913 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becattini N, Cascini G, Rotini F (2015b) Requirements checklists: benchmarking the comprehensiveness of the design specification. In: DS 80—5 Proceedings of the 20th international conference on engineering design (ICED 15) Vol 5: design methods and tools-part 1, Milan, Italy, 27-30.07, p 15Google Scholar
  8. Benami O, Jin Y (2002) Creative stimulation in conceptual design. In: ASME 2002 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp 251–263Google Scholar
  9. Bledow R, Frese M, Anderson N, Erez M, Farr J (2009) A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Ind Organ Psychol 2(3):305–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borgianni Y, Cascini G, Rotini F (2012) Investigating the patterns of value-oriented innovations in blue ocean strategy. Int J Innov Sci 4(3):123–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cascini G (2012) TRIZ-based anticipatory design of future products and processes. J Integr Des Process Sci 16(3):29–63Google Scholar
  12. Cascini G, Rotini F, Russo D (2009) Functional modeling for TRIZ-based evolutionary analyses. In: DS 58 – 5: proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th international conference on engineering design, Vol. 5, design methods and tools (pt. 1), Palo Alto, CA, USA, 24.-27.08. 2009Google Scholar
  13. Cascini G, Rotini F, Russo D (2011) Networks of trends: systematic definition of evolutionary scenarios. Procedia Engineering 9:355–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caves RE and Porter ME (1977) From entry barriers to mobility barriers: conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. Q J Econ 91(2):241–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chan J, Fu K, Schunn C, Cagan J, Wood K, Kotovsky K (2011) On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design: ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples. J Mech Des 133(8):081004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Christensen CM, Rosenbloom RS (1995) Explaining the attacker’s advantage: technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Res Policy 24(2):233–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chua RYJ, Iyengar SS (2008) Creativity as a matter of choice: prior experience and task instruction as boundary conditions for the positive effect of choice on creativity. J Creat Behav 42(3):164–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conradi P (1999) Reuse in electronic design: From information modelling to intellectual properties. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  19. Coombs R, Saviotti P, Walsh V (1987) Economics and technological change. Rowman and Littlefield, LanhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooper AC, Schendel D (1976) Strategic responses to technological threats. Bus Horiz 19(1):61–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Crilly N (2015) Fixation and creativity in concept development: the attitudes and practices of expert designers. Des Stud 38:54–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cross N (1997) Descriptive models of creative design: application to an example. Des Stud 18(4):427–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cross N (2001) Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In: Eastman C, Newstetter W, McCracken M (eds) Design knowing and learning: cognition in design education. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 79–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dahlin KB, Behrens DM (2005) When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness. Res Policy 34(5):717–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dewar RD, Dutton JE (1986) The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis. Manag Sci 32(11):1422–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dix A (2004) Human-computer interaction and web design. In: RW Proctor, KPL Vu Handbook of human factors in web design. Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 28–48Google Scholar
  27. Doboli A, Umbarkar A (2014) The role of precedents in increasing creativity during iterative design of electronic embedded systems. Des Stud 35(3):298–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Domb E (2000) Strategic TRIZ and tactical TRIZ: using the technology evolution tools. TRIZ J January 2000Google Scholar
  29. Dosi G (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res Policy 11(3):147–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Downing F (2003) Transcending memory: remembrance and the design of place. Des Stud 24(3):213–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dunbar K (1997) How scientists think: on-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In: Ward TB, Smith SM, Vaid JE (eds) Creative thought: an investigation of conceptual structures and processes. American Psychological Association, Washington, US, pp 461–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Eckert C, Stacey M (2000) Sources of inspiration: a language of design. Des Stud 21(5):523–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Eilouti BH (2009) Design knowledge recycling using precedent-based analysis and synthesis models. Des Stud 30(4):340–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ettlie JE, Bridges WP, O’keefe RD (1984) Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation. Manag Sci 30(6):682–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fiorineschi L, Frillici FS, Rotini F, Tomassini M (2018) Exploiting TRIZ tools for enhancing systematic conceptual design activities. J Eng Des 29(6):259–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Manag Sci 47(1):117–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fricke G (1993) Empirical investigation of successful approaches when dealing with differently precised design problems. In: International conference on engineering design (1993) ICED93Google Scholar
