Advertisement

Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 29–74 | Cite as

The Communication Bottleneck in Knitwear Design: Analysis and Computing Solutions

  • Claudia Eckert
Article

Abstract

Communication between different members of a designteam often poses difficulties. This paper reports onthe results of a detailed empirical study ofcommunication in over twenty British, German andItalian knitwear companies. The knitwear designprocess is shared by the designers, who plan thevisual and tactile appearance of the garments, and thetechnicians, who have to realise the garment on aknitting machine. They comprise a typical but smalldesign team whose members have different backgroundsand expertise. Knitwear design allows a detailedanalysis of the causes and effects of communicationbreakdown. Designers specify their designsinaccurately, incompletely and inconsistently;technicians interpret these specifications accordingto their previous experience of similar designs, andproduce garments very different from the designers'original intentions. Knitwear is inherently difficultto describe, as no simple and complete notationexists; and the relationship between visual appearanceand structure and technical properties of knittedfabric is subtle and complex. Designers andtechnicians have different cognitive approaches andare very different people. At the same time theinteraction between designers and technicians is badlymanaged in many companies. This paper argues thatimproving the accuracy and reliability of designers'specifications would significantly enhance the designprocess. It concludes with a description of thearchitecture of an intelligent automatic design systemthat generates technically correct designs from thedesigners' customary notations.

automatic design communication design ethnography knitwear notation team working 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agar, M. (1980): The Professional Stranger: An Informal Introduction to Ethnography. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R.J. (1994): Representations and Requirements: The Value of Ethnography in System Design. Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 8, pp. 151–182.Google Scholar
  3. Badke-Schaub, P. and E. Frankenberger (1999): Analysis of Design Projects, Design Studies vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 465–480.Google Scholar
  4. Booch, G., I. Jacobson and J. Rumbaugh (1998): Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  5. Bucciarelli, L.L. (1988): An Ethnographic Perspective on Engineering Design, Design Studies, vol. 9, pp. 159–168.Google Scholar
  6. Bucciarelli, L.L. (1994): Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Burda (1975): Freude am Stricken. Offenburg, Germany: Verlag Aenne Burda GmbH & Co., p. 74.Google Scholar
  8. Burda (1988): Grosses Strickmusterhelf. Offenburg, Germany: Verlag Aenne Burda GmbH & Co.Google Scholar
  9. Busby, J.S. (1998): The Neglect of Feedback in Engineering Design Organisations, Design Studies, vol. 19, pp. 103–117.Google Scholar
  10. Bly, S.A. (1988): A Use of Drawing Surfaces in Different Collaborative Settings, Proceedings of CSCW'88. Portland, OR: ACM Press, pp. 250–256.Google Scholar
  11. Bly, S.A and S.L. Minneman (1990): Commune: A Shared Drawing Surface, Proceedings of the Office Information System Conference. Boston, MA, pp. 184–193.Google Scholar
  12. Cross, N.G. (1989): Engineering Design Methods. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Cross, N.G. and A.C. Cross (1995): Observation of Teamwork and Social Processes in Design. Design Studies, vol. 16, pp.143–170.Google Scholar
  14. Dourish, P. and G. Button (1998): On “Technomethodology”: Foundational Relationships Between Ethnomethodology and System Design. Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 13, pp. 395–432.Google Scholar
  15. Eckert, C.M. (1997): Intelligent Support for Knitwear Design, PhD Thesis, Department of Design and Innovation, Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.Google Scholar
  16. Eckert, C.M. (1997b): 'Design Inspiration and Design Performance', Proceedings of the 78th World Conference of the Textile Institute, Thessaloniki, Greece: The Textile Institute, vol. 1, pp. 369–387.Google Scholar
