AbstractCombining agility and convergence in the development of physical products is a major challenge. Rooted in a design thinking approach, Stanford's ME310 process model attempts to resolve the conflicting priorities of these two design principles. To investigate how successful Stanford's hybrid process model is in doing so, we have used a qualitative case study approach. Our paper begins by outlining this process model's fundamental principles in terms of engineering design methodology. Subsequently, we present the results of our empirical analysis, which tracks the coevolution of problem and solution space by meticulously examining all prototype paths in ten of Stanford's ME310 student projects. We have discovered that convergence during solution finding does not correspond to the process model's theoretical specifications. Even in the phase of the final prototype, both the technical concept and the underlying problem formulation changed frequently. Further research should focus on combining the prototype-based ME310 approach with methods from systems engineering which allow for a more comprehensive theoretical exploration of the solution space. This could lead to improved convergence during solution development.
How Could Emergency Modify our Normal Ethics Standards? A Brief Review of Selected
Chapters in Emergency Ethics