Learning from design-prototyping interaction for engineering innovation from a cross-functional perspective

Purpose: Novel engineering designs are usually infeasible for manufacturing or fail to meet the required performance. The dissimilar functionalities and mindsets between design and manufacturing pose challenges, as well as opportunities for innovation projects. This paper aims to report the innovation process that prototyped a novel engineering design of a haptic device in an engineering research lab. The innovation process went through several design generations. Interaction between design and manufacturing drove the innovation toward both better and worse directions between generations. Design/methodology/approach: Using the case research method, the steps of theoretical proposition development, case selection, data collection, data analysis and theory modification were followed. By interviewing the key persons, the characteristics, issues and recommendations for improvement of the innovation process were identified. Findings: It was found that technical issues were not the hurdles in the innovation process. Instead, managing the inter-organizational mechanism proved critical to its eventual success. The educational gap between the design and manufacturing groups gave rise to communicational and perceptional distance, while the gap in terms of work experience between the two groups enlarged that distance. Research limitations/implications: The research results may be limited to cases with similar organizational and technological contexts. Practical implications: Within an organization, the design and the manufacturing divisions are separated by a functional gap. The functional gap should be managed with multiple views, namely, technical, personal and organizational perspectives. The identified innovation process could help bridge such a gap and facilitate innovative engineering designs in research institutes. Originality/value: The effectiveness of the innovation process was, thus, found to be determined by the positive or negative reinforcement of these two gaps between the design and manufacturing of the research institute.