Changing Conversations and Perceptions: The Research and Practice of Design Science

Although design science is a relatively young field, the impact of design research upon industry is evident in the literature, in the practice of design by academics, and in the experience set of the authors. This chapter provides evidence of impact from three sources, two studies of design literature, and one survey of design researchers. It is found that more than one third of design research articles, despite focusing on theory, include engagements with industry, and, complementarily, a majority of design researchers have patents, industry experience, or both. These studies of design literature and design researchers change our perceptions of the impact of design research on practice and initiate a new conversation. In the context of research findings and models of transferring general fields of research to practice, design research impacts practice in a variety of tangible and long-lasting ways. Building upon these analyses, we develop a first set of guidelines for transferring design research to practice. These guidelines are illustrated by selected examples and outcomes from the authors’ experiences. The frontier of design science, especially the impact on practice, is exciting and filled with unlimited potential. Changing conversations and perceptions is a critical first step in building the community’s tremendous past successes. Through proven guidelines, we may realize our potential and create a sustainable ecosystem of transferring design research to practice.

[1]  V. Bush Science, the Endless Frontier , 1999, Science, the Endless Frontier.

[2]  M. Bergman,et al.  "Introduction to nMOS and cMOS VLSI Systems Design" by Amar Mukherjee, from: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632, U.S.A , 1986, Integr..

[3]  Towards the twenty‐first century , 1991 .

[4]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  DESIGN FOR ASSEMBLY TECHNIQUES IN REVERSE ENGINEERING AND REDESIGN , 1996 .

[5]  D. E. Stokes Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1997 .

[6]  Aaron D. Little,et al.  Functional Analysis: A Fundamental Empirical Study for Reverse Engineering, Benchmarking, and Redesign , 1997 .

[7]  T. Greenhalgh How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine , 1997 .

[8]  H. Van Dyke Parunak,et al.  The MarCon algorithm: A systematic market approach to distributed constraint problems , 1999, Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf..

[9]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Functional Interdependence and Product Similarity Based on Customer Needs , 1999 .

[10]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Development of a Functional Basis for Design , 2000 .

[11]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  A heuristic method for identifying modules for product architectures , 2000 .

[12]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Using quantitative functional models to develop product architectures , 2000 .

[13]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF FUNCTIONAL MODELING: PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES , 2000 .

[14]  John T. Scott,et al.  Barriers Inhibiting Industry from Partnering with Universities: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program , 2000 .

[15]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  FUNCTIONAL MODELING EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES , 2001 .

[16]  D. Simpson A conceptual framework for transferring research to practice. , 2002, Journal of substance abuse treatment.

[17]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice? , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[18]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  GUIDELINES FOR PRODUCT EVOLUTION USING EFFORT FLOW ANALYSIS: RESULTS OF AN EMPIRICAL STUDY , 2002 .

[19]  James LaMonte Greer,et al.  Effort flow analysis: a methodology for directed product evolution , 2004 .

[20]  Simon Szykman,et al.  A functional basis for engineering design: Reconciling and evolving previous efforts , 2002 .

[21]  C. Lenfant Shattuck lecture--clinical research to clinical practice--lost in translation? , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  Irem Y. Tumer,et al.  Mapping function to failure mode during component development , 2003 .

[23]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Identifying Modular and Integrative Systems and Their Impact on Design Team Interactions , 2003 .

[24]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Experimental studies assessing the repeatability of a functional modeling derivation method , 2003 .

[25]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[26]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Ontology-based systematization of functional knowledge , 2004 .

[27]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  Formal Engineering Design Synthesis , 2005 .

[28]  Daniel A. McAdams,et al.  Concept Generation from the Functional Basis of Design , 2005 .

[29]  Jack C. Wileden,et al.  Ontologies for supporting engineering analysis models , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[30]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Special Issue: Engineering applications of representations of function, Part 1 , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[31]  John S. Gero,et al.  A computational study of creativity in design: The role of society , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[32]  Daniel A. McAdams,et al.  A Computational Technique for Concept Generation , 2005 .

[33]  Paul Glasziou,et al.  Jottings , 2005, Evidence-based nursing.

[34]  Jorge Angeles,et al.  An Optimality Criterion for the Structural Optimization of Machine Elements , 2005 .

[35]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Innovations in Design Through Transformation: A Fundamental Study of Transformation , 2006 .

[36]  Vikramjit Singh,et al.  A Novel Exploration into Gust Resistant Operation of MAVs / UAVs Through Transformation , 2006 .

