An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques
Moustafa, A. (2023). An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques. EKB Journal Management System, 13(3), 101-110. doi: 10.21608/idj.2023.368979
Ahmed Waheed Moustafa. "An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques". EKB Journal Management System, 13, 3, 2023, 101-110. doi: 10.21608/idj.2023.368979
Moustafa, A. (2023). 'An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques', EKB Journal Management System, 13(3), pp. 101-110. doi: 10.21608/idj.2023.368979
Moustafa, A. An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques. EKB Journal Management System, 2023; 13(3): 101-110. doi: 10.21608/idj.2023.368979

An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques

International Design Journal
Article 9, Volume 13, Issue 3, May and June 2023, Page 101-110  XML PDF (1.21 MB)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/idj.2023.368979
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Author
Ahmed Waheed Moustafaorcid
Faculty of Applied Arts, Helwan University, Orman Giza
Abstract
The study covers a brief outline on extensive product evaluation methods and techniques from discipline literature and best worldwide practices to overcome design problems and to develop the resources needed to maintain production development. Validated design evaluation methods are identified that help product development optimize its designs to monitor compliant design processes and provide timely, cost-effective solutions and meet safety, customer, and legal requirements. The study is structured to view the state-of-the-art on product design processes evaluation, product design evaluation issues, methods and techniques. The results of this study can be used  as a useful tool to help designers, industry professionals and academics working in either product design or product evaluation sectors such as design students and design assessors, project and product managers, and researchers, teaching academics to further improve the completeness, consistency, and creation of an accurate and modifiable product design. The conclusions summarize the main results and open future work avenues.  
Keywords
Product Design Evaluation; Human-Centered Design; User Experience; Qualitative Evaluation; Quantitative Evaluation
Supplementary Files
References
  1. Adeoye‐Olatunde, O. A., & Olenik, N. L. (2021). Research and scholarly methods: Semi‐structured interviews. Journal of the american college of clinical pharmacy, 4(10), 1358-1367.
  2. Airoma, A. (2020). Investigating the effects of sorcery related behavior on student learning in primary schools in the Koiari area of Central Province, Papua New Guinea. researchgate.net
  3. Aiyegbusi, O. L. (2020). Key methodological considerations for usability testing of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems. Quality of life research. springer.com
  4. Aldoihi, S. (2020). Product Usability Driven System Engineering. https://theses.hal.science/tel-02990256
  5. Baldassarre, B., Calabretta, G., Karpen, I. O., Bocken, N., & Hultink, E. J. (2024). Responsible Design Thinking for Sustainable Development: Critical Literature Review, New Conceptual Framework, and Research Agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-22.
  6. Banga, H. K., Kumar, R., Kalra, P., & Belokar, R. M. (2022). Additive Manufacturing with Medical Applications. From https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350886430
  7. Barnum, C. M. (2020). Usability testing essentials: Ready, set... test!. [HTML]
  8. Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., ... & Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07258.
  9. Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and practice. Busetto et al. Neurological Research and Practice, 2:14, https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
  10. Carol Righi and Janice James (2007) User-Centered Design Stories; Real-World UCD Case Files, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2007 by Elsevier Inc.
  11. Cascini, G., O'Hare, J., Dekoninck, E., Becattini, N., Boujut, J. F., Guefrache, F. B., ... & Morosi, F. (2020). Exploring the use of AR technology for co-creative product and packaging design. Computers in Industry, 123, 103308. From https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/files/227013218/Exploring_the_use_AR_technology_for_co_creative_design_Pre_print.pdf
  12. Chazette, L. & Schneider, K. (2020). Explainability as a non-functional requirement: challenges and recommendations. Requirements Engineering. From https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00766-020-00333-1.pdf
  13. Cross, N. (2021). Engineering design methods: strategies for product design. academia.edu
  14. DebRoy, T., Mukherjee, T., Wei, H. L., Elmer, J. W., & Milewski, J. O. (2021). Metallurgy, mechanistic models and machine learning in metal printing. Nature Reviews Materials, 6(1), 48-68.
  15. Dell'Era, C., Magistretti, S., Cautela, C., Verganti, R., & Zurlo, F. (2020). Four kinds of design thinking: From ideating to making, engaging, and criticizing. Creativity and innovation management, 29(2), 324-344.
  16. Elkhattat, D. & Medhat, M. (2022). Creativity in packaging design as a competitive promotional tool. Information Sciences Letters. 
  17. Elkhattat, Dina and Medhat, Mervat (2022) "Creativity in Packaging Design as a Competitive promotional Tool," Information Sciences Letters: Vol. 11: Iss. 1, Available at: https://digitalcommons.aaru.edu.jo/isl/vol11/iss1/19
  18. EYEWARE, (2024), Head and Eye Tracking Software Trusted by Industry Leaders, from  https://eyeware.tech/blog/author/eyeware/
  19. G. Pahl, W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen and K.-H. Grote (1996) Engineering Design; A Systematic Approach, 3rd Edition, Ken Wallace and Luciënne Blessing Translators and Editors, Springer Science+Business Media, springer.com
  20. Gordon, W. & Langmaid, R. (2022). Qualitative market research: a practitioner's and buyer's guide. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315245553
  21. Granato, D., Barba, F. J., Bursać Kovačević, D., Lorenzo, J. M., Cruz, A. G., & Putnik, P. (2020). Functional foods: Product development, technological trends, efficacy testing, and safety. Annual review of food science and technology, 11(1), 93-118.
