Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-nlvjk Total loading time: 0.307 Render date: 2022-05-21T09:05:14.251Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Medical Device Design Practitioner Strategies for Prototype-Centered Front-End Design Stakeholder Engagements in Low-Resource Settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Abstract

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

Prototypes have the potential to provoke discussion and to encourage stakeholders to play an active role during design engagements in the front-end phases of a design process. However, detailed descriptions of stakeholder engagement strategies in front-end design are lacking. The aim of this research study was to understand how design practitioners prepare and manage stakeholders for engagements involving prototypes in the front-end phases of a medical device design process. Design practitioners at companies developing mechanical and electromechanical medical devices for use in low- and middle-income countries were interviewed following a semi-structured interview guide. Interview transcripts were analysed, and inductive codes were developed. The findings suggest that design practitioners manage the group composition of stakeholders, review the project and prototype(s) with stakeholders at the start of the engagement, and show the progress of prototypes to stakeholders over multiple engagements. These strategies shed light on the importance of handling interpersonal relationships during stakeholder engagement with prototypes.

Type
Article
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) 2019

References

Anderson, K. (2009), “Ethnographic research: A key to strategy”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 87 No. 3, p. 24.Google Scholar
Caldwell, A., Young, A., Gomez-Marquez, J. and Olson, K.R. (2011), “Global Health Technology 2.0”, IEEE Pulse, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 6367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Arteche, A., Bremmer, A.J., Greven, C. and Furnham, A. (2010), “Soft skills in higher education: importance and improvement ratings as a function of individual differences and academic performance”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 221241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chavan, A.L., Gorney, D., Prabhu, B. and Arora, S. (2009), “The washing machine that ate my sari—mistakes in cross-cultural design”, Interactions, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 2631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deininger, M., Daly, S., Sienko, K., Lee, J., Obed, S. and Kaufmann, E. E. (2017), “Does prototype format influence stakeholder design input?”, 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) Vancouver, Canada, 21-25.08.2017. DS 87-4 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) Vol 4: Design Methods and ToolsGoogle Scholar
DiCicco-Bloom, B. and Crabtree, B.F. (2006), “The qualitative research interview”, Medical Education, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 314321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donaldson, K. (2009), “The Future of Design for Development: Three Questions”, Information Technologies and International Development, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 97100.Google Scholar
Kroll, G., Carpena, F., Ghosh, I., Letouzé, E., Rosa, J. and Trivedi, P. (2014), “Revealing Demand for Pro-Poor Innovations” Revealing Demand for Pro-Poor Innovations. Georgetown University, March 7th 2014.Google Scholar
Fruhling, A. and Vreede, G.-J.D. (2006), “Field Experiences with eXtreme Programming: Developing an Emergency Response System”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 3968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J., Marnewick, A. and Pretorius, J. (2015), “Prototyping during the requirements elicitation process in the development of an underground unmanned aerial system”, presented at the Pattern Recognition Association of South Africa and Robotics and Mechatronics International Conference (PRASA-RobMech), November 26, 2015, Port Elizabeth, Pattern Recognition Association of South Africa and Robotics and Mechatronics International Conference (PRASA-RobMech) pp. 6065.Google Scholar
Jacob, S. and Furgerson, S. (2012), “Writing interview protocols and conducting interviews: Tips for students new to the field of qualitative research”, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 17 No. 42, pp. 110.Google Scholar
Khurana, A. and Rosenthal, S.R. (1998), “Towards holistic ‘front ends’ in new product development”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 5774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitzinger, J. (1995), “Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups”, BMJ, Vol. 311 No. 7000, pp. 299302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lauff, C., Kotys-Schwartz, D. and Rentschler, M.E. (2017), “What is a prototype?: Emergent roles of prototypes from empirical work in three diverse companies”, presented at the ASME 2017 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, ASME, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, August 6-9, 2017, Volume 7: 29th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, p. V007T06A033.Google Scholar
Maiden, N.A.M. and Rugg, G. (1996), “ACRE: selecting methods for requirements acquisition”, Software Engineering Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 183192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangham, L.J., Hanson, K. and McPake, B. (2009), “How to do (or not to do)… Designing a discrete choice ex-periment for application in a low-income country”, Health Policy and Planning, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 151158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nuseibeh, B. and Easterbrook, S. (2000), “Requirements engineering: A roadmap”, Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, June 4-11, 2000, Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, ACM, Vol. 1, pp. 3546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabiee, F. (2004), “Focus-group interview and data analysis”, The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 655660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roller, M.R. and Lavrakas, P.J. (2015), Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach, Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
Sanders, E.B.-N. and Stappers, P.J. (2014), “Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning”, CoDesign, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauer, J. and Sonderegger, A. (2009), “The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: Effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion”, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 670677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seyler, D., Kang, K. and Place, M. (2009), “Developing new products for emerging markets: a competency based approach, Theses, Rochester Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
Spradley, J.P. (1979), The Ethnographic Interview, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Vinck, D., Blanco, E., Bovy, M., Laureillard, P., Lavoisy, O., Mer, S., Ravaille, N., et al. (2003), Everyday Engineering: An Ethnography of Design and Innovation, MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiklund, M.E., Kendler, J., Strochlic, A.Y., Kendler, J. and Strochlic, A.Y. (2015), Usability Testing of Medical Devices, CRC Press, available at:https://doi.org/10.1201/b19082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wohlin, C. and Aurum, A. (2006), “Criteria for Selecting Software Requirements to Create Product Value: An Industrial Empirical Study, in Biffl, S., Aurum, A., Boehm, B., Erdogmus, H. and Grünbacher, P. (Eds.), Value-Based Software Engineering, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 179200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yock, P.G., Zenios, S., Makower, J., Brinton, T.J., Kumar, U.N. and Watkins, F.T.J. (2015), Biodesign: The Process of Innovating Medical Technologies, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have Access
Open access

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Medical Device Design Practitioner Strategies for Prototype-Centered Front-End Design Stakeholder Engagements in Low-Resource Settings
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Medical Device Design Practitioner Strategies for Prototype-Centered Front-End Design Stakeholder Engagements in Low-Resource Settings
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Medical Device Design Practitioner Strategies for Prototype-Centered Front-End Design Stakeholder Engagements in Low-Resource Settings
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *