Skip to main content

Integrating Systematic Innovation, Interaction Design, Usability Evaluation and Trends of Evolution

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Abstract

Day by day, more R&D divisions of modern industries start adopting inventive design tools and methods. Creativity needed in designing complex products cannot be left to subjective behavior; it must be helped and exploited by a systematic approach. The research described in this paper aims at developing a design framework focused on interaction issues, by exploiting the systematic approach of the theory of inventing problem solving TRIZ. The final result should integrate design, evaluation, and evolution issues. For this reason, the starting point consists in three tools already developed by the authors’ research group: the interaction design guidelines—IDGL, the usability evaluation multi-methods—UEMM, and ITRE, a gatherer of interaction trends of evolution. All of them contain generic elements both of the TRIZ theory and the interaction design field; for this reason the proposed integrated approach could be exploited in completely different contexts. A first prototype of the framework has been developed as a Microsoft Access database. Its validation has started with two experiences in the field. Results are reported and discussed in the last section of the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Altshuller G, Rodman S (1999) The innovation algorithm: TRIZ, systematic innovation and technical creativity. Technical Innovation Center Inc, Worcester

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zlotin B, Zusman A (1999) The ideation approach to the search, development, and utilization of innovation knowledge. J Altshuller Inst TRIZ Stud 21–29

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lin CC, Luh DB (2009) A vision-oriented approach for innovative product design. Adv Eng Inform 23:191–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pin SC, Haron F, Sarmady S, Talib AZ, Khader AT (2011) Applying TRIZ principles in crowd management. Saf Sci 49:286–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang J, Shang J (2010) Research on developing environmental protection industry based on TRIZ theory. Proced Environ Sci 2:1326–1334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Domb E (2011) The 39 features of Altshuller’s contradiction matrix. Available on http://www.triz-Journal.com/archives/1998/11/d/index.htm. Accessed 20 may 2011

  7. Craig S, Dekoninck E, Harrison D, Cripps A (2006) An analysis of the technological development of the transparent building envelope using the TRIZ trends of evolution. Proceedings of the 13th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering. Leuven, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bogatyrev NR, Bogatyreva OA (2009) TRIZ evolution trends in biological and technological design strategies. Proceedings of the 19th CIRP design conference-competitive design. Cranfield University, pp 293–299

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cavallucci D, Khomenko N (2007) From TRIZ to OTSM-TRIZ: addressing complexity challenges in inventive design. Int J Prod Dev 4:4–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Becattini N, Cascini G, Rotini F (2011) Correlations between the evolution of contradictions and the law of identity increase. Proc Eng 9:236–250

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hertzum M (2010) Images of usability. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 26(6):567–600

    Google Scholar 

  12. ISO (2007) ISO 20282-3: Ease of operation of everyday products—part 3: test method for consumer products. ISO 20282. International Organization for Standardization Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  13. Koca A, Funk M, Karapanos E, Rozinat A, Martens J, Brombacher A (2008) A soft reliability: an interdisciplinary approach with a user-system focus. Qual and Reliab Eng Int 25(1):3–20. Available on http://www.softreliability.org/DokuWiki/publications. Accessed 04 Oct 2011

  14. Koca A, Brombacher A, Panchal J, Mistree F (2009) Engineering soft reliability in product realization. Proceeding of the ASME 2009: international design engineering technical conferences, pp 739–751

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kamper RJ (2002) Extending the usability of heuristics for design and evaluation: lead, follow get out of the way. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 14(3):447–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Koutsabasis P, Spyrou T, Darzentas J (2007) Evaluating usability evaluation methods: criteria, method and a case study. Proceeding of the 12th international conference on human-computer interaction: interaction design and usability pp 569–578

    Google Scholar 

  17. Freiberg M, Baumeister J (2008) A survey on usability evaluation techniques and an analysis of their actual application. Institute of Computer Science, University of Wurzburg, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hartson HR, Andre TS, Williges RC (2001) Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 13(4):373–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Doroodchi M, Nikmehr N (2008) Overview and evaluation of usability evaluation methods for E-learning system. Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on E-learning, E-business, enterprise information system and E-government, EEE. Las Vegas, pp 123–128

    Google Scholar 

  20. Saaty TL (2008) Decision marking with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1:83–98

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Roderburg A, Klocke F, Koshy P (2011) Principles of technology evolutions for manufacturing process design. Proced Eng 9:294–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Filippi S, Barattin D (2011) Exploiting TRIZ tools in interaction design. Proceeding of the TRIZ future 2011, ETRIA 2011. Dublin, Ireland

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kurttila M, Pesonen M, Kangas J, Kajanus M (2000) Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis. Policy Econ 1:41–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsironis L (2008) Empowerment the IDEF0 modeling language. Int J Bus Manag 3:109–118

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Filippi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this paper

Cite this paper

Filippi, S., Barattin, D. (2013). Integrating Systematic Innovation, Interaction Design, Usability Evaluation and Trends of Evolution. In: Chakrabarti, A. (eds) CIRP Design 2012. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4507-3_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4507-3_29

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4506-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4507-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics