Dear Wim, Ken, Rob and Terry,
Thanks for the clarification. Now I am wondering if there is a problem within
the description of "clinical" research, which is the question of research
versus product development.
Terry's Volvo example sounds to me very much like product design. The research
activity is comparable to the kind of experimental or analytical work which
arises in almost every design discipline when the designer is seeking to
innovate rather than apply a proven formula. We have had more than one debate
about this and colleagues have been forthright about the importance of
differentiating between the creative output of an artist or designer and the
contribution to knowledge made by the researcher (even if they sometimes
co-exist in a single piece of work).
So, is the Volvo piston ring development project actually research? (Bearing in
mind that this list is concerned specifically with research education and
research degrees so I guess we are looking for definitions that work in that
context)
Terry's other example from Social Science is also quite specific but it is
about knowledge rather than workable solutions to problems, although they may
follow. The principle of grounded theory allows for generalisable theory to
grow from situation-specific theory and even suggests that this may be a more
realistic route to reliable knowledge than the top-down approach implied by
basic research. If this is so, Terry's Community example sounds like an
admissable activity for a PhD student while the Volvo piston ring is not.
Unless grounded theory applies in engineering and we accept the possibility
that the Volvo piston project will not only provide a direct "formula" for the
actual piston in question but may be informative (through the methods developed
or the refinement of existing data or the invention of novel features in the
design that might have wider use) to other designers.
As an example of a kind of grounded theory in engineering, I would like to
mention the "black art" of designing/developing slip-cast ceramic bathroom
ware. These large castings distort during the firing process and the designer
has to pre-distort the original mould to account for that. Generations of
craftsmen have learned to predict the effects of distortion and minimise the
number of reworks required to get the mould right. More recently CADCAM
engineers have been able to describe the distortion effects in the form of
pseudo materials properties that might be understood by a commercial CAD
modelling system and give reliable enough predictions of distortion.
All of this knowledge came from individuals' experiences of specific cases -
getting a specific toilet bowl to fire true by the end of next week - but has
become very useful in general terms. Somebody did start doing a PhD aimed at
developing true CAD modelling of the actual behaviour of the clay but realised
it would be an enormous effort, which might not get a result, and which would
be of very limited benefit given the specialised nature of the problem so they
went back to their company and worked on improving the development process and
existing CAD tools instead.
Now I'll get my asbestos underwear on and wait for the actual social scientists
on the list to get their flamethrowers out :-)
Best wishes from Sheffield
Chris
*******************************************
Chris Rust
Reader in Design
Art and Design Research Centre
Sheffield Hallam University UK
[log in to unmask]
tel +44 114 225 2706
fax +44 114 225 2603
Psalter Lane, Sheffield S11 8UZ, UK
|