Ecodesign innovation: Is 'early' always 'best'?

This paper explores ecodesign within the product development process (PDP), particularly focusing on the design stages. Previous research has highlighted the early stages as the 'best' place to integrate environmental issues. Here the early stage hypothesis is explored from the perspective of the industrial design department - the early stage designers. Being located at the earliest possible design stages of product development would mean that, were the hypothesis to hold true, industrial design would be the 'best' place to locate ecodesign. Empirical research was conducted with the Industrial Design Centre (IDC) of a global Electrical and Electronic goods manufacture. It used a qualitative, inductive research methodology, based on two 'live' design concept projects, participant observation within the department, and on several semi-structured interviews. Throughout this paper, the empirical work is compared and contrasted to ecodesign literature, specifically to models of ecodesign innovation and the product development process. Beginning by exploring of the early stage hypothesis, the paper concludes with a conceptual model of early stage ecodesign for the context in question.

Articulating current service development practices: a qualitative analysis of eleven mental health projects.

BACKGROUND: The utilisation of good design practices in the development of complex health services is essential to improving quality. Healthcare organisations, however, are often seriously out of step with modern design thinking and practice. As a starting point to encourage the uptake of good design practices, it is important to understand the context of their intended use. This study aims to do that by articulating current health service development practices. METHODS: Eleven service development projects carried out in a large mental health service were investigated through in-depth interviews with six operation managers. The critical decision method in conjunction with diagrammatic elicitation was used to capture descriptions of these projects. Stage-gate design models were then formed to visually articulate, classify and characterise different service development practices. RESULTS: Projects were grouped into three categories according to design process patterns: new service introduction and service integration; service improvement; service closure. Three common design stages: problem exploration, idea generation and solution evaluation - were then compared across the design process patterns. Consistent across projects were a top-down, policy-driven approach to exploration, underexploited idea generation and implementation-based evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into where and how good design practices can contribute to the improvement of current service development practices. Specifically, the following suggestions for future service development practices are made: genuine user needs analysis for exploration; divergent thinking and innovative culture for idea generation; and fail-safe evaluation prior to implementation. Better training for managers through partnership working with design experts and researchers could be beneficial.