ARTÍCULO 86º USO COMERCIAL Y DE SERVICIOS

Respondents were selected using convenience sampling methods. The necessity for this comes from the requirement of a certain level of knowledge and experience for inclusion in each sample group as shown in Table 5. The groups and selection criteria are discussed in the following sections.

Table 5 - Comparison of the test groups. Group Quantity Product

Design Knowledge

Product Design Expertise

Feedback type Feedback data type

Student designer 37 Yes No Self-

administered questionnaire

Quantitative

Professional designer

11 Yes Yes Self-

administered questionnaire

Quantitative

Student designer group

A sample of 37 postgraduate student designers were selected for this group. As a non- probabilistic, non-random sampling method selected for ease and the pre-requisite that members had an average to excellent knowledge of product design and the development process, not all elements of the population had a chance of selection, and so there is no way of knowing how representative the results are of the entire population (Bryman, Bell 2007). However, given that there was a 100% response rate, due to the participation in the study being nominally part of their study programme, it can be said that these results do give an accurate representation of the views of postgraduate product design students.

Table 5 details the resultant group which consisted of 37 post-graduate students who were studying Product Design and Management at Masters level at the University of Liverpool. Many of the students had a Bachelors degree in a product design related subject, including engineering and manufacturing, however some members of the group did not. Although each of the group members had the required knowledge of product design, none of them were experts in the field.

The student designer group gave feedback after using the tool during an assessed module where they were tasked with generating solutions to a problem. The students were encouraged to use the new tool to help with their solution generation and exploration. Shortly after the submission of the work they were asked to complete the self-administered questionnaire online detailing their thoughts as to specific aspects of the tool.

Professional designer group

chosen. The criteria required for inclusion by this non-probabilistic (non-random) sampling method was an expert knowledge of product design and design development, and practical experience of developing products. As this group was selected for ease of administration and prior experience in the field, not all elements of the population had a chance of selection, so again it is not possible to estimate how representative the results are of the entire population (Bryman, Bell 2007).

The sample group was recruited using three approaches. The first approach involved generating a list of suitable companies using the BDI directory database. British Design Innovation is the membership organisation for Industrial Designers involved in product, service and interaction design. For inclusion as a BDI member the company, often a consultancy must have “at least five years commercial design related, post-graduate work experience – with case study evidence of repeat business, client testimonials and commitment to working to a shared code of professional conduct” (Britishdesigninnovation.com, 2012). BDI has 71 members, 51 of them develop products. The second approach involved drafting a news bulletin with the assistance of Tonya Harman of the BDI in order to send out to all 51 of its members. The third approach involved asking colleagues and business contacts to recommend potential designers that could be involved in the study.

As well as collecting quantitative feedback on the tool using the questionnaire, two designers were also informally interviewed regarding their experiences. These two designers were chosen due to their availability and proximity allowing an interview period. The interviews took between 20-30 minutes and consisted of a semi-structured questions and answers format were the designer would give an elaboration of their chosen response to each question in the questionnaire. These responses were noted and are discussed later along with the quantitative results.

Approach 1 – List of designers

In order to recruit a number of designers successfully for the study it was necessary to gather the information outlined in Table 6. This information was usually available from the BDI database. However, on occasion it was necessary to refer to the company website.

Each designer was initially contacted by email. The email explained the study and invited them to take part. It covered all the necessary information, including the URL for the new tool, a link to the short questionnaire and a short description of the study, its intended outcomes and the part their input will play. Each email communication was later followed up by phone call. The phone calls acted as an informal introduction of the project to the designers, and served to express interest directly in the feedback from the designer and to prompt them into action.

Table 6 - Designer details required for inclusion in study. Details collected

Name of company Company address

Name(s) of the product design and developer(s) Phone number

Email address Approach 2 – BDI bulletin

The second approach acted as a reminder to the BDI members contacted during approach 1, and also included a number of members not contacted before. Tonya Harman, the marketing and membership manager at BDI was contacted regarding publicising the study with an intention of recruiting designers for the study. Tonya drafted a bulletin message to be sent out to all 51 BDI members who develop products. The bulletin included a brief description of the new tool stating its beneficial features, followed by a URL link to both the tool and the questionnaire. This was

Approach 3 – Friends and colleagues

Due to a low initial response rate to approaches 1 and 2, it became necessary to draw from personal contacts in order to recruit designers. Colleagues and industrial contacts were asked whether they could recommend any designers to pursue. In each recommended case the designers details were determined and contact was made. The same protocol as approach 1 was used in each case.

Response rate

The response rate for the professional designer group shown in Table 7 was relatively high (21.5%) given the comparable frequencies obtained in other industrial surveys (Synodinos 2003). Additionally, the response rate for the student designer group was also very high (100%), and a small number of professional designers agreed to take part in a semi-structured interview. A mixed research method was therefore adopted in order to “increase the validity of this research through triangulation” (Bryman, Bell 2007). The predominantly quantitative self- administered questionnaires completed by the two groups were used to assess the success of aspects of the new framework and address the second research objective (O2). Whilst the qualitative semi-structured interviews were used to identify unforeseen aspects, potential tool improvements for future development, and to make inferences and back up trends identified in the quantitative data. The use of mixed methods research design enables the findings from the questionnaire to be complemented by valuable contextual information about the responses to each question (Bryman, Bell 2007).

Table 7 – Details of the 11 respondents to the questionnaire

Designer Company Company size Experience Products

1 A Design consultancy/small firm +10 years Consumer products 2 A Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 3 A Design consultancy/small firm +1 years Consumer products 4 B Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 5 C Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 6 D Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 7 E Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 8 G Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 9 H Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products 10 I Design consultancy/small firm +5 years Consumer products

11 J Large +5 years White goods