Resource management skills are critical to success during new product development processes. Design processes are ambiguous and complex, and designers often face a scarcity of resources that limits their ability to move the new product development process forward, such as limited financial capital, time or human resources. A team’s ability to use resources effectively may determine their likelihood of success during new product development processes. Technology-based startup teams represent an authentic, unique subset of new product development teams that are trying to bring innovative technologies to market. While prior work has identified salient traits of team members that affect a team’s trajectory, little work has investigated how these traits may interact with each other and how they affect an individual’s ability to manage resources. Using a mixed-methods approach, we leveraged data from 241 startup team members to study the relationship between individual traits, team characteristics and resource management skills. A k-means cluster analysis unveiled two distinct archetypes of startup team members, differentiated by (1) self-efficacy, (2) bricolage, (3) risk propensity and (4) perceptions of psychological safety. Team members with higher levels of these traits exhibited greater resource management skills.

Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.

While a significant amount of research has documented the importance of design artefacts in design communication, relatively little work has investigated the effect of design artefact quality on the development of a shared understanding between designers. In the current work we focus specifically on sketch quality and the effect of sketch quality on the shared understanding of design dyads. A controlled study with 22 design dyads (44 designers) was conducted to understand the relationship between sketch quality and shared understanding. Results suggest that design artefact quality, measured by sketch understandability, does not predict the shared understanding of a design concept. Our findings hold implications for the fundamental ways in which we evaluate sketch quality and the importance of artefact fidelity for communicative acts.

Prior work has demonstrated that gender identity affects team psychological safety, which is critical to the development of a shared understanding of the task. Further, we know that a shared understanding can increase team cohesion and team performance. Little work has investigated how gender differences affect communicative acts within the context of design, and more specifically how gender differences may affect the development of a shared understanding of the design concept between designers. As a first step towards filling this gap, the current work presents findings from a controlled study conducted at The Pennsylvania State University with 22 design dyads (44 designers). The findings from this study indicate that gender identity within design dyads does not affect participants’ shared understanding of a design concept.