An exploratory study on design process in architecture: perspective of creativity
Any design challenge could be solved by identifying systemic complexity in the issue before following any problem-solving process. Designers approach problems in different forms but historically worked effectively to build a template or phase sequence. The design process can be used by designers virtually in any project which plays a crucial role in designing innovative architectural projects for many architects. Many studies were conducted to analyze, review, compare and recommend several creative approaches to problem management that allow designers to recognize their work and propose new solutions. However, there are not many studies on the stages to follow to undergo a comprehensive design process in architecture. This study aims to review the various stages involved in the design process. Firstly, it addresses the conceptualization phase of design critically examining the creativity and ideation process with creative and strategic thinking. Secondly, it discusses the representation of the design process expressing through storyboards and animatic, computer-aided design and building information modeling, and virtual reality and augmented environments. Thirdly, it discusses design assessment stage where the techniques for assessment of creativity in design and simulation for analyzing users’ perspective is explained. In the conclusions of the paper, a discussion has been made on an inter-relationship between the various stages in the design process and its relevance for a comprehensive understanding of the architectural integrative design process to address any design challenge both as a studio project for architecture students or in live projects by the practicing architects.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Aroztegui, C., Solovyova, I., & Nanda, U. (2010, 23–26 June). Architectural research and representation: expressing sense of place through storyboarding and animatics. In Proceedings of ARCC/EAAE 2010 International Conference on Architectural Research. The European Association for Architectural Education/Architectural Research Centers Consortium. Washington, D.C., United States. https://www.brikbase.org/sites/default/files/A012_Aroztegui.pdf
Ayyýldýz Potur, A., & Barkul, Ö. (2006, 17–18 March). Creative thinking in architectural design education. In Proceedings of the 1st International CIB Endorsed METU Postgraduate Conference Built Environment and Information Technologies (pp. 113–125). Ankara, Turkey. Bursa Technical University.
Babangida Idi, D., & Mohamed Khaidzir, bin K. A. (2015). Concept of creativity and innovation in architectural design process. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 6(1), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIMT.2015.V6.566
Baptista Tavares Carreiro, M., & Luz Pinto, da P. (2013, 4–6 April). The evolution of representation in architecture. In Proceedings of Future Traditions: 1st eCAADe Regional International Workshop (pp. 27–38). Porto, Portugal. Association for Education and research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe.
Bashier, F. (2017). Design process-system and methodology of design research. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 245(8). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/8/082030
Bisadi, M., Mozaffar, F., & Bahger Hosseini, S. (2012). Future research centers: the place of creativity and innovation. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 232–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.223
Burgh, G. (2014). Creative and lateral thinking: Edward de Bono. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Theory, Vol. 1 (pp. 187–188). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Ciepłucha, W. (2018). 7 design methods in architecture. In A. Mielnik (Ed.), Defining the architectural space: rationalistic or intuitive way to architecture, Vol. 8 (pp. 13–22). Naukowe PWN.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196
Cross, N. (2007). From a design science to a design discipline: understanding designerly ways of knowing and thinking. In R. Michel (Ed.), Board of International Research in Design. Design research now: essays and selected projects (pp. 41–54). Birkhäuser Verlag AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8472-2_3
Daniel, R. (2021). Exploring creativity through artists’ reflections. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.11207
Discoverdesign. (2012–2019). Discover design: Chicago architecture center. https://discoverdesign.org/
Editorial Board of International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation. (2013). Perspectives on design creativity and innovation research. In T. Taura & Y. Nagai (Eds.), International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 1(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.754657
Gann, D. M., Salter, A. J., & Whyte, J. K. (2003). Design quality indicator as a tool for thinking. Building Research and Information, 31(5), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/0961321032000107564
Gohardani, N. (2011). Architecture and design research: reflections in relation to the design process. International Journal of Architectural Research, 5(3), 107–115.
Heylighen, A., & Neuckermans, H. (2000, 4–8 July). Design(ing) knowledge in architecture. In Proceedings of European Association for Architectural Education/Architectural Research Centers Consortium Conference 2000. Paris, Lyon, France. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239734680_Designing_knowledge_in_architecture
Irouke, V. M., & Ahianba, J. E. (2013). Advancement of creativity in architectural design education. Journal of Environmental Studies, 1(1), 78–82.
Jagtap, S. (2019). Design creativity: refined method for novelty assessment. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 7(1–2), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2018.1463176
Jones, J. Ch. (1992). Design methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kim, S. A., & Kim, Y. S. (2007, 28–31 July). Design process visualizing and review system with architectural concept design ontology. In DS 42: Proceedings of ICED 2007, the 16th International Conference on Engineering Design, Paris, France. https://www.designsociety.org/publication/25612/Des ign+Process+Visualizing+and+Review+System+With+Architectural+Concept+Design+Ontology
Kuloglu, N., & Durmus, S. (2013). Architecture and technology: architect’s expression language in design process. In ATINER’s Conference Paper Series No. ARC2013-0701. Athens Institute for Education and Research. https://www.academia.edu/15464141/Architecture_and_Technology_Architect_s_Expression_Language_in_Design_Process
Mahmoodi, A. S. M. (2001). The design process in architecture: a pedagogic approach using interactive thinking [PhD/Doctor Thesis, University of Leeds]. Leeds, United Kingdom. https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2155/1/uk_bl_ethos_543080.pdf
Mahmoud, N. E., Kamel, Sh. M., & Hamza, T. S. (2020). The relationship between tolerance of ambiguity and creativity in architectural design studio. Creativity Studies, 13(1), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2020.9628
Prabhu, R., Bracken, J., Armstrong, C. B., Jablokow, K., Simpson, T. W., & Meisel, N. A. (2020). Additive creativity: investigating the use of design for additive manufacturing to encourage creativity in the engineering design industry. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 8(4), 198–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2020.1813633
Pryshchenko, S. V. (2021). Cultural heritage of a poster: communicative and creative experience. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.12605
Siddique, M. N. H., Mowla, Q. A., & Masum, al M. A. (1990). Virtuality in architecture: a design metaphor. In Project: Architectural Pedagogy for the Contemporary Context (pp. 342–350). Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology.
Taura, T., & Nagai, Y. (2017). Creativity in innovation design: the roles of intuition, synthesis, and hypothesis. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 5(3–4), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2017.1313132