3 1 Motivation •  Designers often use prototypes to communicate their thoughts and

ideas to stakeholders1 •  Designers use various formats and levels of refinement of prototypes2 •  Stakeholders can have different levels of

o  Experience, motivation, and investment in the project3

•  Factors influencing how prototypes are perceived include o  Materials, finish, fidelity, visual appearance4,5

•  Stakeholders might perceive good ideas negatively because of a less favorable presentation

•  Stakeholders might perceive not-so-good ideas more positively due to a more refined form of presentation6,7

à Prototype format and quality should be appropriate for the targeted stakeholder group as well as the design question(s) asked.

Influence of prototype type on stakeholder engagement

Conclusions •  Prototype format does indeed influence the category of actionable feedback stakeholders provided •  No single prototype format yielded the highest percentage of justified answers •  Certain forms of prototypes might be better suited to address certain questions •  Not one particular stakeholder group provided more actionable feedback than another •  More experienced stakeholders might be preferable when designers seek feedback on a new device idea

Limitations •  Study sampled participants from a single family planning clinic •  Study introduced participants to a single medical device concept

REF ID A175-1

Category Code Definition Example

I Justified answer with additional design input

Provided input / food for thought in addition to answering the question and justifying the answer

"So maybe it should be designed in (different) sizes"

II Justified answer Answered question affirmatively and provided justification

"I like, the ability of the device to isolate the skin and then the subcutaneous tissue from the muscle"

III Unjustified answer

Answered question affirmatively but provided no justification

"Yes I think it will work”

IV No answer, false-positive or circular logic

Provided no answer, answer was contradicting or made no sense

"I can't say" or “If you get it right, then it will work”

V Missing Data Question was not asked  

Prototype Formats

3D Printed

Sketch

CAD Model

Mock-Up

Answer Categories

Michael Deininger1,2, Kathleen Sienko2,3, Shanna Daly2, Jennifer Lee3, Elsie Effah Kaufmann4 & Samuel Obed5

1Design Science, 2Mechanical Engineering, 3Biomedical Engineering - University of Michigan, 4Biomedical Engineering - University of Ghana, 5University of Ghana Medical School

Contact: Michael Deininger: midei@umich.edu & Kathleen Sienko: sienko@umich.edu

Methods 2

45 Medical Practitioners from Korle Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Ghana

1) Do you think this concept will work? •  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for Sketch

o  Sketches are the least precise form of representation, leaving the largest margin for interpretation and imagination

•  Lowest percentage of justified answer with design input (Category I) for Cardboard Mock-up o  Stakeholders questioned fidelity and physical properties of the Cardboard Mock-up

•  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for Nurses/Midwifes

Findings

2) How do you think patients will feel about this device? •  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for CAD

o  CAD outperformed both physical prototypes (mock-up and 3D printed model) o  CAD model was 3-dimensional in nature, but participants were not able to physically interact

with the prototype or see it on an actual arm •  Lowest percentage of justified answer with design input (Category I) for Sketch

o  Sketch might have made it difficult to visualize how the device would interact with a patient •  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for Doctors

3) What would you change about this device? •  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for 3D printed prototype •  Highest percentage of unjustified (Category III) and invalid answers (Category IV) for Sketch

o  Sketch might have made it difficult to imagine how the device would be used in context •  Both physical models (mock-up and 3D printed) scored higher than the virtual, 2-dimensional models

o  Physical form might have made it easier for participants to be critical of properties such as size, texture or materials

•  Highest percentage of justified answers with design input (Category I) for all groups across all questions

4

Acknowledgements The research team would like to thank Andy Akibateh and Dr. Samuel Dery for their help during data collection and Kimberlee Roth for her help with editing. This work was supported by Fogarty International Center of the U. S. National Institutes of Health under award number 1D43TW009353 and by the University of Michigan's Investigating Student Learning Grant, 2016, funded by the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, the Office of the Vice Provost for Global and Engaged Education and the College of Engineering

References 1) Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., & Clarkson, P. J. (2004). Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25(6), 547–577. 2) Kelley, T. (2010). Prototyping is the shorthand of innovation. Design Management Journal (Former Series), 12(3), 35–42. 3) Chamorro-Koc, M., Popovic, V., & Emmison, M. (2008). Using visual representation of concepts to explore users and designers’ concepts of everyday products. Design Studies, 29(2), 142–159. 4) Kudrowitz, B., Te, P., & Wallace, D. (2012). The influence of sketch quality on perception of product-idea creativity. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing : AI EDAM, 26(3), 267–279. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/10.1017/S0890060412000145 5) Macomber, B., & Yang, M. (2011). The Role of Sketch Finish and Style in User Responses to Early Stage Design Concepts, 567–576. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2011-48714 6) Sauer, J., & Sonderegger, A. (2009). The influence of prototype fidelity and aesthetics of design in usability tests: Effects on user behaviour, subjective evaluation and emotion. Applied Ergonomics, 40(4), 670–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.06.006 7) Seva, R. R., & Helander, M. G. (2009). The influence of cellular phone attributes on users’ affective experiences: A cultural comparison. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(2), 341–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2008.12.001

5

•  Introduction of a new medical device concept •  Three stakeholder groups

o  Nurses/Midwifes, Medical Students. Medical Doctors •  Various prototype formats

o  Sketches, mock-ups, CAD models, 3D printed models •  Answers categorized according to degree of actionable feedback •  Subset of findings (three questions) describes how

o  Prototype format influenced stakeholder feedback o  Group membership influenced stakeholder feedback