No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A FRAMEWORK MODEL FOR FACILITATING DO-IT-YOURSELF DESIGN
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Today's global context of mass-produced items has resulted in an increasing ‘distance’, or alienation, between people and the origins of the items they buy and use: an unhealthy human-product relationship.
This observation permits the search for an alternative interpretation of well-being: a transformation that would support resilience and self sufficiency, and a better human product relationship or ‘a new partnership’, as advocated by various scholars.
In this paper, this new partnership is considered through supporting ‘Do-It-Yourself’ (DIY) product design: a scenario in which professional designers facilitate laypersons to design for themselves. Anticipating (1) the designer's responsibility, and (2) the layperson's innate desire to create, this paper introduces a ‘Design for DIY’ framework method to help bridge the knowledge gap between the product designer and the layperson.
The initial starting points of this study, complemented by a range of ‘Design for DIY’ studies, and an exploration of existing design frameworks and design models, resulted in the design of a ‘Design-for-DIY’ framework. This paper concludes with recommendations for the testing and further development of the Design-for-DIY framework.
Keywords
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Achterhuis, Hans. 2011. “Alle Reden Tot Zorg; Een mens is geen kattenbrokje.” De Groene Amsterdammer, Jan. 31st. 2011, 4.Google Scholar
Al-Murani, Bäsmä. 2019. “Design thinking methods in early phase of ship concept development.”Google Scholar
Atkinson, Paul. 2006. “Do It Yourself: Democracy and Design (editorial).” Journal of Design History 19 (1):1–10. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jdh/epk001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchini, Massimo, and Maffei, Stefano. 2013. “Microproduction everywhere.” Defining The Boundaries of the emerging new Dis.Google Scholar
Bo-Kristensen, Mads. 2018. Fablab schools; Towards Digital Smart, Entrepreneurial and Innovative Pupils: faBlaB schools eu project partners.Google Scholar
Bonvoisin, Jérémy, Galla, Jahnavi Krishna, and Prendeville, Sharon. 2017. “Design principles for do-it-yourself production.” International Conference on Sustainable Design and Manufacturing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brugger, Florian, and Gehrke, Christian. 2018. “Skilling and deskilling: technological change in classical economic theory and its empirical evidence.” Theory and Society 47 (5):663–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buijs, Jan, and Valkenburg, Rianne. 1996. Integrale Produktontwikkeling. Utrecht: Lemma bv.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M., and Halton, E.. 1981. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Clive. 2006. “Home is where the Art is.” Journal of Design History 19 (1):11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehn, Pelle. 2008. “Participation in design things.” Participatory Design Conference (PDC), Bloomington, Indiana, USA (2008).Google Scholar
Ehrenfeld, John R. 2008. Sustainability by design: a subversive strategy for transforming our consumer culture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J Harvey. 1959. “Basic design concepts.” Journal of the American Society for Naval Engineers 71 (4):671–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fablab-Enschede. 2017. “FabLab Enschede vervaardigt plaquette voor ‘Smart Enschede’.” accessed 25-6. https://www.fablabenschede.nl/fablab-enschede-vervaardigt-plaquette-voor-smart-enschede/.Google Scholar
Fox, Stephen. 2013. “Paradigm shift: do-it-yourself (DIY) invention and production of physical goods for use or sale.” Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, Nikolaus, Schreier, Martin, and Kaiser, Ulrike. 2010. “The “I designed it myself” effect in mass customization.” Management science 56 (1):125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, Michael J, Gravdahl, JT, and French, MJ. 1985. Conceptual design for engineers: Springer.Google Scholar
Gershenfeld, Neil. 2012. “How to make almost anything: The digital fabrication revolution.” Foreign Affairs 91 (6):43–57.Google Scholar
Gibbs, G. 1988. Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Oxford: FEU.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Carolyn. 1998. Do It Yourself: Home Improvement in 20th-Century America. New Jersey: Princeton Architectural Press.Google Scholar
Helne, Tuula, and Hirvilammi, Tuuli. 2016. “The relational conception of wellbeing as a catalyst of the ecosocial transition.” In The Ecosocial Transition of Societies: The Contribution of Social Work and Social Policy, edited by Kati Närhi Aila-Leena Matthies, 36-53. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Hirsch, Danielle, and Pauw, Pieter. 2022. “Duurzame Doelen haal je niet alleen in Eigen Land.” NRC Handelsblad, January 4th, 2022, 18-19.Google Scholar
Hollinetz, Hannelore Hollinetz and Martin. 2015. Otelo – Open Technology Labs in Austria. In Patterns of Commoning, edited by D. Bollier and S. Helfrich: Commons Strategy Group and Off the Common Press.Google Scholar
Keinonen, Turkka. 2009. “Design Contribution Square.” Advanced Engineering Informatics 23 (2):142–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, Vijay. 2012. 101 design methods: A structured approach for driving innovation in your organization: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Kymäläinen, Tiina. 2015. “The design methodology for studying smart but complex do-it-yourself experiences.” Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments 7 (6):849–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipovetsky, Gilles. 2006. Le bonheur paradoxal: essai sur la société d'hyperconsommation. Vol. 377: Gallimard Paris.Google Scholar
Maldini, Irene. 2016. “Attachment, Durability and the Environmental Impact of Digital DIY.” The Design Journal 19 (1):141–157. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2016.1085213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, Ezio. 2006. Design, Ethics and Sustainability: guidelines for transition phase. In Cumulus working papers Nantes University of Art & Design HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
Manzini, Ezio. 2012. “Design research for sustainable social innovation.” In Design research now, 233-245. Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mugge, R., Schoormans, J.P.L., and Schifferstein, H.N.J.. 2009. “Emotional Bonding with personalized products.” Journal of Design Engineering 20 (5):467–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myerson, Jeremy. 2016. ”Scaling Down: Why Designers Need to Reverse Their Thinking.” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 2 (4):288–299. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.06.001.Google Scholar
Oleksiuk, Ihor. 2018. “Stakeholders management in a service design process in the pharmaceutical company.”Google Scholar
Pacey, Philip. 1992. “'Anyone designing anything?'Non-professional designers and the history of design.” Journal of Design History 5 (3):217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Wallace, K., Blessing, L.T.M., Beitz, W., and Bauert, F.. 2013. Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach: Springer London.Google Scholar
Peppler, Kylie, and Bender, Sophia. 2013. “Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time.” Phi Delta Kappan 95 (3):22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porritt, Jonathon. 2003. Redefining Prosperity: Resource productivity, economic growth and sustainable development: Sustainable Development Commission.Google Scholar
Pugh, Stuart. 1991. Total design: integrated methods for successful product engineering: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Roozenburg, N.F.M., and Eekels, J.. 1998. Productontwerpen, structuur en methoden. Den Haag: Lemma bv.Google Scholar
Roozenburg, Norbert FM, and Cross, NG. 1991. “Models of the design process: integrating across the disciplines.” Design studies 12 (4):215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvia, Giuseppe. 2013. “Design for satisfactory and sustainable patterns of consumption and production. Il design per la pratica contemporanea del Do It Yourself.”Google Scholar
Salvia, Giuseppe, Bruno, Carmen, and Canina, Marita. 2016. “digitally making as an opportunity for skilling and empowerment.” cumulus association biannual international conference.Google Scholar
Salvia, Giuseppe, and Cooper, Tim. 2016. “The role of design as a catalyst for sustainable DIY.” In Sustainable Consumption, 15–34. Springer.Google Scholar
Sanders, Elizabeth B-N. 2006a. “Scaffolds for building everyday creativity.” Design for effective communications: Creating Contexts for Clarity and Meaning:65–77.Google Scholar
Sanders, Elizabeth BN. 2006b. “Design serving people.” Cumulus working papers Copenhagen 15 (05):28–33.Google Scholar
Schön, D.A. 1984. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Schreier, Martin. 2006. “The value increment of mass-customized products: An empirical assessment.” Journal of Consumer Behaviour 5 (4):317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, E.F. 2010. Small is Beautiful: Economics as if people mattered. London: Blond & Briggs Ltd. (ori.). Original edition, 1973. Reprint, Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Shove, Elizabeth, Watson, Matt, and Ingram, Jack. 2005. “The value of design and the design of value.” Joining Forces’, Design Conference, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Thorpe, Ann. 2010. “Design's role in sustainable consumption.” Design issues 26 (2):3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tukker, Arnold, Cohen, Maurie J, Hubacek, Klaus, and Mont, Oksana. 2010. “The impacts of household consumption and options for change.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 14 (1):13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Abel, Bas, Klaassen, Roel, Evers, Lucas, and Troxler, Peter. 2011. “Open design now.” Amsterdam: Waag Society. Retrieved February 11:2014.Google Scholar
Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2015. “Beyond Interaction.” Interactions (IX) XXII.3:26–31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2756410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vossen, Christina, Kleppe, Robert, and Randi, S. 2013. “Ship design and system integration.” no. September.Google Scholar
Weisser, Tina. 2022. Successfully Implementing Service Design Projects Accessed 30-1-2022.Google Scholar
Wirth, Marco, and Thiesse, Frederic. 2016. “Shapeways and the 3D printing revolution.” Eduglopedia, accessed March 1st, 2021.Google Scholar
Wolf, Marco, and McQuitty, Shaun. 2011. “Understanding the do-it-yourself consumer: DIY motivations and outcomes.” AMS review 1 (3):154–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, Hartanto, and Lesmono, Dharma. 2013. “On the evaluation of product customization strategies in a vertically differentiated market.” International Journal of Production Economics 144 (1):105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynn, David C, and John Clarkson, P. 2018. “Process models in design and development.” Research in Engineering Design 29 (2):161–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access