Naturally emerging decision criteria in product concept evaluation

nt. Concept decisions define the success of both the project and the product to a great extent. Previous research has shown that structured methods are often not used properly or at all in design practice. To shed light on the dynamics of concept selection in real life, we studied decision strategies and the use of decision criteria in concept selection. The experiment involved sixteen professional designers and utilized mixed methods, including verbal protocol analysis. The participants used a great variety of evaluation styles and criteria, sometimes changing them in midst of evaluation. Furthermore, some internal conflicts appeared between different concept evaluation tasks. These findings put designers’ ability to make rational and good concept decisions under some doubt. Further research on human behavior in concept selection is deemed necessary and some prospective research questions are introduced.

[1]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[2]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[3]  K. Stanovich.  How to think straight about psychology , 1985 .

[4]  Donald A. Schön.  The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action , 1986 .

[5]  Stuart Pugh,et al.  Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering , 1991 .

[6]  James K. Beggan.  On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. , 1992 .

[7]  Peter H. Ditto,et al.  Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions , 1992 .

[8]  John W. Payne,et al.  A Constructive Process View of Decision Making: Multiple Strategies in Judgment and Choice , 1992 .

[9]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[10]  M. Chi.  Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of Verbal Data: A Practical Guide , 1997 .

[11]  Y. Asiedu,et al.  Product life cycle cost analysis: State of the art review , 1998 .

[12]  Karen M. Bursic,et al.  Verbal Protocol Analysis as a Method to Document Engineering Student Design Processes , 1998 .

[13]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  How to kill creativity. , 1998, Harvard business review.

[14]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Options: A Review and Theoretical Analysis , 1999 .

[15]  J. L. Pierce,et al.  Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations , 2001 .

[16]  Abbie Griffin,et al.  The PDMA toolbook for new product development , 2002 .

[17]  Christopher A. Mattson,et al.  Pareto Frontier Based Concept Selection Under Uncertainty, with Visualization , 2005 .

[18]  M. Lorenzen.  Creativity in context : Content, cost, chance and collection in the organization of the film industry , 2009 .

[19]  Christopher A. Mattson,et al.  Case studies in concept exploration and selection with s-Pareto frontiers , 2009 .

[20]  Maria C. Yang,et al.  Consensus and single leader decision-making in teams using structured design methods , 2010 .

[21]  S. Vinodh,et al.  Sustainable concept selection using ELECTRE , 2012, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy.

[22]  Ingrid Kihlander,et al.  Managing concept decision making in product development practice , 2011 .

[23]  Belinda López-Mesa,et al.  A study of the use of concept selection methods from inside a company , 2011 .

[24]  Diyar Akay,et al.  Conceptual design evaluation using interval type-2 fuzzy information axiom , 2011, Comput. Ind..

[25]  Miko Laakso,et al.  DUBIOUS ROLE OF FORMAL CREATIVITY TECHNIQUES IN PROFESSIONAL DESIGN , 2012 .