Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:33:11.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The PSI Network Model for Studying Diverse Complex Design Scenarios

Part of: Design Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Yoram Reich  and
Eswaran Subrahmanian
Yoram Reich*
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University;
Eswaran Subrahmanian
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
*
Contact: Reich, Yoram, Tel Aviv University, School of Mechanical Engineering, Israel, yoram@eng.tau.ac.il

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.

Design pervades our world in variety and complexity that is difficult to grasp. Different disciplines and researchers take one or few perspectives to study, model, and try to understand design, why it fails and when it succeeds. However, without a comprehensive model, the value of such approaches is limited. We created a framework – the PSI (Problem, Social and Institutional Spaces) framework – that includes several models, ranging from simple to complex, networked, and hierarchical or recursive that can be used to model all design scenarios. In what follows, we demonstrate the network version of this framework, how it is used, and what insight it can present. The diversity of situations we present, mergers and acquisitions of companies, collaborations between industry and university, large multi- organizational projects, and a very complex project, as well as other cases we do not present here, confers the validity of utility and potential of the PSI framework.

Keywords

Design managementDesign theoryDesign methodology
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1283 - 1292
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
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) 2019

References

Allen, T.J. (1984), Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within the R&D Organization. MIT Press Books.Google Scholar
Ashby, W.R. (1958), “Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems”, Cybernetica, Vol. 1, pp. 83–99.Google Scholar
Bekius, F. and Meijer, S. (2018), “The redesign process of the timetable for the Dutch railway sector: a theoretical approach”, International Journal of System of Systems Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 330–345.Google Scholar
Braha, D. and Bar-Yam, Y. (2004), “Topology of large-scale engineering problem-solving networks”, Physical Review E, Vol. 69 No. 1, p. 016113.Google Scholar
Bonebeau, E. (2002), “Agent based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 7280–7287.Google Scholar
Colfer, L.J. and Baldwin, C.Y. (2016), “The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions”, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 709–738.Google Scholar
Davis, J.G., Subrahmanian, E., Konda, S., Granger, H., Collins, M. and Westerberg, A.W. (2001), “Creating shared information spaces to support collaborative design work”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 377–392.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Klein, K.J. (2000), “A Multilevel Approach to Theory and Research in Organizations: Contextual, Temporal, and Emergent Processes”, In: Klein, K.J. and Kozlowski, S.W.J. (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions (pp. 3–90). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
Lewin, A.Y., Long, C.P. and Carroll, T.N. (1999), “The coevolution of new organizational forms”, Organization Science, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 535–550.Google Scholar
Mihm, J. and Sosa, M.E. (2007), “Organization design for new product development”, in Handbook of New Product Development Management, Routledge, pp. 181–214.Google Scholar
Meijer, S., Reich, Y. and Subrahmanian, E. (2014), “The future of gaming for design of complex systems”, Back to the Future of Gaming, pp. 154–167.Google Scholar
Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (2002), “Evolutionary theorizing in economics”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
Reich, Y. (2017), “The principle of reflexive practice”, Design Science.Google Scholar
Reich, Y., Konda, S.L., Monarch, I.A., Levy, S.N. and Subrahmanian, E. (1996), “Varieties and issues of participation and design”, Design Studies, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 165–180.Google Scholar
Reich, Y., Konda, S., Subrahmanian, E., Cunningham, D., Dutoit, A., Patrick, R., Thomas, M. and Westerberg, A.W. (1999), “Building agility for developing agile design information systems”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 67–83.Google Scholar
Reich, Y. and Subrahmanian, E. (2015), “Designing PSI: an introduction to the PSI framework”, In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 15), Milan, Italy, 7.15.Google Scholar
Reich, Y. and Subrahmanian, E. (2017), “The PSI matrix–A framework and a theory of design”, In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17), Vancouver, Canada, 21–25.08. 2017.Google Scholar
Sitton, M. and Reich, Y. (2018), “EPIC framework for enterprise processes integrative collaboration”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 30–46.Google Scholar
Smulders, F., Reich, Y. and Subrahmanian, E. (2018), “The Dreamliner's bumpy road to takeoff. Could Boeing have known?”, 11th Design Theory SIG Workshop, Paris, 30–31 January 2018Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E., Reich, Y., Konda, S.L., Dutoit, A., Cunningham, D., Patrick, R., Thomas, M. and Westerberg, A.W. (1997), “September. The N-Dim approach to creating design support systems”, In Proc. of ASME Design Technical Conf.Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E., Reich, Y., Smulders, F. and Meijer, S. (2011a), “Designing insights from weaving theories of cognition and design theories”, In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E., Reich, Y., Smulders, F. and Meijer, S.M. (2011b), “Design as synthesis of spaces”, Proceedings of the International Association of Design Research Societies.Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E., Eckert, C., McMahon, C. and Reich, Y. (2017), “Economic development as design: Insight and guidance through the PSI framework”, In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17), Vancouver, Canada, 21–25.08. (pp. 229–238).Google Scholar
Subrahmanian, E., Reich, Y. and Krishnan, S. (2019), We the Designers, MIT Press.Google Scholar