Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Alexandre Gentner

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
An overview of table | clears a first impression of the domains covered by the past projects. We will now discuss the table more in depth.

Figure 5 An overview of table | clears a first impression of the domains covered by the past projects. We will now discuss the table more in depth.

Related Figures (6)

This research is done in collaboration with the Kansei Design (KD) division of Toyota Motor Europe (TME), a team composed of designers and engineers bringing “design-thinking” innovation dynamism to research and development activities. One example of its past activity is the creation of the “Window to the world” visionary concept (video available on the internet), followed by the narrow down steps towards tangible and short-term applicable solutions (Figure 1). This “design-thinking” approach can be defined using the definition provided by Gero opposing the two notions, he made a distinction between ‘ he activity that involves the production of consumable artefacts. He UIP) and “designing” to denote describes “innovation” as being the introduction or up processes or markets) meaning that “creation” and “designing” are involved in the innovation activity. Using the vocabulary introduced ideas to the market: the new concept development stage development stage having as out put consumable artefacts ( ‘ creation” that leads to intel ake of IP into these arte hat aims to create IP and t Figure 2). 2010). Without lectual property facts (products, by Gero helps to distinguish 2 stages in the process of bringing new he new product
This research is done in collaboration with the Kansei Design (KD) division of Toyota Motor Europe (TME), a team composed of designers and engineers bringing “design-thinking” innovation dynamism to research and development activities. One example of its past activity is the creation of the “Window to the world” visionary concept (video available on the internet), followed by the narrow down steps towards tangible and short-term applicable solutions (Figure 1). This “design-thinking” approach can be defined using the definition provided by Gero opposing the two notions, he made a distinction between ‘ he activity that involves the production of consumable artefacts. He UIP) and “designing” to denote describes “innovation” as being the introduction or up processes or markets) meaning that “creation” and “designing” are involved in the innovation activity. Using the vocabulary introduced ideas to the market: the new concept development stage development stage having as out put consumable artefacts ( ‘ creation” that leads to intel ake of IP into these arte hat aims to create IP and t Figure 2). 2010). Without lectual property facts (products, by Gero helps to distinguish 2 stages in the process of bringing new he new product
Typically the creation of IP comes prior the development of artefacts using it. Whereas the NPD activities are orderly following a project plan towards a rather certain date of commercialisation, the invention coming from NCD cannot be scheduled. The NCD stage is also called fuzzy front end due to its more chaotic evolution, the uncertain outputs and the unpredictable amount of funding needed (Koen, 2002). [The NCD stage can bring major competitive advantages but is at the same time recognized as being the most difficult of the innovation process because of its uncertainly (Kim & Wilemon, 2002).
Typically the creation of IP comes prior the development of artefacts using it. Whereas the NPD activities are orderly following a project plan towards a rather certain date of commercialisation, the invention coming from NCD cannot be scheduled. The NCD stage is also called fuzzy front end due to its more chaotic evolution, the uncertain outputs and the unpredictable amount of funding needed (Koen, 2002). [The NCD stage can bring major competitive advantages but is at the same time recognized as being the most difficult of the innovation process because of its uncertainly (Kim & Wilemon, 2002).
2.1 Kansei approaches and their limits
2.1 Kansei approaches and their limits
Figure 4: Representation of a new concept development and the involvement of users and designers (for a given design brief) dil = different aspects of NCD that are in the scope of kansei approaches. Understand the environment of the project (see “scope of the brief’ on figure 4) is the first step towards an optimal NCD flow (Kelly, 2001). It consists in the study of the investigation scope and the juestioning of the design brief in order to extract the good hints. Then comes the concept building activity of the NCD that can be characterised by a succession of two kinds of steps: divergent that corresponds to the creation of alternatives (interaction between the “designer” and the “concept” on figure 4) and convergent that is about the concept assessment and selection (interaction between the “designer” and the “concept” and the ‘user” and the “concept” on figure 4) (Cross, 2008). These iterations combined with the overall decrease of the quantity of ideas and increase of the understanding of the scope permits to narrow down and refine the ideas starting from the biggest possible amount (Liu & Chakrabarti, 2003).
Figure 4: Representation of a new concept development and the involvement of users and designers (for a given design brief) dil = different aspects of NCD that are in the scope of kansei approaches. Understand the environment of the project (see “scope of the brief’ on figure 4) is the first step towards an optimal NCD flow (Kelly, 2001). It consists in the study of the investigation scope and the juestioning of the design brief in order to extract the good hints. Then comes the concept building activity of the NCD that can be characterised by a succession of two kinds of steps: divergent that corresponds to the creation of alternatives (interaction between the “designer” and the “concept” on figure 4) and convergent that is about the concept assessment and selection (interaction between the “designer” and the “concept” and the ‘user” and the “concept” on figure 4) (Cross, 2008). These iterations combined with the overall decrease of the quantity of ideas and increase of the understanding of the scope permits to narrow down and refine the ideas starting from the biggest possible amount (Liu & Chakrabarti, 2003).
Figure 5: Representation of a new concept development and location of the kansei design approaches “understand” (U), “create” (C) and “assess” (A) The first observation we can make is about the participants involved in each activity. On table 1, we see that users are involved before the actual creation of the concept as they are the ones for which the concept is made (“understand” activity). With this in mind, they also participate to the evaluation of the concept created (‘“‘assess” activity). The design team, on the other side follows the whole process and get involved in every activity. On figure 5, this information is summarised on the representation of the involvement of users and designers during the NCD process.
Figure 5: Representation of a new concept development and location of the kansei design approaches “understand” (U), “create” (C) and “assess” (A) The first observation we can make is about the participants involved in each activity. On table 1, we see that users are involved before the actual creation of the concept as they are the ones for which the concept is made (“understand” activity). With this in mind, they also participate to the evaluation of the concept created (‘“‘assess” activity). The design team, on the other side follows the whole process and get involved in every activity. On figure 5, this information is summarised on the representation of the involvement of users and designers during the NCD process.
As we can see on table 1, each activity (“understand”, “create” and “assess”) has been investigated several times within the 8 projects using kansei-based methodologies (P1 to P8). The use of a classification by activity inspired by the state of the art has shown good results for the analysis of past projects (Table 1). The 3 kansei design activities covered all the past studies done within TME-KD and differences but also common elements could be identified as core of the kansei-design approach. To that extend H1 in validated. By looking at the analysis of the past projects and after a team discussion, the “understand”, “create” _ C6... ._ ._ .. 99 4-2... 2. 2. * yf _*f* __ yg gllUDQlLlCl DQ ee: io: ee: ee : Pe | Sc o : et oe f* ._ re: a ™ at.
As we can see on table 1, each activity (“understand”, “create” and “assess”) has been investigated several times within the 8 projects using kansei-based methodologies (P1 to P8). The use of a classification by activity inspired by the state of the art has shown good results for the analysis of past projects (Table 1). The 3 kansei design activities covered all the past studies done within TME-KD and differences but also common elements could be identified as core of the kansei-design approach. To that extend H1 in validated. By looking at the analysis of the past projects and after a team discussion, the “understand”, “create” _ C6... ._ ._ .. 99 4-2... 2. 2. * yf _*f* __ yg gllUDQlLlCl DQ ee: io: ee: ee : Pe | Sc o : et oe f* ._ re: a ™ at.
Related topics:
User Experience (UX)Early Stages of DesignIntegrative Thinking
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved