Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Design Rationale Knowledge Management: A Survey

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering (CDVE 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11151))

Abstract

Design rationale is an explicit expression of the reasons behind decision making when designing an artifact. Despite its potential wide usage recognized by researchers and practitioners, it is still hard to be captured in practice. Most of research considered design rationale as a kind of tool from the scientific and engineering view and ignored humanity factor from the management view. From the perspective of knowledge management, we provide an introduction to the definition, acquisition, representation, integration, application of design rationale in this paper. We conclude with a discussion about the potential causes why the design rationale is hard to capture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kunz, W., Rittel, H.: Issues as elements of information systems. In: Working Paper 131, Institute for Urban & Regional Development, University of California Berkeley (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carroll, J.M., Rosson, M.B.: Design rationale as theory. In: Carroll, J.M. (ed.) HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks, pp. 431–461. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-155860808-5/50015-0

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Haynes, S.R., Bach, P.M., Carroll, J.M.: Scientific design rationale. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 22(4), 359–373 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060408000243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Drucker, P.F.: Landmarks of Tomorrow: A Report on the New “Post-Modern” World. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Polanyi, M.: The Tacit Dimension. University of Chicago Press, London (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nonaka, I.: The Knowledge-Creating Company, pp. 96–104. Harvard Business Review, Brighton (1991). 69

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nonaka, L., Konno, N.: The concept of “Ba”: building a foundation for knowledge creation. Calif. Manag. Rev. 40(3), 40–54 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. GB (China national standard) GB/T 34061.1–2017: Knowledge Management System—Part 1: Guidelines, Standardization Administration of China, Beijing (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  9. ISO (International standard) ISO/PRF 30401: Knowledge management systems – Requirements, ISO, Geneva (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Noble, D., Rittel, H.: Issue-based information systems for design. In: Computing in Design Education: ACADIA Conference Proceedings, Gainesville, Florida. ACADIA. University of Florida (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Conklin, J., Begeman, M.L.: gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 6(4), 303–331 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1145/58566.59297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Potts, C., Bruns, G.: Recording the reasons for design decisions Proceedings. In: 11th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 418–427 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1109/icse.1988.93722

  13. Conklin, E.J., Yakemovic, K.C.B.: A Process-oriented approach to design rationale. Hum.-Comput. Interact 6(3), 357–391 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0603&4_6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. MacLean, A., Young, R., Bellotti, V., Moran, T.: Questions, options, and criteria: elements of design space analysis. Hum.-Comput. Interact 6(3), 201–250 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0603&4_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dutoit, A.H., McCall, R., Mistrík, I., Paech, B. (eds.): Rationale Management in Software Engineering: Concepts and Techniques, pp. 1–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30998-7_1

