Design, Advanced Planning and Product Development

Charles L. OWEN
Institute of Design, Illinois Institute of Technology
350 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60610 USA
Tel: 312 595 4909 Fax: 312 595 4901 E.mail: OWEN@id.iit.edu

3o Congresso Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil:

October 26, 1998. International Symposium: Nuevos Metodos & Tecnologias para el Diseño de
Productos, Santiago, Chile: November 12, 1998

structured planning; product development; concept development; design methods;

design planning; product planning; strategic planning; design technology

ABSTRACT
Economic change brings opportunity as well as failure. In today’s volatile world economy, traditional ways of doing business
are becoming disastrously obsolete. Companies must offer better products now—and introduce them frequently to stay in
business. Growing populations in developed and developing nations have greater expectations for themselves and their
environment, and citizens everywhere are demanding more of private business, government and non-governmental organi-
zations. Fundamental to success in this fast-changing, market-driven world are better ways to find, organize and use the
information critical to advanced planning and design—of artifacts, systems, services and institutions.
Structured Planning is a computer-supported set of tools for information-age design planning. For the development of new
products, it helps planning teams to deal effectively with complexity and ambiguity and to explore projects in both breadth
and depth at the time when insight has the greatest impact. Its tools and procedures help planning teams to uncover user-centered
needs, recognize insightful relationships, capture ideas as they develop, organize large amounts of information optimally for
concept development, and develop solutions appropriate to the real (and natural) complexity of problems.

INTRODUCTION Quality for products (and artifacts generally), is almost al-

Design is no longer an exotic pursuit. Tough times, new ways associated with craftsmanship—how well the product
opportunities and world competition have opened the doors. is made. But there are more dimensions to quality, and they
Overseas competition has done what decades of reasoning can be best appreciated through a consideration of how
could not; design is now recognized as a major strategy for things are designed and what benefits are accrued.
competitive success. Businesses and business schools are
The relationships between design and quality are expressed
making genuine efforts to learn more about design and to
in the Quality Pyramid model (Figure 1). The pyramid has
incorporate sophisticated design thinking in their operations.
a multilayered design core, with craftsmanship as the first
With less fanfare, but potentially greater impact, govern-
of three progressively sophisticated layers. From the design
mental organizations, institutions and NGO’s (non-
perspective, quality as craftsmanship is achieved through
governmental/non-commercial organizations) are also
attention to issues of engineering design and design for
discovering the value of design thinking.
manufacturing. Well-designed products at this level are eas-
In universities around the world, design educators and design ier to make well.
researchers now find themselves with new audiences and
Detail design is at the second layer of the design core. Here
new opportunities for leadership. The challenge for all is to
the role of design is to contribute to performance, human
nurture development of the new means—the design and
factors and appearance. Design specialists (engineering de-
planning theories, processes and organizational models—so
signers, product designers, industrial designers, communi-
that they can permanently infuse design values and benefits
cation designers and others) invent and refine features or
throughout society.
details at this level to make the product work better func-
tionally, work better for people physiologically and psycho-
A DESIGN STRATEGY
logically, and work better symbolically within social and
To see the multiple values of design most clearly, design
cultural niches.
should be viewed through the lens of quality, now the
universally-recognized requisite for success in business.

1

Product
Integrity
eg y
y
Co
So por
nt rit
rit
ci at
r
e I nteg
et e I
al
Concept
or l I
In nteg
rp eta
at
te
gr rity
Co oci
ity
Details
S
Craftsmanship
Figure 1. The Quality Pyramid.
At the third layer, concept, design contributes most to com-
petitiveness (for all products—including systems, institu-
tions and services). Concepts that are holistic and thoroughly
thought through present themselves to buyers and users as
qualitatively better (and worth more). Products designed
well as concepts typically distribute innovations among their
features so systemically that they are exceedingly difficult
to copy by competitors.
Capping the Quality Pyramid is product integrity; under it,
quality extends outward to corporate and societal recipients.
Products that are conceived, designed and produced with
high quality bring praise to the companies or organizations
that produce them. Product integrity confers corporate in-
tegrity; the company with high-quality products is itself
perceived to be of high quality. And corporate integrity, in
turn, adds luster to the society in which the company oper-
ates. Following this model, postwar Japan, as a nation,
became identified with quality in less than a generation.
PROBLEMS OF PLANNING
To reap the benefits of the Quality Pyramid model, we must
fundamentally rethink the process of new product develop-
ment. In today’s very volatile business environment, revo-
lutionary changes may be more frequently appropriate than
evolutionary changes—a prospect for which the convention-
al development process is ill-prepared. Competition is the
provocateur. Whether the local economy is growing dramat-
ically or shrinking dramatically, global competition places
great pressure on the organization unable to produce.
Against the aspirations of the Quality Pyramid, conventional
planning for new product development fails in two critical
ways. In depth, it fails to find and understand the needs of
the many real users of the potential product. The focus too
often is on the customer and/or "end user". This ignores the
many other users who also have much to gain or lose from
the product’s design—those who sell, transport, maintain,
repair and retire the product—to name just a few. Listening
solely to buyers and operators leads to shallow understand-
ing. Shallow understanding produces little insight and is
unlikely to fuel the holistic, thorough thinking necessary for
systemically conceived, break-through products.
In breadth, conventional planning routinely fails to conceive
the most potent product. Development effort typically lin-
gers little more than momentarily on the issue of what the
product should be. The concept to be developed, far too
frequently, is already determined before development be-
gins! To use an outdoor metaphor, the expert development
team is off at sound of the gun to climb the mountain—but
the mountain may be the wrong one! Just any mountain
won’t do. If the purpose of climbing the mountain is to get
to the highest ground, then it is important to locate the
highest mountain before beginning the climb. In today’s
world, it is as important to know what to make as it is to
know how to make it. And, as technological know-how
proliferates, knowing what to make becomes more important
every year!
REFORMING THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Overcoming these planning deficiencies is critical. A refor-
mation of the development process is necessary, and in that
reformation the processes for planning must be improved.
How that should be done requires a look at the development
process in terms of design and its impact on a product’s life
span.
The Impact of Design
The business model is instructive. The costs a company
incurs in developing a product can be nicely related to the
product’s profitability by plotting investment and return over
time. The form of an investment/return curve is loosely
sinusoidal, as suggested by the light gray curve in the back-
ground of Figure 2. The downward loop of the curve records
the investment to develop the product. As the product goes
to market, it begins to return value, and the upward loop of
the curve records its financial return to the company over
its life span.
Of course, a purely sinusoidal curve would not be a happy
result for a company, because return over the product’s life
would only equal investment. All companies work to reduce
the size of the investment segment, both by shortening it in
time and diminishing its dip. All companies also work to
increase the size of the return segment, by extending its
height and lengthening it over time.
In today’s marketplace, a design strategy can support these
objectives in three ways (Whitney 1994).
First, to shorten the length of the investment segment, the
development process must be shortened. From simple phys-
ical prototypes for individual concepts, to computer-
generated, close-to-real experiences, fast design prototyping
can substantially shorten development time (arrow 1 in Fig-
ure 2) by close-coupling ideation and evaluation.
2
 concept; it becomes the "project statement" or "design brief"
for the designing stage that follows.
+$
+$

in vest m en t / r et u r n
in vest m en t / r et u r n

2 r et u r n 3 t im e

t im e
in vest m en t
-$

1 Development

-$ -$
Development

Figure 2. Improving the investment/return curve. unknown

terra exploration
incognita

Second, to raise the return portion of the curve, the quality known
t im e
of the product must be improved. Human-centered design
puts the focus for the design of details where it belongs—and
where it is appreciated—on the users of the product. Pro- Figure 3. Exploration. The use of investment.
ducts sell better if they are better designed for their users—
all of them. This involves a deep appreciation of ergonomics
and physiological, cognitive, social and cultural human fac-
Exploration
tors. The principles of human-centered design can be gath-
ered here through Structured Planning to raise quality and,
consequently, return on investment (arrow 2).
incognita

