A systematic technology evaluation and selection method for computer-supported collaborative design

Design is a global activity. It requires collaboration between individuals across borders and beyond barriers. Modern global design is achieved using computer technologies that support many activities of a design process. However, merely supporting design does not guarantee that it is a successful endeavour. The requirements of computer-supported collaborative design are abstract. They are influenced by human-to-human interaction and/or human to computer interaction. As our society moves towards faster communication technologies and a higher number of collaborative technologies available, the need to evaluate the available tools and select the best tool at the appropriate time of the design process is becoming more compelling. If the best tools are not identified, there are missed opportunities for productivity, impacting team communication, cooperation, coordination, and collaboration. Student designers at University have experienced an observable change in technology use within their personal and academic lives. The proliferation of Web 2.0 technologies and the spread of social media, social network sites and mobile technologies have impacted how students socialise and engage in group project work. However, it is unclear if these technologies support or hinder the design process. This behaviour change has led to a motivation to understand the use of technologies to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design teamwork. This research intended to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design teamwork by defining the requirements of Computer-Supported Collaborative Design, the technologies which can be used to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design, the technology functionalities which these technologies feature, and to use this knowledge to systematically evaluate and select the appropriate technology to use for any given collaborative situation. The outcomes of this research documented within this thesis became the development of a systematic and automated method to allow engineering design teams to evaluate technologies based on the existing knowledge of the requirements of Computer Supported Collaborative Design and select which technologies would best support their group design activities. This technology evaluation and selection method was achieved by the creation of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix, a tool which enables the evaluation of technologies against Computer-Supported Collaborative Design requirements; the creation of an auto-population method for the tool supporting consistency and efficiency of using the method; and the development of an education programme to ensure the correct use of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix. The Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix can be used to support the assessment and selection of technology for use in Computer-Supported Collaborative Design projects by engineering design teams in an educational environment. The tool has been evaluated through demonstration of use for a class and implementation within a class environment. Beyond the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix as a tool, a robust and systematic method of creating the tool has been documented, which is the first step towards broader use of the tool.Design is a global activity. It requires collaboration between individuals across borders and beyond barriers. Modern global design is achieved using computer technologies that support many activities of a design process. However, merely supporting design does not guarantee that it is a successful endeavour. The requirements of computer-supported collaborative design are abstract. They are influenced by human-to-human interaction and/or human to computer interaction. As our society moves towards faster communication technologies and a higher number of collaborative technologies available, the need to evaluate the available tools and select the best tool at the appropriate time of the design process is becoming more compelling. If the best tools are not identified, there are missed opportunities for productivity, impacting team communication, cooperation, coordination, and collaboration. Student designers at University have experienced an observable change in technology use within their personal and academic lives. The proliferation of Web 2.0 technologies and the spread of social media, social network sites and mobile technologies have impacted how students socialise and engage in group project work. However, it is unclear if these technologies support or hinder the design process. This behaviour change has led to a motivation to understand the use of technologies to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design teamwork. This research intended to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design teamwork by defining the requirements of Computer-Supported Collaborative Design, the technologies which can be used to support Computer-Supported Collaborative Design, the technology functionalities which these technologies feature, and to use this knowledge to systematically evaluate and select the appropriate technology to use for any given collaborative situation. The outcomes of this research documented within this thesis became the development of a systematic and automated method to allow engineering design teams to evaluate technologies based on the existing knowledge of the requirements of Computer Supported Collaborative Design and select which technologies would best support their group design activities. This technology evaluation and selection method was achieved by the creation of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix, a tool which enables the evaluation of technologies against Computer-Supported Collaborative Design requirements; the creation of an auto-population method for the tool supporting consistency and efficiency of using the method; and the development of an education programme to ensure the correct use of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix. The Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix can be used to support the assessment and selection of technology for use in Computer-Supported Collaborative Design projects by engineering design teams in an educational environment. The tool has been evaluated through demonstration of use for a class and implementation within a class environment. Beyond the Computer-Supported Collaborative Design matrix as a tool, a robust and systematic method of creating the tool has been documented, which is the first step towards broader use of the tool