  22. Guiné, R. P. F., Florença, S. G., Barroca, M. J., & Anjos, O. (2020). The link between the consumer and the innovations in food product development. Foods. From https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/9/9/1317/pdf
  23. Hapuwatte, B. M. & Jawahir, I. S. (2021). Closed‐loop sustainable product design for circular economy. Journal of Industrial Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13154
  24. Hennink, M. & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social science & medicine. sciencedirect.com
  25. Hesser, Wilfried. (2010). Lecture Standardization in Product Development and Design - by Chandana Perera, from http://www.pro‐norm.de.
  26. Hiebl, M. R. W. ( January 2023). Sample selection in systematic literature reviews of management research. Organizational research methods, Organizational Research Methods ( IF 8.9 ), DOI:10.1177/1094428120986851
  27. Horváth, I. (2022). The epsilon-knowledge: an emerging complement of Machlup's types of disciplinary knowledge. AI EDAM.  Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 36, e18, https://doi.org/10.1017/S089006042200004X
  28. Lanzolla, G. & Markides, C. (2021). A business model view of strategy. Journal of Management Studies. from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/joms.12580
  29. Leavy, P. (2022). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. [HTML]
  30. Leavy, P. (2022). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. [HTML]
  31. Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. (2021). Usability and user experience: Design and evaluation. Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 972-1015. researchgate.net
  32. Llopis-Albert, C., Rubio, F., & Valero, F. (2021). Impact of digital transformation on the automotive industry. Technological forecasting and social change, 162, 120343. nih.gov
  33. Lo, C. K., Chen, C. H., & Zhong, R. Y. (2021). A review of digital twin in product design and development. Advanced Engineering Informatics. [HTML]
  34. Manzoor, A. (2020). Designs of mixed method research. In Cognitive Analytics: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 95-121). IGI Global. [HTML]
  35. McCaffery, K. J., Dodd, R. H., Cvejic, E., Ayre, J., Batcup, C., Isautier, J. M., ... & Wolf, M. S. (2020). Disparities in COVID-19 related knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours by health literacy. medRxiv, 2020-06. from https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.03.20121814.full.pdf
  36. Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020). Changing design education for the 21st century. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(1), 13-49.
  37. P. R. Dwivedi and Karl T. Ulrich (1996), "An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques," Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 7, No. 3,  pp. 217-231
  38. P. R. Dwivedi and Karl T. Ulrich, "An Overview of Product Design Evaluation Methods and Techniques," published in the Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1996, pp. 217-231
  39. Rai, P., Verma, P., Dahiya, A., & Kumar, J. (2022). Factors affecting product design process in traditional societies: a thematic content analysis of novice designers' self-reports. International Journal of Business and Systems Research, 16(2), 240-258.
  40. Roberts, M., Allen, S., & Coley, D. (2020). Life cycle assessment in the building design process–A systematic literature review. Building and Environment., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107274
  41. Sahin, S. (2024). Utilizing AHP and conjoint analysis in educational research: Characteristics of a good mathematical problem. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12830-9
  42. Sahu, C. K., Young, C., & Rai, R. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI) in augmented reality (AR)-assisted manufacturing applications: a review. International Journal of Production Research, 59(16), 4903-4959.
  43. Saleh, T. A. (2020). Nanomaterials: Classification, properties, and environmental toxicities. Environmental Technology & Innovation. from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352186420313675
  44. Samaa Waheed (2021), An effective role of  Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and Mixed Reality in Product Design, International Design Journal, Vol. 11 No. 5, (September 2021) pp 133-149 
  45. Siyu Zhu,Jin Qi, Jie Hu, and Sheng Hao (2022) A new approach for product evaluation based on integration of EEG and eye-tracking, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Volume 52, April 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101601
  46. Srinivas Athreya, Y.D.Venkatesh,(2012) Application Of Taguchi Method For Optimization Of Process Parameters In Improving The Surface Roughness Of Lathe Facing Operation, International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES) Vol 1, Issue 3 (November 2012), PP.13-19 from
  47. Stantcheva, S. (2023). How to run surveys: A guide to creating your own identifying variation and revealing the invisible. Annual Review of Economics. annualreviews.org
  48. Stylidis, K., Wickman, C., & Söderberg, R. (2020). Perceived quality of products: a framework and attributes ranking method. Journal of Engineering Design, 31(1), 37-67.
  49. Verweij, S. & van Meerkerk, I. (2021). Do public–private partnerships achieve better time and cost performance than regular contracts?. Public Money & Management. from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09540962.2020.1752011
  50. Yulianti, T. & Sulistyawati, A. (2021). Online Focus Group Discussion (OFGD) Model Design in Learning. eudl.eu  
Statistics
Article View: 852
PDF Download: 801