Finally, to lengthen the return portion of the curve, it must

be difficult to develop competing products that can steal the
terra

product’s success. Structured Planning treats products and How

to make it
their supporting services as systems in which ideas are in- Concept Specification
tegrated systematically. Products conceived in this way are time
difficult to copy because their features are systemic. Ele-
ments of the design interact in interlocking components of
hardware, software and service. Copying any one or few
incognita

individual components will not produce equivalent qualities

(arrow 3).
terra

What How
to make to make it
Reforming the development process to implement a full
Concept Specification
design strategy requires all three of these individual strate- time
gies, but the major reform that must be made is an organi-
zational one that affects how investment is deployed (Figure
3). Too often today little or no attention is given to the
amount and quality of exploration necessary for sound prod- Figure 4. Above: 1-step development designing;
uct concepts. below: 2-step development planning + designing.
The development process must be changed from a one-step
process, in which an already determined concept is turned
into a specification, to a two-step process wherein a distinct The Development Environment
development stage is devoted to exploration and determining At its simplest, development is the process of producing an
the concept (Figure 4). The traditional process for which the artifact or institution in response to an understanding of a
issue is only "how to make it" must be reconstituted to two problem or opportunity in context. Artisans do this routinely
separate stages: what to make before how to make it. The today; before the industrial revolution, it was the normal
product of the new planning stage of development is the means of production. In essence, it is a direct form of "mak-

3
 Abstract

Analytic Synthetic Insight Idea

Context Artifact/Institution Analytic Synthetic

P a s t P r e s e n t F u t u r e

Context Artifact/Institution

P a s t P r e s e n t F u t u r e

Real

Figure 5. Direct development. Figure 6. Development through design. Draw insight

Create artifact or institution to fit context. from context; convert insight to idea; turn idea into
artifact or institution.

Abstract Abstract

Insight Idea Insight Planning Idea

Concept
Designing Designing

Analytic Synthetic Analytic Synthetic

Specification Specification
Making Product Making Product

Context Artifact/Institution Context Artifact/Institution

P a s t P r e s e n t F u t u r e P a s t P r e s e n t F u t u r e

Real Real

Figure 7. One-step designing. Figure 8. Two-step designing + planning.

ing" that moves between the realms of the analytic and the
synthetic without formal intermediate steps (Figure 5).
When systems of production reach a stage of sophistication
at which designing and making are done by separate pro-
fessionals, the development process gains another dimension
(Figure 6). There is a distinction now between abstract and
real, and the process of development moves to the abstract.
Insights are drawn from context, converted at an abstract
level to ideas and turned back to the real as specifications
for artifacts or institutions.
The one-step development process is represented in this
environment as a process of designing (Figure 7). The pro-
cess begins with a concept, usually at least partially formed.
Most frequently, the concept is an old one to be revised.
Sometimes it is a preconceived new one, brought to attention
by someone influential within the organization. Too often,

4
it is simply a competitor’s product—to be matched at least,
exceeded if possible.
The two-step development process, as a step toward refor-
mation, adds a planning stage before the designing stage,
separating formally the process of concept formation from
the process of turning a concept into a specification (Figure
8). Planning is where "the right mountain" is discovered
before the climb begins. Structured Planning operates in this
stage.
To optimize the planning and designing activities, a third
stage should precede planning (Figure 9). Metaplanning in
the three-step model is concerned with planning the planning
and designing processes (Peng 1993). From the metaplan-
ning level, product development projects are initiated by
projecting areas of interest, modeling contexts, identifying
issues, establishing project resources, selecting, modifying
and developing planning/designing methodology, and pre-
paring a preliminary project charter.
Abstract
Metaplanning
Insight Project Idea
Planning
Concept
Designing
Analytic Synthetic
The Business Context
In most business organizations large enough to have spe-
cialized departments for development, the Development
function has strong links to Research and Marketing as well
as Manufacturing. Specific terms and descriptions differ
among companies, but the general model places the concerns
of Research with problems farthest distant in time, the con-
cerns of Manufacturing with those most current, and those
of Marketing and Development in the middle. The various
forms of design and engineering expertise intermingle with
those of other relevant disciplines within these functional
groupings.
Technological possibilities are investigated by Research;
user interests are most commonly explored by Marketing.
New projects are initiated with engineering consultation for
do-ability, and there is little or no involvement of other
design expertise. The two and three-step models presented
here reform these procedures by substantially augmenting
the development process with design and other human-
centered expertise at the front end of the process.
This has ramifications for the relationships between Devel-
opment and the other functional units. In Figure 10, Re-
search, Development and Marketing are shown as activities
functioning in parallel. The three stages of the development
process are shown within Development because they are
supported primarily from that functional unit. Depending on
the stage of a project’s progress, the relationships between
it and Research and Marketing are different, evolving as
ideas coalesce.

Specification
Making Product Research Development Marketing
changing
emerging needs and
Context Artifact/Institution technologies interests
Meta
Planning
P a s t P r e s e n t F u t u r e

Real desired concept

technology prototypes
Planning
Figure 9. Three-step metaplanning + planning + possible
technology
reaction

designing.
detailed
Metaplanning is particularly important for the full-scale im- problems
Designing
prototypes

plementation of a development process incorporating

solutions reaction
advanced-planning teams. In the emerging new model for
development, multiple planning teams operating in offset
parallel sequence will be trained, briefed and given their
charters by metaplanning departments. The processes of de-
signing and planning will be as much a subject for devel- Tooling and Manufacturing
opment as the products they are used to develop. Those
responsible for metaplanning will be closely associated with Figure 10. The business context: appropriate interactions
those responsible for the development of design processes, at appropriate times.
and as better tools for planning and designing are developed
or obtained, they will be custom-tailored through metaplan-
ning to the goals of projects being initiated.

