Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T23:24:51.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptual Design in Metalworking Microenterprises: An Empirical Study in Tanzania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

E. Opiyo ,
S. Jagtap  and
S. Keshwani
E. Opiyo
Affiliation:
St. Joseph University in Tanzania, Tanzania
S. Jagtap*
Affiliation:
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden
S. Keshwani
Affiliation:
Dayananda Sagar University, India
*
[email protected]

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.

Product design is a key aspect of human intelligence and creativity, attracting not only experts but also workers and self-employed without any formal design training. Although numerous people in developing countries design and manufacture simple products in metalworking microenterprises, there is very little systematic knowledge about their design process. This paper aims to fill this gap in design knowledge. We aim at investigating some aspects of design process in the metalworking microenterprises in Tanzania. The findings reveal how they identify needs, and generate and evaluate concepts.

Keywords

design practiceconceptual designdesign creativityinformal sectordeveloping countries
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 2493 - 2502
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), 2022.

References

Breakwell, G. M. 2006. “Interviewing Methods.” In Research Methods in Psychology, edited by Breakwell, G. M., Hammond, S., Fife-Schaw, C., and Smith, J. A., 232–253. 3rd ed. London, UK: SAGE.Google Scholar
Bryman, A. 2004. Social Research Methods. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing: SpringerGoogle Scholar
Cross, N., Dorst, K., & Christiaans, H. (1996). Analysing design activity: WileyGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, K. M. (2006). Product design in less industrialized economies: constraints and opportunities in Kenya. Research in Engineering Design, 17(3), 135–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GDRC (Global Development Research Center), http://www.gdrc.org/icm/micro/what-is.html, 2020.Google Scholar
Gray, D. E. 2013. Doing Research in the Real World. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2019a). Design and poverty: a review of contexts, roles of poor people, and methods. Research in Engineering Design, 30(1), 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2019b). Design creativity: Refined method for novelty assessment. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 7(1-2), 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2021). Co-design with marginalised people: designers’ perceptions of barriers and enablers. CoDesign, 1–24.Google Scholar
Jagtap, S. 2018. “Intentions and Inspiration in Shaping Visual Appearance of Products: The Practice of Professional Industrial Designers in India.” The Design Journal 21 (1): 85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S., Larsson, A., Hiort, V., Olander, E., Warell, A., & Khadilkar, P. (2014). How design process for the Base of the Pyramid differs from that for the Top of the Pyramid. Design Studies, 35(5), 527–558.Google Scholar
Kabecha, W. (1998). Technological capability of the micro-enterprises in Kenya's informal sector. Technovation, 19(2), 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Nichter, S., & Goldmark, L. (2009). Small firm growth in developing countries. World Development, 37(9), 1453–1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opiyo, E. Z. (2016) a “An Approach to Represent and Communicate Product or System Design Ideas at the Fuzzy-Front End of the Design Process’ Systems, 4(1), 8; pp. 1–18, doi:10.3390/systems4010008.Google Scholar
Opiyo, E. Z. Horva´th, I., Vergeest, J. S. M (2002) “Quality assurance of design support software: review and analysis of the state of the art”, Computers in Industry 49 (2002) 195–215Google Scholar
Opiyo, E. Z. (2016) “Reconnoitring how structural design in the context of industrial design engineering evolves’, Int. J. of Product Development, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opiyo, E. Z. (2017) “A feature-based approach to conceptualisation, upfront modelling, and planning for the future of complex systems’, Int. J. Information of Technology and Management, Vol.16, No. 1, pp.91–112. © 2017 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papalambros, P. Y. (2015). Design Science: Why, What and How. Design Science, 1(1), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J. J., Smith, S. M., & Vargas-Hernandez, N. (2003). Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Design studies, 24(2), 111–134.Google Scholar
Sternberg, RJ, Lubert, TI (1999) The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. In: Sternberg, RJ (ed) Handbook of creativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 3–15Google Scholar
Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2007). Product design and development: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
Williams, C. C., Shahid, M. S., & Martínez, A. (2015). Determinants of the level of informality of informal micro-enterprises: some evidence from the city of Lahore, Pakistan. World Development.Google Scholar