Search

Considering a wide range of ideas is crucial for engineers as they seek to solve complex problems. Paradigm-relatedness is one dimension on which ideas can range from more incremental--ideas that refine and improve existing solutions--to more radical--ideas that approach a problem from a new perspective or seemingly unrelated angle. We developed a tool that consists of a set of framing strategies an engineer can apply to a design task to assist in generating ideas that differ from their initial ideas. We created two versions of the tool--one with an incremental set of framing strategies and another with a radical set. We explored whether the framing tool impacted the paradigm-relatedness of ideas generated in conceptual design sessions. Forty-five students attending a summer engineering outreach program participated in the study. Participants were given a problem statement and generated ideas initially without the tool and then with the version of the tool of their choosing. Post hoc, we coded each idea as more incremental or more radical on a four-point scale and examined the change in ideas between the first ideation session and the second. It was found that 73% of the participants chose the framing tool version we would have assigned to them based on our coding of their initial ideas. All of these participants exhibited a shift in the predicted paradigm-relatedness direction, providing support for the overall effectiveness of the tool. However, some participants selected a version of the tool that was not consistent with our intended use of the tool, and this happened more often with the incremental version of the tool. Those participants were inconsistent in shifting their ideas. Case examples were explored to gain insight into the ways in which the tool was effective as well as how it could be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The way design problems are presented may influence an engineer's ideation process, and eventually, the design outcomes. We aimed to explore the ways in which pre-engineering students shift their design ideas based on different framings of design problems. We evaluated ideas with respect to the metric of paradigm-relatedness, which refers to the extent to which an idea works within the explicitly stated and commonly understood bounds of a problem, versus moves beyond those bounds. Thirteen prospective engineering students participated in the study. Students were first given a problem statement framed in a way that didn't encourage any particular type of solution. The students were asked to generate solutions to the problem using visual and verbal depictions. Subsequently, they were given a second problem framed either to encourage practical solutions based on pre-existing designs or framed to encourage radical solutions not based on pre-existing designs. Ideas were coded as either paradigm-preserving or paradigm-modifying. We identified students whose ideas shifted from more of one type to more of another from their first ideation session to their second, as well as students whose ideas remained consistent. We analyzed their generated idea sets and reflection questionnaires to describe the influence of the framed design problem statements on their ideation approaches. The findings illustrate that problem framing can influence the paradigm-relatedness of ideas generated in a design tasks, both in more adaptive directions and in more innovative directions. However, our findings also illustrate that problem framing is not always successful in causing an individual to shift in their ideation approach, and so additional factors such as individuals' cognitive styles should also be taken into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideation is a key component of the design process, which often takes place in team settings. The team approach to design requires the involvement of all parties demonstrating the use of their expertise and knowledge in the area. Teaming has been shown to have both positive and negative impacts on ideation activities1-5. Cognitive style - or the stable, preferred way that people manage and seek to bring about change - helps us understand the different ways in which people solve problems individually and as part of a team. When team members' cognitive styles are diverse, creating an effect known as cognitive gap, the team may experience the advantages of approaching problems in diverse ways, but the likelihood of conflicts and misunderstandings increases6. This study investigated the relationship between cognitive style and the perceptions of students working in teams about their own ideation. Through the analysis of reflection surveys from 202 pre-engineering, engineering, and design students participating in an ideation study, we explored the following questions: (1) how does working in teams impact students' perceptions of their own ideation?; and (2) how do team members' cognitive styles impact their perceptions of their ideation and team contributions? In this paper, we report on the significant correlations between cognitive style and changes in students' perceptions about their ideation creativity, diversity, elaboration, and difficulty, as well as our exploration of the impact of teaming on these perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of ideation in design is to generate design solutions that have the potential for further development. Having many diverse ideas increases the potential for successful design outcomes by increasing the number of possibilities available during concept evaluation and selection phases. How do we define the problems that would allow for the most diverse solution space? The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of how different contexts impacted the variety of solutions generated within the solution space, by a diverse group of students. In this exploratory case study, we report on (1) how we identified a set of design problems with diverse contexts appropriate for students with varied backgrounds, and (2) how we explored the impact of these problem contexts on the size of the solution space, aiming to select the contexts with the most diverse pool of ideas for our ongoing studies1 . Our results show that diversity judged by multiple raters was consistent and provided us with evidence to support the decision of which design problems to use in our further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideation is the process of generating ideas for solving design problems, and it is a critical part of the overall design process. In order to encourage designers to ideate across a broader spectrum of ideas, we developed the Design Problem Framework (DPF) to assist in the development and framing of design problem statements. Part of the basis for the DPF was research on cognitive styles, which suggests that there is a range of preferences for approaching problem solving, and that these preferences influence how different individuals naturally approach ideation. We used Kirton's Adaption-Innovation theory as a basis for understanding the range of cognitive styles. The other part of the basis for the DPF was research on problem framing, which suggests that the structure of design problem statements influences an individual's approach and the outcomes produced. Using the DPF as a foundation, we propose that design problems that encourage adaptive ideation behaviors include more specified constraints, along with criteria for solutions that build on already existing solutions to the same or similar problems. In contrast, design problems that encourage innovative ideation behaviors include criteria for solutions that are radically different from existing solutions and are not bound by specific constraints. In this paper, we present a set of five design problems constructed using the DPF, with three different versions of each problem statement: (1) a neutrally framed version; (2) an adaptively framed version; and (3) an innovatively framed version. Three examples of student-generated solutions are also discussed to illustrate the resulting outcomes. We propose this framework as a guide for the development of design problem statements for use in education, research, and the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A paper which explores the development of a sustainable foundation for investigations into the factors affecting ideation flexibility of engineers and correlating them with students' cognitive styles is presented. The impact of each factor on approaches to solving design problems by pre-engineering and engineering students, at various stages in their educational programs were tested. Guidelines were developed to help engineers to increase their ideation flexibility.