5
Before project initiation, the relationship between Develop-
ment and Research (at the metaplanning level) is one of
technology assessment. The question is, "What impending
technologies within or outside the company should be ex-
plored for implementation in new products?" The relation-
ship with Marketing at this stage is similar: "What needs
and interests are emerging in segments of society?" Neither
of these questions elicit product proposals; rather, they
launch processes of scouting, exploring and trend spotting.
At the planning stage of development, the relationships
change to direct associations between a planning team and
the special expertise of the functional group. Planning teams
need suggestions and confirmations of technologies from
Research as they propose ideas. They need criticism and
field evaluations from Marketing as they develop prototyp-
ical concepts.
When a project has reached the designing stage, relationships
between Development, Research and Marketing are more
traditional. Technological problems and solutions are han-
dled by Research (when they are not manufacturing related);
detailed demonstrations and prototypes are field-tested by
Marketing. At this stage, the members of the planning team
will have returned to their functional groups as champions
of the project.
STRUCTURED PLANNING IN THE
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Within the spectrum of the development process, Structured
Planning provides tools for the planning stage of develop-
ment. From its inception as a response to general inadequa-
cies in the design process, it has evolved to offer specific
remedies for deficiencies of planning. To meet the breadth
problem, for instance, it advocates segmentation of the de-
velopment process. The existence of planning as a concept
development stage separate from designing grows out of this
advocacy. To meet the depth problem, as another instance,
it has within its tool kit a process of Action Analysis ex-
pressly designed to seek out all users of a product and to
gain insight about their needs from their behavior.
The tools of Structured Planning, some computer-supported,
can be custom-tailored to a project and can be used with
other planning tools. In essence, Structured Planning sup-
ports planning and concept development in two major ways:
(1) it provides a philosophy, framework and information
handling formats for discovering what needs to be done—
with insight for why; and (2) it organizes this information
in the best way for planners and designers to use it.
In its most general formulation, it progresses through five
phases.
Project Definition
The first phase of Structured Planning is concerned with
project definition (Figure 11). Working with a preliminary
project charter and an initial set of issues selected as relevant
by the project initiators (metaplanning), a planning team
works to investigate the issues, develop arguable positions
and, through discussion and follow-up research, converge
upon positions that optimize project goals. The phase con-
cludes with a set of documents (Defining Statements) that
effectively define the project.
Defining Statement Issue Topic: S t o rage an d Re t rie v al 1
Project
TV Co m m an d
Question at Issue
Wh a t p r ovis ion s h ou ld b e m a d e for t h e s t or a ge of
equ ip m en t a n d it s exp ed ien t r et r ieva l?
Originator
E . S cia m m a r ella
Contributors
2 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 T. Bolger
Position
X Co n s t rain t
Obje c t ive
S t or a ge a n d r et r ieva l elem en t s m u s t p r e-
ven t d a m a ge t o equ ip m en t a n d op t im ize
3 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 E . S cia m m a r ella
1 Oct ob er , 1 9 9 1 C. Owen
Dire c t ive a cces s , b ot h in t h e field a n d in t h e s t u d io.
Source/s Alternative Positions
Field Op era tion s for Telecom m u n ica tion .
In Pro du c t io n Te le v is io n . New Yor k :
X Co n s t rain t
Obje c t ive
E qu ip m en t m u s t b e d es ign ed t o b e s elf-
p r ot ect in g s o t h a t it d oes n ot r equ ir e
Com m u n ica t ion s Pu b lis h in g, 1 9 8 9 . Dire c t ive s ep a r a t e s t or a ge elem en t s .
Keeley, L. W. Televis ion Fu tu res . Co m -
m u n ic at io n s No. 1 6 (J u n e 1 9 9 0 ): 9 -1 5 . X
Co n s t rain t
Obje c t ive
A va r iet y of s t or a ge a n d r et r ieva l elem en t s
s h ou ld b e a va ila b le t o m eet d iffer en t
Meet in g wit h Gen . Mgr . Iwa t e 8 / 9 / 9 0 . Dire c t ive u s er s ’ a ct ivit y r equ ir em en t s .
Tea m d elib er a t ion s .
Background and Arguments
Th er e a r e s ever a l s it u a t ion s in wh ich p r op er s t or a ge a n d fa s t r et r ieva l of equ ip m en t a r e cr it ica l t o
op er a t ion s . Field op er a t ion s a r e a good exa m p le. Op er a t ion s in t h e field , b y d efin it ion , im p ly ch a n gin g
en vir on m en t s t h a t p la ce p r ior it y on t h e p r ot ect ion of equ ip m en t —a n d , t h u s , s t or a ge a n d r et r ieva l.
Des ign for r et r ieva l b ecom es im p or t a n t wh en t im e con s t r a in t s a r e con s id er ed . For a con t in u ou s flow of
in for m a t ion , it is a b s olu t ely n eces s a r y t o h a ve t h e r igh t equ ip m en t in p la ce, on t im e (Pr od u ct ion
Televis ion 1 9 8 9 , 1 1 7 ).
Tr a n s p or t is a n ot h er m od e of op er a t ion t h a t p la ces equ ip m en t in p ot en t ia lly d a m a gin g s it u a t ion s . In
t h e field , t h e n eed for ca r e in t r a n s p or t a n d fa s t r et u r n t o a ct ion is ob viou s . In t h e s t u d io, r ela t ive
p er m a n en ce of loca t ion is d ecep t ive. E qu ip m en t is m oved t o t h e s t u d io, b et ween s t u d ios , wit h in a
s t u d io a s ch a n gin g s et u p s d em a n d , a n d in a n d ou t of u s e a s equ ip m en t is ch a n ged or r ep la ced
(Pr od u ct ion Televis ion 1 9 9 0 , 1 2 0 ).
Th e n a t u r e of t h e t ech n ologies u s ed in in for m a t ion a n d en t er t a in m en t t r a n s m is s ion a n d p r od u ct ion
d ict a t es t h e u s e of t h ou gh t fu l s t r a t egies t o p r ot ect fr a gile s ys t em s . S ou n d collect in g s ys t em s ca n b e
ea s ily b r ok en ; ligh t collect in g s ys t em s r equ ir e clea n op t ics —u n s cr a t ch ed a n d u n fou led b y d es t r u ct ive
en vir on m en t s ; elect r on ic s ys t em s m u s t b e p r ot ect ed fr om h ea t , cold a n d s h ock . Field u s e r equ ir es
s p ecia l a t t en t ion t o s t or a ge a n d r et r ieva l. S t u d io u s e is les s t r a u m a t ic, b u t if equ ip m en t will b e m oved ,
t h ou gh t s h ou ld b e given t o it s p r ot ect ion (Keeley 1 9 9 0 , 1 4 ).
Form: 5/19/1998
4
Version Date: 1 Oct ob er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 3 0 Au gu s t , 1 9 9 1
Figure 11. Project Definition. Issue-based project
description.
Action Analysis
In the second phase (Figure 12), a process called Action
Analysis is used to uncover in detail what the product must
do. The failure of conventional planning to seek out all users
and consider their problems in depth is addressed in this
phase. Action Analysis is a top-down analytic technique for
establishing the functions that must be performed by the
product and its users (considered as a system). The system,
as it begins to emerge from the project definition phase, is
analyzed progressively: first to establish the modes in which
it will operate (e.g., distribution, transport, use, storage,
maintenance, repair, adaptation, retirement—or, in the spe-
cific example of Figure 12, [a television production system]:
studio operations, field operations, pre-production, produc-
tion, post-production, management, transportation, etc.);
second, to identify the major activities that will take place
within each mode of operation (under production, for ex-
ample: recording, participating and conducting); and, finally
using Activity Analysis forms (Figure 13), to specify the
functions that the system or user will perform in each ac-
tivity. These Functions are the "criteria" against which the
system must be planned; the system must perform all the
Functions well. They usually number in the hundreds, and
6
 Activity Analyses Function Structure
Activity Analysis Activity: Re c o rdin g 2

Project Scenario
TV Co m m an d
Ca m er a s a n d m icr op h on es follow t h e a ct ion of a p r ogr a m s eg-
m en t b ein g r ecor d ed for a p a r t of a s p ecia l s h ow. Th e s t u d io
Mode s et is t h e s cen e for t h e a ct ion ; even t s a r e d ir ect ed fr om t h e
S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion ) con t r ol r oom .

Originator
E d u a r d o S cia m m a r ella

Contributors
5 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 Tea m d elib er a t ion s
TV Command
Users (Players) System Components (Props) Environmental Components (Set)
Act or s , p er for m er s Ca m er a s Fla t s , s et s , p r op s
Ca m er a op er a t or s S t a n d s , cr a n es , t r ip od s Air con d it ion
S ou n d op er a t or s Tr a ck s Per s on n el, op er a t or s
Floor m a n a ger , d ir ect or Mics / b oom s E n vir on m en t a l n ois e
S t a ge h a n d s Ligh ts S t u d io floor elem en t s
Hea d p h on es , h ea d s et s

System Functions Associated Design Factors

Recor d / s t or e in for m a t ion Rem ot e Digit a l S t or a ge

Studio Operations Field Operations

Receive a n d t r a n s m it
Is ola t e & focu s s ou n d S elect ive Filt r a t ion
Is ola t e & focu s im a ge
Pr ovid e com m u n ica t ion lin k s
Rem ot e Movem en t Coor d in a t ion
Un n eces s a r y Lin k a ges Con fu s e
Design
Functions Factors
User Functions
Move ca m er a / len s
Move b oom / m ic
Associated Design Factors
Lim it ed Op er a t or Mob ilit y
E qu ip m en t In t er fer es wit h Per s on n el
Pre-Production Production Post-Production Management Transportation Production Modes
Com m u n ica t e d ir ect ion s Rem ot e Movem en t Coor d in a t ion

Form: 5/19/1998
Development Arrangement
Version 2 Date: 5 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 4 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1

Design Factors Assembling Designing Placing Installing Rehearsing Recording Participating Conducting Striking Storing Maintaining Repairing Transporting Moving Storing Setting-Up Shooting Striking
Activities
Designate Display Identify Identify line Determine Record/store Support Display cues Veil Place/ Filter Alert user Secure Secure Load/unload Instruct user Record/store Assemble/
environment environment elements components feedback equipment displace environment elements elements information disassemble
Identify Receive/ Display shot Locate Organize Access shot
Install Display cues Instruct user source Determine transmit Allow Communicate elements Monitor malfunction Reduce Reduce equipment Transmit/ elements
Design Factor Title: S e le c t ive Filt rat io n 14
environment camera transmission Display script position Promote status damage damage Stabilize receive Retrieve
Project
TV Co m m an d
Source/s Associated Functions Communicate Instruct Provide Isolate and of information Display safety Address Secure equipment information elements
Mode
1 . Per s on a l ob s er va t ion .
2 . In t er view, s t a ff,
Is ola t e a n d focu s s ou n d
Is ola t e a n d focu s im a ge Support directions element pathway Determine focus sound equipment Instruct user Alert user damage Display Display elements Link
S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion ) CBS Ch ica go TV Affilia t e,
S ep t em b er 1 5 , 1 9 9 1 . subsystems Mobilize Provide lighting Isolate
Isolate and feedback position Instruct user Expedite equipment equipment information Protect user Load/unload
Activity
Recor d in g position position
Originator
Relay Select element connection Set focus image Separate Organize Identify repair Retrieve and power Protect Organize
E d u a r d o S cia m m a r ella
visuals/cues imagery Guide Identify parameters Provide links Suport audio/ equipment elements Confirm Document Document element equipment equipment
Contributors
media Access contents contents
2 1 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 C. Owen
element connection Communicate operator Retrieve repair
Manipulate directions Support Access elements equipment Organize Organize Manage Assemble/
Collect images Secure Monitor equipment equipment disassemble Control
Move movement Perform placement placement
Observation
Beca u s e a n or m a l s t u d io r ecor d in g
even t r equ ir es m a n y p a r t icip a n t s
a n d a wid e r a n ge of equ ip m en t , wh a t
is in t en d ed a n d wh a t a ct u a lly t a k es
Extension
It is t h e goa l of t h e d ir ect or (a s well a s a ll in volved ) t o p r od u ce
im a ges a n d s ou n d a ccor d in g t o t h e s cr ip t . Ach ievin g a con t in u -
ou s flow of im a ges a n d s ou n d wit h ou t er r or r ed u ces cos t s ,
im p r oves wor k in g efficien cies a n d p r od u ces a b et t er fin a l
components
Alter
Read
Input
element connection Simulate
reality camera/lens
Move
Communicate
directions
Manage
plan maintenance Confirm
malfunction
Guide
elements
Guide
element
elements unit
Transport Functions
p la ce a r e s om et im es a t od d s . p r od u ct .
Th er e a r e s ign ifica n t va r ia t ion s in t h e wa y t elevis ion p r ogr a m s
parameters Route Document boom/mic Speak Monitor Determine unit
a r e r ecor d ed . S om e a r e h igh ly-cr a ft ed , p olis h ed p r od u ct ion s ;
Relay simulation Deliver
ot h er s s t r ive for im m ed ia cy a n d a r e d ir ect a n d r a w. E a ch k in d of
p r od u ct ion r equ ir es it s own con t r olled "filt r a t ion " of t h e p ot en -
t ia l a ct ion s of p er s on n el a n d m ovem en t s of equ ip m en t . For a
Monitor lines Communicate Listen shot need elements
h igh -en d p r od u ct ion , a s ou n d b oom d r oop in g in t o t h e fr a m e is
s im p ly n ot a llowa b le; a n ot h er p r ogr a m m igh t u s e s u ch "h u m a n "
performance Connect directions Input Monitor Access Mobilize
er r or s a s s ign a t u r es of t h e s h ow.
Speed elements
Insights Cover in g t h e en t ir e s t yle r a n ge, u n for t u n a t ely, m ea n s a ccom m o-
d a t in g t h e s t r ict es t r equ ir em en t s . Ca m er a s m u s t b e a b le t o
m ove fr eely, u n ob s t r u ct ed b y floor -la id ca b les a n d im p r op er ly
p la ced equ ip m en t . Ligh t s m u s t t r a ck flu id ly a n d m a in t a in
Connect
interfaces
equipment Practice
human
Gesture
script
Monitor
malfunction
Correct
delivery
p os it ion s r igid ly. Op er a t or s m u s t m ove in con s p icu ou s ly, wit h ou t
movements
n ois e a n d wit h ou t in t r u d in g s h a d ows . Micr op h on es m u s t
a n t icip a t e m ovem en t a n d m a in t a in r ela t ive p os it ion wit h ou t
en t er in g t h e fr a m e of a ct ion . Th e k ey t o a ll of t h is is or ga n ized
equipment malfunction
com m u n ica t ion —t h e r igh t in for m a t ion t o t h e r igh t p er s on a t t h e
r igh t t im e.
Finalize position Mobilize
Design Strategies Solution Elements Specify status: E Existing M Modified S Speculative
decisions elements
Revea l cr it ica l p os it ion s E qu ip m en t Ca r t ogr a p h er
An t icip a t e m ovem en t s S h a d ow Cu es Adjust
Ideas
E ye Tr a ck er
S en s e a n d s ign a l s cr ip t ch a n ge S u r fa ce Pixels components
Con t r ol ext r a n eou s n ois e E lect r on ic S ou n d Ca n celin g
Digit a l Im a ge Filt r a t ion

Form: 5/19/1998

Version 2 Date: 2 1 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 7 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1

Figure 12. Action Analysis. Top-down analysis of functionality for all users.

Activity Analysis Activity: Re c o rdin g 2 Design Factor Title: S e le c t ive Filt rat io n 14

Project Scenario Project Source/s Associated Functions

TV Co m m an d TV Co m m an d
Ca m er a s a n d m icr op h on es follow t h e a ct ion of a p r ogr a m s eg- 1 . Per s on a l ob s er va t ion . Is ola t e a n d focu s s ou n d
m en t b ein g r ecor d ed for a p a r t of a s p ecia l s h ow. Th e s t u d io Is ola t e a n d focu s im a ge
Mode s et is t h e s cen e for t h e a ct ion ; even t s a r e d ir ect ed fr om t h e Mode 2 . In t er view, s t a ff,
S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion ) con t r ol r oom . S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion ) CBS Ch ica go TV Affilia t e,
S ep t em b er 1 5 , 1 9 9 1 .
Activity
Originator Recor d in g
E d u a r d o S cia m m a r ella
Originator
Contributors E d u a r d o S cia m m a r ella
5 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 Tea m d elib er a t ion s
Contributors
2 1 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 C. Owen

Users (Players) System Components (Props) Environmental Components (Set)

Act or s , p er for m er s Ca m er a s Fla t s , s et s , p r op s
Ca m er a op er a t or s S t a n d s , cr a n es , t r ip od s Air con d it ion
S ou n d op er a t or s Tr a ck s Per s on n el, op er a t or s Observation Extension
Floor m a n a ger , d ir ect or Mics / b oom s E n vir on m en t a l n ois e Beca u s e a n or m a l s t u d io r ecor d in g It is t h e goa l of t h e d ir ect or (a s well a s a ll in volved ) t o p r od u ce
S t a ge h a n d s Ligh ts S t u d io floor elem en t s even t r equ ir es m a n y p a r t icip a n t s im a ges a n d s ou n d a ccor d in g t o t h e s cr ip t . Ach ievin g a con t in u -
Hea d p h on es , h ea d s et s a n d a wid e r a n ge of equ ip m en t , wh a t ou s flow of im a ges a n d s ou n d wit h ou t er r or r ed u ces cos t s ,
is in t en d ed a n d wh a t a ct u a lly t a k es im p r oves wor k in g efficien cies a n d p r od u ces a b et t er fin a l
p la ce a r e s om et im es a t od d s . p r od u ct .
System Functions Associated Design Factors
Th er e a r e s ign ifica n t va r ia t ion s in t h e wa y t elevis ion p r ogr a m s
Recor d / s t or e in for m a t ion Rem ot e Digit a l S t or a ge a r e r ecor d ed . S om e a r e h igh ly-cr a ft ed , p olis h ed p r od u ct ion s ;
Receive a n d t r a n s m it ot h er s s t r ive for im m ed ia cy a n d a r e d ir ect a n d r a w. E a ch k in d of
Is ola t e & focu s s ou n d S elect ive Filt r a t ion p r od u ct ion r equ ir es it s own con t r olled "filt r a t ion " of t h e p ot en -
Is ola t e & focu s im a ge Rem ot e Movem en t Coor d in a t ion t ia l a ct ion s of p er s on n el a n d m ovem en t s of equ ip m en t . For a
Pr ovid e com m u n ica t ion lin k s Un n eces s a r y Lin k a ges Con fu s e h igh -en d p r od u ct ion , a s ou n d b oom d r oop in g in t o t h e fr a m e is
s im p ly n ot a llowa b le; a n ot h er p r ogr a m m igh t u s e s u ch "h u m a n "
er r or s a s s ign a t u r es of t h e s h ow.
Cover in g t h e en t ir e s t yle r a n ge, u n for t u n a t ely, m ea n s a ccom m o-
d a t in g t h e s t r ict es t r equ ir em en t s . Ca m er a s m u s t b e a b le t o
m ove fr eely, u n ob s t r u ct ed b y floor -la id ca b les a n d im p r op er ly
p la ced equ ip m en t . Ligh t s m u s t t r a ck flu id ly a n d m a in t a in
p os it ion s r igid ly. Op er a t or s m u s t m ove in con s p icu ou s ly, wit h ou t
n ois e a n d wit h ou t in t r u d in g s h a d ows . Micr op h on es m u s t
a n t icip a t e m ovem en t a n d m a in t a in r ela t ive p os it ion wit h ou t
en t er in g t h e fr a m e of a ct ion . Th e k ey t o a ll of t h is is or ga n ized
User Functions Associated Design Factors com m u n ica t ion —t h e r igh t in for m a t ion t o t h e r igh t p er s on a t t h e
r igh t t im e.
Move ca m er a / len s Lim it ed Op er a t or Mob ilit y
Move b oom / m ic E qu ip m en t In t er fer es wit h Per s on n el
Design Strategies Solution Elements Specify status: E Existing M Modified S Speculative
Com m u n ica t e d ir ect ion s Rem ot e Movem en t Coor d in a t ion
Revea l cr it ica l p os it ion s S E qu ip m en t Ca r t ogr a p h er
An t icip a t e m ovem en t s S S h a d ow Cu es
M E ye Tr a ck er
S en s e a n d s ign a l s cr ip t ch a n ge S S u r fa ce Pixels
Con t r ol ext r a n eou s n ois e E E lect r on ic S ou n d Ca n celin g
M Digit a l Im a ge Filt r a t ion