  17. Eckert, C.M. and H.E. Bez (2000): A Garment Design System Using Constrained Bézier Curves, International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, vol.12, No 2, pp. 134–143.Google Scholar
  18. Eckert, C.M., N.G. Cross and J.H. Johnson (1998): Intelligent Support for Communication Diffi-culties in Conceptual Design. Proceedings of Computer Aided Conceptual Design' 98, Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University Engineering Design Centre, pp. 267–284.Google Scholar
  19. Eckert, C.M., N.G. Cross and J.H. Johnson (2000): Intelligent Support for Communication in Design Teams: Garment Shape Specifications in the Knitwear Industry, Design Studies, vol. 21, pp. 99–112.Google Scholar
  20. Eckert, C.M. and A. Demaid (1997): Concurrent Design, Proceedings of the 78th World Conference of the Textile Institute. Thessaloniki, Greece: The Textile Institute, vol. 3, pp. 101–122.Google Scholar
  21. Eckert, C.M., I. Kelly and M.K. Stacey (1999): Interactive Generative Systems for Conceptual Design: An Empirical Perspective, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, vol. 13, pp. 303–320.Google Scholar
  22. Eckert, C.M. and M.K. Stacey (1994): CAD Systems and the Division of Labour in Knitwear Design. In A. Adam, J. Emms, E. Green and J. Owen (eds.): Women, Work and Computerization: Breaking Old Boundaries - Building New Forms. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland, pp. 409–422.Google Scholar
  23. Eckert, C.M. and M.K. Stacey (1995): An Architecture for the Intelligent Support of Knitwears Design. In J.E.E. Sharpe (ed.): AI System Support for Conceptual Design. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, pp. 71–92.Google Scholar
  24. Eckert, C.M. and M.K. Stacey (1999): Adaptation of Sources of Inspiration in Knitwear Design. Cambridge University Engineering Department, Technical Report CUED/C-EDC/TR80.Google Scholar
  25. Eckert, C.M. and M.K. Stacey (2000): Sources of Inspiration: a Language of Design, Design Studies, vol. 21, pp. 523–538.Google Scholar
  26. Eckert, C.M., M.K. Stacey and J. Wiley (1999b): Expertise and Designer Burnout, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Engineering Design. Munich, Germany: Technical University of Munich, vol. 1, pp. 195–200.Google Scholar
  27. Ehrlenspiel, K. (1995): Integrierte Produktentwicklung, Munich, Germany: Carl Hanser Verlag.Google Scholar
  28. Fowler, M. and K. Scott (1999): UML Distilled, 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  29. Goel, V. (1995): Sketches of Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Goldschmidt, G. (1991): The Dialectics of Sketching. Creativity Research Journal, vol. 4, pp. 123–143.Google Scholar
  31. Goldschmidt, G. (1994): On Visual Design Thinking: The Vis Kids of Architecture. Design Studies, vol. 15, pp. 158–174.Google Scholar
  32. Goodland, M. and C. Slater (1995): SSADM Version 4: A Practical Approach. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  33. Henderson, K. (1999): On Line and on Paper. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hammersley M. and P. Atkinson (1995): Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Hollan, J. and S. Stornetta (1992): Beyond Being There. Proceedings of CHI'92, Monterey, CA: ACM Press, pp. 119–125.Google Scholar
  36. Ishii, H. and K. Minoru (1992): ClearBoard: A Seamless Medium for Shared Drawing and Conversation with Eye Contact, Proceedings of CHI'92. Monterey, CA: ACM Press, pp. 525–532.Google Scholar
  37. Jacobson, I., G. Booch and J. Rumbaugh (1999): The Unified Software Development Process. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  38. Kolodner, J. (1993): Case-Based Reasoning, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  39. Kvan, T., R. West and A.H. Vera (1997): Tools and Channels of Communication: Dealing with the Effects of Computer Mediation on Design Communication. Proceedings of Creative Collaboration in Virtual Communities' 97, Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney. http://www.arch.su.edu/kcdc/conferences/VC97/papers/west.htmlGoogle Scholar
  40. Lofland, J. (1995): Analytic Ethnography: Features, Failings, and Futures, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol. 24, no.1, pp. 30–67.Google Scholar
  41. Mäkirinne-Croft, P., W. Godwin and S. Saadat (1996): A Conceptual Model of the Fashion Design Process, Cheltenham & Gloucester College of Higher Education, Report for: EPSRC/DIP GR/H84475.Google Scholar
  42. McFadzean, J., N.G. Cross and J.H. Johnson (1999): Notation and Cognition in Conceptual Sketching, Proceedings of VR'99, Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  43. Meyer, M. (1992): How to Apply the Anthropological Observation Technique of Participatory Observation to Knowledge Acquisition for Expert Systems, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Men, and Cybernetics, vol. 22 no. 5 pp. 983–991.Google Scholar
  44. Minneman, S.L. (1991): The Social Construction of a Technical Reality: Empirical Studies of Group Engineering Design Practice, PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center report SSL-91-22.Google Scholar
  45. Minneman, S.L. and S.A. Bly (1990): Experiences in the Development of Multi-user Drawing Tools. Proceedings of the Third Guelph Symposium on Computer Mediated Communication, Guelph, Canada, pp. 154–167.Google Scholar
  46. Minneman, S.L. and S. Harrison (1999): The DrawStream Station: A Tool for Distributed and Asynchronous Chats About Sketches and Artifacts, Proceedings of HCI'99, Munich, Germany, pp. 221–225.Google Scholar
  47. Moran, T.P., W. van Melle and P. Chiu, P. (1998): Spatial Interpretation of Domain Objects Integrated into a Freeform Electronic Whiteboard, Proceedings of UIST 98, San Francisco: ACM Press, pp. 175–184.Google Scholar
  48. Neilson, I. and J. Lee (1994): Conversations with Graphics: Implications for the Design of Natural Language/Graphics Interfaces, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 40, pp. 509–541.Google Scholar
  49. Newell, A. (1981): The Knowledge Level, AI Magazine, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–20. Also published in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 18, pp. 87-127, 1982.Google Scholar
  50. Pahl, G. and W. Beitz (1996): Engineering Design, trans. K. Wallace, L. Blessing and F. Bauert. London, UK: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Penrose, R. (1989): The Emperor's New Mind. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Perry, M. and D. Sanderson (1998): Coordinating Joint Design Work: the Role of Communication and Artefacts. Design Studies, vol. 19, pp. 273–288.Google Scholar
  53. Purcell. A.T. and J.S. Gero (1998): Drawings and the Design Process. Design Studies, vol. 19, pp. 389–430.Google Scholar
  54. Pycock, J. and J. Bowers (1996): Getting Others to Get it Right: An Ethnography of Design Work in the Fashion Industry, Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Work' 96, Cambridge MA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  55. Rumbaugh, J., M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy and W. Lorensen (1990): Object-OrientedModeling and Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  56. Scaife, M., E. Curtis and C. Hill (1994): Interdisciplinary Collaboration: A Case Study of Software Development for Fashion Designers, Interacting with Computers, vol. 6, pp. 395–410.Google Scholar
  57. Schön, D.A. (1983): The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. NewYork, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  58. Schön, D.A. and G.A. Wiggins (1992): Kinds of Seeing and Their Function in Designing. Design Studies, vol. 13, pp. 135–156.Google Scholar
  59. Schreiber, A.Th., H. Akkermans, A. Anjewierden, R. de Hoog, N. Shadbolt, W. van de Velde and R. Wielinga (1999): Knowledge Engineering and Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  60. Schreiber, A.Th., R. Wielinga and J.A. Breuker (1993): KADS: A Principled Approach to Knowledge-Based System Development. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  61. Scrivener, S., S. Clark, A. Clarke, J. Connolly, S. Garner, H. Palmén, M. Smyth and A. Schappo (1993): Real-Time Communication Between Dispersed Work Groups Via Speech and Drawing. Wirtschaftsinformatik, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 149–156.Google Scholar
  62. Scott A.C., J.E. Clayton and E.L. Gibson (1991): A Practical Guide to Knowledge Acquisition, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  63. Shima Seiki (1996): Total Knitting System, Sales Brochure, Shima Seiki Europe, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