  38. Fricke G (1996) Successful individual approaches in engineering design. Res Eng Design 8(3):151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fu K, Chan J, Cagan J, Kotovsky K, Schunn C, Wood K (2013) The meaning of “near” and “far”: the impact of structuring design databases and the effect of distance of analogy on design output. J Mech Des 135(2):021007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Geels FW (2004) From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res Policy 33(6):897–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Germain R (1996) The role of context and structure in radical and incremental logistics innovation adoption. J Bus Res 35(2):117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gero JS (1990) Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Mag 11(4):26Google Scholar
  43. Gero JS (1996) Creativity, emergence and evolution in design. Knowl Based Syst 9(7):435–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gero JS, Kannengiesser U (2004) The situated function–behaviour–structure framework. Des Stud 25(4):373–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Goel V, Pirolli P (1992) The structure of design problem spaces. Cogn Sci 16(3):395–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Goldschmidt G (2011) Avoiding design fixation: transformation and abstraction in mapping from source to target. J Creat Behav 45(2):92–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gonçalves M, Cardoso C, Badke-Schaub P (2013) Inspiration peak: exploring the semantic distance between design problem and textual inspirational stimuli. Int J Des Creat Innov 1(4):215–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hargadon A, Sutton RI (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Adm Sci Q 716–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Helms M, Vattam SS, Goel AK (2009) Biologically inspired design: process and products. Des Stud 30(5):606–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Heylighen A, Deisz P, Verstijnen I (2007) Less is more original? Des Stud 28:499e512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Howard TJ, Culley SJ, Dekoninck E (2006) Information as an input into the creative process. In: DS 36: proceedings DESIGN 2006, the 9th international design conference, Dubrovnik, CroatiaGoogle Scholar
  52. Howard TJ, Culley SJ, Dekoninck E (2008) Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature. Des Stud 29(2):160–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Howard TJ, Dekoninck EA, Culley SJ (2010) The use of creative stimuli at early stages of industrial product innovation. Res Eng Des 21(4):263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Isaksen SG, Gaulin JP (2005) A reexamination of brainstorming research: implications for research and practice. Gifted Child Q 49(4):315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ishibashi K, Okada T (2006) Exploring the effect of copying incomprehensible exemplars on creative drawings. In: Proceedings 28th annual conference cognitive science society, Vancouver, BC, Canada July, pp 26–29Google Scholar
  56. Jansson DG, Smith SM (1991). Design fixation. Design studies,12(1), 3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Johne A (1999) Successful market innovation. Eur J Innov Manag 2(1):6–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Jones JC, Thornley DG (1963) Conference on design methods. Papers presented at the conference on systematic and intuitive methods in engineering industrial design, architecture and communications, London (1962)Google Scholar
  59. Kershaw TC, Hölttä-Otto K, Lee YS (2011) The effect of prototyping and critical feedback on fixation in engineering design. CogSci, BostonGoogle Scholar
  60. Kucharavy D, De Guio R (2005) Problems of forecast. In: ETRIA TRIZ future 2005, pp 219–235Google Scholar
  61. Lane DM, Jensen DG (1993) Einstellung: knowledge of the phenomenon facilitates problem solving. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol. 37, No. 18. SAGE Publications, pp 1277–1280Google Scholar
  62. Lawson B (2004) Schemata, gambits and precedent: some factors in design expertise. Des Stud 25(5):443–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Le Masson P, Hatchuel A, Weil B (2016) Design theory at Bauhaus: teaching “splitting” knowledge. Res Eng Des 27(April 2016):91–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lee LTS, Sukoco BM (2011). Reflexivity, stress, and unlearning in the new product development team: the moderating effect of procedural justice. R&D Manag 41(4):410–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Liikkanen LA, Perttula MK (2006) Contextual cueing and verbal stimuli in design idea generation. In: Design computing and cognition’06. Springer, Netherlands, pp 619–631Google Scholar
  66. Linsey JS, Tseng I, Fu K, Cagan J, Wood KL, Schunn C (2010) A study of design fixation, its mitigation and perception in engineering design faculty. J Mech Des 132(4):041003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Linsey JS, Clauss EF, Kurtoglu T, Murphy JT, Wood KL, Markman AB (2011) An experimental study of group idea generation techniques: understanding the roles of idea representation and viewing methods. J Mech Des 133(3):031008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Luchins AS (1942) Mechanization in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung. Psychol Monographs 54(6):iCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mak TW, Shu LH (2008) Using descriptions of biological phenomena for idea generation. Res Eng Des 19(1):21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Marslen-Wilson W, Tyler LK (1980) The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition 8(1):1–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Massetti B (1996) An empirical examination of the value of creativity support systems on idea generation. MIS Q 20(1):83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mc Neill T, Gero JS, Warren J (1998) Understanding conceptual electronic design using protocol analysis. Res Eng Design 10(3):129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. McKoy FL, Vargas-Hernández N, Summers JD, Shah JJ (2001) Influence of design representation on effectiveness of idea generation. In: ASME IDETC design theory and methodology conference, Pittsburgh, PA, pp 9–12Google Scholar
  74. McMahon C et al (2016) Results from the breakout sessions of group B. In: Chakrabarti A, Lindemann U (eds) Impact of design research on industrial practice. Springer, Cham, pp 71–74Google Scholar
  75. Moreno DP, Hernandez AA, Yang MC, Otto KN, Hölttä-Otto K, Linsey JS, Linden A (2014) Fundamental studies in design-by-analogy: a focus on domain-knowledge experts and applications to transactional design problems. Des Stud 35(3):232–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Moreno DP et al (2015) A step beyond to overcome design fixation: a design-by-analogy approach. In: Gero J, Hanna S (eds) Design Computing and Cognition'14. Springer, Cham, pp. 607–624Google Scholar
  77. Mowery D, Rosenberg N (1979) The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies. Res Policy 8(2):102–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Nijstad BA, Stroebe W, Lodewijkx HF (2002) Cognitive stimulation and interference in groups: Exposure effects in an idea generation task. J Exp Soc Psychol 38(6):535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Osborn AF (1953) Applied imagination. Oxford, England, Scribner’SGoogle Scholar
  80. Oxman R (1990) Prior knowledge in design: a dynamic knowledge-based model of design and creativity. Des Stud 11(1):17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pasman G (2003) Designing with precedents. TU Delft, Delft University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  82. Pavitt K, Soete L (1980) Innovative activities and export shares: some comparisons between industries and countries. In: Technical innovation and British economic performance. Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp 38–66Google Scholar
  83. Pavitt K, Wald S (1971) The conditions for success in technological innovation. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  84. Perttula M, Sipilä P (2007) The idea exposure paradigm in design idea generation. J Eng Des 18(1):93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Porter ME (1979) The structure within industries and companies' performance. The review of economics and statistics. Rev Econ Stat 61(2):214–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Pucillo F, Becattini N, Cascini G (2016) A UX model for the communication of experience affordances. Des Issues 32(2):3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Pugh S, Clausing D (1996) Creating innovative products using total design: the living legacy of Stuart Pugh. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  88. Purcell AT, Gero JS (1992) Effects of examples on the results of a design activity. Knowl Based Syst 5(1):82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Radcliffe DF, Lee TY (1989) Design methods used by undergraduate engineering students. Design Stud 4:199–207Google Scholar
  90. Rosenberg N (1976) Perspectives on technology. CUP Arch, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Rowe PG (1987) Design thinking. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA, 28Google Scholar
  92. Runco MA, Jaeger GJ (2012) The standard definition of creativity. Creat Res J 24(1):92–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Sarkar P, Chakrabarti A (2008) The effect of representation of triggers on design outcomes. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 22(02):101–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Sawaguchi M (2001) Study of effective new product development activities trough combination of patterns of evolution of technological systems and VE. TRIZ J May 2001Google Scholar