Form: 5/19/1998 Form: 5/19/1998

Version 2 Date: 5 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 4 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Version 2 Date: 2 1 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 7 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1

Figure 13. Activity Analysis distinguishes Functions and insights associated with them (Design Factors).

7
they record the needs of many users, not just buyers and
operators.
In the process of uncovering Functions, particular attention
is paid to noticing problems and opportunities, potential or
actual, that arise as the Functions are performed. Insights
are gained here for why things work or don’t work well.
These, along with ideas for what do about them, are noted
first on the Activity Analysis forms and then written up in
separate documents called Design Factors. Associated with
the Functions for which they were observed, they become
a major resource for the synthesis phase of planning yet to
come and for other development and manufacturing stages
downstream in the project.
Design Factors record the qualitative information most use-
ful for planning and design. This is where the results of
critical observations and research studies are crystallized and
built into the information base as a part of the collective
memory for the project. Essential during the project as the
bases for ideas, they continue to have value through the life
of the product (and its follow-on adaptations) as the under-
lying information upon which the design was based. With
similar Design Factors from other projects, they define a
major new form of corporate memory—a record of insights
applicable to any project with similar aspects of function.
Figure 13 shows an Activity Analysis form (left) and a
Design Factor document (right) expanded from one of As-
sociated Design Factor notations entered in the study of the
activity. The Design Factor relates a relevant insight from
an interview.
The Design Factor document contains a number of entries.
Most important, however, is information of two kinds: in-
formation about the problem (or opportunity) detected, and
information about what might be done about it. The fact
that problem and solution are both covered in the same
document is not accidental. It is important that when insights
are recognized, ideas be sought for how to use them; and it
is important that when insight information is retrieved at a
later date, the range of ideas expressed when the insight was
gained be there for further reflection.
The "Observation" section is the first of two sections dealing
with a problem/opportunity. An Observation is usually a
single sentence in which an insight is recorded about a
Function. As much as possible, it distills the essence and
summarizes behavior important to understanding what hap-
pens as the Function is performed.
Associated with the Observation section is an "Extension"
section. In this section, explanatory material is placed to
extend or develop the information of the Observation. No
matter how thoughtfully worded, a summary Observation is
seldom able to convey enough information to develop an
insight adequately. The whys that are inevitably asked are
addressed in the Extension. Primary research may be intro-
duced; background material may be discussed; examples
may be cited; contributing phenomena other than those men-
tioned in the Observation may be mentioned; side effects
may be considered. After examining the Extension section,
a reader should understand the Design Factor, appreciate its
value and even anticipate how the insight might be used—
the subject of the following "idea" sections.
"Design Strategies" is the first of two sections dealing with
solution ideas. By definition, "Design Strategies are gener-
alized suggestions for how to use the information of the
Observation and its Extension. For a format, they take an
imperative verb phrase, carefully crafted to abstract a strat-
egy without specifically describing a solution idea.
Specific ideas go into the "Solution Elements" section. So-
lution Elements come in three kinds. The first is Existing;
this is something that already exists and potentially can be
integrated into the system solution. It may be already owned
by the organization or may be incorporable through pur-
chase, alliance or other arrangement. The second is Modified.
In this case, the inspiration already exists, but is modified
to fit the occasion. The third kind is Speculative, so named
because it is a new idea (more than a simple modification
of an existing idea).
Solution Elements are preliminary ideas. They are responses
to individual Design Factor insights and may or may not be
used in the final overall concept. They are important for
determining interaction among Functions in the structuring
phase of the process—and may actually be used in the
overall solution—but, at the time they are written, they are
immediate reactions to insight, capturing the creative
thoughts of the moment. For a format, Solution Element
titles take a noun phrase. Noun phrases express concepts
well and are easy to remember—especially if they include
colorful phraseology. A good name for a Solution Element
(modified or speculative) combines an adjective and a noun
in an evocative title. Such a title, once explained, is readily
retained in memory, and a wealth of detail associated with
the concept is usually recalled with it.
Other sections on the Design Factor form serve the needs
of the knowledge base. The "Originator" section identifies
the author of the Design Factor, subsequently, its sponsor.
"Contributors" record the authors of changes and when they
were made. "Associated Functions" tie the Design Factor to
the Functions for which it was written. A "Title" names the
Design Factor for retrieval. Entries in "Source/s" follow
standard footnote format, and Extension entries contain foot-
note indicators where appropriate. If the information is from
the Originator’s direct observation or personal experience,
the Source entry is "Personal observation".
Solution Elements, once given names, are developed on their
own document forms. This is done to collect as much detail
about the idea as can be obtained at the best time to do
so—when the idea is fresh. In Figure 14, a Design Factor
introducing ergonomic insights inspired by Functions iden-
tified for the Recording activity generates several Solution
Elements. One, "Equipment Cartographer", is shown in its
document form at the right. The Solution Element form is
a simple version of what will be elaborated considerably as
System Elements in the final presentation of the project as
a system. It is a single page with three important sections:
8
 Existing
Design Factor Title: Re m o t e Mo v e m e n t Co o rdin at io n 17 Solution Element Status: Modified
X Speculative
Title: Equ ipm e n t Cart o graph e r 7

Project Source/s Associated Functions Project Description:

TV Co m m an d TV Co m m an d
1 . Mor ga n , C. T., J . S . Cook Is ola t e a n d focu s im a ge A wea r a b le, m u lt ip le-s cr een ed com p u t er a n d com m u n ica t ion
III, A. Ch a p a n is a n d M. W. Is ola t e a n d focu s s ou n d d evice a b le t o p r ovid e r ea l-t im e in for m a t ion on equ ip m en t lo-
Mode Mode ca t ion a n d t h e ch a r a ct er is t ics a n d s t a t u s of a ll p h ys ica l ele-
S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion ) Lu n d . Hu m an En gin e e rin g Move ca m er a / len s S t u d io Op er a t ion s (Pr od u ct ion )
Gu ide t o Equ ipm e n t De s ign . Move b oom / m ic m en t s a n d on goin g p r oces s es in t h e s t u d io en vir on m en t .
New Yor k : McGr a w-Hill,
Activity Activity
Recor d in g 1963. Recor d in g
2 . S h er id a n , Th om a s B.
Originator S u p ervis ory Con trol of Rem ote Originator
Ch a r les Owen Ma n ip u la tors . In Adv an c e s in B. Cop p om
Man -Mac h in e S y s t e m s
Contributors Re s e arc h , Vol. 1 , ed it ed b y Contributors
Willia m B. Rou s e, Gr een wich , 1 8 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 S . Bu r k s
1 3 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 Tea m d elib er a t ion s
CT: J AI Pr es s , 1 9 8 4 .
2 0 S ep ., 1 9 9 1 T. Bu lger

