90
W. Chu et al.
Fig. 6.1) into a three-dimensional physical cube, we intend to use the form of dice
play to introduce elements of randomness (Bengtsson et al. 2018) and thus provide a
more interactive way for design practitioners to unfold the different aspects of human
activities.
To better support the use of the Activity Cube in designers’ early-stage design
ideation process, we also developed the Activity Design Cards to provide questions
and examples for designers to explore. The Activity Design Cards are comprised of
six categories which match with the six facets of the Activity Cube. Each card is
comprised of two parts: an activity-centered design question and a corresponding
design example (see Fig. 6.3). The design examples we illustrated in the cards are
extracted from the products and services that people are familiar with in their daily
life contexts. The purpose is to help design practitioners to reflect on the questions
through the support from design examples without the need to spend further efforts in
learning the background of the theory. Currently, there are 24 activity design cards,
covering all six facets of the Activity Cube. Note that the deck of cards will be
expanded in the next prototype iteration. The current version is available from the
authors upon request.
6.5 Case Study Deployment: Reducing Household Food
Waste Through Packaging Design
6.5.1 Case Study Background
At this early concept development stage of our sustainable ACD toolkit, we aimed to
gain insight in terms of how the ACD toolkit can be used in designers’ ideation process
and collect feedback regarding the usability of the toolkit. We tested the toolkit in an
ongoing case study “Design On-pack Information Attributes to Influence Consumer
Household Food Waste Behavior” (Chu et al. 2019). In the project, the tool was
tested in both collaborative design workshops and individual ideation sessions. We
invited both design researchers and food industry practitioners to participate in the
study. This combination of participant background and research settings allowed us
to understand how the toolkit can be used by not only professional designers, but
also people without any solid design background, not only in group scenarios but
also in individual settings. The design brief that all the participants received was “In
order to optimize people’s correct usage of date labels and storage guidance, what
packaging or non-packaging product/service design concepts can be developed?”.
Observation notes, audio recordings and participants’ sketches were collected in the
workshops and interviews. All of the workshops and interviews were transcribed.
W. Chu et al.
Fig. 6.1) into a three-dimensional physical cube, we intend to use the form of dice
play to introduce elements of randomness (Bengtsson et al. 2018) and thus provide a
more interactive way for design practitioners to unfold the different aspects of human
activities.
To better support the use of the Activity Cube in designers’ early-stage design
ideation process, we also developed the Activity Design Cards to provide questions
and examples for designers to explore. The Activity Design Cards are comprised of
six categories which match with the six facets of the Activity Cube. Each card is
comprised of two parts: an activity-centered design question and a corresponding
design example (see Fig. 6.3). The design examples we illustrated in the cards are
extracted from the products and services that people are familiar with in their daily
life contexts. The purpose is to help design practitioners to reflect on the questions
through the support from design examples without the need to spend further efforts in
learning the background of the theory. Currently, there are 24 activity design cards,
covering all six facets of the Activity Cube. Note that the deck of cards will be
expanded in the next prototype iteration. The current version is available from the
authors upon request.
6.5 Case Study Deployment: Reducing Household Food
Waste Through Packaging Design
6.5.1 Case Study Background
At this early concept development stage of our sustainable ACD toolkit, we aimed to
gain insight in terms of how the ACD toolkit can be used in designers’ ideation process
and collect feedback regarding the usability of the toolkit. We tested the toolkit in an
ongoing case study “Design On-pack Information Attributes to Influence Consumer
Household Food Waste Behavior” (Chu et al. 2019). In the project, the tool was
tested in both collaborative design workshops and individual ideation sessions. We
invited both design researchers and food industry practitioners to participate in the
study. This combination of participant background and research settings allowed us
to understand how the toolkit can be used by not only professional designers, but
also people without any solid design background, not only in group scenarios but
also in individual settings. The design brief that all the participants received was “In
order to optimize people’s correct usage of date labels and storage guidance, what
packaging or non-packaging product/service design concepts can be developed?”.
Observation notes, audio recordings and participants’ sketches were collected in the
workshops and interviews. All of the workshops and interviews were transcribed.