Understanding and classifying the role of design demonstrators in scientific exploration

Abstract This paper describes the development of a model for classifying the different type of ‘design demonstrator’ that might be used in translating scientific activity from the laboratory to the market. Two detailed case studies are described in which designers worked closely with scientists. In one of the projects, the scientists were seeking to commercialise their research. In the other, the research was at an early stage and the scientists had not considered commercialisation. Different types of physical artefact produced in these collaborative projects were analysed to identify the extent to which they might contribute to science, technology, application or market. Evidence indicates that demonstrators might fulfil multiple purposes and that the translation from science to market is more complicated than is often shown in linear models. An original classification of the role of demonstrators through this journey is provided.

[1]  Christoph H. Loch,et al.  Collaborative Prototyping and the Pricing of Custom - Designed Products , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[2]  B. Schutt.  Sorting things out. , 1970, The American journal of nursing.

[3]  Andrew B. Hargadon,et al.  Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. , 1997 .

[4]  P. Kotler,et al.  DESIGN: A POWERFUL BUT NEGLECTED STRATEGIC TOOL , 1984 .

[5]  C. Rust.  Design Enquiry: Tacit Knowledge and Invention in Science , 2004, Design Issues.

[6]  C. Rust.  Unstated contributions: how artistic inquiry can inform inter-disciplinary research , 2007 .

[7]  P. Groenewegen,et al.  Engaging Boundary Objects in OMS and STS? Exploring the Subtleties of Layered Engagement , 2009 .

[8]  Frederick Grinnell,et al.  Everyday Practice of Science: Where Intuition and Passion Meet Objectivity and Logic , 2009 .

[9]  Margot Brereton,et al.  An observational study of how objects support engineering design thinking and communication: implications for the design of tangible media , 2000, CHI.

[10]  Joseph Agassi,et al.  Between Science and Technology , 1980, Philosophy of Science.

[11]  D. Merrifield.  Obsolescence of Core Competencies Versus Corporate Renewal , 1995 .

[12]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Design Methodology and Relationships with Science , 1993 .

[13]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[14]  I. Niiniluoto.  The aim and structure of applied research , 1993 .

[15]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Success through design , 1987 .

[16]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[17]  Julie H. Hertenstein,et al.  Valuing design: Enhancing corporate performance through design effectiveness , 2010 .

[18]  Dominique Vinck,et al.  Everyday Engineering. An ethnography of Design and Innovation , 2003 .

[19]  G. Gemser,et al.  How integrating industrial design in the product development process impacts on company performance , 2001 .

[20]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  The Role of Material Objects in the Design Process: A Comparison of Two Design Cultures and How They Contend with Automation , 1998 .

[21]  John C. Mankins,et al.  Technology Readiness Levels-A White Paper , 1995 .

[22]  James Moultrie,et al.  Investigating the technology-based innovation gap for the United Kingdom: A report for the UK Design Council , 2006 .

[23]  Jacky Swan,et al.  Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[24]  R. Pielke,et al.  Beyond Basic and Applied , 1998 .

[25]  Victor P. Seidel,et al.  Managing the Repertoire: Stories, Metaphors, Prototypes, and Concept Coherence in Product Innovation , 2014, Organ. Sci..

[26]  M. G. Millis.  Assessing Potential Propulsion Breakthroughs , 2005, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Stephen Ward,et al.  The Valley of Death as Context for Role Theory in Product Innovation , 2010 .

[28]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[29]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering , 1991 .

[30]  Robin Roy,et al.  The long-term benefits of investing in new product development by SMEs , 2000 .

[31]  Stephen K. Markham,et al.  Moving Technologies from Lab To Market , 2002 .

[32]  Henry H. Bauer,et al.  Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method , 1992 .

[33]  Dominique Vinck,et al.  Accessing Material Culture by Following Intermediary Objects , 2012 .

[34]  Beth A. Bechky.  Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[35]  A. Webster.  Science, Technology and Society: New Directions , 1991 .

[36]  Robert Phaal,et al.  A framework for mapping industrial emergence , 2011 .

[37]  Christopher Lorenz,et al.  Harnessing design as a strategic resource , 1994 .

[38]  Andreas Herrmann,et al.  Isn't It Cute: An Evolutionary Perspective of Baby-Schema Effects in Visual Product Designs , 2011 .

[39]  J. Whyte,et al.  Knowledge Practices in Design: The Role of Visual Representations as `Epistemic Objects' , 2009 .

[40]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[41]  James Moultrie,et al.  Design in science: exploring how industrial designers can contribute to scientific research , 2011 .

[42]  Marcel Bogers,et al.  Collaborative Prototyping: Cross-Fertilization of Knowledge in Prototype-Driven Problem Solving , 2014 .

[43]  Eswaran Subrahmanian,et al.  Boundary Objects and Prototypes at the Interfaces of Engineering Design , 2003, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[44]  David F. Channell.  Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1999 .