Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T04:33:35.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Virtually Hosted Hackathons for Design Research: Lessons Learned from the International Design Engineering Annual (IDEA) Challenge 2021

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

M. Goudswaard ,
L. Kent ,
L. Giunta ,
J. Gopsill ,
C. Snider ,
F. Valjak ,
K. A. Christensen ,
H. Felton ,
D. N. Ege  and
R. M. Real
...Show all authors
M. Goudswaard*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
L. Kent
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
L. Giunta
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
J. Gopsill
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
C. Snider
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
F. Valjak
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Croatia
K. A. Christensen
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
H. Felton
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
D. N. Ege
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
R. M. Real
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
C. Cox
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
N. Horvat
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Croatia
S. Kohtala
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
S. W. Eikevåg
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
T. Martinec
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Croatia
M. M. Perišić
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Croatia
M. Steinert
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
B. Hicks
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
*
mark.goudswaard@bristol.ac.uk

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.

This paper provides an overview and appraisal of the International Design Engineering Annual (IDEA) challenge - a virtually hosted design hackathon run with the aim of generating a design research dataset that can provide insights into design activities at virtually hosted hackathons. The resulting dataset consists of 200+ prototypes with over 1300 connections providing insights into the products, processes and people involved in the design process. The paper also provides recommendations for future deployments of virtual hackathons for design research.

Keywords

hackathonsdesign challengeprototypingdesign methodsdesign practice
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 21 - 30
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

Blessing, L.T.M. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009), DRM, a Design Research Methodology, DRM, a Design Research Methodology, Springer, available at: 10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1.Google Scholar
Briscoe, G. and Mulligan, C. (2014), “Digital Innovation: The Hackathon Phenomenon”, Creativeworks London, No. 6, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Erichsen, J.F., Sjöman, H., Steinert, M. and Welo, T. (2020), “Protobooth: Gathering and analyzing data on prototyping in early-stage engineering design projects by digitally capturing physical prototypes”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM, available at: 10.1017/S0890060420000414.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K.A. and Simon, H.A. (1982), “Protocol Analysis”, A Companion to Cognitive Science, pp. 425–432.Google Scholar
Flus, M. and Hurst, A. (2021a), “Experiences of Design At Hackathons: Initial Findings From an Interview Study”, Proceedings of the Design Society, Vol. 1 No. AUGUST, pp. 1461–1470.Google Scholar
Flus, M. and Hurst, A. (2021b), “Design at hackathons: New opportunities for design research”, Design Science, No. May, available at:10.1017/dsj.2021.1.Google Scholar
Frey, F.J. and Luks, M. (2016), “The innovation-driven Hackathon - One means for accelerating innovation”, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, Association for Computing Machinery, available at: 10.1145/3011784.3011794.Google Scholar
Giunta, L., Kent, L., Goudswaard, M., Gopsill, J. and Hicks, B. (2022), “Pro2booth: A Tool for increasing the efficacy of the prototyping capture process (Under review)”, Design Conference Proceedings 2022.Google Scholar
Goldshmidt, G. and Weil, M. (1998), “Contents and Structure in Design Reasoning”, Design Issues, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 85–100.Google Scholar
Kent, L., Gopsill, J., Goudswaard, M. and Giunta, L. (2022), “Analysing and visualising the design process through graphs (Under Review)”, Proceedings of the Design Conference.Google Scholar
Lee, J. (1997), “Design Rationale Systems: Understanding the Issues”, IEEE Expert, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAlpine, H., Cash, P. and Hicks, B. (2017), “The role of logbooks as mediators of engineering design work”, Design Studies, Vol. 48 No. September 2018, pp. 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAlpine, H., Hicks, B.J., Huet, G. and Culley, S.J. (2006), “An investigation into the use and content of the engineer's logbook”, Design Studies, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 481–504.Google Scholar
Angarita, Medina, and Nolte, M.A., A. (2020), “What do we know about hackathon outomces and how to support them? - A Systematic Literature Review”, in Nolte, A., Alvarez, C., Hishiyama, R., Chounta, I.-A., Rodríguez-Triana, M.J. and Inoue, T. (Eds.), CollabTech 2020, Vol. 12324, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 50–64.Google Scholar
Nelson, J., Berlin, A. and Menold, J. (2019), “Archie: An automated data collection method for physical prototyping efforts in authentic design situations”, Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Vol. 7, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. and Menold, J. (2020), “Opening the black box: Developing metrics to assess the cognitive processes of prototyping”, Design Studies, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 70, p. 100964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolte, A., Pe-Than, E.P.P., Filippova, A., Bird, C., Scallen, S. and Herbsleb, J.D. (2018), “You hacked and now what? – Exploring outcomes of a corporate hackathon”, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Association for Computing Machinery, Vol. 2 No. CSCW, available at:10.1145/3274398.Google Scholar
Pe-Than, E.P.P. and Herbsleb, J.D. (2019), Understanding Hackathons for Science: Collaboration, Affordances, and Outcomes, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), Vol. 11420 LNCS, Springer International Publishing, available at: 10.1007/978-3-030-15742-5_3.Google Scholar
Wall, M.B., Ulrich, K.T. and Flowers, W.C. (1992), “Evaluating prototyping technologies for product design”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 163–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar