Qualitative Methods and Metrics for Assessing Wayfinding and Navigation in Engineering Design
Designing can be viewed as a body of behaviors. Fundamental to several design behaviors is Path Determination. Path Determination describes the moments when designers choose what they will take up for development as well as how they experience their perceptual horizon.
Our research suggests that there are two primary modes of Path Determination, Wayfinding and Navigation. Each of these has been correlated with different outcomes in redesign scenarios. Wayfinding correlates to making significant changes to an object, while navigation correlates to making incremental changes to an object.
In this chapter, I present a novel methodology for capturing and observing Wayfinding and Navigation behaviors, as well as several metrics for measuring these behaviors.
KeywordsMaterial Analyzer Product Concept Incremental Improvement Path Determination Radical Break
This research was made possible by a generous and on-going grant from the Hasso Plattner Institute for Design Thinking Research. The author would like to express his gratitude for their help, guidance, and patience without which this work would not have been possible:
Jonathan Antonio Edelman
- Bakeman R, Deckner DF, Quera V (2008) Analysis of behavioral streams. In: Handbook of research methods in developmental science. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, pp 394–420Google Scholar
- Bekker MM, Olson JS, Olson GM (1995) Analysis of gestures in face-to-face design teams provides guidance for how to use groupware in design. In: Proceedings of the 1st conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, ACM, Ann Arbor, pp 157–166Google Scholar
- Edelman JA, Leifer L (2) Hidden in plain sight: affordances of shared models in team based design. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on engineering design (ICED’09), vol 2. ds publications, pp 395–406 (Print)Google Scholar
- Eris O (2002) Perceiving, comprehending, and measuring design activity through the questions asked while designing. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Grosskopf A, Edelman J, Weske M (2010) Tangible business process modeling‚ Äì methodology and experiment design business process management workshops. In: Lecture notes in business information processing, vol 43. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 489–500Google Scholar
- Ingold T (2007) Lines: a brief history. Routledge, London (Print)Google Scholar
- Jung M (2010) Designing perception-action theories – theory-building for design practice. In: Proceedings of the eighth design thinking research symposium, Sydney (Print)Google Scholar
- Jung MF, Ade M (2007) Design knowledge coaching – a conceptual framework to guide practise and research. In: 16th international conference on engineering design. ds publications. pp 415–416, (Print)Google Scholar
- Luebbe A et al (2010) Design thinking implemented in software engineering tools. In: Staudinger I (ed) DAB documents, Sydney (Print)Google Scholar
- McNeill D (1992) Hand and mind: what gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (Print)Google Scholar
- Meinel C, Leifer L, Plattner H (2011) Design thinking: understand – improve – apply. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (Print)Google Scholar
- Minneman S et al (1995) A confederation of tools for capturing and accessing collaborative activity. In: Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on multimedia, ACM, San Francisco, pp 523–534Google Scholar
- Tang JC, Leifer LJ (1988) A framework for understanding the workspace activity of design teams. In: Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work. ACM, Portland, pp 244–249Google Scholar
- Törlind P, Sonalkar N (2) Lessons learned and future challenges for design observatory research. In: 17th international conference on engineering design (ICED’09), Stanford University: ds publications (Print)Google Scholar
- Yin RK (1994) Case study research: design and methods. Sage, Beverley HillsGoogle Scholar