Workshop session: mapping success in collaborative engineering

Successful collaborative engineering practices have demonstrated significant benefits to industry: improving efficiency; eliminating rework due to information inconsistencies; managing complexity and automating parts of the collaborative design process. Despite these benefits, collaborative endeavours fail due to obstacles such as: sharing knowledge through ineffective communication methods; co-ordinating stakeholders with divergent objectives; managing teams with cultural and leadership differences; and configuring collaborative networks towards a long-term and strategic vision. Changing innovation landscapes have the potential to radically advance collaborative practices to develop more user-centred, innovative and customised products in a timelier manner. The Collaborative Design SIG has been working to define the characteristics of successful collaborative practices through previous workshops exploring the changing innovation landscape. These characteristics present complex challenges to conventional industrial practice and confounds the benefits gained from wide-spread implementation. These challenges could, for example, relate to the complexities of extending knowledge management practices beyond the boundaries of the organisation and the subsequent manipulation of this knowledge; the operation of formal and informal collaborative networks that manages ambiguity, equivocality, and conflicting constraints; the adaptation of organisational structures to become more flexible, agile and open; and the ownership of the product development process. This workshop will bring together collaborative design and innovation researchers with the aim of creating a coherent, integrated, and more holistic understanding and definition of collaborative engineering enablers and inhibitors. The workshop will bring together the domains of industry and academia to facilitate networking and knowledge exchange benefiting all participants

Recommendations for the use of social network sites and mobile devices in a collaborative engineering design project

This paper investigates how mobile devices and online social networks are used in the context of a collaborative and cross-disciplinary distributed design project. The global design project is undertaken by students from four Universities in the collaboration of an aeroplane seatbelt product. It was observed that students have begun to make a change toward using social network sites and mobile devices for collaborative design and communication needs. This paper documents this change in student behavior and investigates the reasons for this change. Through structured and unstructured interviews, it was found that students have a natural preference towards the software they use for personal communication over prescribed unfamiliar software. Students in global teams are expected to be accessible at all times and mobile technology supports this need. In addition, students did not naturally adopt professional practices which lead to lost information and miscommunication. From these findings, a set of recommendations were created to assist those involved in a global design project

Understanding Industry 4.0 digital transformation

The concept of Industry 4.0 has motivated large engineering sectors towards a common focus for improvement. Academics have capitalised on the common language, shared motivation and marketability of Industry 4.0. The potential and perceived benefits of Industry 4.0 are clear within academia and beyond. However, are engineering companies ready for the digital transformation associated? and, can Industry 4.0 be achieved by SMEs? In this paper, we investigate these questions through activity on project road mapping with 4 Scottish companies to reveal Industry 4.0 readiness and literacy

The use of social network sites in a global engineering design project

The global design project challenges students from three European universities to work in engineering design teams on the development of a product. To execute the design process, students have chosen to utilise social network sites as a platform for communication and collaboration. The aim of the study was to investigate how students were utilising social network sites as part of their collaborative work during the global design project and their views on the level of support given. A survey and semi-formal interviews were used to collect data on views and the use of social network sites. The study reveals: (1) the popularity of different social network sites for social and academic tasks, (2) the expectation of support students' and academics' think is required, and (3) a need for greater guidance in the use of social network sites. The use of social network sites by students' is discussed with a focus on how they can be better supported in future projects. This paper proposes that students' and academic staff require guidance on the best practices for using social network sites in global design projects to support students' education

Online Course Design Using Iterative Workshops on Computer-Supported Collaborative Design for Engineering Design Students

Based on observations of global design classes at different institutions, students selected technologies without justification for the suitability of the technology to support their collaborative design activities. To best support students in their collaborative endeavours, a short online course in computer-supported collaborative design was developed. The process of the creation of the short online course was unique using students’ identification of their gaps in knowledge during workshops, iteratively over three years to develop a complete educational experience.  Workshops were conducted with students to identify gaps in students’ knowledge that were addressed at future workshops, by filling these gaps and conducting the same gap finding activity the researchers can identify if these gaps can be filled through an educational intervention. Surveys were used to evaluate the success of the development of an online course in Computer-Supported Collaborative Design (CSCD).  The method for the development of the short online course was logical and successful based on feedback from students during surveys. The outcomes of this method can have implications for those developing novel courses in familiar teaching environments or new digital media. This research has identified the interventions required to prepare students for global design projects in a novel way. Lessons from this research will support other educators to consider their course development practice. &nbsp

Is pen-to-paper the buggy whip of design? Assessing the use of ai tools for design sketching

Sketching is quick and effective, however with the advent of generative AI, do the current generation of novice designers have an alternative? This paper compares the use of sketching and text-to-image generative AI tools to produce initial concept images (“sketches”) by novice designers. This will identify the viability and potential adoption of AI as a replacement, and gauge the adoption willingness of novice designers, replacing sketching. This study compares conventional sketching and AI image generation using first year product design students to record brainstormed initial concepts using both sketching and generative AI tools, this study compares various attributes of both, including ability to represent designer’s intentions. The findings of this study suggest that at present, novice designers continue to prefer conventional sketching with 75% believing that it is more accurate to designers’ intentions and 59.62% believing that it is easier to use

