Designing is not Problem Solving… but it involves a lot of it!

Problem solving is the process of finding a solution to a given situation or challenge. One way to approach problem solving is to use the given-this-find-this formulation. This formulation consists of three parts: the given information, the desired information, and the constraints or criteria. For example, designing a chair will require defining dimensions and materials. Given the material properties and a maximum load, the minimum thickness of the chair material can be found to satisfy a strength or deflection constraint. This type of problem solving is very common in the engineering curriculum and most are well familiar with it.

Another common method for solving problems is to use heuristics. Heuristics are rules of thumb or shortcuts that help simplify the problem and guide the search for a solution. For example, a heuristic for the chair design might include typical thickness per material type. Using a heuristic like this might result in getting an approximate and useful solution but not defining an exact geometry. Heuristics are not guaranteed to find the optimal solution, but they can help reduce the complexity and time of problem solving. Another form of heuristics is pattern matching. Many students have experience using homework problems or example problems to study for or complete exams. The same pattern matching can be used in problem solving in design that are similar in domain or solution principle.

However, there is a distinction between typical engineering problem solving and engineering design. One of the main distinctions between problem solving in engineering and design work in engineering is the degree of uncertainty and ambiguity involved in the process. Problem solving in engineering typically involves applying well-established methods and techniques to clearly defined problems with known parameters and constraints. Design work in engineering, on the other hand, involves dealing with ill-structured problems that have multiple possible solutions and criteria for evaluation. Design work in engineering requires more creativity, innovation and iteration than problem solving in engineering.

One of the challenges of product design is that design problems are often ill-structured or ill-defined. This means that there is no clear and definitive statement of what the problem is, what the goals are, what the constraints are, or what the criteria for success are. Ill-structured problems require designers to explore, frame, and refine the problem space as well as the solution space. They also require designers to deal with uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity. Ill-structured problems are common in product design because products are influenced by many factors, such as user needs, market trends, technological opportunities, social and environmental impacts, and competitive forces. Therefore, product designers need to adopt a flexible and iterative approach that allows them to learn from feedback, experiment with alternatives, and adapt to changing conditions.

One way to describe the difference is that a design problem is like the given-this-find-this problem solving formulation except that the givens, the constraints, and the objectives change and are redefined throughout the process. This leads to an understandable frustrating question: If the problem continuously changes, how do we know when we have a “good” design or solution?