Collaborative Design: “Forming,Storming,and Norming”

Abstract

Issue

A lack of collaboration with other design disciplines is a problem encountered by many interior design education programs across the country.

Goal

The goal was to broaden interior design student's exposure to two other design disciplines: architecture and landscape architecture.

Application

Students and faculty can no longer afford to work in isolation as companies are increasingly seeking collaborative efforts to solve their problems. In response to this need, students from architecture, interior design, and landscape architecture were grouped in interdisciplinary teams in a collaborative design course.

Description

The literature on the advantages and disadvantages of collaborative teamwork are reviewed. Given the advantages associated with teamwork, the development of the collaborative design course is described along with student reactions upon completion of the course.

Conclusion

Student responses reiterated the advantages and disadvantages of working in teams. More importantly, students understood the importance of being exposed to collaborative design efforts.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albanese

C. A.

, Hines

J. D.

, & Rainey

M. C.

(1995). Assessment of entry–level interior design skills: Implications for curriculum. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 87(3), 40–44.

Aldington

(1996). The landscape obligation. Architects should consider landscape in their designs. Architects Journal, 204, 26–27.

Bento

R. F.

(1997). Creating conditions for successful teamwork in college courses: A systems approach to teamwork design decisions. College Student Journal, 137–144.

Boyer

E. L.

, & Mitgang

L. D.

(1996). Building community: A new future for architecture education and practice. Princeton, NJ : The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Bronzino

J. D.

, Ahlgren

D. J.

, Chung

, Mertens

J. D.

, & Palladir

J. L.

(1994). Design and teamwork: A must for freshman. IEEE Transactions on Education, 37(2), 184–188.

Dean

(1997). Listening to: Landscape architects. Architectural Record, 185, 44–49.

Denton

H. G.

(1997). Multidisciplinary team–based project work: Planning factors. Design Studies, 18, 155–170.

Ehrlenspiel

, Giapoulis

, & Gunther

(1997). Teamwork and design methodology–observations about teamwork in design education. Research in Engineering Design, 9, 61–69.

Franklin

(1997). The right way to do it: A case for collaboration. Landscape Architect and Specifier News, 13(1), 5–6.

10.

Gates

G. A.

, & Ali

Y. K.

(1996). Strategic planning for interior design education: Effective development in conditions of resource decline. Journal of Interior Design, 22(1), 45–50.

11.

March

(1991, Spring). Some teams work better than others. Design Management Journal, 2, 49–53.

12.

Moonan

(1998). Listening to: Interior designers. Architectural Record, 186, 66–69.

13.

Pothoff

J. K.

(1992, SeptemberOctober). Interior designers in architectural firms. The ASID Report, 26.

14.

Pothoff

J. K.

(1996). Interior design work in architectural firms. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 88(1), 55–59.

15.

Starr

(1996, March). Designing interior in architecture. Interiors and Sources, 7(48), 58–60.

16.

Wagenknecht–Harte

(1989). Site + sculpture: The collaborative design process. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold.

17.

Walton

(1991, Spring). The hallmarks of successful design teams. Design Management Journal, 2, 5–9.

18.

White

A. C.

, & Dickson

A. W.

(1996). Perceptions of the value of interior design: Factors influencing program accountability and sustainability in higher education. Journal of Interior Design, 22(2), 25–41.