Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T03:57:20.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perspectives on Innovation: The Role of Engineering Design

Part of: Design Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Ola Isaksson ,
Claudia Eckert ,
Olivia Borgue ,
Sophie I Hallstedt ,
Andreas Makoto Hein ,
Killian Gericke ,
Massimo Panarotto ,
Yoram Reich  and
Anna B Öhrwall Rönnbäck
Ola Isaksson*
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology;
Claudia Eckert
Affiliation:
The Open University;
Olivia Borgue
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology;
Sophie I Hallstedt
Affiliation:
Blekinge Institute of Technology;
Andreas Makoto Hein
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay;
Killian Gericke
Affiliation:
University of Luxembourg;
Massimo Panarotto
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology;
Yoram Reich
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University;
Anna B Öhrwall Rönnbäck
Affiliation:
Luleå University of Technology
*
Contact: Isaksson, Ola, Chalmers University of Technology, Product and Production Development, Sweden, ola.isaksson@chalmers.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The aim of the paper is to foster a discussion in the engineering design community about its understanding of the innovation phenomena and the unique contribution that comes from engineering design. The paper reports on the dialouge originating from a series of workshops with participants from different backgrounds in engineering design, systems engineering, industrial design psychology and business.

Definitions of innovation are revisited as used in business, management and engineering design contexts. The role of innovation is then discussed related to product development from (i) the management perspective, (ii) a systems architecture perspective and (iii) in relation to sustainable development as one driver of innovation.

It is argued that engineering design has a central role in how to realise the novelty aspect of innovation and often plays a critical role in maturing these into the valuable products, and there is a need to articulate the role of engineering design in innovation to better resonate with the business and management research.

Keywords

InnovationDesign engineeringDesign processDesign management
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1235 - 1244
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Adams, R., Bessant, J. and Phelps, R. (2006), “Innovation management measurement: A review”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 21–47. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00119.xGoogle Scholar
ACARE (2011), “Fligthpath 2050 – Europe's Vision for Aviation”, Report of the High Level Group on Aviation Research. Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe, October 2004. Publications Office of the European Union. ISBN 978-92-79-19724-6Google Scholar
Anderson, P. and Tushman, M. (1990), “Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change”, Adm. Sci. Q.Google Scholar
Baldwin, C.Y. and Clark, K.B. (2000), “Design rules: The power of modularity”, MIT press.Google Scholar
Baregheh, A., Rowley, J. and Sambrook, S. (2009), “Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation”, Manag. Decis. Vol. 47, pp. 1323–1339. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910984578Google Scholar
Butterworth-Hayes, P. (2010), “Open Rotor research revs up”, Aerospace America, March 2010Google Scholar
Calantone, R.J. and di Benedetto, C.A. (1988), “An integrative model of the new product development process: an empirical validation”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 5, pp. 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.5302011Google Scholar
Chaochotechuang, P., Daneshgar, F. and Sindakis, S. (2015), “Innovation strategies of New Product Development (NPD)”, International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 57–75. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijkss.2015040104.Google Scholar
Chiu, M.-C. and Chu, C.-H. (2012), “Review of sustainable product design from life cycle perspectives”, Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 13, pp. 1259–1272 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-012-0169-1Google Scholar
Colfer, L. J. and Baldwin, C.Y. (2016), “The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions”, Ind. Corp. Chang., Vol. 25, pp. 709–738.Google Scholar
Conway, M.E. (1968), “How do committees invent”, Datamation, Vol. 14, pp. 28–31.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. (1988), “The new product process: a decision guide for management”, J. Mark. Manag., Vol. 3, pp. 238–255.Google Scholar
Cooper, R.G. (2011), “Winning at new products: Creating value through innovation”, Basic Books.Google Scholar
Crawley, E., Cameron, B. and Selva, D. (2015), Systems Architecture: Strategy and Product Development for Complex Systems. Prentice Hall Press.Google Scholar
Dougherty, D. and Cohen, M. (1995), “Product Innovation in Mature Firms”, in Bowman, E. and Kogut, B. (eds), Redesigning the Firm. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Eckert, C. M., Stacey, M., Wyatt, D. and Garthwaite, P. (2012), “Change as little as possible: creativity in design by modification”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 337–360, http://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2011.639299.Google Scholar
European Union (2014), “The role of public support in the commercialisation of innovations”, Eurobarometer, Vol. 394, http://doi.org/10.2769/128, Available at http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_394_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
European Environment Agency – EEA (2017), “Circular by design - products in the circular economy”, EEA report No 6/2017, ISBN 978-92-9213-857-8 http://doi.org/10.2800/860754.Google Scholar
Garcia, R. and Calantone, R. (2002), “A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review”, J. Prod. Innov. Manag., Vol. 19, pp. 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1920110Google Scholar
Goedhuys, M. and Veugelers, R. (2012), “Innovation strategies, process and product innovations and growth: Firm-level evidence from Brazil”, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Vol. 23, pp. 516–529Google Scholar
Hansen, M.T. and Birkinshaw, J. (2007), “The innovation value chain: a logic for fixing your company's innovation problems”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85, pp. 121–130.Google Scholar
Hein, A. (2016), “Heritage technologies in space programs - assessment methodology and statistical analysis”, PhD thesis, Technical University of Munich. Available at https://www.academia.edu/attachments/52701197/download_file?st=MTU1NDYzNjI4OCw4MC4yMTcuMTkxLjEyNg%3D%3D&s=swp-splash-headerGoogle Scholar
Hein, A.M., Chazall, Y., Jankovic, M. and Boutin, S. (2018), “A methodology for architecting collaborative product service system of systems”, in: IEEE–13th System of Systems Engineering Conference. https://doi.org/10.1109/sysose.2018.8428697Google Scholar
Henderson, R. and Clark, K. (1990), “Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms”, Adm. Sci. Q., Vol. 35, pp. 9–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549Google Scholar
Kaiserfledt, T. (2006), Review of Theories of Invention and Innovation (No. 47). Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS-Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.Google Scholar
MacCormack, A., Rusnak, J. and Baldwin, C.Y. (2011), “Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: a test of the mirroring hypothesis”, SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1104745Google Scholar
Mankins, J.C. (1995), Technology Readiness Levels—A White Paper. Advanced Concepts Office, Office of Space Access and Technology, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
OECD (1991), The nature of innovation and the evolution of the productive system. technology and productivity-the challenge for economic policy.Google Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J. and Grote, K.-H. (2007), Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach, 3rd ed. Springer London, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-319-2Google Scholar
Papalambros, P.Y. (2008), “Design Innovation”, J. Mech. Des., Vol. 130, p. 040201. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2897922Google Scholar
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P. and Probert, D.R. (2004), “Customizing roadmapping”, Research-Technology Management, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 26–37. http://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2004.11671616Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. (1927), “The Explanation of the Business Cycle”, Economica, Vol. 21, p. 286. https://doi.org/10.2307/2548401Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J.A. (1947), “The Creative Response in Economic History”, J. Econ. Hist., Vol. 7, pp. 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700054279Google Scholar
Schilling, M.A. (2017), Strategic Management of Technological Innovation. (5th edition.) McGraw-Hill, New York. ISBN 978-1-259-25552-6Google Scholar
Schulte, J. and Hallstedt, S. (2017), “Challenges and preconditions to build capabilities for sustainable product design”, In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) Vancouver, Canada, 21–25 August, Vol. 1.Google Scholar
Schulte, J. and Hallstedt, S.I. (2018), “Company risk management in light of the sustainability transition”, Sustainability, Vol. 10, p. 4137. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114137Google Scholar
Smaling, R. and de Weck, O. (2007), “Assessing risks and opportunities of technology infusion in system design”, Syst. Eng., Vol. 10, pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20061Google Scholar
Sosa, M., Eppinger, S. and Rowles, C. (2004), “The misalignment of product architecture and organizational structure in complex product development”, Manage. Sci., Vol. 50, pp. 1674–1689. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0289Google Scholar
Sosa, M., Mihm, J. and Browning, T. (2011), “Degree distribution and quality in complex engineered systems”, J. Mech. Des., Vol. 133, p. 101008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4004973Google Scholar
Suh, E., Furst, M., Mihalyov, K. and de Weck, O. (2010), “Technology infusion for complex systems: A framework and case study”, Syst. Eng., Vol. 13, pp. 186–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20142Google Scholar
Terwiesch, C. and Ulrich, K. (2009), Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities. Harvard Business Review Press. ISBN: 9781422152225Google Scholar
Tushman, M. and Anderson, P. (1986), “Technological discontinuities and organizational environments”, Adm. Sci. Q., Vol. 31, pp. 439–465. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392832Google Scholar
Utterback, J. and Abernathy, W. (1975), “A dynamic model of process and product innovation”, Omega, Vol. 3, pp. 639–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(75)90068-7Google Scholar
Willard, B. (2012), The New Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line; New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, BC, Canada. ISBN 0-86571-451-7Google Scholar
Wyatt, D.F., Eckert, C.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2009), “Design of product architectures in incrementally developed complex products”, In DS 58-4: Proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 4, Product and Systems Design, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 24.–27.08. 2009 (pp. 167–178).Google Scholar
Zelkowitz, M.V. (1996), “Software engineering technology infusion within NASA”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 250–261. http://doi.org/10.1109/17.511836Google Scholar