Blog

Product design: questions for problem definition

The common-sense dictates that the process of problem-solving in product design begins long before any solution is formulated; it starts with the ability to ask the right set of questions. Properly framing a problem is crucial, as it sets the direction for the entire inquiry and influences the quality of the solutions that follow. The meticulous questioning not only clarifies the issue at hand but also narrows the focus, guiding the problem-solver toward relevant data and insights. By identifying the core of the problem early on, the search for answers becomes both efficient and effective. Therefore, the act of questioning becomes not just a precursor but an integral step in finding solutions.

So, here is the wisdom:

A good question is half the answer.

Is there a good set of questions or one needs to re-invent the wheel every time?

If you need a set of questions for product design, below is a good one to properly formulate the problem coming from a back-in-the-nighties book. I stumbled into this gem while searching for a solution and found them very useful. Perhaps, you will find them useful too (Tooley, 2009, pp. 30–32; Roozenburg & Eekels, 1995, pp. 151–152):

  • Performance: Which function(s) does the product have to fulfill? By what parameters will the functional characteristics be assessed? Accuracy? Speed? Power? Strength? Storage volume? Capacity?
  • Environment: To which environmental influences is the container subjected during manufacturing, storing, transportation, and use: Temperature? Vibration? Humidity? Which effects of the container on the environment should be avoided?
  • Life in service: How intensively will the container being used? How long does it have to last?
  • Maintenance: Is maintenance necessary and available? Which parts have to be accessible?
  • Target product cost: How much may the product cost, considering the prices of similar products?
  • Transportation: What are the requirements of transport during production, and to location of use?
  • Packaging: Is packaging required? Against which influences should the packaging protect the products during storage, transportation, in use?
  • Quantity: What is the size of run? Is it a batch or continuous production?
  • Manufacturing facilities: Should the container be designed for existing facilities? Are investments in new production equipment possible? Is (a part of) the production going to be contracted out?
  • Size and weight: Do production, transport, or use put limits as to the maximum dimensions or weight?
  • Aesthetics, appearance and finish: What are the preferences of the consumers, customers? Should the product fit in with a product line or house style?
  • Materials: Are special materials necessary? Are certain materials not to be used (for example in connection with safety or environmental effects)?
  • Product life span: How long is the product expected to be produced and marketable?
  • Standards: Which standards (national and international) apply to the product and its production? Should standardisation within the company or industrial branch be taken into account?
  • Ergonomics: Which requirements, with regard to perceiving, understanding, using handling, etc., does the product have to meet?
  • Quality and reliability: How large may ‘mean times before failure’ and ‘mean times to repair’ be? Which failure modes, and resulting effects on functioning, should certainly not occur?
  • Shelf life and storage: Are there during production, distribution, and use (long) periods of time in which the product is stored? Does this require specific ‘conservative’ measures?
  • Testing: To which functional and quality tests is the product submitted, within and outside the company?
  • Safety: Should any special facilities be provided for the safety of the users and nonusers? Disposal personnel?
  • Product policy: Does the current and future product range impose requirements on the product? Is an update/upgrade of the containers possible?
  • Social and political implications: What is the public opinion with regard to the product?
  • Product liability: For which unintended consequences of production, operation, and use can the manufacturer be held responsible?
  • Installation and operation: Which requirements are set by final assembly and installation outside the factory and by learning to use and operate the product?
  • Reuse, recycling, and disposal: Is it possible to prolong the material cycle by reuse of materials? Parts? Can the materials and parts be separated for waste disposal?

 

If you are a product designer, the books below are worth every penny you may spend on them.

Sources:
Roozenburg, N. F. M. & Eekels, J. (1995). Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods. New York, NY: Willey.
Tooley, M. (Ed.), 2009. Design Engineering Manual. Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA

Globalisation no more… what is next?


Image source: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201907/01/WS5d196537a3103dbf1432b248.html

Mark my words, but the situation we have today (as of May 2020) in the economy and politics globally is the end of globalisation as we know it. If you missed somehow in the notion of globalisation, it is, according to IMF 2000 definition, “the increasing integration of economies around the world, particularly through trade and financial flows.” Besides the trade and capital movement, it relates among many others to the movement of people and the spread of knowledge/technology as some of the most important mechanisms for the existence of globalisation. We are about to witness how all of these are going to be trashed or replaced. Replaced with what? Now, this is a good question. To even distantly approach it, we need to see why/what for globalisation exists, what happens now (past years, even a decade) to threaten its existence. Only then we can imagine/fantasise what is next.

Why globalisation exists?

It is almost a common sense that trade is a part of the big geopolitical game and the rules were set to serve the interests of the main beneficiary (-ies). Let me reemphasise: it was assembled by the interested player(s) for the expected benefits of the interested player(s). If someone is good at swimming, it would be naïve to propose to compete at marathon running especially with professional runners. If you are good at swimming, then make everyone swim. The existing global trade system was designed to facilitate trade in those areas, where the western civilisation has a relatively good edge against the rest. The system is designed to support the trade of high-tech products, goods and services, and financial instruments which yield thicker profit margins. The rest of manufacturing, for instance, is considered insignificant and was outsourced to the second and third world countries. No one designed the system for the resistance of the heavy stress conditions, global crisis, major threats as this is not the main strength of the one who sets the rules.

In the post-Soviet era/post-Cold War era, it was considered that the development of the globalisation would secure the leading position of the USA as the main beneficiary. The foreign policy of Ronald Raegan administration brought “the giant” to the knees. The decision was made to ransack the Soviet Union, Russia and the satellite states, benefiting of the abundant resources and relatively unsaturated market of Eastern Europe. Think for a moment about the geographic spread: from Eastern Germany on the west, to Yugoslavia on the south, up to Estonia and all the way to Russian Kamchatka laid the market to consume the manufactured products and resources awaiting for someone to get hold of them. The pie was too big to digest alone so the States brought to the table its Western European allies. At about the same time, China was allowed to get access to the globalisation system. China, at the time, was a huge pool of cheap human resource and outsourcing some of the insignificant tasks made good sense. Then producing more advanced products made equally good sense, since no one expected anything of China. The players made money out of this cooperation, but no one expected that China can win the race. The race was for the white gentlemen to win – not for China. Fast forward to present days, here we are: China is the biggest manufacturer, biggest economy, with the biggest internal market, projecting its influence there, where only the gentlemen were allowed (Africa, Middle East, Europe and even Americas).

What happens now?

Continue reading “Globalisation no more… what is next?”