Republic of the Philippines
NORTHERN ILOILO POLYTECHNIC STATE COLLEGE
Estancia, Iloilo
Reg. No. 97Q19783
ORIENTATION TO ME
ME 121: Orientation to ME Eng’r. John Paul G. Arceo
NIPSC-BSME 1 Instructor 1
Second Semester, SY 2021-2022
Time Allotment: 1 hour/week
2 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
6-1 INTRODUCTION
Creativity is an integral part of the engineering design process, its presence
often being the major influence on the impact of a product. Without some
element of creativity in design there is no potential for innovation where novel
ideas are implemented and transformed into commercial value. To emphasise this
importance, recent figures were released from the UK treasury concluding that
the top innovating companies produce 75% of revenue from products or services
that did not exist 5 years ago. Within industry, creativity does not necessarily
equate to success, however, without some form of innovative new product
development, long-term failure is a certainty. In order for firms to increase their
organisational creativity, thus resulting in enhanced innovation, the creative
process of individuals must be considered within the design process.
Whilst participating in engineering/social science creativity cluster meetings
it was clear that many social scientists could not distinguish between creative and
design processes. Furthermore, little differentiation was made between the
production and development of ideas and the production and development of a
product. Conversely, engineers generally acknowledge that the creative process is
different to the design process though are unable to succinctly describe it. Though
the definitions of creativity and design are far from rigid and are used differently
throughout research, the following definitions have been constructed from the
authors’ analysis of the considerable amount of literature reviewed.
• Creative Process: A cognitive process culminating in the generation of an idea.
• Design Process: A labour intensive process culminating in the proposal of a
product or process.
This module will undertake an in-depth study of both the creative process
and the engineering design process. The purpose of this module is to identify
where and when in the process of design does creativity occur. Throughout the
chapter the parallels and contradictions between design literature and creativity
literature become apparent.
LESSON 6-2: THE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS 3
6-2 THE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS
The understanding of the design process is important for the teaching of
design, the improvement of products, and the efficiency of engineering-based
companies; it is also the foundation on which a lot of design research is
conducted. It is thought that understanding this process relative to the creative
process may give insight into where and when resources should be focused in
order to enhance creative performance and the quality of the product designed.
There are several ways of describing the design process, of which 3 main
categories have been identified. Though abstract and non-prescriptive, the most
accurate description is the ‘knowledge driven’ design process, typified by C-K
theory. Here, the information contents of the several spaces are filled in a
seemingly random order, the process ends when there is sufficient information in
each space to terminate or make a design recommendation. Another, and
frequently used description, is the divergent-convergent style process, which
works along the idea of gaining then evaluating information and, generating then
selecting alternatives. However, by far the most common is the linear type design
process model. Table 1 contains the various design processes reviewed from the
literature. As the models are predominantly of the linear style, column headings
were chosen based around broad headings modelled on the Pahl and Beitz
systematic design process: ‘Need’, ‘Analysis of Task’, ‘Conceptual Design’,
‘Embodiment Design’ and ‘Detailed Design’ in that order. A further column was
added to describe post design activities which are often also described by several
process models.
This section will draw conclusions from the different engineering design
processes described in literature and within Table 1. The findings will provide the
reader with an understanding of the different types of engineering design process
and the elements that relate to creativity. The subsequent sub-sections deal with
the varying characteristics of the different process models, whether prescriptive
or descriptive (Section 2.1), generic or specific (Section 2.2), describing outputs or
activities (Section 2.3), and whether the process is driven by a market or
technology (Section 2.4)
4 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
LESSON 6-2: THE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS 5
6-2.1 Prescriptive or Descriptive
There is much literature regarding the formalisation of the design process.
These are traditionally split into two categories, the descriptive process models
(for example see Figure 1) and the prescriptive process models (for example see
Figure 2), both of which are commonly represented by flow diagrams. The
descriptive models attempt to replicate the sequence of occurrences throughout
design, however, models are said to provide “over simplistic” and “over idealistic”
views of the design process. The prescriptive models are then built upon these
descriptive models in order to guide the designers more efficiently through the
design process.
Although the prescriptive models are by definition not natural design
practice, many are so generic and well known that they only remain prescriptive
to novice design engineers. Perhaps the most famous and commonly quoted of
these processes is the Pahl and Beitz systematic design process (Figure 2), now
more often used in reference for purposes of descriptive representation. When
constructing process models there is always trade-off between how useful or
prescriptive it can be, against, how inclusive it is to different projects and how
user friendly it is to the designer. This results in very similarly structured process
models between descriptive and prescriptive models. Column ‘W’ (in Table 1)
shows the breakdown between the Prescriptive (P) and Descriptive (D) models
reviewed.
6 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
6-2.2 Generic or Specific
The level of complexity of a design process model is of great importance
and has large impact on its value. Simple models generally follow a linear route
with fewer, more broadly defined steps leading from the start to finish. These
models are easy to apply to the variety of different design projects that may be
encountered, making them more user friendly to the designer. Though the field of
design research contains a number of these simplistic design process models, very
few are adopted by industry as they are considered too generic. Instead of
actively guiding the designer these are approaches that are often used as
management and documentation tools rather than as actual design aids. It is
interesting to note that specific solutions to design processes are more frequently
created than they are published. During the planning phase of industrial design
projects, it is common to construct gant-charts, timelines and stage gates to map
the process ahead. This can be time consuming, particularly when done without
the use of a generic guideline. As a solution to this, engineering companies often
produce their own generic design processes to suit capabilities, product ranges
and customer base, such as the Rolls Royce Derwent Process. These design
processes can be particularly effective if constructed on the basis of best known
practice and are re-evaluated and updated on a regular basis. An example of a
company specific innovation process can be seen at the bottom Table 1, labelled
IIP (Industrial Innovation Process). The breakdown between the Generic (G) and
Specific (S) models reviewed is shown in Column ‘X’ of Table 1.
In both generic and specific design process models, few aid the actual
‘creating’ aspect of design further than suggesting activities, tools or techniques
that can be applied, or the deliverables that should be achieved, at each particular
stage. Several authors have attempted to fill this gap, though these may be
considered to be more exclusive to the difficult conceptual design activities,
rather than the rest of the extensive and difficult activities involved in engineering
design. These processes neatly span the analysis of task, conceptual design and
embodiment design phases as shown in Table 1. A recently introduced tool,
PRIZM, is a good example of this type of support process. Based around principles
from the TRIZ contradiction matrix, the process guides the user though a quest to
LESSON 6-2: THE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS 7
reach the desired requirements and the ideal final result. Interestingly, here the
requirements are placed at the end of the process as aims, rather than functional
requirements typically found at the beginning of an engineering design process.
6-2.3 Output or Activity
Not only do the phases of the design process take on different titles,
covering slightly different amounts of the actual design process or viewing it from
a slightly different perspective, within the phases authors vary on whether to
prescribe or describe the process in terms of outputs or activities. Column ‘Y’ (in
Table 1) shows the breakdown between processes describing Outputs (O),
Activities (A) or Both (B) from the models reviewed. It becomes evident from this
that descriptive models tend to use activities to distinguish the different phases of
the design process. Most prescriptive models provide both output and activity;
this is also quite typical of flow chart and the stage gate models such as the IIP
process (shown in table 1).
Whilst several design activities such as ‘generate’ and ‘evaluate’ can also be
found in the creative process, the outputs described are not, as the creative
processes tend to only describe activities or cognitive phases. Though the design
outputs can also be deemed information inputs to following phases, Black is the
only author that donates the input of ‘inspiration’, which is directly linked to the
creative process and occurs at a specific point relative to the design process.
Interestingly this actually refers to a textile fashion design process rather than an
engineering design process.
6-2.4 Market or Technology
The sequence of stages, activities and outputs will be subtly different from
project to project. The types of generic design process models try best to
encompass these subtle changes through the broad headings of stages, thought
there will always be exceptions. In all of the process models evaluated (Table 1),
processes proceed in the same direction, moving from a need or analysis of task
to conceptual design. For the majority of cases this may be true, where 80% of
8 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
projects are driven by a realised problem or market space. However there are also
cases of design projects driven by the available technology. Though not usually
stated in literature, the design process for a technology driven project has a
variety of differences, particularly at its starting point. To emphasise this, consider
Gero’s FBS framework which represents the core elements of Mechanical
Engineering Design (Figure 3).
The Function (F) of a product will be decided early on in an ideal market
driven process (Figure 4); were functional requirements are formed in the
‘Analysis of Task Phase’. During the ‘Conceptual Design Phase’ the designers will
produce concepts which have Behaviours (B) that will hopefully satisfy the
functional requirements. During the ‘Embodiment Design Phase’ the physical
Structures (S) of these concepts are realized.
In contrast, technology driven projects (Figure 5) are based around the use
of behaviours exhibited by other structures. This may be a company trying to
exploit one of its patents, or an inventor attempting to make use of an interesting
shape or mechanism. Here the projects’ begin in the conceptual design phase
where the behaviour of a known technology is taken. In a seemingly random
sequence, a function is derived from the behaviour to fit a particular market
space, whilst a structure is developed by which the behaviour can be embodied.
Column ‘Z’ (in Table 1) shows the breakdown between processes driven by
Market (M), Technology (T) or Both (B) from the models reviewed.
LESSON 6-3: THE CREATIVE PROCESS 9
6-3 THE CREATIVE PROCESS
It may seem that psychologists can be split into two categories as described
by Boden, namely as romantics and non-romantics The romantics take a more
spiritual view of creativity where it is viewed as a mysterious and subconscious
process . This is still quite a common view of the creative process, however, it is of
little help to academic research particularly with regards to creativity in
engineering design.
Non-romantic views of creativity will be the focus of this section and are
typically conveyed as flow diagrams or creative process models. Shneiderman
offers three different perspectives of non-romantic style creativity: situationalist
(Section 3.1); structuralist (Section 3.2); and inspirationalist (Section 3.3). The
following sections will thus take the reader through these three different views of
the creative process with some alternative structures before concluding with a
comparative summary of the process models shown in Table 2.
6-3.1 Situationalist
Situationalists view of creativity moves away from the individual
perspective of creativity and views creativity as more of a social process. Its
10 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
potential realised by Osborn where brainstorming was introduced along with the
increased performance of group creativity. This view of creativity is relatively new
compared to the view of inspriationalists and structuralists, highlighting more
importance on interaction and collaboration with other individuals and the world
around us. Due to the relatively new perspective of the situationalists and little
research having been performed in the area of social creativity, there are few
creative process models showing such a perspective. However, one such model
which has been developed to bring a social aspect to the creative process has
been developed by who uses four stages to describe the social creative process:
Collect; Relate; Create; and Donate, which can be seen relative to other process
models in Table 2.
Although the authors agree that social creativity is one of the most
important areas of study in order to enhance creativity within organisations, it is
not the focus of this research. For the purpose of the overall research and the
proposed hypothesis for idea generation is that, the individual views everything in
terms of information. Therefore the social aspect of creativity as it is considered
to be a dynamic stream of verbal information amongst peers.
6-3.2 Structuralist
Structuralists apply a more systematic and methodological approach to
creativity. Creative process models in this form have been described by several
authors in terms of the exploration and transformation of conceptual spaces.
These models of the creative process are seen as the more modern
approach, formulised to move away from the unconscious process of incubation
and illumination. Although, this does not necessarily contradict the
inspirationalist approach, it just offers a more detailed and structured route to
the illumination phase. Koestler [48] describes a conscious idea generation
process with deliberate connection of matrices of thought (similar to ideas though
association), likened to Amabile’s belief, where new ideas are generated through
the combination of two or more old, existing ideas.
LESSON 6-4: COMPARISON 11
Amabile attempts to view this phenomenon from an angle known as the
componential approach. The three components proposed are: Domain-relevant
skills; Creative-relevant skills; and Task motivation. These valid but relatively
immeasurable components determine a designer’s creative performance in a
particular domain, throughout the five-stage process Amabile prescribes. It is a
common perception in creative literature that the level of motivation is
proportional to creative performance. This is contradictory to the stages of
incubation and illumination (described in 3.3) where the conscious motivation is
zero as the problem is not being considered. Although the topic of motivation is
beyond the scope of this paper, its links to creativity suggest that it is a process
that can be managed rather than being totally random.
6-3.3 Inspirationalist
Inspirationalists focus on the individuals coming up with ideas in a fashion
such as the ‘eureka’ moment – a sudden change in perception giving rise to an
idea from the subconscious. Such a creative process model which fits in with this
view is Wallas’s with his stages of incubation and illumination.
This is the most recognised of all creative process models and detailed a
four stage creative process of: Preparation – Incubation – Illumination –
Verification. This is a linear process and contains no feedback loops.
6-4 COMPARISON
Paradoxically the confusion between the design process and the creative
process is more than understandable given their similarity. The following section
will highlight several key crossovers and differences between the two processes,
before suggesting how they may fit together forming an integrated descriptive
process model (Figure 6).
12 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
LESSON 6-4: COMPARISON 13
6-4.1 Similarities
There are several commonalities between the two processes, in particular
the notation or the form that the models are presented. The literature regarding
both Creative and Design processes mainly consists of linear type models. This is
done in attempt to formalise these quite erratic processes which both contain a
substantial cognitive element. Furthermore, the literature regarding both
processes also describes two other main types of process model, one involving
divergent-convergent processes, the other describing information spaces (design)
and, problem and solution spaces (creativity).
Another notable similarity between the processes is the need for
information and its analysis and understanding at the start of the process
(analysis of task phase).
6-4.2 Differences
The embodiment design phase is defined by noticeably different activities
and outputs to the equivalent stage of the creative process. Preceding the
embodiment phase would be an evaluation and selection of a concept of which to
embody, this phase is therefore all about adding the physical form to the concept.
This phase of the creative process is simply the evaluation of the idea/solution
generated. Following this stage is the detailed design phase which produces
formal communication documents for manufacture/implementation, unlike the
creative process where this stage does not always exist and involves the less
formal externalising of the idea.
It is thus argued that the main difference between the design process and
the creative process is seen within the scale and scope of the processes. In the
completion of a successful design process, plans of the product or process would
be laid out for the user, manufacturer, assembler, etc. Its process steps will
consist of logical assumptions, evaluation, decisions and rejected solutions on
route the final recommendation. The creative process simply addresses the
generation and validation of single ideas.
14 MODULE 6/ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CREATIVITY
6-4.3 Integration
It is clear from the above analysis that the creative process is a vitally
important subset of the design process. Figure 6 suggests how the creative
process may be integrated into the market driven design process. Here the
processes are joined at the common first phase – the ‘analysis of task’ phase. It is
emphasised that the creative process manifests in both the conceptual design
phase and the embodiment design phase. Each loop of the creative process
within these phases will first generate information as an idea, and then evaluate it
which adds to the design information and may re-clarify the task.
6-5 CONCLUSION
This chapter has analysed and summarised in some detail the key design
processes and likewise key ‘creative’ processes. The inconsistencies between the
two different processes and approaches are both interesting and challenging,
posing the question – what has the engineering design research community to
learn from the extensive work undertaken in the social science/physiological
communities? Definition is, as usual, a key problem that is unlikely to be resolved
completely in the near future. But it is quite clear several creative processes could
easily be termed design processes and vice-versa. While design engineers have a
broad knowledge of product development and the iterative processes concerned
with design, physiologists have much deeper knowledge to the cognitive
processes involved in creativity and idea generation. But it can be seen that the
‘creative’ processes could be linked into the engineering design processes with
which the engineering design research community is familiar, with potentially
considerable benefit. However, cross-disciplinary research and agreement of
terminology and process boundaries will be essential in developing effective
prescriptive processes to aid creativity throughout the design process.