Observation Extension Properties — what it is:

For r em ot e con t r ol of ca m er a s ,
m icr op h on e b oom s a n d ligh t in g,
op er a t or s m u s t b e a b le t o con -
s t r u ct a r t ificia l p er cep t u a l s p a ces
a n d m ove ob ject s wit h in t h em
wit h con fid en ce.
Movin g ca m er a s , m icr op h on es a n d ligh t in g rem otely is a p ot en - • S ize, weigh t a n d for m d es ign ed for ea s y-a cces s , h a n d s -fr ee p or t a b ilit y
t ia lly d ifficu lt t a s k , s u b ject t o s er iou s m is t a k es a n d im p r ecis ion • Rea l-t im e con n ect ivit y wit h a ll s t u d io op er a t ion s
u n les s ca r efu l a t t en t ion is p a id t o t h e h u m a n fa ct or s a t t en d a n t
on in d ir ect con t r ol. • Mu lt ip le s cr een s for s im u lt a n eou s u s e a t h igh r es olu t ion
• In t egr a t ed d a t a b a s e or ga n iza t ion for in for m a t ion on equ ip m en t a n d s cr ip t s
Wh er e h u m a n op er a t or s will t h em s elves con t r ol t h e m ovem en t s
• Ba t t er y op er a t ion s for u p t o eigh t h ou r s
of ca m er a s , b oom s , et c., t h e con t r ol d evices s h ou ld a s m u ch a s
p os s ib le m ove lik e t h e ob ject s b ein g con t r olled . "A m a jor r e-
qu ir em en t is t h a t a con t r ol m ove in t h e exp ected d ir ect ion , p r o-
d u cin g a m a ch in e or d is p la y m ovem en t in a s im ila r d ir ect ion ...
For p r ecis ion , a s in gle con t r ol m ovin g in 2 or 3 d im en s ion s is
b et t er t h a n s ep a r a t e on es , ea ch m ovin g in on e d im en s ion "
(Mor ga n , et a l 1 9 6 3 , 2 6 3 ).
If a h u m a n op er a t or m igh t b ecom e t oo b u s y, fa t igu ed or b or ed ,
it m a y b e a p p r op r ia t e t o go t o a level of com p u t er -m ed ia t ed s u - Features — what it does:
p er vis or y con t r ol. In t h is ca s e, "...t h e com p u t er d oes n ot p r ovid e
on e fu n ct ion or on e for m of m ed ia t ion , b u t m a n y — a t d iffer en t • Pr ovid es t ext a n d gr a p h ic com m u n ica t ion s a m on g t ech n icia n s , ca m er a / s ou n d op er a t or s a n d d ir ect or
p la ces in t h e s ys t em , a t d iffer en t t im es or u n d er d iffer en t cir - • E n a b les on goin g p r oces s es t o b e m on it or ed s im u lt a n eou s ly
cu m s t a n ces . ... fr om t h e h u m a n op er a t or ’s viewp oin t t h e ch a n ge • Help s ca m er a / s ou n d op er a t or s t o a n t icip a t e m ovem en t s r equ ir ed of ca m er a s a n d m icr op h on es
t o b ein g a s u p er vis or is a lwa ys a ch a n ge fr om con t in u ou s a n d
d ir ect s en s in g a n d con t r ol t o in d ir ect or s om ewh a t r em ot e con - • Keep s a ccu r a t e in ven t or y of equ ip m en t wit h loca t ion s r et r ieva b le gr a p h ica lly
t r ol. Th e ch a n ge m ea n s ob s er vin g m or e in t egr a t ed d is p la ys a n d • In t egr a t es s et con s t r u ct ion wit h s cr ip t r equ ir em en t s t o op t im ize ca m er a a n gles a n d s ou n d p ick -u p
is s u in g s u b goa l or con d it ion a l com m a n d s , a ll a t a h igh er level p os it ion s
t h a n wit h con t in u ou s con t r ol" (S h er id a n 1 9 8 4 , 1 3 5 ).

Design Strategies Solution Elements Specify status: E Existing M Modified S Speculative

Revea l cr it ica l p os it ion s S E qu ip m en t Ca r t ogr a p h er

An t icip a t e m ovem en t s S S cr ip t S p ot Ligh t
M E ye Tr a ck er
Associated Function/s Source Design Factor/s
Cr ea t e vir t u a l con t r ol M Viewp oin t VR Ma s k
en vir on m en t s Is ola t e a n d focu s s ou n d 1 4 . S elect ive Filt r a t ion
Is ola t e a n d focu s im a ge 1 7 . Rem ot e Movem en t Coor d in a t ion
Delega t e con t r ol S As s ign m en t S u p er vis or Move ca m er a / len s
S Rob ot ic E qu ip m en t Dir ect or Move b oom / m ic

Form: 5/19/1998 Form: 5/19/1998

Version 2 Date: 1 3 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 1 0 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Version 3 Date: 2 0 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1 Date of first version: 1 1 S ep t em b er , 1 9 9 1

Figure 14. Design Factors suggest ideas, treated as Solution Elements.

Information Structure

701

601

501 502

401 402 403 404 405 clusters of

Functions
301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313

201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224

101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139
1 9 14 35 7 1 32 37 42 72 76 75 18 17 58 58 61 63 49 43 43 90 47 19 60 5 5 67 84 73 5 53 20 69 2 8 2 2 25
4 11 39 55 35 6 33 38 24 74 77 78 23 18 62 59 63 71 50 49 46 94 48 21 64 20 66 70 91 95 20 68 68 88 20 26 30 3 29
9 12 40 34 34 40 77 78 79 24 31 63 63 51 50 50 96 87 87 65 69 70 95 68 69 69 89 22 30 93 10
34 13 38 38 42 79 79 82 27 85 52 51 70 87 69 70 68 92
35 14 40 40 45 80 80 83 28 57 52 87 97 70 86 88
36
38
15
16
41 41
45
47 81 81 58 97 84
88
88 Functions
40 35 47
36
38
40

Figure 15. Structuring. Bottom-up reorganization of Functions based on design ideas (Solution Elements).

9
 File Edit View

Functions
Go Operations

Means
Options Directory

Ends
Structured Planning - Synthesis

Means Ends Means End

Help

Information Structure 701

69 Promote safety 134 Managing 221 Inventory access 312 Studio environment
inventory and control and set creation
88 Load/unload
89 Manage equipment
53 Support movement 132 Transporting 220 Operations and What End?

Means to
equipment logistics
68 Place/displace
elements
69 Promote safety
2 Install environment 135 Assembling sets 222 Installation

601
20 Mobilize elements
Structured Planning - Synthesis
22 Secure elements File Edit View Go Operations Options Directory Help

68 Place/displace
elements What End?
Means to
88
88 Load/unload
20 Mobilize elements 133 Materials handling
24 90 117 42
30 88
68 Place/displace
22 Need-to- Organize 28
elements Know Priority Software
99 90
69 Promote safety Process
27 Information
70 Retrieve elements
75 11 93

501 502
What End? 36 Procedure
86 Deliver elements
Means/Ends 31229
Means to

Cluster: 51 29 31
88 Load/unload Requires 104 73 28
Analysis
History Select
Project:
Procedure 28 75 73
31 Histories
TV Command
83 76 82 74
17 Inform Med Inform Necessary
75 (Sony) Personnel 27 77 Doctor
for Diagnosis
2778
78
96
116 Interface
Receiver
90 88 11 24 88 114
31

86 28 97
88 Access Store 28
31
115
35 Control
Complications
95
Interface
Transmitter 78
Patient Net

38
Scan Data

88 30
29 24 401
Structured Planning - Synthesis
402 403 404 405
75 73 73

43 Travelling
File Edit View
110 Go Operations Options Directory Help
75 31 30 Store 28
Patients Results
307
XX ZZ 29 Solution
Function Speculations End Means Ends Means Ends YY
MeansDesign
Elements
301 302 303 304 Factor 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 313
312 Studio environment
and set creation
Modularize structural
elements
Construx Planes and Volumes 312
Limbs
Minimize assembly/
disassembly time Locate storage Surface Pixels
away from sets
End Protectively store
Storage Pockets
fo
unused equipment Make equipment easy
r What Means?

201 202 203

to store and find
204 205 Equipment
206 Conveyor
207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224
Move components Load and unload
efficiently effectively
Move to location Power Jockey
automatically
Establish equipment Infra Net
location system
101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139
Equipment
Cartographer
End

fo
1 9 14 35 7 1 32 37 42 72 76 75 18 17 58 58 61 63 49 43 43 90 47 19 60 5 5 67 84 73 5 53 20 69 2 8 2 2 25
r What Means?
4 11 39 55 35 6 33 38 24 74 77 78 23 18 62 59 63 71 50 49 46 94 48 21 64 20 66 70 91 95 20 68 68 88 20 26 30 3 29
9 12 40 34 34 40 77 78 79 24 31 63 63 51 50 50 96 87 87 65 69 70 95 68 69 69 89 22 30 93 10
34 13 38 38 42 79 79 82 27 85 52 51 70 87 69 70 68 92
35 14 40 40 45 80 80 83 28 57 52 87 97 70 86 88
36 15 41End 41 47 81 81 58 97 84 88
312 Ends/Means
fo
Cluster:

r What Means?
38 16 45 88
Project: Synthesis
40 35 47
TV Command 36
(Sony)
38
40

Figure 16. Synthesis. Bottom-up, top-down idea generation; means/ends analysis, cluster analysis, ends/means synthesis.

a brief description of an idea, a list of its properties (what significantly—with all that means for products that are hard
it is), and a list of its features (what it does). These latter to copy.
lists, given in bullet form as noun phrases for properties,
In the structuring phase, Structured Planning’s computer
verb phrases for features, not only are a fast and effective
programs work from the bottom up using the hundreds of
way to describe a concept, but also form the basis for com-
ideas already generated as Solution Elements to reorganize
municating it to engineering (properties) and marketing (fea-
the Functions into an Information Structure. This hierarchy
tures).
of Functions (with associated Design Factors) is especially
well suited to the creative needs of the planning team. The
Structuring
reformed clusters cross former categories, and Functions can
Phase three of Structured Planning is concerned with reor-
appear in more than one cluster. The Information Structure
ganizing the Functions, optimizing their organization for
naturally anticipates well-designed artifacts and institutions.
synthesis (Figure 15). The Function Structure produced by
the top-down analysis of phase two is ideal for uncovering
Synthesis
what needs to be done; but it is fatally flawed as a guide
A number of techniques exist for expanding team creativity.
to creating a new concept! Excellent for analysis, it is an
Many of them can be used in this phase. Because of the
extremely poor choice for synthesis.
attention given during the Action Analysis phase to collect-
Because it was created by establishing categories and filling ing ideas as they occur, there are typically hundreds of ideas
them downward, the Function Structure produced by Action already available to the planning team as Solution Elements.
Analysis (and, indeed, any organization produced by Because the Structuring phase has organized the Functions
categorically-developed, top-down analysis) inherently in- into an Information Structure optimized for design, there is
hibits cross-category thinking. In the analysis of a housing a "road map" to follow while considering them.
system, for example, Functions such as Sense fire and Rec-
One of the more useful synthesis tools is a bottom-up/top-
ognize intrusion would show up in separate categories—
down procedure that employs Means/Ends Analysis and
probably under Fire Protection and Security. For synthesis,
Ends/Means Synthesis (Figure 16). Working from the bot-
this isolating form of organization is counterproductive. A
tom up, Means/Ends Analysis helps the team to understand
better organization would be one in which Functions are
the new organization of Functions through finding appro-
placed together on the basis of whether they have potential
priate labels to describe the branches of the Information
for using components of the developing system in common.
Structure. Working downward, Ends/Means Synthesis helps
In the housing example, an infrared heat sensor able to detect
the team to select, refine, modify and invent ideas as "means"
a developing fire might also be used to sense an intruder,
to meet the needs inferred from the newly labeled "end"
suggesting that the two Functions should be considered to-
branches. In the process, System Elements are created as
gether when ideas are being developed. Cross-category
final elements of the system. They may be direct restate-
thinking is stimulated by this form of organization, and the
ments of Solution Elements already described and associated
potential for holistic, multifunctional ideas is increased
with the Functions of the cluster under consideration, or they

10
 Existing Environmental Continuation Environmental
System Element Status:
X
Modified
Speculative
Title:
Image Mapping
1 System Element page: 1 Title:
Image Mapping
1

Project Superset Element/s: Related Elements: Fulfilled Functions Associated Design Factors
TV Command None 2. Infra Net 27, 29, 34, 35, 37, 38, 41, 42, 55, 56, 57, 35, 37, 41, 44, 45, 46, 78, 80, 85, 101, 102,
Contributors 3. New Senses 59, 62, 66, 67, 82, 91, 92 133, 134, 142, 155, 167, 168, 177, 180,
c. Gesture Glove 192, 193
Team deliberations
Subset Elements:
f. Virtual Viewer
Discussion
None 4. Thunder Dome
a. Thunder-D Grip Until now, studio productions required individualized studio sets. The entire concept of
"studio" work was built around the idea that control of the environment could be optimized
6. Construx
Source (if Existing or Modified): only on location—in a studio set. Movie and television sets of the past (and today) have
b. Surface Pixels
ranged from minimal sets, little more than seating with controlled lighting, to mammoth,
c. Shadow Cues
exceedingly complex and expensive recreations of entire environments.
The revolution in computer processing of the last decade brings the concept of set to a new
Description: level of awareness. A variety of inventions, from matting techniques and computer-controlled
A system of software and hardware able to produce "virtual" sets that do not require movements in film making to texture mapping in computer graphics, have made it possible to
extensive physical constructions. Sophisticated software creates three-dimensional, highly create realistic three-dimensional images that combine human actors and environments
realistic computer environments that can be combined with video takes of real actors on a constructed from data bases.
skeletal "blue" set. Environmental Image Mapping takes maximum advantage of this capability both to reduce
the cost and complexity of the sets, and to increase the flexibility and speed at which sets can
be constructed and struck. The elements of TV Command’s studio system are designed to
Properties — what it is:
work synergistically with this specialized approach to virtual reality.
• Software able to produce three-dimensional computer models of environments.
After a set is designed in virtual reality using the Thunderdome, it is prepared by
• Software able to map visual imagery onto simple computer produced frameworks to assembling basic Construx building
produce realistic three-dimensional environmental objects. elements in an arrangement that approxi-
• Virtual reality software for creating sets. mates the intended environment. The
physical Construx elements are for the
• Skeletal physical structures able to roughly duplicate physical elements in the virtual actors’ convenience only. Actors move
environment. around tables, sit in chairs, walk through
doors, etc. as they would in a conventional
set.
What the actors see is the skeletal Construx
set with cues on surfaces wherever they need
them—on the floor, walls, desks—any flat
surface. The cues, produced with Shadow
Features — what it does: Cues and produced with Surface Pixels, are
invisible to the television audience.
• Speeds the construction of sets and programs.
What the audience sees is quite another
• Eliminates the high cost of authentic sets through the use of skeletal "for actors only" picture. From the studio’s data bases,
structures. detailed images are mapped into a three-
• Extends possibilities for program settings to the entire range of environments capturable as dimensional model of the set maintained in
images in visual data bases. the computer. This model of the desired
• Exploits virtual reality processes to enable the same image data to be used for design and environment (for example the living room of
finished productions. a contemporary home) is integrated with the
studio cameras’ images of the actors on the
• Enables television production to be distributed widely among low-cost sites. live set. The result is an image for transmis-
sion that looks as if the actors are on
location.

