Bioquímica experimental I 5.5.1.1.1 Datos Básicos del Nivel 3

Design processes offer a structure to be used in NPD processes. This is an effort to further develop the product design field, by establishing reliable, predictable and efficient processes for NPD. Hsu (2013), classifies measuring NPD performance in

19

terms of financial and non-financial aspects. Furthermore, Hsu (2013, p66) describes six criteria used to measuring NPD performance namely; “reaching the sales volume goal for new products by percentage; financial percentage of reaching the sales return goal for new products; technical ability promotion of new products;

company brand image and promotion by new products; and customers’ non-financial appraisals of new products.”

Therefore, to better understand the NPD process, it is essential to understand how design models were derived and how they relate to other methods. The empirical cycle and Hall’s cycle were investigated to understand origins of creative ‘practical’

process models. Furthermore, a basic design cycle and the engineering design model (Pahl & Beitz (1984)) are compared to better understand NPD process models (see Figure 8).

2.3.1.1 Empirical Cycle

This is a cycle by de Groot (1969) as cited in Roozenburg (2008). The cycle begins with the observation of the situation, on which a problem solver has to act. The problem solver then explores possible solutions (suppositions). Expectations from possible solutions are envisioned. Followed by testing, thus comparing expectations with desired effects from the observation stage. The final step involves using what was learnt from this cycle.

The development process will involve several cycles, each implementing what was learnt from the previous cycle. The empirical cycle gives structure to the ‘trial and error’ process making it a conscious and purposeful form of a thought process. De Groot describes the empirical cycle as a very general model, the actual implementation of which can be different in different fields.

2.3.1.2 Hall’s Cycle

Roozenburg (2008) describes Hall’s cycle as applicable to complex practical problem solving in general. It is a specific use/adaptation of the empirical cycle to the field of systems engineering. Therefore, this model can be viewed as a link between the empirical cycle and the basic design cycle. The description of the steps is as follows;

The first step problem definition involves studying whether a need is real. Value system design involves planning on how to find a solution to the identified need and

20

set the evaluation criteria. System synthesis is a ‘trial and error’ process aimed at implementing the value system design. System analysis involves the evaluation of the alternative solutions generated in the system synthesis phase. Selecting the best system is the process of comparing the alternative solutions to the evaluation criteria formulated during value system design. Finally, the planning for action stage is the implementation of the of the chosen solution

2.3.1.3 The Basic Design Cycle

The basic design cycle is a more specific form of a problem solving model, derived from Hall’s cycle; also considered the most fundamental model for designing.

Roozenburg (2008, p58) points out that “someone who claims to have solved a design problem must have gone through the design cycle at least once.” The steps of the design cycle as described by Roozenburg (2008, p59-60) are;

Analysis involves outlining the intended functions of a new product. The designer predicts problems associated with such an envisioned new product. The step concludes with the formulation of the ‘problem statement’ and the criteria to be met by the solution. Synthesis is the least tangible step of the design cycle and therefore the least understood as it has to do with the thought process. The result of the synthesis step is the tentative design, the externalization of an idea, i.e. written/

verbal statement, sketch or model. Simulation is the envisioning of the proposed product’s behaviour. The process can be based on the designer’s experience or on scientific evidence. This step results with the expectations about the properties of the proposed new product. Evaluation involves the value of a proposed design. The proposed design is compared to the evaluation criteria, developed in the analysis step. The closer the proposed design is to the evaluation criteria the greater the acceptability chances. Decision step, involves a “go” or “no go” decision on the proposed design. If it is accepted then the proposed design is developed further; if not, the design cycle is repeated to come-up with a better idea.

21

Figure 8: Design model origins and relationships: Adapted from De Groot, Hall, Roozenburg and Pahl &

Beitz.

22

2.3.1.4 Model of Engineering Design (Pahl and Beitz)

As described in Roozenburg (2008, p64-67), this is a more engineering inclined design process, thus more product development process inclined and detached from the user-product interaction. The model is made up of the four phases, clarification of the task, conceptual design, embodiment design and detail design.

Clarification of task, involves gathering information on the problem and product requirements drawn-up. As the work progresses the problem is understood better and the product requirements evolve accordingly. Conceptual design, begins with the implementation of the products requirements. This is followed by determining product overall function and important sub-functions to be fulfilled and establishing their interrelationships. “Conceptual design is commonly seen to be the most important phase of the design process, because the decisions made here, will strongly bear upon all subsequent phases of the design process,” argues Roozenburg (2008, p66). Embodiment design is the continual refinement of the concept into the definitive design. The layout, form and material of the proposed design are determined; functionality, consumer preference, reliability and manufacturability are also evaluated. Detail design involves finalising the product dimensions, materials to be used and the production plans.

Figure 8 shows the relationship between the NPD process models, empirical cycle, Hall’s cycle, the basic design cycle and the model of engineering design. It is evident that despite the models being designed for different fields of study, the primary process is essentially the same.

Design models consist of a structure that continually collects information (from user and context), utilizes the information and then gets back to the user and context for evaluation. Similarly, Sandmeier et al. (2010, p93) in their study describe “the foundation of XP’s [Extreme Programming] product development process is provided by short, highly efficient cycles of accessing, releasing and absorbing customer contributions.” For purposes of this research, the Basic Design Model has been simplified for easier understanding during data collection (see Table 3).