Abstract
Day by day, more R&D divisions of modern industries start adopting inventive design tools and methods. Creativity needed in designing complex products cannot be left to subjective behavior; it must be helped and exploited by a systematic approach. The research described in this paper aims at developing a design framework focused on interaction issues, by exploiting the systematic approach of the theory of inventing problem solving TRIZ. The final result should integrate design, evaluation, and evolution issues. For this reason, the starting point consists in three tools already developed by the authors’ research group: the interaction design guidelines—IDGL, the usability evaluation multi-methods—UEMM, and ITRE, a gatherer of interaction trends of evolution. All of them contain generic elements both of the TRIZ theory and the interaction design field; for this reason the proposed integrated approach could be exploited in completely different contexts. A first prototype of the framework has been developed as a Microsoft Access database. Its validation has started with two experiences in the field. Results are reported and discussed in the last section of the paper.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Altshuller G, Rodman S (1999) The innovation algorithm: TRIZ, systematic innovation and technical creativity. Technical Innovation Center Inc, Worcester
Zlotin B, Zusman A (1999) The ideation approach to the search, development, and utilization of innovation knowledge. J Altshuller Inst TRIZ Stud 21–29
Lin CC, Luh DB (2009) A vision-oriented approach for innovative product design. Adv Eng Inform 23:191–200
Pin SC, Haron F, Sarmady S, Talib AZ, Khader AT (2011) Applying TRIZ principles in crowd management. Saf Sci 49:286–291
Zhang J, Shang J (2010) Research on developing environmental protection industry based on TRIZ theory. Proced Environ Sci 2:1326–1334
Domb E (2011) The 39 features of Altshuller’s contradiction matrix. Available on http://www.triz-Journal.com/archives/1998/11/d/index.htm. Accessed 20 may 2011
Craig S, Dekoninck E, Harrison D, Cripps A (2006) An analysis of the technological development of the transparent building envelope using the TRIZ trends of evolution. Proceedings of the 13th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering. Leuven, Belgium
Bogatyrev NR, Bogatyreva OA (2009) TRIZ evolution trends in biological and technological design strategies. Proceedings of the 19th CIRP design conference-competitive design. Cranfield University, pp 293–299
Cavallucci D, Khomenko N (2007) From TRIZ to OTSM-TRIZ: addressing complexity challenges in inventive design. Int J Prod Dev 4:4–21
Becattini N, Cascini G, Rotini F (2011) Correlations between the evolution of contradictions and the law of identity increase. Proc Eng 9:236–250
Hertzum M (2010) Images of usability. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 26(6):567–600
ISO (2007) ISO 20282-3: Ease of operation of everyday products—part 3: test method for consumer products. ISO 20282. International Organization for Standardization Geneva
Koca A, Funk M, Karapanos E, Rozinat A, Martens J, Brombacher A (2008) A soft reliability: an interdisciplinary approach with a user-system focus. Qual and Reliab Eng Int 25(1):3–20. Available on http://www.softreliability.org/DokuWiki/publications. Accessed 04 Oct 2011
Koca A, Brombacher A, Panchal J, Mistree F (2009) Engineering soft reliability in product realization. Proceeding of the ASME 2009: international design engineering technical conferences, pp 739–751
Kamper RJ (2002) Extending the usability of heuristics for design and evaluation: lead, follow get out of the way. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 14(3):447–462
Koutsabasis P, Spyrou T, Darzentas J (2007) Evaluating usability evaluation methods: criteria, method and a case study. Proceeding of the 12th international conference on human-computer interaction: interaction design and usability pp 569–578
Freiberg M, Baumeister J (2008) A survey on usability evaluation techniques and an analysis of their actual application. Institute of Computer Science, University of Wurzburg, Germany
Hartson HR, Andre TS, Williges RC (2001) Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 13(4):373–410
Doroodchi M, Nikmehr N (2008) Overview and evaluation of usability evaluation methods for E-learning system. Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on E-learning, E-business, enterprise information system and E-government, EEE. Las Vegas, pp 123–128
Saaty TL (2008) Decision marking with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1:83–98
Roderburg A, Klocke F, Koshy P (2011) Principles of technology evolutions for manufacturing process design. Proced Eng 9:294–310
Filippi S, Barattin D (2011) Exploiting TRIZ tools in interaction design. Proceeding of the TRIZ future 2011, ETRIA 2011. Dublin, Ireland
Kurttila M, Pesonen M, Kangas J, Kajanus M (2000) Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis. Policy Econ 1:41–52
Tsironis L (2008) Empowerment the IDEF0 modeling language. Int J Bus Manag 3:109–118
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag London
About this paper
Cite this paper
Filippi, S., Barattin, D. (2013). Integrating Systematic Innovation, Interaction Design, Usability Evaluation and Trends of Evolution. In: Chakrabarti, A. (eds) CIRP Design 2012. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4507-3_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4507-3_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4506-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4507-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)