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Gruber, T.R., Russell, D.M.: Design knowledge and design rationale: a framework for representation, capture, and use. Technical report, KSL 90–45. Stanford University, Stanford, California (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lee, J.: Design rationale systems: understanding the issues. IEEE Expert 12(3), 78–85 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1109/64.592267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nkwocha, A., Hall, J.G., Rapanotti, L.: Design rationale capture for process improvement in the globalised enterprise: an industrial study. Softw. Syst. Model. 12(4), 825–845 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-011-0223-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yoshikawa, H.: Systematization of design knowledge. CIRP Ann. 42(1), 131–134 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62409-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Takeda, H., Veerkamp, P., Tomiyama, T., Yoshikawa, H.: Modeling design processes. AI Mag. 11(4), 37–48 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tomiyama, T.: From general design theory to knowledge-intensive engineering. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 8(4), 319–333 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400000998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Liu, J., Hu, X.: A reuse oriented representation model for capturing and formalizing the evolving design rationale. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 27(4), 401 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060413000395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kimura, F., Suzuki, H.: Representing background information for product description to support product development process. CIRP Ann. 44(1), 113–116 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62287-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Burge, J., Brown, D.C.: Reasoning with design rationale. In: Gero, J.S. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence in Design 2000, pp. 611–629. Springer, Dordrecht (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4154-3_30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Shipman III, F.M., Marshall, C.C.: Formality considered harmful: experiences, emerging themes, and directions on the use of formal representations in interactive systems. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 8(4), 333–352 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008716330212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Horner, J., Atwood, M.E.: Design rationale: the rationale and the barriers. In: NordiCHI 2006, New York, NY, USA, pp 341–350 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shum, S.J.B., Selvin, A.M., Sierhuis, M., Conklin, J., Haley, C.B., Nuseibeh, B.: Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale. In: Dutoit, A.H., McCall, R., Mistrík, I., Paech, B. (eds.) Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pp. 111–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30998-7_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Shipman, F.M., McCall, R.J.: Integrating different perspectives on design rationale: supporting the emergence of design rationale from design communication. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 11(2), 141–154 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1017/S089006040000192X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Boehm, B., Kitapci, H.: The WinWin approach: using a requirements negotiation tool for rationale capture and use. In: Dutoit, A.H., McCall, R., Mistrík, I., Paech, B. (eds.) Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pp. 173–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30998-7_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Garcia, A.C.B., Howard, H.C.: Acquiring design knowledge through design decision justification. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 6(01), 59 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400002948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Myers, K.L., Zumel, N.B., Garcia, P.: Acquiring design rationale automatically. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 14(2), 115–135 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400142027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bracewell, R.H., Wallace, K.M.: A tool for capturing design rationale. In: The 14th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 2003), Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 185–186 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bracewell, R., Wallace, K., Moss, M., Knott, D.: Capturing design rationale. Comput. Aided Des. 41(3), 173–186 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2008.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sung, R.C.W., Ritchie, J.M., Lim, T., Kosmadoudi, Z.: Automated generation of engineering rationale, knowledge and intent representations during the product life cycle. Virtual Real-London 16(1), 69–85 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-011-0196-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sung, R., Ritchie, J.M., Rea, H.J., Corney, J.: Automated design knowledge capture and representation in single-user CAD environments. J Eng. Des. 22(7), 487–503 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820903527187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mix, K.J., Jensen, C.G., Ryskamp, J.: Automated design rationale capture within the CAx environment. Comput.-Aided Design Appl. 7(3), 361–375 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3722/cadaps.2010.361-375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rogers, B., Qiao, Y., Gung, J., Mathur, T., Burge, J.E.: Using text mining techniques to extract rationale from existing documentation. In: Gero, John S., Hanna, S. (eds.) Design Computing and Cognition ‘14, pp. 457–474. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14956-1_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Liang, Y., Liu, Y., Kwong, C.K., Lee, W.B.: Learning the “whys”: discovering design rationale using text mining - an algorithm perspective. Comput. Aided Des. 44(10), 916–930 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2011.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang, H., Johnson, A.L., Bracewell, R.H.: The retrieval of structured design rationale for the re-use of design knowledge with an integrated representation. Adv. Eng. Inf. 26(2), 251–266 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Peng, G., Wang, H., Zhang, H., Zhao, Y., Johnson, A.L.: A collaborative system for capturing and reusing in-context design knowledge with an integrated representation model. Adv. Eng. Inf. 33, 314–329 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2016.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang, Y., Luo, X., Li, J., Buis, J.J.: A semantic representation model for design rationale of products. Adv. Eng. Inf. 27(1), 13–26 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Conklin, J., Selvin, A., Shum, S.B., Sierhuis, M.: Facilitated hypertext for collective sensemaking: 15 years on from gIBIS. In: HYPERTEXT 2001, New York, NY, USA, pp. 123—124 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Burge, J.E., Brown, D.C.: Integrating design rationale with a process model. In: Artificial Intelligence in Design (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Poorkiany, M., Johansson, J., Elgh, F.: Capturing, structuring and accessing design rationale in integrated product design and manufacturing processes. Adv. Eng. Inf. 30(3), 522–536 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2016.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pratt, M.J., Kim, J.: Experience in the exchange of procedural shape models using ISO 10303 (STEP). In: SPM 2006, New York, NY, USA, pp. 229—238 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1145/1128888.1128920

  46. McCall, R.J., Bennett, P., Johnson, E.: An overview of the PHIDIAS II HyperCAD system. In: Reconnecting: ACADIA Conference Proceedings, St. Louis, Missouri. ACADIA. Washington University (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Agouridas, V., Simons, P.: Antecedence and consequence in design rationale systems. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 22(4), 375–386 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060408000255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tang, A., Jin, Y., Han, J.: A rationale-based architecture model for design traceability and reasoning. J. Syst. Softw. 80(6), 918–934 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.08.040

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) Grant Research on Design Decision Context Knowledge Modeling Methods and Application (NO. 51475027). Additional support was provided by Standardization Administration of China (SAC) Grant Knowledge Management in Consumable Industry.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. China National Institute of Standardization, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

    Gaofeng Yue

  2. Beihang University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

    Jihong Liu & Yongzhu Hou

Authors
  1. Gaofeng Yue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jihong Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yongzhu Hou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jihong Liu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Balearic Islands, Palma de Mallorca, Spain

    Yuhua Luo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yue, G., Liu, J., Hou, Y. (2018). Design Rationale Knowledge Management: A Survey. In: Luo, Y. (eds) Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering. CDVE 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11151. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00560-3_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00560-3_33

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00559-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00560-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation