Design team decision-making underpins all activities in the design process. Simultaneously, goal alignment within design teams has been shown to be essential to the success of team activities, including engineering design. However, the relationship between goal alignment and design team decision-making remains unclear. In this exploratory work, we analyze six student design teams’ decision-making strategies underlying 90 selections of design methods over the course of a human-centered design project. We simultaneously examine how well each design team’s goals are aligned in terms of their perception of shared goals and their awareness of team members’ personal goals at the midpoint and end of the design process, along with three other factors underpinning team alignment at the midpoint. We report three preliminary findings about how team goal alignment and goal awareness influence team decision-making strategy that, while lacking consistent significance, invite further research. First, we observe that a decrease in awareness of team members’ personal goals may lead student teams to use a different distribution of decision-making strategies in design than teams whose awareness stays constant or increases. Second, we find that student teams exhibiting lower overall goal alignment scores appear to more frequently use agent-driven decision-making strategies, while student teams with higher overall goal alignment scores appear to more frequently use process-driven decision-making strategies. Third, we find that while student team alignment appears to influence agent- and process-driven strategy selection, its effect on outcome-driven selection is less conclusive. While grounded in student data, these findings provide a starting place for further inquiry into of designerly behavior at the nexus of teaming and design decision-making.

@en

Designers' choices of methods are well known to shape project outcomes. However, questions remain about why design teams select particular methodsand how teams' decision-making strategies are influenced by project- and process-based factors. In this work, we analyze novice design teams' decision-making strategies underlying 297 selections of human-centered design methods over the course of three semester-long project-based engineering design courses. We propose a framework grounded in 100+ factors sourced from new product development literature that classifies design teams' method selection strategy as either agent-, outcome-, or process-driven, with eight further subclassifications. Coding method selections with this framework, we uncover three insights about design team method selection. First, we identify fewer outcomes-based selection strategies across all phases and innovation types. Second, we observe a shift in decision-making strategy from user-focused outcomes in earlier phases to product-based outcomes in later phases. Third, we observe that decision-making strategy produces a greater heterogeneity of method selections as compared to the class average as a whole, or project type alone. These findings provide a deeper understanding of designers' method selection behavior and have implications for effective management of design teams, development of automated design support tools to aid design teams, and curation of design method repositories, e.g., theDesignExchange.

@en

Designers’ choices of methods are well known to shape project outcomes. However, questions remain about why design teams select particular methods and how teams’ decision-making strategies are influenced by project- and process-based factors. In this mixed-methods study, we analyze novice design teams’ decision-making strategies underlying 297 selections of human-centered design methods over the course of three semester-long project-based engineering design courses. We propose a framework grounded in 100+ factors sourced from new product development literature that classifies design teams’ method selection strategy as either Agent- (A), Outcome- (O), or Process- (P) driven, with eight further subclassifications. Coding method selections with this framework, we uncover three insights about design team method selection. First, we identify fewer outcomes-based selection strategies across all phases and innovation types. Second, we observe a shift in decision-making strategy from user-focused outcomes in earlier phases to product-based outcomes in later phases. Third, we observe that decision-making strategy produces a greater heterogeneity of method selections as compared to the class average as a whole, or project type alone. These findings provide a deeper understanding of designers’ method selection behavior and have implications for effective management of design teams, development of automated design support tools to aid design teams, and curation of design method repositories@en

With the surging number of digital devices penetrating our daily routines, the risks inherent to cybersecurity—the protection of data on digital products connected to the Internet—have also increased since these devices (e.g., connected home devices, personal monitoring) collect, process, analyze and store users’ sensitive personal information. Thus, there is a pressing need to assist users in being aware of and dealing with potential cybersecurity threats. With the proposition that fulfilling the need starts with developing an in-depth understanding of the user behaviors in the context of cybersecurity, an exploratory study was conducted that employed three mixed qualitative and quantitative research methods—a trend analysis, an interview study, and an online survey study. The paper reports the user characteristics on (1) awareness levels of cybersecurity issues, (2) uses of digital devices, and (3) means of dealing with the privacy issues in product use. The results of the studies were translated into eight personas that systematically reflect distinct characteristics of users, which can help designers empathize with their potential users vulnerable to cybersecurity risks.@en

As more digital devices with sensing capabilities are introduced into users’ daily lives, the risks of threats to data and privacy and security have increased. While cybersecurity has been acknowledged as an important concern in developing products with digital services, currently available design methodologies and practices offer limited effective guidance to designers to explicitly address cybersecurity issues. In this paper, we present a case study from a product design course at the University of California, Berkeley, where the course’s teaching team implemented an intervention in the form of cybersecurity- focused educational materials into the design process. The baseline and post-intervention survey results indicate that the cybersecurity intervention throughout the course had positively influenced the students’ awareness of cybersecurity (p<0.001, SD=0.79, 26% increase in score, Cohen’s d=0.81). The intervention provoked the designers to consider and include aspects of cybersecurity in developing their design solutions throughout most of the design process. However, their increased awareness aside, the extent of the student teams considering cybersecurity had tapered off over the 6-week design course with little noticeable influence in the final design.@en