  64. Spencer, D. (1989): Knitting Technology, Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  65. Smithers, T. (1996): On Knowledge Level Theories of Design Process. In J.S. Gero and F. Sudweeks (eds.): Artifical Intelligence in Design' 96. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 561–579.Google Scholar
  66. Smithers, T. (1998): Towards Knowledge Level Theories of Design Process. In J.S. Gero and F. Sudweeks (eds.): Artifical Intelligence in Design' 96, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 3–21.Google Scholar
  67. Stacey, M.K. and C.M. Eckert (1999): An Ethnographic Methodology for Design Process Analysis. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Engineering Design. Munich, Germany: Technical University of Munich, vol. 3, pp. 1565–1570.Google Scholar
  68. Stacey, M.K. and C.M. Eckert (2000): Against Ambiguity. COOP 2000 Workshop Proceedings: The Role of Objects in Design Collaboration: Communicating through Physical and Virtual Objects, Sophia Antipolis, France: INRIA.Google Scholar
  69. Stacey, M.K., C.M. Eckert and J. McFadzean (1999): Sketch Interpretation in Design Communication. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Engineering Design. Munich, Germany: Technical University of Munich, vol. 2, pp. 923–928.Google Scholar
  70. Star, S.L. (1989): The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Heterogeneous Problem-Solving, Boundary Objects, and Distributed Artificial Intelligence. In L. Gasser and M.N. Huhns (eds.): Distributed Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, Menlo Park, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 37–54.Google Scholar
  71. Symon, G. (1998): The Work of IT System Developers in Context: An Organisational Case Study, Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 13, pp. 33–71.Google Scholar
  72. Tang, J.C. (1989): Listing, Drawing and Gesturing in Design: A Study of the Use of Shared Workspaces by Design Teams. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Xerox Palo Alto Research Center report SSL-89-3.Google Scholar
  73. Tang, J.C. (1991): Findings from Observational Studues of Collaborative Work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 34, pp. 143–160.Google Scholar
  74. Tang, J.C. and L. Leifer (1988): A Framework for Understanding the Workspace Activity of Design Teams. Proceedings of CSCW'88. Portland, OR: ACM Press, pp. 226–232.Google Scholar
  75. Tang, J.C. and S.L. Minneman (1990): VideoDraw: Video Interface for Collaborative Drawing, Proceedings of CHI'90, Seattle, WA: ACM Press, pp. 313–320.Google Scholar
  76. Tang, J.C. and S.L. Minneman (1991): VideoWhiteboard: Video Shadows to Support Remote Collaboration, Proceedings of CHI'91, New Orleans, LA: ACM Press, pp. 313–320.Google Scholar
  77. Ullman, D., D. Herling and B. D'Ambrosio (1997): What to Do Next: Using Problem Status to Determine the Course of Action, Research in Engineering Design, vol. 9, pp. 214–227.Google Scholar
  78. Universal (1996): Pattern Presentation Unit, Sales Brochure, Universal Maschinenfabrik, Westhausen, Germany.Google Scholar
  79. Viller, S. and I. Sommerville (1999): 'Coherence: An Approach to Representing Ethnographic Analyses in System Design', Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 14, pp. 9–41.Google Scholar
  80. Valkenburg R. and K. Dorst (1998): The Reflective Practice of Design Teams. Design Studies, vol. 19, pp. 249–271.Google Scholar
  81. Voss, A. (1996): Towards a Methodology for Case Adaptation, Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  82. Voss, A., B. Bartsch-Spörl and and R. Oxman (1996): A Study of Case Adaptation Systems. In J.S. Gero and F. Sudweeks (eds.): Artificial Intelligence in Design' 98. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 173–189.Google Scholar
  83. Wagner, I., M. Buscher, P. Morgensen and D. Shapiro (1999): Spaces for Creating Context and Awareness - Designing a Collaborative Virtual Work Space for (Landscape) Architects. Proceedings of HCI'99, Munich, Germany, pp. 283–287.Google Scholar
  84. Wielinga, B.J., A.Th. Schreiber and J.A. Breuker (1992): KADS: A Modelling Approach to Knowledge Engineering. Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 4, pp. 5–53.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Eckert
    • 1
  1. 1.Engineering Design Centre, Engineering DepartmentUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations