Studia grazie alle numerose risorse presenti su Docsity
Guadagna punti aiutando altri studenti oppure acquistali con un piano Premium
Prepara i tuoi esami
Studia grazie alle numerose risorse presenti su Docsity
Prepara i tuoi esami con i documenti condivisi da studenti come te su Docsity
Trova i documenti specifici per gli esami della tua università
Preparati con lezioni e prove svolte basate sui programmi universitari!
Rispondi a reali domande d’esame e scopri la tua preparazione
Riassumi i tuoi documenti, fagli domande, convertili in quiz e mappe concettuali
Studia con prove svolte, tesine e consigli utili
Togliti ogni dubbio leggendo le risposte alle domande fatte da altri studenti come te
Esplora i documenti più scaricati per gli argomenti di studio più popolari
Ottieni i punti per scaricare
Guadagna punti aiutando altri studenti oppure acquistali con un piano Premium
Design models and methodologies for design cognition
Tipologia: Prove d'esame
1 / 8
Questa pagina non è visibile nell’anteprima
Non perderti parti importanti!
3.1 Cognitive processes 3.2 When a team is more appropriate than an individual?
documentation and three different types of reformulation. Most of these have been formulated starting from the analysis of concrete cases, observing and analyzing the way in which the designers work. In recent years the body of work on design theory has helped the generation of a science of design. These studies are important because they managed to unified the field at a high level of generality, mark “design-oriented” structures of knowledge and pushed a paradigmatic shift in the organization of R&D departments and innovation centers all around the world in many disciplines and academic fields such as creativity research, data mining and knowledge management (Campos & Filho, 2016). 2 Common behaviours in the design processes In my experience gained during the Bachelor’s degree in Industrial Product Design, at the Politecnico di Milano, and now in the Master program Integrated Product Design the teaching of Bruno Munari had a strong impact on students design attitude. Munari encloses the passages of his design method, among the pages of his book “Da Cosa Nasce Cosa” (1981). The novelty is that he does it with extreme simplicity and spontaneity, comparing the process of designing to prepare a typical italian dish. With the same enchanted lightness he affirms that designing is not an innate gift of a few. Creativity is in each of us, regardless of our cultural background. What matters is to proceed with a logical order, moreover the experience will help to repeat the steps instinctively and then to develop a behavioral attitude to face the possible problems. Surely following an order can help, however it’s only through testing and prototyping that is possible to discover the problems related to physical contingencies. As well as the ideas that stay in the incubator for too long, nobody has the certainty that they will work or not. Situated Cognition theory (late twentieth century) advances that knowing is indivisible from doing, so cognition cannot came apart from the context. The two researchers Schon D. and Wiggins G. found out that designers tend to use their sketches not only to visualize, concretize and collect their ideas but also to reinterpret what they have just produced (Gero & Kannengiesser, 2006). That is why it is possible to say that designing is a rich cognitive interplay of inside and outside our head (fig. 1). It is possible to generate new ideas just reinterpreting past designs in terms of other elements (^) fig. 1
of the context, this is called constructive memory. Sometimes during the design process it is not difficult to run into unproductive moments, so called design fixation (Gero & Purcell, 2006). Different descriptions of design fixation show that when designers are exposed to existing design solutions (e.g. directly from their environment) then this might unconsciously reduce the range of possible alternatives that they will investigate. Design fixation might be noticed in many different kinds of design activities (e.g. urban planning, computer engineering, etc.) however most of the empirical studies have focussed on industrial or mechanical fields. These moments could be related to many other behavioural and cognitive facts that are described in other literatures (e.g. attentional blink, stuckness and psychological ownership) but the nature of those relationships has not been examined yet (Cardoso & Crilly, 2017). It is true that design fixation reduce the area of ideas in which designers work but they still could demonstrate creativity in that restricted area, maybe discovering alternative solutions that would not have been advanced without fixation.
3. Design individually or in teams
From the field of aeronautics is interesting to notice what Dr. Norman Warner (2003) has presented as a structural model of team collaboration (fig. 2), which is a synthesis of the literature in team collaboration and team communication. The model presents four interdependent stages of collaboration: Team Knowledge Base Construction, Collaborative Team Problem Solving, Team Consensus and Product Evaluation & Revision. It may appear as a linear model but the stages are not strictly sequential, the scheme shows four level of cognitive processes: Meta-cognition , guiding the overall problem solving process, the Information Processing Tasks necessary for the team to fulfill each collaboration stage, the Knowledge Required to support the information processing tasks and the Communication Mechanisms for Knowledge Building and Information Processing , basically verbal and/or written communication. The proposed structural model of team collaboration could be a starting point for understanding the cognitive mechanisms placed in different contexts (Warner & Wroblewski, 2004). Probably the main difference between individual and collective work lies in the first stages. Unlike individual work, which can allow anachronisms in the classic design structure, in team work laying the foundations of knowledge is the first step to allow the whole team to align itself. Therefore we start identify and collect relevant informations to the problem to be solved.
the ideas are spread they are subjected to the interpretation of everyone and that is the moment of maximum creativity.
In my personal experiences I discovered that is incredibly more powerful working in team to generate alternative solutions to a problem. Even when I was working individually I were constantly looking for people from different fields than mine to brainstorm with. And the results were concrete. I graduated last year in Product Design and I find out the technical solution for my thesis project after a conversation with a biotechnologist student and a mechanical engineer. Also in a company working in teams is very important, much more if the company manage to find a balance between the individual moment and the shared one, also trough organized spaces. For example, the offices of the Vitra campus in Basel are entirely designed according to the model of the combi-office (Peach, 2010): a more free layout from workstations in which it is possible to generate areas for common and individual work, thus recognizing the importance for the employee of both the private and the group component. Sharing ideas and engage team building exercises is really significant because it helps to develop problem solving skills and to be more creative. Creative design is one of the most evident features that is able to differentiate modern humans from the other makers of artifacts. “If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.” George Bernard Shaw
Campus, F., & Filho, I. G. (2016) Creation of artifacts: State of art of design Cascini, G., Fantoni, G., & Montagna, F. (2012) Situating needs and requirements in the FBS fra- mework. Elsevier Crilly, N., & Cardoso, C. (2017, May) Where next for research on fixation, inspiration and creativi- ty in design? Design Studies Gero, J. S. (2007, June) An ontology of situated design teams. Artificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturing Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2003) The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. Elsevier Gero, J. S., & Purcell, A. T. (2006) Design and Other Types of Fixation or Is Fixation Always Incompatible with Innovation? Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., Reich, Y., & Subrahmanian, E. (2017). Design theory: a foundation of a new paradigm for design science and engineering. Springer Munari, B. (1981). Da cosa nasce cosa. Roma: Editori Laterza. Norman W. Warner, N. W., & Wroblewski, E. M. (2004) The cognitive processes used in team col- laboration during asynchronous, distributed decision making Stibel, J. (2009). Wired for Thought: How the Brain is Shaping the Future of the Internet. Harvard Business School Press Rossi, P. G., & Toppano, E. (2009). Progettare nella società della conoscenza. Roma: Carocci Edi- tore. Available information on: https://teamweek.com Available information on:https://hbr.org Available information on:http://www.sevilpeach.co.uk Fig. 1) available image on The situated function-behaviour-structure framework Fig. 2) available image on The cognitive processes used in team collaboration during asynchronous, distributed decision making
