Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-9b74x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-25T03:46:26.768Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design Methods Review For Smart Product: Objectomy, a New Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

C. E. Bangle ,
M. Rosso ,
F. Montagna  and
M. Cantamessa
C. E. Bangle
Affiliation:
Chris Bangle Associates, Italy
M. Rosso
Affiliation:
Chris Bangle Associates, Italy
F. Montagna*
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Torino, Italy
M. Cantamessa
Affiliation:
Politecnico di Torino, Italy
*
francesca.montagna@polito.it

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Digital artefacts call for new design challenges: they enable services, technology-driven and multidisciplinary never ended processes, uncouple form-function, in a social relationship that must be ecosystem-framed. Then, the usual design mindset is not proper and expected vs unexpected outcomes must be equally studied. A framework of methods, in view of the usual design variables and the new ones called by design of smart objects, is here offered. From that the seeds for the future aid to the design process of smart objects result. Then, Objectomy and one real application case are described.

Keywords

smart objectsobjectomydesign methodsproduct designdigital design

Information

Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 2045 - 2054
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Akao, Y. (1990), Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into product design, G.H Mazur (trans) Cambridge, M.A: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
Altshuller, G. (1996). And suddenly the inventor appeared: Triz, the theory of inventive problem solving. Worcester, Mass, Technical Innovation Center.Google Scholar
Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, l. D. W., Wright, M., (2017), “Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems, Strategic Entrepreneurial Journal”, Vol. 12, No.1, pp. 72–95. 10.1002/sej.1266Google Scholar
Bangle, C. (2010), Gina meets Pink, [online] Tedx, Munich, available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFCdngXM04UGoogle Scholar
Bangle, C. (2020), "Objectomy application", interview by Marco Rosso, [in person] 16 October.Google Scholar
Belton, V. and Steward, T.J., (2002), Multiple criteria decision analysis, an integration approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.Google Scholar
Breschi, R., Freundt, T., Orebäck, M. and Vollhardt, K. (2018), The expanding role of design in creating an end-to-end customer experience. [online] McKinsey, Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/the-expanding-role-of-design-in-creating-an-end-to-end-customer-experience (accessed 23.11.2021).Google Scholar
Brown, T. (2008), Design thinking. [online] Harvard business review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking (accessed 21.11.2021)Google Scholar
Bstieler, L., Gruen, T., Akdeniz, B., Brick, D., Du, S. et al. . (2018), “Emerging Research Themes in Innovation and New Product Development: Insights from the 2017 PDMA-UNH Doctoral Consortium”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 35, pp. 300–307. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12447Google Scholar
Campbell, M., Cagan, J. and Kotovsky, K. “Agent-Based Synthesis of Electro-Mechanical Design Configurations.” Proceedings of the ASME 1998 Design Engineering Technical Conferences. Volume 3: 10th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology. Atlanta, Georgia, USA. September 13–16, 1998. 10.1115/DETC98/DTM-5673Google Scholar
Cantamessa, M., Montagna, F. and Cascini, G. (2016), “Design for innovation - A methodology to engineer the innovation diffusion into the development process. Computer in Industry. Vol. 75 No. C, pp. 46–57. 10.1016/j.compind.2015.10.013Google Scholar
Cantamessa, M., Montagna, F., Altavilla, S. and Casagrande-Seretti, A. (2020). “Data-driven design: the new challenges of digitalization on product design and development”. Design Science, Vol. 6, No. e27. 10.1017/dsj.2020.25Google Scholar
Cantamessa, M. (2021). “Design in Motion”, Proceedings of the ICED 21, International Conference Engineering Design, Gothenburg, Sweden, August 16-20, 2021.Google Scholar
Chen, L.-H. (2014) The affordance concept in User Computer Interaction, Bulletin of JSSD, Vol. 61 No. 1.Google Scholar
Clarkson, P. & Eckert, C. (2005). Design Process Improvement: A Review of Current Practice, Springer, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. (1993) “Science and design methodology: A review”, Research in Engineering Design Vol. 5, pp- 63-69. 10.1007/BF02032575Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2005), Engineering Design Methods Strategies for product design, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
De Bono, E., and Zimbalist, E. (1970). Lateral thinking, Penguin Books, London.Google Scholar
Deterding, S., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.E. and Dixon, D. (2011), “Gamification: Toward a Definition”. CHI 2011 Gamification Workshop Proceedings, Vancouver, May 7-12, 2011.Google Scholar
Díaz, L., Salmi, A., & Reunanen, M. (2009), “Role playing and collaborative scenario development”. In DS 58-6: Proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th ICED conference, Vol. 6, Design Methods and Tools (pt. 2), Palo Alto, CA, USA, August 24-27, 2009.Google Scholar
Eberle, B. (1996), Scamper on: Games for imagination development, Prufrock Press Inc, Austin.Google Scholar
Faulkner, P. and Runde, J. (2010). “The Social, the material, and the ontology of non-material technological objects”, In Proceedings of CJE 2017, Towards De-Financialisation and the the Rise of New Capitalism, Jannuary 1-30, 2017Google Scholar
Forrester, J. W. (1999) “System dynamics: the foundation under systems thinking”, Sloan School of Management. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Vol. 10.Google Scholar
Gero, J. S. (1990), “Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design”. AI Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 4.Google Scholar
Gero, J. S., Kannengiesser, U. (2004), “The Situated Function-Behaviour-Structure Framework”, Design Studies, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 373–391. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghajargar, M., De Marco, A. and Montagna, F., (2017), “Wise Things: when smart objects stimulate reflection”, Proceeding of the IHCI 2017 Conference: Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Giaccardi, E. and Fischer, G. (2008) Creativity and evolution: a Metadesign perspective, Digital Creativity, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 19–32. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14626260701847456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J. (1977), “The Theory of Affordances”. In (Ed): The ecological approach to visual perception, Houghton Mifflin, Boston pp. 127–137Google Scholar