  95. Schilling MA (2010) Strategic management of technology innovation. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  96. Schön DA (1988) Designing: rules, types and words. Des Stud 9(3):181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Schumpeter JA (1934) The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle, vol 55. Transaction Publishers, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  98. Senbel M, Girling C, White JT, Kellett R, Chan PF (2013) Precedents reconceived: urban design learning catalysed through data rich 3-D digital models. Des Stud 34(1):74–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Shah JJ, Smith SM, Vargas-Hernandez N (2003) Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Des Stud 24(2):111–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Shane S (2001) Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Manag Sci 47(2):205–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Shpakovsky N (2006) Abstract of book “Evolution Trees. Analysis of technical information and generation of new ideas”. TRIZ J December 2006Google Scholar
  102. Silverberg G (2002) The discrete charm of the bourgeoisie: quantum and continuous perspectives on innovation and growth. Res Policy 31(8):1275–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Simonton DK (2010) Creative thought as blind-variation and selective-retention: combinatorial models of exceptional creativity. Phys Life Rev 7(2):156–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Smith RP, Tjandra P (1998) Experimental observation of iteration in engineering design. Res Eng Des 10(2):107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Smith SM, Ward TB, Schumacher JS (1993) Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task. Memory Cogn 21(6):837–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Soete LL (1981) A general test of technological gap trade theory. Weltwirtschaftliches Arch 117(4):638–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Song M, Thieme J (2009) The role of suppliers in market intelligence gathering for radical and incremental innovation. J Prod Innov Manag 26(1):43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Thomas JC, Carroll JM (1979) The psychological study of design. Des Stud 1(1):5–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Toh C, Miller SR, Kremer GE (2013) The role of personality and team-based product dissection on fixation effects. Adv Eng Educ 3(4):1–23Google Scholar
  110. Tripsas M (1997) Surviving radical technological change through dynamic capability: evidence from the typesetter industry. Ind Corp Change 6(2):341–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Trott P (2008) Innovation management and new product development. Pearson Education, LondonGoogle Scholar
  112. Tseng I, Moss J, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2008) The role of timing and analogical similarity in the stimulation of idea generation in design. Des Stud 29(3):203–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Tulving E (1991) Concepts of human memory. In: Squire LR, Weinberger NM, Lynch G, McGaugh JL (eds) Memory: organization and locus of change. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–32Google Scholar
  114. Ullman DG, Wood S, Craig D (1990) The importance of drawing in the mechanical design process. Comput Gr 14(2):263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Van de Poel I (2003) The transformation of technological regimes. Res Policy 32(1):49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Verganti R (2008) Design, meanings, and radical innovation: a metamodel and a research agenda. J Prod Innov Manag 25(5):436–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Visser W (1990) More or less following a plan during design: opportunistic deviations in specification. Int J Man Mach Stud 33(3):247–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Visser W (1995) Use of episodic knowledge and information in design problem solving. Des Stud 16(2):171–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Viswanathan VK, Linsey JS (2013) Role of sunk cost in engineering idea generation: an experimental investigation. J Mech Des 135(12):121002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Weisberg RW (2009) On ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking in creativity. Tools Innov. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 23–47Google Scholar
  121. Wierenga B, Van Bruggen GH (1998) The dependent variable in research into the effects of creativity support systems: quality and quantity of ideas. MIS Q 22:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Youmans RJ (2011) The effects of physical prototyping and group work on the reduction of design fixation. Des Stud 32(2):115–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Zahner D, Nickerson JV, Tversky B, Corter JE, Ma J (2010) A fix for fixation? Rerepresenting and abstracting as creative processes in the design of information systems. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 24(02):231–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Zirger BJ, Maidique MA (1990) A model of new product development: an empirical test. Manag Sci 36(7):867–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Zlotin B, Zusman A (2001) Directed evolution: philosophy. Theory and practice. Ideation International Inc, Farmington HillsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Saliminamin
    • 1
  • Niccolo Becattini
    • 1
  • Gaetano Cascini
    • 1
  1. 1.Politecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations