abstract - pure.tue.nl€¦ · web viewsince 2003 this research has continued at the university of...

Morphology to stimulate alternatives in building design. An integral approach to study design process interventions

WIM ZEILER Department of the Built Environment, University of Technology Eindhoven, Eindhoven. [email protected] school building renovationpromoting timber prefabrication, indoor environment quality and active useof renewables”,

Abstract The need for energy and environmentally sustainable building designs in light of growing concerns about climate change has introduced further complexity in the design process of buildings. Addressing these complexities does however calls for the involvement of the various multidisciplinary design teams right from the conceptual design phase of buildings. To support multidisciplinary building design teams, a supportive design method based on the use of morphological charts and a morphological overview was researched and designed in cooperation with the Dutch professional organizations of architects and consulting engineers. This tools aids architects and engineers with their new role in the conceptual design phase as it enables effective structuring of each discipline’s perspective on the design task as well as structuring the available domain knowledge. The design support tool was first evaluated in workshops as part of a training program for industrial experts and also as part of multidisciplinary master’s program at the technical university Eindhoven. The outcome shows that the design support tool facilitates significant increase in the number of possible solutions generated by design teams and it demonstrates that the morphological charts and morphological overview can be used as analyses tools for evaluating the impact of different interventions during the various phases of the design process. In this paper, in addition to a detailed discussion of the design support tool and the impact of various interventions, we discuss the relation between the morphological approach to other theoretical design aspects such as the use of C-constructs based on the Concept-Knowledge theory of Hatchel and Weil to further stimulate the generation of sub-solutions.

Keywords Building Design, multidisciplinary, integrated, morphological charts

1.0 Introduction The conceptual building design phase is crucial in the overall design process as it determines the life-cycle

quality and owner value of the building. While It is not uncommon for designers to commence the design process with ill-defined problems where the solution and the problem itself develop almost in parallel through the early stage of the design, the amount of relationships and dynamic social interactions at times further complicates the design at the early stages. The increased complexity of building design inevitably calls for more design collaboration [Lee and Jeong 2012], and the early collaboration of architects and engineers can facilitate the creation of new knowledge and solutions beyond the specific scope of each individual discipline [Kovacic and Fitzmoser 2014]. According to the American Institute of Architects [AIA 2007], design collaboration leads to optimized project results and increased worth to the owner. This needed collaboration might however not be very easy to achieve during the early stages of the design. As an example, in the early design phase is not easy for the architects as engineers ‘speak different language’, are ‘too specialized’, and in a lot of cases, are ‘not willing to compromise on certain issues’ [Kanters et al 2014]. There is therefore the need for a design support tool to facilitate interaction and information exchange between the various design team members as they come up with viable alternatives to be considered by all design team members. In 1999, the professional Dutch organization for architects and consulting engineers together with the University of Technology Delft and the Building Services Society started a research to develop an Integral design method to improve the conceptual building design process. Since 2003 this research has continued at the University of Technology Eindhoven and led to a design method based on intensive use of morphological charts.

In section 2, details of the developed design methodology are presented and in section 3, a description of the experiment for testing the method with professionals and with students are provided. In addtion, different interventions to improve the design process are described. In section 4, the results of the different experiments are provided and followed with a discussion of the results. The conclusions about the added value of the design method as a support tool and research tool are also provided in this section.

/tt/file_convert/5b5d5acc7f8b9a68368ea98f/document.docx 10/10/2016 05:39

2.0 MethodologyDue to problems resulting from the lack of quality of products and projects, in the early 1960’s researchers

and practitioners began to investigate new design methods as a way to improve the outcome of design processes [Cross 2007]. Since then, there has been a period of expansion through the 1990’s right up to the present day [Chai and Xiao 2012, Le Masson et al 2012]. However, there is still no clear picture of the essence of the design process [Horvath 2004, Bayazit 2004, Almeflet 2005], and many models of designing exist [Wynn and Clarkson 2005, Pahl et al 2006, Howard et al 2008, Tomiyama et al 2009]. Moreover, many of the design methodologies were developed at universities, and are rarely applied in industrial applications [Birkhofer et al 2005, Stolterman 2008, Ranjan et al 2012, Gericke and Blessing 2012]. After studying different design methods, it was decided to use a method derived from the General System theory [Zeiler and Savanovic 2009] and its outcome was evaluated in a situation as close as possible to practice amongst professionals, see section 3. The design method has a distinctive feature, the step pattern of activities (generating, synthesizing, selecting and shaping, that occurs within the design process, see Fig. 1.

Figure 1. The four-step pattern of Integral Design.

This method was expanded to a multi-disciplinary design method, Integral Design, through the intensified use of morphological charts developed by Zwicky [Zwicky & Wilson 1967]. Specifically, the use of a morphological overview built from the individual design team member’s morphological charts. A morphological chart is a kind of matrix with columns and rows which contain the aspects and functions to be fulfilled and the possible solutions connected to them, see Fig. 2 A. These functions and aspects are derived from the program of demands. An example of a morphological chart created by an architect is depicted in figure Fig. 2 B. In principle, overall solutions can be created by combining various sub-solutions to form a complete system solution combination, see Fig. 2. Design processes can be improved through improving three types of process communication [Senescu et al 2013, Senescu and Haymaker 2013]: understanding, sharing and collaboration. The use of the morphological charts and morphological overview is an excellent way to improve the design process communication procedure. It makes it possible to record information about the solutions for the relevant functions and aids the cognitive process of understanding, sharing and collaboration [Wynn and Clarkson 2005, Ritchey 2010].

Figure 2. (A) Concept of a morphological chart and (B) a practical example of a morphological chart by an architect

Figure 3. Morphological chart and the possible solutions on the horizontal rows of the chart, with the lines representing 2 possible solution combinations

In the first step of the integral design method, the individual designer has to make a list of what he thinks are the most important functions that has to be fulfilled based on the design brief. This is derived from their /tt/file_convert/5b5d5acc7f8b9a68368ea98f/document.docx 10/10/2016 05:39

own specialist perspective. The morphological charts are formed as each designer translates the main goals of the design task, derived from the program of demands, into functions and aspects and is then put into the first column of the morphological chart, see Fig 4 A. In the second step of the process, the designers add the possible part solutions to the related rows of the functions/aspects of the first column. Based on the given design task, each design team member perceives reality due to his/her active perception, memory, knowledge, and needs. The morphological charts represent the individual interpretation of reality, leading to active perception, stimulation of memory, activation of knowledge and definition of needs. These individual morphological charts can be combined by the design team to form one morphological overview, see Fig. 4 B.

(A) (B)

Figure 4. (A) The first two design steps of the design process cycle, interpreting the design brief and list the functions in the first column of the morphological chart and add the related sub-solutions (B) The second phase generating the morphological overview from the individual morphological charts.

The morphological overview of an integral design team process is generated by combining in two steps the different morphological charts made by each discipline. First, functions and aspects are discussed and then the team decides which functions and aspects will be placed in the morphological overview. Then, after this first step, all participants of the design team can contribute their solutions for these functions and aspects by filling in the rows within the morphological overview. Putting the morphological charts together enables ‘the individual perspectives from each discipline to be put on the table’, which in turn highlights the implications of design choices for each discipline. This approach supports and stimulates the discussion on and the selection of functions and aspects of importance for the specific design task, see Fig. 5.


Figure 5. Building the morphological overview; Step 1, the MO contains the chosen functions and aspects (1) from the different MC’s. Step 2, the MO with the accepted sub solutions (2) from the separate MC’s

Putting the morphological charts together makes it possible to ‘put on the table’ the individual perspectives from each discipline about the interpretation of the design brief and its implications for each discipline. This enables, support and stimulates discussion on the selection of functions and aspects of importance for the specific design. In step two the functions and aspects are discussed and decisions are placed by the team in the morphological overview. By structuring design (activities) with morphological overviews as the basis for reflection on the design results, stimulates communication between design team members and helps the understanding within design teams. It stimulates collaboration as it makes the step easier to come forward with new design propositions. Through visualizing the individual contributions within a design team, morphological overviews based on the individual morphological charts stimulate the understanding of different perspectives within design teams.

Morphological Charts and Mental Models in Design TeamsResearchers in several disciplines have applied the construct of mental models to understand how people

perform tasks based on their knowledge, experience and expectation [Badke-Schaub et al 2007]. The concept of mental models was first proposed by Craick [1943] in order to explain human coping behaviour within a complex world [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2013c]. Starting from the four models that are commonly used by Cannon-Bowers (the task model, the equipment model, the team model and the team interaction model) Badke-Schaub proposed a modified framework for design activities [Neuman et al 2006, Badke-Schaub et al 2007]. Team Mental Models are not meant to only refer to multiple levels or sets of shared knowledge. It also refers to a synergetic functional aggregation of the team’s mental functions representing similarity, overlap and complementarity [Langan-Fox et al 2004]. Design typically takes part in an organizational context, with relations to clients and users and specific market situation. Thus, mental models in design teams include context knowledge that reflects on the given situation, see Fig. 6. The way team members perceive and understand reality can vary according to their background knowledge, expertise etc., which have an effect on their mental models [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2014]. When team members interact with each other, they evolve and adapt their own mental models and construct a mental model shared by the team [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2013c]. Each team member has a different influence on the development of the sharedness of team mental models and can only be analysed from the exchange of communication acts [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2013b].


Figure 6. Mental models [Badke-Schaub et al 2007]

Mental models are hypothetical constructs that cannot be ideally directly measured (Neuman et al 2006). However, using the morphological charts and morphological overview as an intervention tool, it is possible to measure and to represent a mental model of the team. Therefore by applying a design method, it becomes possible to describe the design process in such a way that it could be used to illustrate the mental model of the design team. By applying the Integral Design method to structure the design process and using its design tools; the morphological chart and morphological overview in relation to the model of Badke-Schaub [Badke-Schaub et al 2007], the development of the mental model in teams can be visualised. In the current model, each design team member; architects, structural engineers, building physics consultants and building services engineers, perceive reality due to his/her active perception, memory, prior knowledge, skills, abilities, and needs. see Fig. 7 and Fig. 6.

Figure 7. Design Team mental model Morphological Overview in analogy with the model by Badke-Schaub [Zeiler 2016]

This demonstrates that the morphological charts and morphological overview of the Integral Design method can make the Team Mental Model transparent. Given that designers pose different knowledge, skills,


expertise, and objectives, their approach to a design task varies significantly with respect to other team members. However, through exchanging views with each other, they develop gradually their own team’s representations and adapt them to build models shared by the team [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2013a]: the transformation from their individual morphological charts towards the morphological overview.

The main aim of our integral design approach is to support design teams. Supporting design teams could improve conceptual design collaboration in order to stimulate the creation of new design proposals. As such, we analysed the effect of applying design theory and design tools to increase creativity within multi-disciplinary design teams. Similar to the research by Le Masson et al. [Le Masson et al 2011], we examined how to influence the interplay between creativity issues and design theory [Zeiler 2012, Zeiler 2013]. The next research question was the effect of one specific intervention; the introduction of C (Concept)-projectors from the Concept-Knowledge (C-K) theory of Hatchuel and Weil [Elmquist and Segrestin 2009], on the integral design method in order to stimulate the creativity of design teams. Design is to process existing knowledge and information about the actual needs of the client to come to yet unknown solutions, concepts for the design task and as such a distinction can be made between the known [knowledge] and the unknown [concepts]. This distinction determines the core propositions of C-K theory [Hatchuel and Weil 2007] which defines design as the interplay between two interdependent spaces having different structures and logics: the space of concepts C and the space of knowledge K. Within this research space K represents all explicit representations of a design team’s knowledge [Hatchuel and Weil 2002], see Fig 8.

Figure 8. The C-K design square [ Hatchuel and Weil 2007].

From here, two types of synthesis are possible: either the representations are combined, using the K→K operator, or are transformed, using the K→C operator. This last transformation means adding new properties [K→C] to a concept. This way the set is partitioned into subsets, see for example C1 in Fig. 8; subtracting properties includes the set in a set that it contains [Shai et al 2009], see for example Co in Fig. 8. After partitioning or inclusion, concepts may still remain concepts [C→C], or can lead to the creation of new propositions in K [C→K], see for example the Ck to Kk conjunction in Fig. 8. A design solution is formed from a concept Ck after a transformation from the unknown to the known and becomes a true proposition in K. This transformation can happen by test, proof, validation etc. In the next stage of our research, the use of the so called C-constructs, sometimes called C-projectors, of the KCP (Knowledge Concepts Proposition).


3.0 ExperimentsSince the year 2000, together with the Royal society of architects (BNA), the Association of Consulting

Engineers (NLIngenieurs) and the Society of Building Services Engineers, a series of workshops were organized in the Netherlands. More than two hundred professionals from different professional organisations and having at least 12 years’ experience voluntarily participated in these workshops. In the educational setting at University well over 300 students since the beginning of the experiments. Here only the latest series of experiments will be descriped.

3.1. Workshops for professionals & studentsAfter extensively experimenting with different setups for the workshop, it was determined that a 2-

day workshop setting was sufficient {Savanovic 2009]. The finalized two-days’ workshop model was organised as part of a professional training program for architects and consulting engineers (structural engineers, building services engineers and building physics engineers), as well as for architects and contractors [Quanjel 2013].

The structure of the workshop for professionals was applied in the educational “Multidisciplinary master design project” at the TU Eindhoven, department of the Built Environment. The basis of this project was the use of the learning-by-doing workshop approach and the use of morphological overviews. The integral design workshops were the start-up workshop of our multidisciplinary masters’ project. Students from architecture, building physics, building services, building technology and structural engineering was offered the opportunity to participate. Each year there was on average 6 teams consisting of 4 disciplines: architecture, structure, building physics and building services. Students performed different design assignments, which were based on the assignments tested in the workshops for professionals [Savanovic 2009]. All the assignments of the different sessions were related to aspects of nearly Zero Energy Buildings (nZEB) and had a similar level of complexity which made the results comparable. The whole project took 14 weeks. The average age of the students was 23 and they had no professional experience.

3.2. Intervention: adding a professional to a student’s design teamAfter the student session, six professionals with about 25 years’ professional experience and having an average age of 50 years participated, see Fig. 10. In total, 180 students and 36 professionals participated in the workshops series since 2011.


Step 1

Figure 10. Building the morphological overview; Step 1 the MO contains the chosen functions and aspects (1), the individual interpretations from the different MC’s. Step 2 the MO with the accepted sub solutions (2), the individual knowledge from the separate MC’s

3.3. C-K theory experiments: intervention with c-constructs

Applying C-constructs to the Integral Design approach enables us to expand the knowledge domain, which was formed by the design task related morphological overview by stimulation of new transformation between space K and space C. The C-projector is an active K→C operator. These C-constructs are domain strange concepts, which can be used as a source of inspiration and the start of further research. The C-construct stimulates the subconscious of the designers and they come forward with new concepts. These concepts can then thereafter evaluation determining the possibility of concepts result in new possibilities. This method by Hatchuel and Weil [Elmquist and Segrestin 2009] was investigated to stimulate the creation of new concepts in our Integral Design workshops. The intended effect of the C-constructs is the expansion of the solution space in C. After which, by means of research and evaluation, the transformation of C-K is a result and as a consequent the expansion of space K. The concept is no longer a concept but has become a proven possible solution and thus became part of the knowledge K. The morphological Integral Design approach combined with the transformation by C-constructs between space C and space K, leads to the schematic of Fig. 9.