[37]  Carolyn Conner Seepersad,et al.  Adapted concept generation and computational techniques for the application of a transformer design theory , 2006, DAC 2006.

[38]  Pertti Järvinen On Reviewing of Results in Design Research , 2007, ECIS.

[39]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Design for Transformation: Theory, Method and Application , 2007 .

[40]  J. Mathews,et al.  Accelerated internationalization by emerging markets' multinationals: The case of the white goods sector , 2007 .

[41]  L. H. Shu,et al.  Including Functional Models of Biological Phenomena as Design Stimuli , 2007 .

[42]  M. Perkmann,et al.  University Industry Relationships and Open Innovation: Towards a Research Agenda , 2007 .

[43]  Irem Y. Tumer,et al.  A Graph-Based Fault Identification and Propagation Framework for Functional Design of Complex Systems , 2008 .

[44]  Robert L. Nagel,et al.  Exploring the Use of Functional Models in Biomimetic Conceptual Design , 2008 .

[45]  Arthur B. Markman,et al.  Modality and representation in analogy , 2008, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[46]  J. Gero,et al.  Social structures that promote change in a complex world: The complementary roles of strangers and acquaintances in innovation , 2008 .

[47]  Jan Holmström,et al.  Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach , 2009, Decis. Sci..

[48]  A. Kieser,et al.  Why the Rigour-Relevance Gap in Management Research is Unbridgeable , 2009 .

[49]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Innovations in Design Through Transformation: A Fundamental Study of Transformation Principles , 2009 .

[50]  Matthew I. Campbell,et al.  An experimental study on the effects of a computational design tool on concept generation , 2009 .

[51]  A. Salter,et al.  Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration , 2009 .

[52]  L. Green,et al.  Diffusion Theory and Knowledge Dissemination, Utilization, and Integration in Public Health , 2009, Annual review of public health.

[53]  Martin Kenney,et al.  Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model , 2009 .

[54]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Innovation Through tRaNsFoRmAtIoNaL Design , 2009 .

[55]  John S. Gero,et al.  Growing and destroying the worth of ideas , 2009, C&C '09.

[56]  M. Perkmann,et al.  Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations , 2009 .

[57]  Daniel Jensen,et al.  When to Transform? Development of Indicators for Design Context Evaluation , 2010 .

[58]  Roger Sametz,et al.  Creating and communicating value(s) , 2010 .

[59]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Transformation Design Theory: A Meta-Analogical Framework , 2010, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[60]  Bettina von Stamm Innovation—What's Design Got to Do with It? , 2010 .

[61]  Robert L. Nagel,et al.  Function-based, biologically inspired concept generation , 2010, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[62]  Gisele Raulik-Murphy A comparative analysis of strategies for design promotion in different national contexts , 2010 .

[63]  M. Wright,et al.  30 Years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing Academic Entrepreneurship , 2011 .

[64]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  On the benefits and pitfalls of analogies for innovative design : Ideation performance based on analogical distance, commonness, and modality of examples , 2011 .

[65]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Faculty participation in licensing: Implications for research , 2011 .

[66]  Ricardo Sosa,et al.  TRIZ-Based Design of Rapid 3D Modelling Techniques with Formative Manufacturing Processes , 2011 .

[67]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  Computer-Based Design Synthesis Research: An Overview , 2011, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[68]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Knowledge mapping for rapidly evolving domains: A design science approach , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[69]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  UNDERSTANDING INNOVATION: A STUDY OF PERSPECTIVES AND PERCEPTIONS IN ENGINEERING , 2011 .

[70]  Katrin Jonsson,et al.  A Relevant Issue : Establishing Collaborations with Multiple Practitioners , 2012 .

[71]  David A Chambers,et al.  Bridging research and practice: models for dissemination and implementation research. , 2012, American journal of preventive medicine.

[72]  Jone L. Pearce,et al.  The decreasing value of our research to management education , 2012 .

[73]  Philip R. O. Payne,et al.  Evidence generating medicine: redefining the research-practice relationship to complete the evidence cycle. , 2013, Medical care.

[74]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  A Fitness-Utility Model for Design Science Research , 2011, TMIS.

[75]  Knowledge for Business (K4B): A University – Business Knowledge Transfer Collaboration Framework , 2013 .

[76]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  The Meaning of “Near” and “Far”: The Impact of Structuring Design Databases and the Effect of Distance of Analogy on Design Output , 2012 .

[77]  Bryan G. Cook,et al.  Moving Research into Practice: Can We Make Dissemination Stick? , 2013 .

[78]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  Discovering Structure in Design Databases Through Functional and Surface Based Mapping , 2013 .