Innovations in Collaborative Web Design

2007 ◽  
pp. 148-164
Author(s):  
Madelon Evers
Keyword(s):  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Action Learning ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Web Design ◽  
Interactive Systems ◽  
Multidisciplinary Design ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Design Projects

In this chapter we analyse the link between multidisciplinary design and team learning, which, we argue, need to be supported in equal measure during Web design projects. We introduce a new approach to collaborative Web design, called the “Design and Learning Methodology,” as a way to support these two processes. The approach involves many stakeholders, including future website users, in design decision-making. It structures stakeholder participation through multidisciplinary design teams (MDTs). It uses professional facilitators to guide design and learning processes. Facilitation tools are drawn from a combination of action learning methods, which help MDTs reflect and act on new knowledge gained from design experiences, and human-centred design, which is an international protocol for achieving quality in interactive systems design (ISO 9000 series). Based on our research, we describe how facilitation of the process of learning from design contributes to continuous improvement in collaborative competencies needed for Web design.

An Integrative Bargaining Paradigm for Investigating Multidisciplinary Design Tradeoffs

1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (16) ◽  
pp. 1028-1032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifford E. Brown ◽  
Jonathan A. Selvaraj ◽  
Brian S. Zaff ◽  
Michael D. McNeese ◽  
Randall D. Whitaker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Collaborative Design ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Multidisciplinary Design ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
Experimental Paradigm ◽  
Initial Report ◽  
Initial Validation ◽  
Design Tradeoffs

In design teams, decision making entails negotiation among parties pursuing common goals with potentially divergent interests and objectives (Bucciarelli, 1988). In multidisciplinary design teams, these parties negotiate from perspectives further biased by their respective backgrounds, expertise, and roles. System design can be improved if we better understand how technical data are communicated and assimilated, how mutually advantageous tradeoffs are discovered, and how the managing of design tradeoffs can best be supported. As part of our larger research effort in Collaborative Design Technology, we are examining the processes by which integrative design tradeoffs are realized, in preparation for enhancing these processes through data visualization and communication tools facilitating mutual understanding and consensual decision making. This initial report describes our work to date in creating and validating an experimental paradigm to serve as a testbed for subsequent studies of multidisciplinary design practice. This paper describes the paradigm and the initial attempts to demonstrate its ecological validity. This initial validation effort involved a comparison of novices and experts in the field of design and their performance on the design decision making task. We found that experts performed better than novices on the design task, which provided initial validation support for the experimental paradigm.

scholarly journals Exploring the Role of Artefacts to Coordinate Design Meetings

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Marisela Gutierrez Lopez ◽  
Kris Luyten ◽  
Davy Vanacken ◽  
Karin Coninx
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Interactive Systems ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
User Centered Design ◽  
Cognitive Ergonomics ◽  
Design Activities ◽  
Previous Design ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
Extended Discussion

Design artefacts are vital to communicate design outcomes, both in remote and co-located settings. However, it is unclear how artefacts are used to mediate interactions between designers and stakeholders of the design process. The purpose of this paper is exploring how professional design teams use artefacts to guide and capture discussions involving multidisciplinary stakeholders while they work in a co-located setting. An earlier draft of this paper was paper published in the Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics (ECCE 2017). This work adds substantial clarification of the methodology followed, further details and photographs of the case studies, and an extended discussion about our findings and their relevance for designing interactive systems. We report the observations of six design meetings in three different projects, involving professional design teams that follow a user-centered design approach. Meetings with stakeholders are instrumental for design projects. However, design teams face the challenge of synthesizing large amounts of information, often in a limited time, and with minimal common ground between meeting attendees. We found that all the observed design meetings had a similar structure consisting of a series of particular phases, in which design activities were organized around artefacts. These artefacts were used as input to disseminate and gather feedback of previous design outcomes, or as output to collect and process a variety of perspectives. We discuss the challenges faced by design teams during design meetings, and propose three design directions for interactive systems to coordinate design meetings revolving around artefacts.

Creating Effective Communication among User-Centered Technology Design Groups

2015 ◽  
pp. 104-117
Author(s):  
Laura B. Dahl
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Web Design ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Quality Work ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
The Many ◽  
User Centered

The user-centered design process among U.S. companies is commonly carried out by design teams. Groups of designers are commonly unable to create high quality work due to the need to first work out several issues. These issues include needing to get to know one another's capabilities while also learning how to effectively communicate through the many difficult decisions and deadlines common to software and Web design projects. This chapter describes the communication research that illuminates the process that groups go through before they can achieve high-quality results.

A Case Study of the Effects of Design Project Length on Team Collaboration and Leadership in Senior Mechanical Engineering Projects

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Righter ◽  
Andy Blanton ◽  
Hallie Stidham ◽  
Doug Chickarello ◽  
Joshua D. Summers
Keyword(s):  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
Team Collaboration ◽  
Project Completion ◽  
Communication Structures ◽  
Senior Design ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Engineering Projects

This paper describes exploratory research regarding leadership and communication within undergraduate engineering design teams. The case study was performed on student design projects of one and two semester duration to begin to assess the impact of project length on leadership and communication within the design teams. Data was collected using a survey that was given to the participants in three capstone design projects in Clemson University’s senior design course. The survey was administered within one month of course and project completion. While there were differences in the communication and leadership patterns between the teams, there were other possible influences beyond the project length such as team size and organization, organizational and geographic distribution, and the nature of the product. As a result, further research is proposed to study leadership and communication structures within undergraduate teams and multi-team systems (MTS).

scholarly journals Characterization of the Transient Response of Coupled Optimization in Multidisciplinary Design

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erich Devendorf ◽  
Kemper Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Optimization Problems ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Discrete Systems ◽  
Product Development Process ◽  
Multidisciplinary Design ◽  
Distributed Design ◽  
Equilibrium Solutions ◽  
Acceptable Solution ◽  
Number Of Iterations

Time is an asset of critical importance in a multidisciplinary design process and it is desirable to reduce the amount of time spent designing products and systems. Design is an iterative activity and designers consume a significant portion of the product development process negotiating a mutually acceptable solution. The amount of time necessary to complete a design depends on the number and duration of design iterations. This paper focuses on accurately characterizing the number of iterations required for designers to converge to an equilibrium solution in distributed design processes. In distributed design, systems are decomposed into smaller, coupled design problems where individual designers have control over local design decisions and seek to achieve their own individual objectives. These smaller coupled design optimization problems can be modeled using coupled games and the number of iterations required to reach equilibrium solutions varies based on initial conditions and process architecture. In this paper, we leverage concepts from game theory, classical controls, and discrete systems theory to evaluate and approximate process architectures without carrying out any solution iterations. As a result, we develop an analogy between discrete decisions and a continuous time representation that we analyze using control theoretic techniques.

Contribution of the co.LAB Framework to the Collaborative Design of Serious Games: Mixed-Methods Validation Study (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique Jaccard ◽  
Laurent Suppan ◽  
Félicia Bielser
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Serious Games ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Serious Game ◽  
Multidisciplinary Design ◽  
Design Teams ◽  
Design And Development ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND Multidisciplinary collaboration is essential to the successful development of serious games, albeit difficult to achieve. The co.LAB serious game design framework was created to support collaboration within serious game multidisciplinary design teams. Its use has not yet been validated in a naturalistic context. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to perform a first assessment of the impact of the co.LAB framework on collaboration within multidisciplinary teams during serious game design and development. METHODS This was a mixed-methods study based on two serious game design projects in which the co.LAB framework was used. The first phase was qualitative and carried out using a general inductive approach. To this end, all members of the first serious game project team who used the co.LAB framework were invited to take part in a focus group session (N=6). Results inferred from qualitative data were then used to define a quantitative instrument (questionnaire) which was designed according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys. Members of both project teams (N=11) were then asked to answer the questionnaire. Quantitative results were reported as median [Q1;Q3] and appropriate non-parametric tests used to assess for between group differences. Finally, results gathered through the qualitative and quantitative phases were integrated. RESULTS In both phases, the participation rate was 100%. Verbatim transcripts were classified into 4 high level themes: influence on collaborative dimensions; impact on project course, monitoring and efficiency; qualitative perceptions of the framework; and influence of team composition on the use of the framework. Accordingly, the web-based questionnaire was then developed according to Burhardt's seven dimensions of collaboration. In both projects, the co.LAB framework had a positive impact on most dimensions of collaboration during the multidisciplinary design and development of serious games. When all collaborative dimensions were aggregated, the overall impact of the framework was rated on a scale from "-42" to "+42" (very negative to very positive). The overall score was 23 [20;27], with no significant difference between groups (P=.58). Most respondents also believed that all serious game design teams should include a member possessing a significant expertise in serious game design frameworks to guide the development process. CONCLUSIONS The co.LAB framework has a positive impact on collaboration within serious game development teams. However, expert guidance seems necessary to maximize development efficiency. Whether such guidance can be provided by means of a collaborative web platform remains to be determined.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document