Step 2

Figure 9. Morphological representation of the C-constructs transformation process within the four operators of C-K theory Hatchuel and Weil (2003) [Zeiler 2012b]

In 2011, 2012 and 2014, experiments with the use of C-constructs were performed. First in the session with the professionals, the design teams made their morphological overviews, after which a lecture was given about C-K theory and the possible application of C-constructs. The design team continued with the design assignment and tried to generate concepts with the help of some examples of C-constructs that were given to them. The starting point for this session was the morphological overviews of the former design session. The focus of this intervention was on applying C-constructs to make the step from existing knowledge to the unknown world of concept and generation of new alternatives.

4.0 Results

4.1. The effect of the step from Morphological Chart towards Morphological OverviewThe results obtained from the student workshops within the master project Integral Design (2011-

2016) were compared with those obtained from the professional application from the research by Savanovic [2009]. A Central element of the Integral Design process is the use of morphological charts by individual designers which were combined into one morphological overview by the design team. By making combinations within the morphological overview of possible sub solutions and combining them with overall solutions, the teams generated their solutions. The number of functions and sub solutions mentioned by the designers in their morphological charts were counted and the average numbers of functions and solutions as mentioned by the design teams are represented in Fig. 11. More results and information of the original professional’s research workshops were presented by Savanovic [2009]. Here only a brief selection of the results of the professional workshops is given in relation to the workshops for students, see Fig. 11 far right.


Figure 11. Results students workshops Integral Design 2011-2016 and those of the professional workshops 2009

4.2 The effect of adding a professional to a student’s teamOn average, the student teams (2011-2016) produced in their morphological charts quite similar results compared to the professionals: slightly less functions (14.4% less: students 6.5 professionals 7.6) but slightly more sub-solutions (19% more: students 20,6 professionals 17,3) than the professional teams of the research by Savanovic [2009], see Fig. 12.

Figure 12. The number of sub-solutions proposed in the morphological charts (MC) and morphological overview (MO) by students & professionals of the Master project integral design.

4.3 The effect of C-constructs On average, the teams (2011, 2012 and 2014)) produced in their morphological charts quite similar results compared to the professionals: more functions (42%) and more sub-solutions (42% more), see Fig. 13.


Figure 13. Results C-K’s C projectors within the 2011, 2012 and 2014 MIO workshops

5 Discussion

Although the use of morphological charts based on functional decomposition is quite common in mechanical engineering design, they are rarely used in a multi-disciplinary setting. Using morphological charts during a conceptual design phase is not new, but adding the morphological overview after a team discussion makes it a new design approach. Results show that the group interaction is of great importance during the conceptual design phase and has a clear positive effect on the number of functions and aspects discussed as well as on the number of generated part solutions. This was found by the original research with professionals as well as in the educational setting with students. Given the number of involved design teams in the latest series of workshops, around 36 teams with around 220 participants, there is a sound quantitative basis to draw conclusions from the results.The advantage of our approach, which uses individual morphological charts transformable by the design team into a morphological overview, is that the design team’s discussion begins after the preparation of the individual morphological charts. This allows each designer to develop his own interpretation and representation, in relation to his specific discipline based knowledge and experience. This interpretation can then be combined with the interpretations by the other designers into a morphological overview. The different interpretations of the design brief result in a team specific morphological overview based on the morphological charts from each design team member. Importantly, this encourages and allows engineering based disciplines to think and act more freely than is common in the traditional design approach. In summary, this approach permits greater freedom of mind of the individual designers and results in more functions and aspects generated through the individual interpretation of the design problem as well as the generation of more sub solutions from the different disciplines.

How knowledge can be better coordinated, communicated and shared in teams that in many cases are heterogeneous and multi-disciplinary is a critical aspect that has not yet received enough attention [Casakin and Badke-Schaub 2013c]. Traditionally, a design method is developed at a university where it is tested on students and then implemented in practice. In this research, that was changed; the testing was done as close to practice as possible with professionals and then implemented at the university. Although student studies play an important role in design research, we in our research tried to develop a link between industrial and experimental contexts. The need for such an approach was identified by Cash et al. [2011)] as it enables comparison between the behaviour of students with that of professionals when designing [Cash et al 2012].

5.1 The effect of making a Morphological chart a second timeDuring the workshops the students made two time an exercise with the use of morphological cahrt and morphological overview in a design team. Interesting is to see wheater there is a learning effect on the quantitative outcome of the process. On average, the student teams (2011-2016)) produced in their morphological charts quite similar the first and second time, results reveal only slightly more functions (2%) and sub-solutions (2% more), se Fig. 14.

Figure 14. The effect of making a Morphological chart a second time


5.2 The effect of adding a professional to a student’s teamOn average, the teams produced in their morphological charts quite similar in their first serie compared to the results compared to the series with a professional, however there is a change in focus from sub solution generation (3% less) to aspects/functions (16 % more), see Fig. 15.

Figure 15. The effect of adding a professional to a student’s team

5.3 The effect of C-projectorsAs stated by Le Masson et al. [2007] there is an interplay that links creativity and design theory. That

interplay leads to new ways of managing design, new ways of managing knowledge, processes and organizations for design activities. In our case we used the framework of integral design in combination with C-K theory to stimulate creativity within multi-disciplinary building design teams. Although we have to be very careful about drawing conclusions based on a limited amount of experiments (18 teams) and participants (78). Nevertheless, in all situations there was a positive effect of the application of the C-constructs. However, to be sure about the effect, we should in future also do the experiment in a kind of double blinded procedure. So for example, allow 3 teams work with the C-constructs and give the other teams the same time to work on the extension of the morphological overview without any new input or tools.

As the proposals are put forward in the conceptual design phase there is no possibility to make a statement about the quality of the mentioned proposals. Therefore, we only included quantitative results in relation to the effect of the interventions that we made to the design process. The only thing about quality might be that the more functions are mentioned the broader the analysis of the design brief might be done, in that case there is clearly a positive effect of the application of the C-constructs, as there was an increase in the average number of mentioned functions. The results of individual design teams can show large differences, depending on all kinds of aspects relating to personality, social capabilities, attitude etc. of the individuals within the teams. Therefore, we selected students from our University who all had similar educational background and experience, as well as were about the same age. Nonetheless there is still a big difference in the manner people are able to express, discuss and share their thoughts in design sessions.

6.0 ConclusionA new design approach, Integral Design, was developed to support all the disciplines involved in the

building design process by structuring the communication and solution generation process in steps and structuring the information flow about the tasks and solutions of the other disciplines. The method forms a design within the design process and enables a structured approach even in the conceptual design phase. All the steps in the process become transparent and can be analysed and learned from to further improve the design team’s process. Results showed that Integral Design was a good way of showing the knowledge and influence of each design discipline/member. The main lessons from the paper are that Integral Design with its use of morphological overviews stimulates architects and engineers and helps them with their communication. It is a good method for supporting the education of a new generation of architects and engineers, who each have new roles in the highly complex tasks of designing sustainable cost effective nearly Zero Energy Buildings.

The educational setting allowed us to further investigate interventions in the design process of students. The results of tree interventions were presented: /tt/file_convert/5b5d5acc7f8b9a68368ea98f/document.docx 10/10/2016 05:39

(1) stimulate the creativity of design teams by applying the integral design method with its use of morphological overview

(2) introduction of a professional to the student’s design teams during the workshop(3) use of C-constructs to further stimulate the generation of alternatives

All presented interventions had a positive effect on the number of generated proposals and also on the amount of notated functions in the design process. This indicates that the effectiveness and productivity of design teams can large improved by adding structure to the process as well as add experience to the design team. Making the design process steps transparent enables easier exchange of information. This will also improve team members understanding of each other’s tasks and results in better communication and combined efforts to further generate more part solutions. This way students, architects and engineers will be better prepared for future professional collaborative role in sustainable development by means of integral design approach. The role of the morphological charts and morphological overview is essential in structuring the process as well enabling analyses in the conceptual design process in more detail.

Acknowledgements This research was done in cooperation with the Dutch engineering consulting companies: Deerns Smits van

Burgst, Valstar Simonis, RHDHV and Nieman. The project was financially supported by the professional organisations Uneto-VNI and OTIB as well as the foundations WOI and PIT

References AIA, The American Institute of Architects (AIA). 2007. Integrated Project Delivery: A Guide. Version 1. [Online].

Available at: http://www.msa-ipd.com/IPD_Guide_2007.pdfAlmefelt L., 2005a, Balancing Properties while Synthesising a Product Concept – A Method Highlighting

Synergies, Proceedings ICED’05, Melbourne, AustraliaAlmefelt L., 2005b, Requirements Driven Product Innovation, Methods and Tools Reflecting Industrial Needs,

PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, SwedenBadke-Schaub P., Neumann A., Lauche K., Mohammed S., 2007, Mental models in design teams: a valid

approach to performance in design collaboration?, CoDesign 3(1): 5-20Bayazit N., 2004, Investigating Design: A review of Forty Years of design research, Design Issues 20(1}: 16-29 Casakin H., Badke-Schaub P., 2013a, Measuring sharedness of mental models in Architectural and Engineering

Design teams, Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Seoul, Korea

Casakin H., Badke-Schaub P., 2013b, Sharedness of mental models in design teams: The role of the architect and the client, Proceedings 5th International Congress of International Association of Societies of Design Research (IASDR), Tokyo, Japan

Casakin H., Badke-Schaub P., 2013c, The Psychology of Creativity: Mental Models in Design Teams, In book: Psychology of Creativity, Edition: 1, Chapter: The Psychology of Creativity: Mental Models in Design Teams, Publisher: Nova, Editors: A. Antonietti, B. Colombo, and D. Memmert, pp.167-180, Nova Publishers.

Casakin H., Badke-Schaub P., 2014, Mental models and creativity in Engineering and Architectural Design Teams, Proceedings Design Computing and Cognition, Univ ersity College London, UK

Casakin H., Badke-Schaub P., 2015, Team Mental Models in Design Problem Solving: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, In book: Advances in Psychology Research. Volume 106, Nova Science Publishers

Cash P., Snider C., 2014, Investigating design: A comparison of manifest and latent approaches, Design Studies, 35(5): 441-472

Chai K-H., Xiao X., 2012, Understanding design research: A bibliometric analysis of Design Studies (1996–2010), Design Studies 33(1): 24-43

Craick K.J.W., 1943, The nature of explanation, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCross N., 2007, Editorial Forty years of design research, Design Studies 28(1): 1-4Elmquist M., Segrestin B., 2009. Sustainable innovative design: lessons from the KCP method experimented

with an automotive firm, International Journal of Automotive technology and management 9[2]: 229-244Gericke K., Blessing L., 2012, An analysis of design process models across disciplines, Proceedings International

Design conference Design 2012, DubrovnikHatchuel A. and Weil B., 2007, Design as Forcing: Deeping the foundations of C-K theory, Proceedings ICED’07,

ParisHatchuel A., Weil B., 2002, C-K theory: Notions and applications of a unified design theory, Proceedings of the

Herbert Simon International Conference on Design Sciences, Lyon, 15-16 March 2002Horváth I., 2004, A treatise on order in engineering design research, Research in Engineering Design 15(3): 155-

181


Howard T.J., Culley S.J., Dekonick E., 2008, Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature, Design Studies 29(2): 160-180

Kanters J., Horvat M., Dubois M., 2014, Tools and methods used by architects for solar design, Energy Buildings 68(part C): 721-731

Kovacic I., Filzmoser M., 2014, Designing and Evaluation Procedures for Interdisciplinary BIM Use – An Explorative Study, Engineering Project Organization Conference Devil’s Thumb Ranch, Colorado July 29-31

Langan-Fox J., Anglim J., Eilson J.R., 2004, Mental Models, Team Mental Models, and Performance: Process, Development and Future Directions, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 14(4): 331-352

Le Masson P., Hatchuel A., Weil B., 2007, Creativity and design reasoning: How C-K theory can enhance creative design, Proceedings ICED07, Paris

Le Masson P., Hatchuel A., Weil B., 2012, How design theories support creativity – an historical perspective, Proceedings 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity, ICDC2012, Glasgow

Le Masson P., Hatchuel A., Weil, B., 2011, The Interplay between Creativity Issues and Design Theories: A new Perspective for Design Management Studies, Creativity and Innovation Management 20: 217-237

Lee J., Jeong Y., 2012, User-centric knowledge representations based on ontology for AEC design collaboration, Computer-Aided Design 44: 735-748

McDonnell J., 2015, Gifts to the Future: Design Reasoning, Design Research, and Critical Design Practitioners, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(2): 107-117

Neumann A., Badke-Schaub P., Lauche K., 2006, Measuring the development of shared mental models in product design teams, Proceeding 16th World congress of ergonomics, Maastricht

Ölvander J., Lundén B., Gavel H., 2008, A computerized optimization framework for the morphological matrix applied to aircraft conceptual design, Computer Aided Design 41(2): 187-196

Pahl G., Beitz W., Feldhusen J., Grote K.H., 2006, Engineering Design, A Systematic Approach, 3th edition, Ken Wallace K. and Blessing L. translators, Springer

Quanjel E.M.C.J., 2013, Collaborative Design support, PhD thesis, TU EindhovenRanjan B.S.R.C., Srinivasan V., Chakrabarti A., 2012, An extended, integrated model of designing, Proceedings of

TMCE, Karlsruhe, GermanyRezgui Y., Hopfe C., Voarkulpipat C., 2010, Generations of knowledge management in the architecture,

engineering and construction industry: An evolutionary perspective, Advanced Engineering Informatics 24: 219-228

Ritchey T., 2010, Wicked problems Social messes, Decision Support Modelling with Morphological Analysis, Swedish Morphological Society , Stockholm

Savanović P., 2009, Integral design method in the context of sustainable building design, PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, Netherlands

Senescu R., Aranda-Mena G., Haymaker J., 2013, Relationships between Project Complexity and Communication, Journal of Management in Engineering 29(2): 183–197.

Senescu R., Haymaker J., 2013, Evaluating and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of design process communication, Advanced Engineering Informatics 27: 299-313

Shai O., Reich Y., Hatchuel A., Subrahmanian E., 2009, Creativity theories and scientific discovery: a study of C-K theory and infused design, Proceedings ICED’09, Stanford, US

Tomiyama T., Gu P., Jin Y., Lutters D., Kind Ch., Kimura F., 2009, Design methodologies: Industrial and educational applications, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 58(2): 543-565

Wynn D., Clarkson J., 2005, Models of designing, in Designing process improvement, Springer Zeiler W., 2012a, Creativity in design education: the effect of C-K’s C-constructs, Proceedings E&PDE, Antwerp,

BelgiumZeiler W., 2012b, Stimulating creativity in building design education: introducing experts and C-K’s C-projectors,

Proceedings ICDC, Glasgow, UKZeiler W., 2013, Morphological analysis of C-K’s C-constructs on design group creativity, Proceedings E&PDE,

Dublin, IrelandZeiler W., 2016, Competences beyond engineering: a mental model of conceptual building design, Proceedings

ASHRAE conference, St.Louis, USZeiler W., Savanović P., 2009, General Systems Theory based Integral Design Method, Proceedings ICED’09,

Stanford, USZwicky F., 1948, The Morphological Method of Analysis and Construction, Courant Anniv. Vol., New York: Wiley-

Interscience Zwicky F., Wilson A.G. (eds.), 1967, New Methods of Thought and Procedure. Contributions to the Symposium

on Methodologies, May 22-24, Pasadena, New York Springer Verlag


abstract - pure.tue.nl€¦ · web viewsince 2003 this research has continued at the university of...

Documents