Gordon, W. J. (1961), Synectics: The development of creative capacity, Harper.Google Scholar
Greenough, H. (1947), Form and Function: Remarks on Art, (Ed) Harold A. Small, Univ. of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
Hartson, R. (2003), “Cognitive, physical, sensory and functional affordances in interaction design” Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 315–338. 10.1080/01449290310001592587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargroves, K. and Smith, M. (2006), “Innovation inspired by nature: Biomimicry”. ECOS, Vol. 129, pp. 27–29. 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.792Google Scholar
Hermann, M., Pentek, T. and Otto, B. (2016), “Design principles for Industrie 4.0 scenarios” In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), IEEE, pp. 3928–3937. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, H., and Stolterman, E. (2011), “Form and materiality in interaction design: a new approach to HCI”, In CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '11) Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 399–408. 10.1145/1979742.1979619Google Scholar
Kortuem, G., Kawsar, F., Fitton, D. and Sundramoorthy, V. (2010), “Smart Objects as Building Blocks for the Internet of Things” Internet Computing, IEEE Vol. 14, pp. 44 - 51. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2009.143.Google Scholar
López, T.S., Ranasinghe, D.C., Patkai, B. and Mcfarlane, D. (2011), “Taxonomy, technology and applications of smart objects”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 13, pp. 281–300. 10.1007/s10796-009-9218-4.Google Scholar
Marion, T.J., Meyer, M.H. and Barczak, G. (2015), “The influence of digital design and IT on modular product architecture”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp.98–110. 10.1111/jpim.12240.Google Scholar
Miles, L. D. (1968), "Rules Of The Game", Vol. 1 No. 1, Pergamon Press, WisconsinGoogle Scholar
Moggridge, B. (2007) Designing Interactions, The MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Montagna, F. (2011), “Decision-aiding tools in innovative product development contexts”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montagna, F. and Cantamessa, M., (2019). “Unpacking the innovation toolbox for design research and practice”, Design Science, Vol.5, No. 8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2019.3Google Scholar
Mourtzis, D., and Doukas, M. (2014), “Design and planning of manufacturing networks for mass customisation and personalisation: challenges and outlook”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 19, pp. 1–13. 10.1016/j.procir.2014.05.004.Google Scholar
Norman., D. A. (1988), The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Maier, J. R. (2003), “Affordance-Based Methods for Design”, Proceedings of the ASME 2003 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Chicago, Illinois, US, pp. 785- 794.Google Scholar
Osborn, A. F. (1953), Applied imagination, Scribner'S.Google Scholar
Oxman, R. (2006), “Theory and design in the first digital age”, Design Studies, Vol. 27. 10.1016/j.destud.2005.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J. and Grote, K.H. (2007), Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, 3rd Edition, Springer-Verlag London Limited, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, M. E. and Heppelmann, J. E. (2014), How smart, connected products are transforming competition. [online] Harvard Business Review, available at: https://hbr.org/2014/11/how-smart-connected-products-are-transforming-competition (accessed 23.11.2021)Google Scholar
Pugh, S.(1981), “Concept Selection: A Method that Works.” In Proceedings of the International conference on Engineering Design, August 9-13, 1981, Rome, Italy, pp. 497–506.Google Scholar
Rapp, A. & Cena, F. (2015). Affordance for self-tracking wearable devices. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (p. 2). ISWC ’15. 10.1145/2802083.2802090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raff, S., Wentzel, D. and Obwegeser, N. (2020), “Smart Products: Conceptual Review, Synthesis, and Research Directions”. Journal of Product and Innovation Management, Vol. 37, pp. 379–404. 10.1111/jpim.12544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973), “Dilemmas in a general theory of planning”. Policy Sciences, American Assiocation for the Advancement of Science, Vol. 4, Boston pp. 155–169 10.1007/BF01405730Google Scholar
Smith, G.F., Browne, G.J., (1993), “Conceptual Foundations of Design Problem Solving”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, man and Cybernetics, Vol. 23. No. 5, pp.1209–1219. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/21.260655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P. (2002), “Thinking in Design Teams – An Analysis of Team Communication Design Studies”, Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 473–496. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, H. & Hart-(2014). Binding the material and the discursive with a relational approach of affordance. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (p. pp. 3533–3542). 10.1145/2556288.2557185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, K. T., and Eppinger, S. D. (2015) Product design and development. 6th edition, Mc Graw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Vitali, I., Arquilla, V. and Rifino, I. (2019), “Design for Meaning of Smart Connected Products”. Design Innovation Management Conference. https://dx.doi.org/10.33114/adim.2019.03.251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wing, J. (2006), “Computational Thinking”, Communications of the ACM,Vol. 49, pp.33–35, 10.1145/1118178.1118215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, C., McFarlane, D.C., Ahmad Zaharudin, A., and Agarwal, V. (2002), “The intelligent product driven supply chain” IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 4, No. 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynn, D. and Clarkson, P. (2018), “Process models in design and development”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 29, pp. 161–202. 10.1007/s00163-017-0262-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoo, Y. (2010), “Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 213–231. 10.2307/20721425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoo, Y., Boland, R.J., Lyytinen, K., and Majchrzak, A. (2012), “Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World," Organization Science, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 1398–1408.Google Scholar
Zittrain, JL. 2006. The generative internet. Harvard Law Review: 1974–2040.Google Scholar