Evaluating ideation using the publications Popular Science, Popular Mechanics and Make in coordination with a new patent search tool and the 6-3-5 method

Abstract

The ideation or concept generation stage in the design process is ripe with possibility for infusion of creativity that can lead to the development of innovative products and systems. Along with the desired creativity or novelty, concepts must also be feasible in order to have promise as fielded products. This combination of desired novelty and required feasibility can be difficult to attain. Various ideation techniques have been developed which aid the designer in their quest for an innovative new product or system. In the current work, we evaluate four ideation techniques: use of the publications Popular Science and Popular Mechanics, use of the publication Make, use of a new patent search tool and use of the 6-3-5 "brain writing - rotational drawing" technique. The four techniques are described in detail with particular emphasis placed on a description of the patent search tool as this ideation technique, based on recently developed software, has not been previously disseminated. The techniques are then assessed to determine their utility in terms of quantity of ideas generated, novelty of the ideas and feasibility of the ideas. This assessment was done in the context of a capstone design team at the US Air Force Academy working on a robotics oriented project. Specifically, the design team is developing small robots with the ability to maneuver through rough terrain in caves or tunnels for surveillance purposes. Representative assessment results include the fact that the design team was able to produce over 20 new concepts using the new patent search tool; validating that this new technique shows great promise. Also, the feasibility of the concepts created using the Make publication was significantly higher (p-value of 0.06) than the concepts from the Popular Science and Popular Mechanics publications while the novelty ratings between these two showed no statistically significant difference. Overall the team generated over 130 concepts with the largest contributors to this quantity coming from the Make publication and the 6-3-5 technique. The paper concludes by noting the unique characteristics and resulting contributions from each of the four ideation techniques along with suggestions regarding which technique(s) might be most beneficial depending on the nature of a specific design challenge. © 2012 American Society for Engineering Education.