Designing cross-disciplinary programmes to develop the entrepreneurial skills of engineering design & business students

The current and future workforce need to be multi-skilled, adaptable, collaborative and creative in finding new solutions to problems. Importantly, they need a good understanding that there needs to be market desirability, technical feasibility and financial viability for the new solution to be a commercial success. Engineering students are highly skilled in technical feasibility, business students are highly skilled with commercial/financial viability and market desirability understanding. What if both of these groups were brought together? Could the skills for a more skilled future workforce be developed? Increase the quality of solutions being developed? Increase the numbers of student business ideas being taken beyond their educational studies? An 8-week program was run between (Engineering Design Department - Omitted for review) and (Business School - Omitted for review) at (University - Omitted for review), to explore collaboration opportunities between business students and engineering students with the aim of building skills of future workers, increase the quality of final solutions being developed and increase the numbers of student businesses ideas being taken beyond their educational studies. The program paired 6 groups of business students working on a range of product or service based business concepts with an engineering design student mentor. The role of the engineering design mentor was to provide advice and guidance on the technical feasibility and viability of the business students product design concepts. Further to this, the engineering design mentor was then tasked with assisting the business students in developing a minimum viable product (MVP) prototype, which would enable the business students to better communicate their concept. Feedback from both student mentors, and business students was positive. Business students reflected on the benefits in developing skills in what it may be like to work with a consultant, and became more aware of the implications of technical feasibility on their product offering and business model. They also gained a better appreciation of time and costs in developing the MVP. Student mentors saw benefits in developing skills in client negotiation, communication and in project scope setting, and were exposed to managing changing client requirements, as the business students refined their concepts in line with market research gathered, focussing on customer desirability. This project was financially backed by the (Business School - Omitted for review), and student mentors were paid an hourly rate to a maximum budget of 30 hours of support. Interestingly, feedback from student mentors suggested the experience in itself was invaluable, and in some cases, they went above and beyond the allocated budget of 30 hours as they saw the benefits to their own personal development. Of the six student teams supported, four went on to engage with external support services for developing their ideas further after they graduated. From this four, two registered businesses, and two continued to explore ideas at idea stage out with their university studies. The outcomes of this research are lessons learnt for future implementation of pilot projects of this nature

What have we learnt : reflections pre and post pandemic on the transition to engineering design education online

Engineering design education has experienced a recent paradigm shift. Online learning was once a novel concept with few universities and courses offered fully online. A consequence of the global COVID-19 pandemic was a shift to online learning as the default for all universities during the period of self-isolation. Pre-pandemic on-campus education considered technologies to support distributed learning as a novel concept, as secondary to in-person education. Now, the engineering design educational community must consider remote learning as equal to in-person learning. We now find ourselves as educators, not with a desire for computer-supported collaboration, but instead with computer-necessitated collaboration now being the norm. Workshops were conducted with participants of the E&PDE conferences, and members of the Design Education Special Interest Group of the Design Society in 2020 and 2021. The first workshop took place in July 2020 with the aim to determine ‘what the challenges in the Design Education transition to online will be and how to overcome these. The outcomes of the workshop were: four key areas, 12 challenges and six solutions to these challenges. It was clear from this workshop that there were gaps in knowledge in terms of how to overcome challenges. Those involved in this transition did not believe the pandemic would have a huge impact on engineering design education and the community had little experience in taking emergency measures to get online quickly whilst still delivering high-quality material. The second workshop took place in early September 2021 after the community had experienced one year of teaching fully online. This time, 19 challenges were identified and 16 solutions to these challenges. By comparing the outcomes of the workshops, we can better understand the gaps in knowledge of engineering design educators before and after the first year of online learning, and the innovative solutions created to overcome these challenges. This paper will share the engineering design practice changes reported by the participants of the workshops that will be useful to others who are developing online content. A third workshop was conducted in late September 2021 developing upon the outcomes of the first and second workshops, in which participants were asked to take the challenges and solutions and to map these to a university timeline for students. This timeline proposes to support the planning of educational interventions to overcome common challenges and opportunities for online learning. The value of the timeline is in supporting others who are now engaged in online or hybrid learning, as a permanent change to their teaching practice, or as a framework, if a rapid change to fully online happens again