Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool

Asko Ellman, Robert E. Wendrich, Tarja Tiainen

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In design and engineering context, the use of tools, simulations and multi-realities is already an intrinsic part of design activities, methods and processes. To support participatory design during the ideation phase in a co-creative context, participative tools are needed. User-centered and co-creative design could benefit product creation and innovation process through data-collection (incl. product characteristics and user requirements) from individual data-mining activities. The traditional approach for customer requirements prioritization is pair-wise comparison. It is used both in the QFD method and in the Pugh matrix method. In practice, this means that a user compares two product characteristics at a time and decides which one of the two is more important or if they are equally important. Determining a suitable user interface for the comparison has proven to be the most demanding phase in the implementation of this method. This paper presents alternative ways to implement a customer property tool and discusses experiences with some of its implementations. In the first version, the interface is based on the use of numbers, whereas the last version is more visual, interactive and game-like. The feasibility of the tool was studied in user tests carried out in Finland and in the Netherlands.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
Place of PublicationCharlotte, NC, USA
PublisherAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
PagesV01BT02A041-
ISBN (Print)978-0-7918-5008-4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Aug 2016
Event36th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference 2016 - Charlotte, United States
Duration: 21 Aug 201624 Aug 2016
Conference number: 36

Publication series

Name
PublisherASME

Conference

Conference36th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference 2016
CountryUnited States
CityCharlotte
Period21/08/1624/08/16

Fingerprint

User interfaces
Data mining
Innovation

Keywords

  • METIS-320538
  • IR-103247

Cite this

Ellman, A., Wendrich, R. E., & Tiainen, T. (2016). Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool. In Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (pp. V01BT02A041-). Charlotte, NC, USA: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2016-59886
Ellman, Asko ; Wendrich, Robert E. ; Tiainen, Tarja. / Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool. Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Charlotte, NC, USA : American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 2016. pp. V01BT02A041-
@inproceedings{3aaddb0b0d0645f3a62e8bd9ff35ec3e,
title = "Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool",
abstract = "In design and engineering context, the use of tools, simulations and multi-realities is already an intrinsic part of design activities, methods and processes. To support participatory design during the ideation phase in a co-creative context, participative tools are needed. User-centered and co-creative design could benefit product creation and innovation process through data-collection (incl. product characteristics and user requirements) from individual data-mining activities. The traditional approach for customer requirements prioritization is pair-wise comparison. It is used both in the QFD method and in the Pugh matrix method. In practice, this means that a user compares two product characteristics at a time and decides which one of the two is more important or if they are equally important. Determining a suitable user interface for the comparison has proven to be the most demanding phase in the implementation of this method. This paper presents alternative ways to implement a customer property tool and discusses experiences with some of its implementations. In the first version, the interface is based on the use of numbers, whereas the last version is more visual, interactive and game-like. The feasibility of the tool was studied in user tests carried out in Finland and in the Netherlands.",
keywords = "METIS-320538, IR-103247",
author = "Asko Ellman and Wendrich, {Robert E.} and Tarja Tiainen",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "21",
doi = "10.1115/DETC2016-59886",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-0-7918-5008-4",
publisher = "American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)",
pages = "V01BT02A041--",
booktitle = "Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference",
address = "United States",

}

Ellman, A, Wendrich, RE & Tiainen, T 2016, Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool. in Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Charlotte, NC, USA, pp. V01BT02A041-, 36th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference 2016, Charlotte, United States, 21/08/16. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2016-59886

Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool. / Ellman, Asko; Wendrich, Robert E.; Tiainen, Tarja.

Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Charlotte, NC, USA : American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 2016. p. V01BT02A041-.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool

AU - Ellman, Asko

AU - Wendrich, Robert E.

AU - Tiainen, Tarja

PY - 2016/8/21

Y1 - 2016/8/21

N2 - In design and engineering context, the use of tools, simulations and multi-realities is already an intrinsic part of design activities, methods and processes. To support participatory design during the ideation phase in a co-creative context, participative tools are needed. User-centered and co-creative design could benefit product creation and innovation process through data-collection (incl. product characteristics and user requirements) from individual data-mining activities. The traditional approach for customer requirements prioritization is pair-wise comparison. It is used both in the QFD method and in the Pugh matrix method. In practice, this means that a user compares two product characteristics at a time and decides which one of the two is more important or if they are equally important. Determining a suitable user interface for the comparison has proven to be the most demanding phase in the implementation of this method. This paper presents alternative ways to implement a customer property tool and discusses experiences with some of its implementations. In the first version, the interface is based on the use of numbers, whereas the last version is more visual, interactive and game-like. The feasibility of the tool was studied in user tests carried out in Finland and in the Netherlands.

AB - In design and engineering context, the use of tools, simulations and multi-realities is already an intrinsic part of design activities, methods and processes. To support participatory design during the ideation phase in a co-creative context, participative tools are needed. User-centered and co-creative design could benefit product creation and innovation process through data-collection (incl. product characteristics and user requirements) from individual data-mining activities. The traditional approach for customer requirements prioritization is pair-wise comparison. It is used both in the QFD method and in the Pugh matrix method. In practice, this means that a user compares two product characteristics at a time and decides which one of the two is more important or if they are equally important. Determining a suitable user interface for the comparison has proven to be the most demanding phase in the implementation of this method. This paper presents alternative ways to implement a customer property tool and discusses experiences with some of its implementations. In the first version, the interface is based on the use of numbers, whereas the last version is more visual, interactive and game-like. The feasibility of the tool was studied in user tests carried out in Finland and in the Netherlands.

KW - METIS-320538

KW - IR-103247

U2 - 10.1115/DETC2016-59886

DO - 10.1115/DETC2016-59886

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 978-0-7918-5008-4

SP - V01BT02A041-

BT - Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference

PB - American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

CY - Charlotte, NC, USA

ER -

Ellman A, Wendrich RE, Tiainen T. Framework and Feasibility Study for Pairwise Comparison Tool. In Proceedings ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Charlotte, NC, USA: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). 2016. p. V01BT02A041- https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2016-59886