Abstract
This paper is a contribution to a more conscious use of tangible mock-ups in collaborative design processes. It describes a design team’s use of mock-ups in a series of workshops involving potential customers and users. Focus is primarily on the use of three-dimensional design mock-ups and how differences in these affected the dialogue. Reflective conversations were established by using tangible mock-ups as “things-to-think with.” They served as boundary objects that spanned the gap between the different competencies and interests of participants in design. The design mock-ups evoked different things for different participants, whereas the challenge for the design team was to find boundaries upon which everybody could agree. The level of details represented in a mock-up affected the communication so that a mock-up with few details evoked different issues, whereas a very detailed mock-up evoked a smaller variation of issues resulting in a more focused communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andreasen, M. M. and Hein, L. (1987), Integrated Product Development. UK: IFS Publications.
Bamberger J. (1991). The Laboratory for Making Things: Developing Multiple Representations of Knowledge, In The Reflective Turn, edited by D.A. Schön. New York: Teachers College Press, 37–61.
Beyer, H. and Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual Design. Defining Customer-Centred Systems. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Binder, T. (1995). Designing for Workplace Learning. AI & Society 7: 218–243.
Binder T. (1999). Setting the Stage for Improvised Video Scenarios. In CHI’99 extended abstracts (Pittsburgh, PA, May). New York, NY: ACM Press.
Brandt E. (2004). Action Research in User-Centred Product Development. AI & Society 18: 113–133.
Brandt, E. (2001). Event-Driven Product Development: Collaboration and Learning. Ph.D. dissertation. Copenhagen: Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Management, Technical University of Denmark.
Brandt, E. and Grunnet, C. (2000). Evoking the Future: Drama and Props in User Centered Design. In Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference (PDC’00), pp. 11–20. New York, NY: ACM Press.
Bucciarelli, L. (1994). Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Buur J. and Andreasen, M.M. (1989). Design Models in Mechatronic Product Development. Design Studies 10(3): 155–162.
Bødker, S. and Buur, J. (2002). The Design Collaboratorium. A Place for Usability Design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 9(2): 152–169 (June).
Carroll, J. M. (2000). Making Use. Scenario-Based Design of Human-Computer Interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
Corbett, M., Rasmussen, L. B. and Rauner F. (1991). Crossing the Border: The Social and Engineering Design of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems. London: Springer.
Ehn, P. (1988). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Stockholm: Arbejdslivscentrum.
Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (1991). Cardboard Computers: Mocking-It-Up or Hands-On the Future, In Design at Work, pp. 169–195, edited by J. Greenbaum and M. Kyng. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum.
Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering. Science Technology and Human Values 16(4): 448–473.
Jones, J. C. (1970). Design Methods. London: Wiley.
Latour, B. (1990). Drawing Things Together. In Representation in Scientific Practice, edited by M. Lynch and S. Woolgar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Papert, S (1980). Mindstorms. Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Preece J. (1994). Human–Computer Interaction. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Preece, J. Rogers, Y. and Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction Design. Beyond Human–Computer Interaction. New York: Wiley.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
Star, S. L. (1989). The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Heterogeneous Problem-Solving, Boundary Objects and Distributed Artificial Intelligence. In Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2, pp. 37–54, edited by M. Kuhns and L. Gasser. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
Wenger, E. (1990). Towards a Theory of Cultural Transparency: Elements of a Social Discourse of the Visible and the Invisible. Orange County: University of California, Irvine. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
The Concise Oxford Dictionary (1987). Oxford University Press.
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank all the people who participated in the WORM project. Thank you to the User Centred Design Group at Danfoss A/S for support and encouragement. A special thank you to Larry Bucciarelli, Jacob Buur, and Thomas Binder for the feedback on earlier drafts of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brandt, E. How Tangible Mock-Ups Support Design Collaboration. Know Techn Pol 20, 179–192 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-007-9021-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-007-9021-9