Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Design Teams' keyword pg.1 of 1
27 JUNE 2014

Collaborative peer learning through pair programming

"Pair programming is a style of programming in which two programmers work side–by–side at one computer, continuously collaborating on the same design, algorithm, code, or test. One of the pair, called the driver, types at the computer or writes down a design. The other partner, called the navigator, has many jobs. One is to observe the work of the driver, looking for defects. The navigator also has a more objective point of view and is the strategic, long–range thinker. Together, the driver and the navigator continuously brainstorm a solution. Periodically, the programmers switch roles between the driver and the navigator."

(Laurie Williams, 2007)

Williams, L. (2007). "Lessons learned from seven years of pair programming at North Carolina State University." SIGCSE Bull. 39(4): 79–83.

1

TAGS

active learning • brainstorming solutions • co-learnercollaborative learningcomputer programming education • continuously collaborating • design pedagogy • design roles • design teams • driver (peer learning) • Laurie Williams • learn to codelearning is socially enactedlearning processlearning software • learning strategies • learning support • navigator (peer learning) • North Carolina State University • pair programming • participatory learningpedagogic approachespedagogic practicespeer instructionpeer learningpeer-production • role specialisation • side-by-side • social learningsocial-constructivist approachsoftware programmingtechnology educationworking practicesworking together

CONTRIBUTOR

Liam Birtles
21 MARCH 2013

Design Prototypes as Boundary Objects in Innovation Processes

"In our paper we focus on how design prototypes can foster communications in organizations that deal with the development of innovations. We distinguish the impact of prototypes between two different organizational levels; we first conduct the impact of prototypes at the level of organizational design teams that develop ideas and concepts for solutions. We then focus on the impact of prototypes on the level of organizational teams and departments that have not been part of the initial design phase but are responsible for further developments in the innovation process, e.g. production, financing, and marketing.

Previous research has indicated that prototypes have a significant influence on both organizational levels. Prototypes, in the best cases, can become so–called boundary objects between different domains and stakeholders and may deliver positive effects within the innovation process. However, the successful management of stakeholders in this context remains highly challenging. In this paper we want to address these difficulties as well as the current state of research in this field. We propose that a prototype does not only stand for an important design technique but should moreover be regarded as a management tool that can be integrated into a structured dialogue between stakeholders. We provide first insights on what a structured dialogue, based on prototypes, can mean and what it thereby should imply. We will synthesize prior research findings and begin to develop a concept on how to utilize prototypes as boundary objects from a management perspective."

(Holger Rhinow, Eva Köppen and Christoph Meinel, 2012)

Holger Rhinow, Eva Köppen, and Christoph Meinel: "Prototypes as Boundary Objects in Innovation Processes". Conference Paper in the Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Design Research Society (DRS 2012), Bangkok, Thailand, July 2012

TAGS

2012 • between domains • between stakeholders • boundary objects • Christoph Meinel • design concepts • design phase • design prototypesdesign solutionsdesign teams • develop ideas • Eva Koppen • financing • first insights • foster communication • Holger Rhinow • impact of prototypes • innovationinnovation process • innovation processes • International Conference on Design Research Society • management perspective • marketing process • organisational designorganisational teamspositive effectsproduction processprototype • prototypes • prototyping • stakeholder management • structured dialogue

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
02 JANUARY 2013

Facing ambiguity differently across design, business and technology

"team[s] of students of mixed disciplines worked together to understand and map a problem–space (identified by the client). They then defined a solution–space before focussing on a particular opportunity outcome. The range of projects included incremental innovation opportunities represented by the Lego and Hasbro projects through radical Philips work to truly disruptive work with Unilever. The studies confirmed stereotypical view points of how different disciplines may behave. They showed that design students were more (but not completely) comfortable with the ambiguous aspects associated with 'phase zero' problem–space exploration and early stage idea generation. They would only commit to a solution when time pressures dictated that this was essential in order to complete the project deliverables on time and they were happy to experiment with, and develop, new methods without a clear objective in mind. In contrast, the business students were uncomfortable with this ambiguity and were more readily able to come to terms with incremental innovation projects where a systematic approach could be directly linked to an end goal. The technologists, were more comfortable with the notion of the ambiguous approach leading to more radical innovation, but needed to wrap this in an analytical process that grounded experimentation. Meanwhile, the designers were unclear and unprepared to be precise when it came to committing to a business model. "

(Mark Bailey, 2010, p.42)

Bailey, M. (2010). "Working at the Edges". Networks, Art Design Media Subject Centre (ADM–HEA). Autumn 2010.

1

TAGS

2007ADM-HEAambiguityambiguity and uncertainty • ambiguous approach • analytical processapproaches to ambiguitybusinessbusiness modelclear objectivesclient needscollaboration • core competency • Cox Reviewdecision making • design outcome • design teamsdesign thinkingdisciplinary culturesdisciplinary knowledge • disruptive work • Dorothy Leonard-Barton • end goal • grounded experimentation • Hasbro • idea generationincremental innovationinnovation practice skillsinterdisciplinarityinterpretive perspective • learning cultures • LEGO • multidisciplinary design • multidisciplinary teamsNorthumbria Universityopen-ended process • pedagogical cultures • phase zero • Philips Researchproblem-solvingproblem-solving • problem-space • project deliverablesproject teamsradical innovationrequirements gatheringsolution-space • sub-disciplinary specialisation • systematic approach • T-shaped individuals • T-shaped people • T-shaped skillsthinking stylesUnileverworking methodsworking practices

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
21 JULY 2012

Reflection-in-action: framing, naming, moving and reflecting

"Reflection–in–action proceeds by a construction cycle of framing, naming, moving and reflecting. Framing and naming concern the problem–setting in that the designer constructs a problem out of a situation by naming the things to which she will pay attention whilst at the same time framing the way that the problem is viewed (Schön 1991). Framing in this sense imposes an order onto the problem; moves are made towards a solution in relation to how the situation is framed. However, the situation 'talks back'; surprise at the outcomes of moves leads to reflecting. Reflecting on outcomes may trigger either further moves or a new framing (Schön 1996). Reflection–inaction is not an interruption to fluid action; it is always embedded within action."

(Simone Stumpf and Janet McDonnell, CiteSeerX)

1). Simone Stumpf and Janet McDonnell, "Individual Learning Styles and Perceptions of Experiential Learning in Design Teams"

TAGS

CiteSeerX • conceptualisation cycle • construction cycle • cycle of learningdesign educationdesign problemdesign solutiondesign teamsDonald Schonexperiential learningframingindividual learning styles • Janet McDonnell • knowledge cycle • learning styles • moving and reflecting • naming • naming activities • naming processpedagogy • Pennsylvania State University • problem-setting • reflecting • reflectionreflection-in-action • Simone Stumpf • talk back

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
14 MARCH 2009

Seymour warns of split in profession

"Seymourpowell co–founder Richard Seymour is warning that an increasing level of specialisation is splitting design into two different professions. He suggests that a polarisation will lead to more generalist solution providers – what he calls 'polymath interpolators' – on the one hand, and specialist executors on the other."

(Design Week, 7 September 2006)

1

TAGS

2006bifurcationdesign knowledge • design pipeline • design practitionersdesign professionalsdesign specialistdesign teamsDesign Weekdesign workdisciplinary specialisationexpertise • generalism • generalistimprovisationinventorknowledge integrationmulti-skilled creatorsmultidisciplinarity • polarisation • polymath • polymath interpolator • Richard Seymour • Seymourpowell (consultancy) • solution providers • solution-spacespecialisation • specialists • strategic thinkingthinking stylestransdisciplinarityworking practices

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.