Advertisement

Positioning industrial design students to operate at the ‘fuzzy front end’: investigating a new arena of university design education

  • Paul W. Wormald
Article

Abstract

This paper describes pedagogic research to instigate, support and understand a significant change in the education of undergraduate industrial design students. Design educators at Loughborough University, UK, have proposed that it will be critical for future industrial designers to learn new knowledge and abilities which will enable them to successfully operate at the ‘fuzzy front end’ of new product development. This is an arena before a traditional design brief exists (i.e. ‘pre-brief’), and typically involves in-depth investigation of such issues as users, experiences and brand, followed by exploitation of the findings. Curriculum development and new teaching, evolved over five annual cycles of implementation, reflection, planning and new implementation, is described. A model of the activities and processes of this ‘pre-brief’ arena is presented. Through structured investigation of the cycles of improvement and follow-up evaluation research, evidence gathered from stakeholders (students, educators, and industry) indicates that industrial design students can be taught to successfully operate at this fuzzy front end, and that this can be a highly effective strategy for students in their design project work. It also suggests that the students’ enhanced abilities will be in demand following their graduation.

Keywords

Industrial design education Fuzzy front end New product development Pedagogic research 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the contribution in the development of teaching and learning material and curriculum development of Mr Michael Rodber, Dr Rebecca Cain and Mr Ian Storer.

References

  1. Alexis, J. (2006) Needs clusters: A research strategy for accelerating user centered design innovation. IIT Institute of Design http://trex.id.iit.edu/papers/alexis_needsclusters.pdf. Accessed 16 August 2007.
  2. Avison, D., Lau, F., Myers, M., & Nielsen, P. A. (1999). Action research. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 94–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, T. (2006). Innovation through design thinking. Presentation at MIT sloan school of management, 16 March 2006. http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/357. Accessed 28 March 2007.
  4. Cagan, J., & Vogel, C. M. (2001). Creating breakthrough products: Innovation from product planning to program approval. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Cox, G. (2005). Cox review of creativity in business: Building on the UK’s strengths. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  7. Deschamps, J.-P., & Nayak, P. R. (1995). Product Juggernauts: How companies mobilize to generate a stream of market winners. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  8. Design Council. (2010). How to write a design brief. http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/About-Design/Design-Techniques/Briefing-by-Peter-L-Phillips/. Accessed 11 March 2010.
  9. Industrial Design Society of America (IDSA). (2010). ID defined. http://www.idsa.org/. Accessed 11 March 2010.
  10. Juratovac, J. (2005). Building a bridge to the end user: How industrial designers contribute to new product development. In K. B. Khan (Ed.), The PDMA handbook of new product development (2nd ed., pp. 389–405). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1997). Integrating the fuzzy front end of new product development. Sloan management review 1997. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  12. Khurana, A., & Rosenthal, S. R. (1998). Toward holistic “Front Ends” in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Koen, P. A., Ajamian, G., Boyce, S., Clamen, A., Fisher, E., Fountoulakis, S., et al. (2002). Fuzzy-front end: Effective methods, tools and techniques. In P. Belliveau, A. Griffen, & S. Sorermeyer (Eds.), The PDMA toolbook for new product development (pp. 2–35). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Lofthouse, V. (2008). Discrete observation as a method of identifying real design needs. In New perspectives in design education 10th international conference on engineering & product design education, Barcelona, September 2008 (pp. 180–185). Institution of engineering designers and the design society.Google Scholar
  15. Lopes, A. M. (2008). Designed inquiry: The significance of research education for industrial designers. In New perspectives in design education 10th international conference on engineering & product design education, Barcelona, September 2008 (pp. 132–137). Institution of engineering designers and the design society.Google Scholar
  16. Norman, E. (1999). Action research concerning technology for design and associated pedagogy. Educational Action Research, 7(2), 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rodgers, P. A. & Anusas, M. (2008). Ethnography and design. In New perspectives in design education 10th international conference on engineering & product design education, Barcelona, September 2008 (pp. 186–191). Institution of engineering designers and the design society.Google Scholar
  18. Roozenburg, N. J. M., & Eekels, J. (1995). Product design: Fundamentals and methods. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Siu, K. W. M. (2003). Nurturing all-round engineering and product designers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Siu, K. W. M. (2007). Guerrilla wars in everyday public spaces: Reflections and inspirations for designers. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 37–56.Google Scholar
  21. Smith, M. K. (2007). ‘Action research’, the encyclopaedia of informal education. http://www.infed.org/research/b-actres.htm. Accessed 24 July 2009.
  22. Squires, S., & Byrne, B. (2002). Creating breakthrough ideas: The collaboration of anthropologists and designers in the product development industry. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  23. Stappers, P. J., & Sleeswijk Visser, F. (2007). Bringing participatory techniques to industrial design engineers. In Shaping the future? 9th International conference on engineering & product design education, Newcastle Upon Tyne, September 2007 (pp. 117–122). Institution of engineering designers and the design society.Google Scholar
  24. Steen, M., Kuijt-Evers, L., & Klok, J. (2007). Early user involvement in research and design projects—A review of methods and practices. In 23rd EGOS Colloquium, Vienna, July 2007. European group for organizational studies.Google Scholar
  25. Veryzer, R. W. (2005a). Enhancing new product development success through industrial design strategy. In K. B. Khan (Ed.), The PDMA handbook of new product development (2nd ed., pp. 378–388). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Veryzer, R. W. (2005b). The roles of marketing and industrial design in discontinuous new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22, 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wormald, P. W., & Rodber, M. J. (2008). Aligning industrial design education to emerging trends in professional practice and industry. Journal of Design Research, 7(3), 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhang, Q., & Doll, W. J. (2001). The fuzzy front end and success of new product development: A causal model. European Journal of Innovation Management, 4, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Industrial Design, School of Design and EnvironmentNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations