Transferring Design Methods into Practice

  • K. Wallace


Over the past 40 years there has been a rapid expansion of engineering design research. Researchers have proposed many methods to support designers, but there is evidence that many of these methods have not been transferred into practice. Why is this so? To address this question design practice, design research and knowledge transfer are discussed. Designers often consider new design methods to be complex, inflexible, incomplete, and not relevant to their working practices. The author’s career spanned 40 years in design practice and design research. He reflects on the changes that have taken place and presents a case study of a successful transfer of a design method into practice. The main conclusion is that in too many cases it is nobody’s job to transfer design methods into practice – there is a “missing link”.


Knowledge Transfer Design Practice Design Research Methodology United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority Flat Screen Television 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



Professor Herbert Birkhofer has made outstanding and unique contributions to design research and to promoting consolidation within the field. His leadership, inspiration and friendship are gratefully acknowledged.


  1. Asimow M (1962) Introduction to design. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  2. Birkhofer H, Kloberdanz H, Sauer T, Berber B (2002) Why design methods don’t work and how to get them to work. In: Proceedings of the Engineering Design in Integrated Product Development 3rd International Seminar – EDIProD 2002, Zielona Gora, PolandGoogle Scholar
  3. Blessing LTM, Chakrabarti A (2009) DRM: a design research methodology. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bracewell R, Gourtovaia M, Moss M, Knott D, Wallace KM, Clarkson PJ (2009) DRed 2.0: a method and tool for capture and communication of design knowledge deliberated in the creation of technical products. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED 09, Stanford, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Broadbent GH, Ward A (eds) (1969) Design methods in architecture. Lund Humphries, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Cantamessa M (2001) Design research in perspective: a meta-research upon ICED 97 and ICED 99. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED 01, Glasgow, UKGoogle Scholar
  7. Cash P, Hicks B, Culley S (2009) The challenges facing ethnographic design research: a proposed methodological solution. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED 09, Stanford, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Feilden GBR (Chair) (1963) Engineering design. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. French MJ (1971) Engineering design: the conceptual stage. Heinemann, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Geis C, Bierhals R, Schuster I, Badke-Schaub P, Birkhofer H (2008) Methods in practice – a study on requirements for development and transfer of design methods. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – DESIGN 2008, Dubrovnik, CroatiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Geis C, Birkhofer H (2010) Classification and synthesis of design theories. In: Proceedings of the International Design Conference – DESIGN 2010, Dubrovnik, CroatiaGoogle Scholar
  12. Gregory SA (Editor) (1966) The design method. Butterworths, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Hubka V (1982) Principles of engineering design. Eder WE (Translator), Butterworth, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Jänsch J, Birkhofer H (2007) Imparting design methods with the strategies of experts. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design – ICED 07, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones JC, Thornley DG (eds) (1963) Conference on design methods. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones JC (1970) Design methods: seeds of human futures. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Marples DL (1960) Decisions of engineering design. Institution of Engineering Designers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Matousek R (1963) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Johnson DC (ed), Blackie, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. PABLA (1966). Problem analysis by logical approach (2nd Edition). United Kingdom Atomic Energy AuthorityGoogle Scholar
  20. Pahl G, Beitz W (1977) Konstruktionslehre, Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  21. Pahl G, Beitz W (1984) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Wallace KM (ed), Springer, London (2nd edition 1995; 3rd edition 2007)Google Scholar
  22. Reich Y (2010) My method is better!. In: Research in Engineering Design, Vol 21, No 3:137–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. VDI 2221 (1987) Systematic approach to the design of technical systems and products. Wallace KM (ed), Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI), GermanyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Wallace
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations