COLLABORATION AND SCOPE AREAS OF CHANGING CO-DESIGN APPROACHES IN THE FORMATION OF DESIGN CRITERIA

Abstract

Nowadays, new trends see design education not as a discipline shaped by a perfectionist form approach; but as a collaborative holistic, sharing, and exploratory approach. The aim of this study is to develop a perspective on Furniture development and formation in today’s world within the innovative, collaborative holistic, ever-evolving process design approaches that have been developing and diversifying since the 90s. (Burnett 2009; Rylander 2009; Sanders & Stappers, 2008). It is not possible for a single design discipline to answer the scale or complexity of the design problems we face today and seek to provide solutions. Considering that experimental, virtual and real mixed areas will be designed in the future; it is not possible to ignore the fact that areas that work in collaboration with integrated disciplines in the field of design and work with an understanding of common gain will spread. Co-Design expertise/disciplines are involved in the design and production of furniture; many design disciplines such as Communication design, interface design, brand design, graphic design, digital design, system design, transformation design, organizational design and space design require simultaneous/joint/integrated work because of the effort to create the holistic values of design. By proposing a roadmap for the development of design-based professions, these forms of expansion create new areas of design activity where designers facilitate creative collaborations. The research method in the study in which qualitative research method is used can be defined as “explanatory case study”. In line with the purpose of the study, one of the qualitative data collection tools, “document analysis” technique was used.

Keywords

• Co-Design
• İnnovative Furniture
• Multiple Design Collaboration

References

1. Altınok, M. (1987). Industrial Design in Furniture Production. Master Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü
2. Andarood, H. G., (2014). In the field of interior design, the analysis of visual communication based on graphic design. Master Thesis. Ankara: Hacettepe University
3. Arnheim, R. (1966). Dynamics of Shape: Design Quarterly. Berkeley: Uni. California Press
4. Asatekin, M. (1997). Product-User Relations in Industrial Design. ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Yayın Kurulu, Ankara
5. Baird, F., Moore, C.J., and Jagodzinski, A.P., (2000). An ethnographic study of engineering design teams at Rolls-Royce Aerospace. Design Studies, 21, 333-355
6. Bilgin, N. (1991). Goods and People, Gündoğan Yayınları, Ankara
7. Bucciarelli, L.L., (1996). Designing Engineers. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England
8. Burnett, B. (2009). Building New Knowledge and the Role of Synthesis in Innovation. International Journal of Innovation Science, 1(1), 13-27

9. Carpman, J. R., Grant, M. A., (1993). Design That Cares: Planning Health Facilities for Patients and Visitors, American Hospital Publishing, Chicago
10. Chiu, M.L., (2002). An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration. Design Studies, 23 (2), pp.187-210
11. Cooper, R.G., and Kleinschmidt, E.J., (1994). Determinants of Timeliness in Product Development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11, pp. 381- 396
12. Cooper, R.G., (1999). The invisible Success Factors in Product Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16, pp. 115-133
13. Forlizzi, J. & Ford, S. (2000). The Building Blocks of Experience: An Early Framework for Interaction Designers. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, 419–423
14. Fregonara, E., Giordano, R., Rolando, D. & Tulliani, J.M., (2016) Integrating Environmental and Economic Sustainability in New Building Construction and Retrofits, Journal of Urban Technology, 23(4), 3-28
15. Hamilton, D. K. (2003). The four levels of evidence based design practice. Healthcare Design, 3, 18-29
16. Hamilton, D.K, Watkins, D.H., (2009). Evidence-Based Design for Multiple Building Types, John Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey
17. İlisulu, T. İ. (2015). A New Dimension in Design: Service Design. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication, 5(4), 98-111
18. İpek, Y. (2014). Computational Design Approaches: An Integrated Design Proposal. Master Thesis. İstanbul: İTÜ, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü
19. İzgi, U. (1999). Process, Concepts and Relations in Architecture. İstanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi Yayınları
20. Klein, J. T. (2005). Humanities, culture, and interdisciplinary: the changing American academy. Albany, State University of New York Press
21. Koberg, D. ve Bagnall, J. (1974). The Universal Traveler. Los Altos
22. Kymalainen, T. (2013). Dreamnesting – Co-created future vision of an intelligent interior design experience. Futures, 50, 74-85
23. Langerak, F., Hultink, J.J., Robben, H.S.J., (2005). The Impact of Market Orientation, Product Advantage, and Launch Proficiency on New Product Performance and Organizational Performance Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(2), 79-94
24. Mager, B., (2008). Service Design Definition. (PDF) Service Design Definition | Birgit Mager - Academia.edu Consulted: 17.11.2020
25. Malone, E., Mann-Dooks, J.R., Strauss, J., (2007). Evidence-Based Design: Application in the MHS, http://www.noblis.org/MissionAreas/HI/public/Documents/EBDInMH S.pdf, Consulted: 15.11.2020
26. Martin, C. S. & Guerin, D. A. (2006). The Interior Design Profession’s Body of Knowledge, University of Minnesota
27. McDonough III, E.F., (1993). Faster New Product Development: Investigating the Effects of Technology and Characteristics of the Project Leader and Team. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10, 241-250
28. Meru, H. (1986). İndustrial Design, Ecohachule Für Künstlerische Und İndustrielle Gestaltung İn Linz. Austria.