A comparison of how novice and experienced design engineers benefit from design guidelines

Reimlinger, Benedikt; Lohmeyer, Quentin; Moryson, Ralf; Meboldt, Mirko

doi:10.1016/j.destud.2019.04.004

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We did not observe the behavior of our participants, but instead, we solicited and analyzed their descriptions of their experiences making decisions during the engineering design process and their espoused beliefs about the way that engineering design decisions are and should be made in practice. This methodological approach complements other studies, which have directly observed or characterized design behaviors (such as Ahmed et al, 2003;Atman et al, 1999;Atman et al, 2007;Baird et al, 2000;Cross et al, 1994;Cross & Cross, 1998;Reimlinger et al, 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Dringenberg

Guanes

Leonard

2021

Studies in Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Engineers need to be able to make robust design decisions. Because design is an ill-structured endeavor, design decisions require some combination of rationalistic, intuitive, and empathic approaches. However, engineering education remains largely oriented towards the use of rationalistic approaches. Purpose/Hypothesis: We posit that the persistent gap between the need to leverage diverse approaches to make engineering design decisions and the emphasis on primarily rationalistic approaches in engineering spaces is due, in part, to the beliefs that individuals hold about diverse approaches. Design/Method: We analyzed interview transcripts to identify the beliefs shared by students and by faculty (as individual units of analysis) about rationalistic, intuitive, and empathic approaches to making engineering design decisions, and then we compared the shared beliefs of the two groups. Results: Students and faculty similarly shared a belief that rationalistic approaches are normative in engineering. The two groups also had a common, general belief that empathic approaches are missing in engineering, but they differed in the ways in which they talked about empathic approaches. Finally, the two groups differed in their beliefs about the role of diverse approaches in practice: students believed rationalistic approaches are and should be used most in practice, but faculty believed that rationalistic approaches are inherently limited and therefore require the use of intuitive approaches. Conclusions: We interpret the pervasive belief that engineers are expected to portray their design decision making as primarily rational as a reflection of an unrealistic yet powerful social norm in engineering spaces, which can be understood as a key part of how the exclusive culture of engineering is perpetuated. We see a need to teach explicitly about this social norm in order to disrupt it, and we encourage engineering educators to reflect on how the ways in which their praxis might endorse or reinforce such unrealistic beliefs, either explicitly or implicitly.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Dringenberg

Guanes

Leonard

2021

Studies in Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study was first conducted at the company's site in Germany, cf. Reimlinger et al (2019), then in Eastern Europe and Asia. The methods, the materials and the setup were the same.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring how design guidelines benefit design engineers: an international and global perspective

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A multitude of design guidelines that are intended to support design engineers with knowledge and information during the embodiment design of physical products have been developed back in the 1980s and 1990s. However, since then, the setting in which products are developed and designed has changed and associated tasks and activities are carried out globally rather than locally. Yet, knowledge on the benefit of such design guidelines and their impact on the performance of multinational design engineers from different regions and with different levels of experience is still lacking. To address this, a mobile eye tracking study has been developed and carried out with 47 differently experienced practitioners from Germany, Eastern Europe and Asia. The results show differences in how design engineers from different regions with different levels of experience may benefit from design guidelines and how design guidelines may impact experts’ and novices’ performance, indicate beneficial ways of using them and point out the kind of information and the way of representation that attracts the most attention within a design guideline. The paper concludes that the improvement and development of design guidelines that are intended to support the embodiment design of physical products is needed and proposes to rethink current engineering design guidelines both content-wise and representation-wise.

show abstract

“…The new proposed process framework in this study is envisioned to become the guide or reference for design engineers in the product design and development process, which aptly adapts some of the structured qualitative approaches that assist in maintaining their design focus throughout the process [42].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive 7M IoT adoption model-a lifecycle shift paradigm

Ibrahim¹,

Romli²,

Arep³

et al. 2021

IJATEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the primary issues with many product design and development processes today is to have a good balance between the elements of form and function. While all products must be able to perform their intended functions, considerations of aesthetic features are also necessary for them to be accepted as a good quality design. However, most available design and development processes of engineering products have been more focused on achieving the functional aspects and tend to treat the aesthetic aspects as less crucial features. This approach has led to many failed functional products in the market as their physical design lacks appealing factors to the targeted customers. To improve the situation, a new product design and development framework is proposed in this study to better facilitate designers or engineers in creating an all -rounded quality product design. This new method is developed based on the findings from conducted survey among engineeringstudents, who are future product design engineers, to identify and resolve issues with current methods that they use for their design tasks. All in all, the new proposed method is essentially tailored to offer a comprehensive guide for developing beautiful and useful products based on semantics design approach.

show abstract

A comparison of how novice and experienced design engineers benefit from design guidelines

Cited by 17 publications

References 15 publications

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Exploring how design guidelines benefit design engineers: an international and global perspective

A comprehensive 7M IoT adoption model-a lifecycle shift paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About