{"id":439,"date":"2017-10-31T14:27:14","date_gmt":"2017-10-31T14:27:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/?p=439"},"modified":"2018-01-08T21:05:59","modified_gmt":"2018-01-08T21:05:59","slug":"there-is-more-to-methods-than-a-good-idea","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/there-is-more-to-methods-than-a-good-idea\/","title":{"rendered":"There is more to methods than a good idea"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-442\" src=\"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/Slide1-300x169.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"169\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/Slide1-300x169.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/Slide1-768x432.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/Slide1-960x540.jpg 960w, https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/Slide1.jpg 1280w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Designers have mixed feelings about methods. Christopher Alexander, the architect and design theoretician said \u201cIf you call it, \u2018It\u2019s a Good Idea To Do\u2019, I like it very much; if you call it a \u2018Method\u2019, I like it but I\u2019m beginning to get turned off; if you call it a \u2018Methodology\u2019, I just don`t want to talk about it\u201d (Alexander, 1971).\u00a0Engineering designers, who need to accomplish tasks by\u00a0deadlines, are a bid more favourably predisposed to using methods.<\/p>\n<p>So, what is a method, anyway? This looks like it should be an entirely straightforward question, and from the individual perspective of many engineers and designers it is an entirely straightforward question. The classical engineering design text book by Pahl and Beitz (2007) defines methods as \u201csystematic procedure with the intention to reach a specific goal\u201d. The notion of method causes a surprising amount of confusion among engineering designers in industry and academia; and this confusion adversely affects efforts to introduce new methods into industrial practice.<\/p>\n<p>Method development is one of the raisons d\u2019etre of engineering design research and method uptake by industry is perceived as an important success criterion. Learning methods\u00a0for specific tasks is an important part of design education. However when we look at industry, we find that a lot of engineers and designers work methodically, but whether they follow a specific method is an other matter. They use methods up a point and than often give up. Great, if the method has given them what they needed, but often they just get stuck.<\/p>\n<p>In the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.designsociety.org\/mmep-sig\" >Modelling and Managing Engineering Processes Special Interest Group<\/a> of of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.designsociety.org\/\" >Design Society<\/a>, we are working as an international group on modelling design processes and methods to support them. We bring experts from industry and academia together to work on challenging concepts. In a recent workshop with industry, it became very clear, that companies use news methods, if they have a crisis and the new methods help in resolving it. Otherwise they only use methods that are very well established and worked out in a lot of detail and explained very well.<\/p>\n<p>A good idea is not enough. Designers need to understand how to represent the results the results the method generates, have a procedure they can follow in applying the method and understand the context in which the method is intended to the used. Only if these are clear and work well together, the method can be picked up by others. Below is an overview of the core concepts involved in modelling design processes. More details can be found <a href=\"http:\/\/oro.open.ac.uk\/50445\/3\/50445.pdf\" >here<\/a>\u00a0in a recent conference paper.<\/p>\n<table style=\"height: 341px;\" width=\"812\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td width=\"108\">Term<\/td>\n<td width=\"495\">Explanation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td width=\"108\">Core idea<\/td>\n<td width=\"495\">The basic principle, technique or theory that the method employs.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td width=\"108\">Representation<\/td>\n<td width=\"495\">An object or other artefact that shows and stands for a target system, i.e. intermediate results and deliverable created by using the method.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td width=\"108\">Procedure<\/td>\n<td width=\"495\">A description of the actions required to apply a method, for enabling the user of the method to do something more easily or with a sufficient guarantee of correctness, focusing on the sequence of actions and their completeness.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td width=\"108\">Intended use<\/td>\n<td width=\"495\">A description of scope of a method, the coverage within, scope and expected benefit from using the method, informing the user about suitability of the method for a particular design task in a specific context.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>References<\/p>\n<p>Alexander, C. (1971). The state of art in design methodology.\u00a0<em>Design Method\u00a0<\/em><em>Group Newsletter<\/em>, pp. 3\u20137. Berkeley.<\/p>\n<p>Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., &amp; Grote, K. H. (2007).\u00a0<em>Engineering Design &#8211; A Systematic Approach<\/em>\u00a0(3rd ed.).Berlin: Springer-Verlag.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Designers have mixed feelings about methods. Christopher Alexander, the architect and design theoretician said \u201cIf you call it, \u2018It\u2019s a Good Idea To Do\u2019, I like it very much; if you call it a \u2018Method\u2019, I like it but I\u2019m beginning to get turned off; if you call it a \u2018Methodology\u2019, I just don`t want [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":442,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[54],"class_list":["post-439","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-design-research","tag-engineering-design"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/439","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=439"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/439\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":452,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/439\/revisions\/452"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/442"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=439"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=439"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/design\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=439"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}