An official website of the United States government
Abstract Designers often gather information, for instance through stakeholder or domain expert meetings, to understand their design problems and develop effective solutions. However, few previous studies have provided in-depth descriptions of novice engineering designers’ approaches to conducting information gathering meetings. In this preliminary study, we analyzed data from six capstone mechanical engineering design teams to identify the types of individuals from whom teams gathered information, when these meetings occurred, and how teams solicited information during meetings. Teams in our study exhibited a range of information gathering behaviors that aligned with recommended practices, particularly in their early meetings. We also observed relatively few instances of teams exhibiting behaviors that were less similar to recommended practices during their meetings. However, our findings revealed two key trends across teams that represented specific opportunities for improvement and that may reflect characteristic novice approaches to conducting information gathering meetings. First, teams explored domain experts’ perspectives in depth during meetings and met with additional domain experts to inform their projects. Teams' meetings with project partners contained few instances of deep exploratory information gathering behaviors in comparison. In addition, teams seemed to finalize design decisions during early design meetings and were less likely to conduct information gathering meetings during later design phases. The comprehensive descriptions of novice mechanical engineering designers’ approaches provided in our preliminary study provide an entry point for further investigations that can inform engineering training, tools, and pedagogy for conducting effective meetings.
more »
« less
An in‑depth investigation of student information gathering meetings with stakeholders and domain experts
Information gathering activities in engineering design projects play an important role in the identification and definition of stakeholder needs and requirements. However, few studies have explored how students gather information from stakeholders and domain experts in capstone design settings. In this study, we analyzed audio recordings from 19 information gathering meetings submitted by six capstone design teams to investigate how student designers gathered information during these meetings. Our findings include 22 information gathering behaviors that student design teams exhibited during their meetings, half of which were more similar to recommended best practices for information gathering and half of which were less similar. Our findings, including the list of behaviors and associated examples, may be used to guide student designers in employing effective information gathering approaches.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1611687
- PAR ID:
- 10177407
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International journal of technology and design education
- ISSN:
- 1573-1804
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Effective communication is an integral part of engineering design and leads to successful design outcomes. While there have been extensive calls to equip novice designers with effective communication skills, there is only a limited body of work that has attempted to characterize the communication patterns of novice designers, particularly when engaging with external audiences. This work seeks to characterize how the project type, or the nature of design problem, shapes the communicative patterns of novice designers when communicating design outcomes to external audiences. Presentations of design solutions from 46 teams were collected at the end of a semester-long capstone design program. These presentations were then characterized as industry- and human-centered projects. Analysis was conducted using topic modeling and Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count analysis to identify differences in linguistic patterns of novice designers between the two project types. Contrary to prior findings, no significant differences were found, implying that the communication patterns of novice designers are not affected by the type of project (or design problem being solved).more » « less
-
Engineering designers often span knowledge boundaries when developing complex systems but doing so poses challenges because members of different knowledge groups must bridge their language, cognitions, and “thought worlds” to effectively broker, resituate, and make use of each other’s ideas. Objects— ranging from prototypes to kanban boards to value stream maps—are frequently used in cross-functional design practice, but the outcomes associated with such objects appear varied and dependent not only the objects’ characteristics but on how, when, and by whom they are used. This paper describes a two-year inductive ethnographic study within a turbomachinery design company to understand how cross-functional design teams span their knowledge boundaries to advance their designs and design processes. We collected observations of 70 cross-functional meetings and 52 interviews across functional groups during the development of complex turbomachinery products. Our findings include three roles of objects of collaboration: routinizing cross- boundary interaction, translating information across boundaries, and motivating joint negotiation or discovery. We found two prominent outcomes—co-discovery of a design risk, opportunity, or workflow bottleneck and co-design of a joint integrated solution— that appeared to follow from the latter two roles, respectively. These findings are significant because they clarify the roles of objects in cross-boundary design work and suggest ways for designers to more effectively use objects to span knowledge boundaries.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)This study explored seven engineering graduate students’ collaborative problem-solving (CPS) skills while working in interdisciplinary teams. Students worked in two different teams, in face-to-face and online environments, to solve complex manufacturing design challenges posed by their instructor. The students were assessed using an observational rubric with four dimensions: peer interactions, positive communication, tools and methods and iteration and adaption, and scored via each dimension’s associated attributes, and subsequently interviewed. Six students scored emergent or proficient in CPS and had slightly higher CPS scores during the second observation. One student demonstrated a limited ability for CPS and the observable CPS skills decreased during the project. Interviews revealed the importance of (1) relying on instructor and student chosen technologies for collaborative tasks, (2) recognising and drawing on peer expertise early in the project, (3) building trust during and outside of team meetings and (4) valuing off-site and online collaborative work. Findings advance the understanding of how graduate students working in interdisciplinary teams rely on particular features of collaboration to solve engineering design challenges, which may assist in developing future skills and fostering productive teamwork.more » « less
-
This paper reports on the initial implementation of a two student “tiger team” in an engineering capstone design class. A tiger team is a small group of individuals that covers a range of expertise and is assigned when challenges arise that helps address the root issues causing the challenge. The term was coined in the 1960’s in the Cold War; tiger teams are used in industry, government, and military organizations. While tiger teams in these situations are usually formed around an issue then disbanded, in the capstone class the tiger team was formed for the duration of the two semester long class; details on formation and the larger context and organization of the class are discussed in the paper. The rationale for the tiger team was the observation over many years of a capstone class that as projects are functionally decomposed and subsystems assigned to individual students, a not insignificant fraction of students become “stuck” at some point in time – the concept of “stuckness” is further derived in the full paper. The result is that if delays accumulate on critical parts of the project, teams often struggle to get the project back on track and end up with a cascading series of missed deadlines. The rationale for the tiger team is to help teams identify when parts of the project are getting behind schedule and to have additional, short-term help available. In the initial implementation described here, the tiger team was two students—one from electrical and one from computer engineering—who volunteered for the position and were confirmed in that role by the other students in the class. Initial data shows that during the problem identification phase of the project the tiger team attended team meetings, helped evaluation project milestone reviews, worked to solve individual and team issues, and regularly met with the faculty. Early in the semester the two tiger team students described their role as unclear and worried their technical exposure would be limited. Later, as the teams developed technical representations, the tiger team provided independent feedback and addressed multiple technical challenges. Finally, as teams started to build technical prototypes the tiger team role again shifted to helping individuals with specific aspects of their project; this role continued throughout the remainder of the year-long course. This in-depth case-study of the experience of implementing a tiger team draws on observations from students, faculty, the tiger team members, and an external ethnographer. This work may help other capstone instructors who may be considering similar interventions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09595-w