Form: 5/19/98

1
Form: 5/19/1998
Version Date: 4 December, 1991 Date of first version: 4 December, 1991

Figure 17. Communication. Concept as plan described in detail by System Elements, each with Related System Elements,
Description, Properties, Features, Fulfilled Functions, Associated Design Factors and Discussion.

may be modifications/combinations of Solution Elements— Each System Element has a title and seven information
seen in a new light by the juxtapositions of the Information sections.
Structure—or they may be wholly new ideas invented as a
The first section lists System Elements that are closely as-
response to the newly seen interactions. Always requiring
sociated in operation or purpose, providing a hypertext-like
thoroughness and pointing the way to cross-functional in-
mapping among the ideas for better understanding the Plan.
novation, are the Functions with their associated Design
Elements closely associated are discriminated as Superset
Factor insights that terminate each branch of the structure.
Elements (elements for which the subject element is a part),
Subset Elements (elements considered a part of the subject
Communication
element), and Related Elements (elements at the same level
Invariably, the result of the Synthesis phase is a substantial
of detail). Next, is a short Description summarizing the
number of innovative, highly interrelated ideas. To extract
System Element’s general properties and features. Third, is
full advantage from this wealth of material, the ideas must
a list of Properties describing what the System Element is.
be organized for optimal communication to those responsi-
This list, expanded and refined from one or more Solution
ble for the next stage of development. At the end of the
Elements or newly developed in the Synthesis process, sets
planning stage, the product is still a concept; many details
forth the essential qualities that must be provided in the
must be resolved creatively in the designing stage before it
design. Fourth is a list of Features describing what the
can be produced.
System Element does. Similarly derived from precursor So-
The concept is communicated as a Plan made up of an lution Elements or new ideas evolved during Synthesis, this
Overview and many System Elements, each describing an list establishes what is expected of the System Element in
idea for hardware, software, a procedure or an organizational terms of its functionality. Statements in both lists must be
concept (Figure 17). The Overview presents the major ele- crafted carefully to make sure that the essence of the plan-
ments of the concept and their relationships. The System ners’ idea will be retained without overly constraining the
Elements provide the details. freedom of the designers. The fifth section lists the Functions
Fulfilled by the System Element. This enables designers and

11

Concepts
Planning
Metaplanning
Projects
Figure 18. Escalator delivery. Predictable delivery;
reliable innovation.
decision makers to track ideas back to the Activities and
Functions for which they were envisaged. The system must
perform all the functions that have been assigned to it. Sixth,
is a section for Associated Design Factors, closing the loop
from Function to insight to idea. The Design Factors high-
light the original problems, opportunities and insights that
inspired the Solution Elements and, ultimately, the System
Element. Finally, there is a thorough Discussion of the idea
with illustrations, calculations, examples and any other sup-
port that may be useful. The purpose of this section is to
present the idea as fully and clearly as possible. If the
designers are unable to develop a better idea, they should
be able to refine one from the planners’ information in this
section.
ESCALATOR DELIVERY
Like it or not, the pace of new product introduction will not
slacken. Serious competition will effectively curtail long
product life spans. And any hard times ushered in by eco-
nomic crises will only sharpen the competitive situation;
reduced markets require a larger market share for a company
to stay even. Although Structured Planning can significantly
extend a product’s life span by raising levels of innovation
and distributing design features systemically, all products
are vulnerable over time. Companies with fast reaction strat-
egies bring down competitors’ products by reverse engineer-
ing them and getting to market quickly with low-cost,
patent-evasive alternatives made possible by minimal devel-
opment costs.
The Design Strategy for development pits higher quality
products that are more innovative and difficult to copy
against the fast reaction strategy. Escalator Delivery adds
another dimension, to give the Design Strategy a one-two
punch. Made possible by a reformed development process,
Escalator Delivery (Figure 18), is also a strategy for fast
delivery. It is not, however, a reaction strategy—it is a
parallel development process.
At the heart of Escalator Delivery is the concept of Advanced
Planning Teams. Advanced Planning Teams are small teams
of individuals assembled from relevant functional units, sup-
ported in their tasks by Development, and guided by planners
trained in Structured Planning team techniques. Borrowing
from a naval analogy, members of a team are members of
a task force. They are "on loan" from their type commands,
to which they return when their task is completed.
While temporarily assigned to an Advanced Planning Team,
members are responsible for the development of a concept
for a new product, system or service to be produced. When
their task is completed, they return to their functional units
as champions of the project. They (and those that follow
them to other teams) also bring back to their functional units
new cross-discipline skills and broader knowledge of their
organization’s resources, development capabilities and phi-
losophy.
Escalator Delivery gets its name from the process by which
advanced planning teams are assembled, charged and de-
ployed. Through the metaplanning process, planning proj-
ects are conceived and initiated continuously, drawing
widely on the human resources of the organization’s func-
tional groups for the makeup of teams. Once begun, the
process delivers new concepts at a predictable frequency.
Given similar planning timetables, deliveries follow each
other in the same frequency that projects were initiated, no
matter how long the planning takes. The process resembles
an escalator, with new concepts following behind each other
at a predictable delivery rate. The effect is to have new
concepts available just fast enough to defeat fast-reaction
competitors. Just as the competition successfully brings its
copy into the market, its target is obsolete, replaced by a
new one more conceptually advanced.
CONCLUSIONS
Design thinking, fortified with appropriate tools, can con-
tribute much more significantly upstream than downstream
in the development process. International competition has
proven this. The worldwide recession of the ’80’s heightened
sensitivity considerably, and the looming slowdown now
will add an emphatic endorsement. Design is now recognized
as the upstream resource most likely to keep organizations
competitive under the new economic realities.
A Design Strategy contains elements to speed development,
add value and extend product life spans. To speed develop-
ment, fast prototyping and Escalator Delivery contribute
swift response to changing conditions: fast prototyping col-
lapses both planning and designing time; Escalator Delivery
supplies innovative concepts predictably and reliably. Add-
ing value requires getting the details right. Human-centered
design, directed through Structured Planning ensures that
the product is designed well for people and conceived well
12
in the first place. Extended product life span is a natural OWEN, Charles L. Information Processing and Design
result of the systemic approach of Structured Planning. Planning. In Design in the Age of Information, 123-129.
1996 NSF Workshop: Design@2000, Raleigh, NC: North
As evidence for the value of the Design Strategy, an issue
Carolina State University, 1997.
last year of Trendsetter Barometer, a U.S. business news-
letter (Young 1997), announced that: "Breakthrough" revo- PENG, Chi-Kang. Metaplanning for Design Projects. Un-
lutionary products have created sales booms for companies published Master of Science in Design thesis, Chicago:
that produced them (Young 1997). Of the fastest growing Illinois Institute of Technology, 1993.
companies in the U.S., more than one third launched break-
WHITNEY, Patrick. Unpublished speech, Schaumburg,
through products in 1995 and 1996. Collectively, the reve-
Illinois: Motorola, Inc., February 10, 1994.
nues of these companies soared 1,850% over the last five
years. How did they achieve this success? First, by innovat- YOUNG, David. "Breakthrough" Products, Services.
ing revolutionary concepts: a majority applied new technol- Chicago Tribune. Business Section (February 17, 1997):
ogy; 47% found new uses for existing technology. Second, 3; Compiled from: Cooper and Lybrand’s Trendsetter
by organizing themselves to implement a design strategy: Barometer.
the greatest number of successful ideas, 33%, came from
team-oriented research and development processes; almost
as many came from cross-functional teams or think tanks.
Reforming the development process enables the philosophy
of product integrity embodied in the Quality Pyramid model,
adding value for individual, institution and society (Figure
19).
From design core to capstone and cladding, the Quality
Be t t er
Pyramid links quality to design. Structured Planning imple-
ments the model to produce concepts that are superior by
design:
Differ en t
• different—freshly imagined to match the best of new tech-
nology to emerging needs and interests, Righ t
• better—thoroughly and systemically thought through for
all users, and
• right—sensitively positioned to meet environmental, per-
sonal, social and cultural needs. Figure 19. The Quality Pyramid.
Better products through sound design strategy.
The strategy is straightforward; tools to implement it are
available; and the road to reform beckons, urged by both
competition and opportunity. The rewards will go to those
who commit. But the commitment required is more heart
than purse. Of all the resources necessary for business or
institutional success, the least costly is design. A Design
Strategy, implemented with information-age tools, is a blue-
print today for success.

REFERENCES AND SELECTED READINGS

OWEN, Charles L. Context for Creativity. Design Studies.
13, No. 3 (1992): 216-228.
OWEN, Charles L. Product Integrity by Design.
Design/Recherche No. 3 (February 1993): 5-10.
OWEN, Charles L. A Critical Role for Design Technology.
Design Management Journal. Keynote article, 3, No. 2
(1993): 10-18.
OWEN, Charles L. Design for Integrity. Chicago: Institute
of Design Communications Center, Illinois Institute of Tech-
nology, 1993.

13