The textile designer 2.0: A workshop guide for future ...€¦ · possibilities of eTextiles within the market sectors of fashion, interiors architecture and healthcare. Keywords:

WALKER&PIPER

©2017TheAuthors.PublishedbyLoughboroughUniversity.ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBY-NClicense(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1

Thetextiledesigner2.0:Aworkshopguideforfutureworkshopfacilitatorsinsmarttextiles

S.Walker1&A.Piper2

1. A.NottinghamTrentUniversity2. B.NottinghamTrentUniversity

ThisitemwassubmittedtotheproceedingsoftheLoughboroughUniversityTextileDesignResearchGroupINTERSECTIONSConference2017bythe/anauthor(LeaveBlankforBlindCopy).Citation:Walker,S.&Piper,A.(2017)Thetextiledesigner2.0:Aworkshopguideforfutureworkshopfacilitatorsinsmarttextiles.InProceedingsofIntersections:CollaborationsinTextileDesignResearchConference,13September2017,LoughboroughUniversityLondon,U.K.Availablefromwww.lboro.ac.uk/textile-research/intersections.AdditionalInformation:Publisher:LoughboroughUniversity(©TheAuthors)Rights:ThisworkismadeavailableaccordingtotheconditionsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0International(CCBY-NC4.0)licence.Fulldetailsofthislicenceareavailableat:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/PLEASECITETHEPUBLISHEDVERSION.

WALKER&PIPER


2

Thispaperreportsuponaninterdisciplinaryworkshopcalled‘DesigningwitheTextiles’ledbyateamoffacilitatorswithbackgroundsinwovenandmultimediatextiledesign,andtextileengineering.Theaimoftheworkshopwastosupportparticipants inmultidisciplinarygroupstodevelopsmarttextileconceptsusing electronic textiles (eTextiles). The paper discusses the roles of the facilitators, the workshopdelivery including the hands-on activities designed to stimulate co-design thinking. The workshopoutcomesillustratethedifferentresultscreatedfromtheworkshopgroupsandtheirfutureapplications.Thereflectionsonbehalfofthetwotextiledesignfacilitatorsareanalysedtodiscussthetransitionfrompractitionertofacilitator.Finalrecommendationsforfutureworkshopssuggesttheneedforfacilitatorsto become co-researchers to support interdisciplinary design approaches to envisaging futurepossibilitiesofeTextileswithinthemarketsectorsoffashion,interiorsarchitectureandhealthcare.Keywords:interdisciplinary;textiledesigner;innovation;eTextiles;co-designIntroductionThe ‘Designing with eTextiles’ workshop held in February 2015 invited delegates of the Networkconference ArcInTex to participate in advancing methodologies for design research in eTextiles atNottingham Trent University. The EPSRC funded project ‘An Internet of Soft Things’ (IoSoft) played apivotal role in organising the conference and enabling workshops of this kind to take place and theopportunity to collaborate with other research groups such as the Advanced Textiles Research Group(ATRG). The collaborationwith theATRGprovided a context for theworkshop participants to envisagefuture possibilities and applications of the Advanced Textiles Research Group’s technologies. Thesetechnologies included electronically functional yarn, thermistor reactive yarn and electronically heatedtextiles(Corketal.,2013andLugodaetal.,2015).Theworkshopfocusedondesignandcreativitywiththerole of the ATRG technologies providing a context for participants to understand methodologicalimplicationstodesignandengineering.Theroleofthefacilitatorsintheworkshoporganisedaprogramofactivities over 3 days to stimulate discussion and making with eTextiles. The activities includedexperimenting with hands on electronic components from locally based manufacturer of electronicsewable textiles: Kitronik. The team of facilitators organised group discussions to reflect onmultidisciplinary practice and an opportunity to share results and outcomes of the workshop via anexhibition. The brief for the workshop participants included a focus on an area of application tocontextualisea conceptualprototype. Thebrief alsoadvisedparticipants to thinkbroadlybeyond thesecategoriesinsearchofnewundisclosedmarketswithintheeTextilesdomain.Apanelofreviewersjoinedat the end of the 3-day event to deliver feedback and suggestions on the collaborations. This panelinvolvedmembersfromtheATRGgroup,studentsandatextiledesignlecturer.Co-designineTextilesThe workshop facilitators were particularly keen to facilitate collaboration amongst a diverse group ofindividuals.AccordingtorecentresearchineTextilepractice(Bailleetal.,2012andGlazzardetal.,2015),supporttowardsthedevelopmentofco-designrelationshipswaskeytoenablingcreativityandinnovationtounfoldbetweenpeoplefromvariedrolesandbackgrounds.Ariyatumetal.,2004suggestedthatinnewproductdevelopment(NPD)stagesinsmarttextilesclothingdevelopment,practitionersoftenstruggletounderstand new types of practice that is vastly different to their own thus leading to complications incommunication. The key to the success of smart textiles is therefore collaboration. Interdisciplinaryknowledge in thedomainofeTextiles isnowrequired if it is tobecomea leadingmarket in the future.Froma researchpracticeperspective, theemergenceofnewmethodologicalpractices ineTextileshaveenabled an insight into constraints and opportunities (Kettley et al., 2010 and Briggs et al., 2016). Inorganisationalandstrategicmanagement,theshift ineconomicpracticetowardssustainablemodels fordrivingtriplebottomlineincentivesandpushingserviceoverproduct-centriclogicprovidesaninvestment

WALKER&PIPER


3

fortheeTextilessectortoconsiderwhenitcomestoadaptingtochangingconsumerbehavioursandnewtechnologicallyinnovativeproductsandservicesystems(Gardienetal.,2013andWebster,2013). Co-designpracticehas suggested in recent years thatmaking,doing,enactingand tellingare importantformsofpractice-ledresearchthatemphasiseontheopportunitiesofdesign(Fischer,1998;Stappersetal.,2005; Steen et al., 2007). Sanders’ prolific work with co-design opened opportunities for cross-disciplinarypractice to informnew tools andmethods in the shapeof a convivial toolbox (Sanders andStappers,2012).Thefacilitatorsintheworkshopbelongedtodifferentbackgroundsofdesignandscience.Onecommonfactorsharedwastheinfluenceofhands-onengagementwithmaterialsandtools.Handsonengagement with materials and processes in practice-led and design research is a means of forming,conceptualisingandexternalising ideas(Philpott,2012;TaylorandTownsend2014;PiperandTownsend2016).Writing,drawingandmanipulatingcan,inthemselves,induceorextendideasanddevelopments,itis“notpartofaction; it ispartofthought”(ClarkeandChalmers,1998:10).Similarly,movingawayfromones’ownspecialismbydrawingfrommethodsandtechniquesfromotherdisciplinesfacilitatesproblem-solving, conceptual thinking and innovation by challenging established ways of thinking and working(Lehmann2012;Abbot2004).Thefacilitatorsofthisworkshopwerekeentoapplytheabovetheoriestodesignaworkshopthatwouldenable co-design thinking and hands on engagement. Conditions for mutual learning drawn from theworkshopsledbyBailleetal.,2012andGlazzardetal.,2015witheTextilesinformedamethodologythatwouldempowerindividualgrowthandethicalrelationships.EvidentlyinthefieldofeTextilesistheneedforcollaborationandmultidisciplinaryknowledge(Kirstein,2013andPailles-Friedman,2016),futurefocusonthemanagementofdesign,innovationandcreativityisofimportanceforsustainingthedisciplineandthe interdisciplinary knowledge that emerges fromeTextile practice. Von Stamm’s (2008) argument forsustaining collaboration is through incentivising theneed fordeveloping ‘real teams’ inorganisations.Aproblemhoweverencounteredisthemisuseofknowledgeavailableinteamsthatleadtoemotionalandpsychologicalbarriersfromthelackofvaluepropositionmadeclear(TenBhomeretal.,2013andWalkeretal.,2015).Thefacilitators’desireintheworkshoptoinnovatewithaco-designmethodologyintroducesthepossibilityofnewtoolsandmethodstoaddressproblemsencounteredincollaboration.Moreover,thespecific characteristics of the roles of the facilitators made transparent to audiences in the designmanagementfieldwilllikelyprovidefuturedirectionandimproveprospectsofproductivity.WorkshopFacilitationandDeliveryTheworkshopdeliveredbytwotextiledesignersandtwotextileengineersspecialisedintextiledesign(AnnaPiperandSarahWalker)andelectronicengineering(EkaelMbiseandPasinduLugoda)(Figure1)Specialist knowledge from the facilitators informed the design of the workshop activities includingconceptandprototypedevelopment,textiletechniquesandmaterialsandreflectivepractice.Thetextileengineers provided advanced specialist knowledge of technical and electronic textiles to supportcircuitryproblemsandtoprovideinsightintofuturepossibilitiessuchasmedicalelectronics,bluetoothconnectivityandprogramming.

WALKER&PIPER


4

Figure1.TDRG-WorkshopFacilitators

Source:TDRG–SarahWalker

Thefacilitatorsacknowledgedthattheparticipantsmightbenewtotheexperienceofdesigningwithe-textilesandtocollaboration.Theparticipantsattendingtheworkshopaswellcamefromanumberofdifferentbackgroundsandspecialisms.The facilitatorsused thisknowledge in theconstructionof theworkshopplananddrewfromtheirownspecialismstofacilitateanenvironmentthatofferpeopletheopportunities to merge skills, particularly technical taught skills and experiential knowledge derivedfromhands-onengagementwithmaterialsandprocesses(Polyani,1966andLehman,2012).Asshownin the workshop program (Figure 2), the activities led by different members of the facilitator teamincorporatedarangeofdiscussion-basedandhands-onactivities.

WALKER&PIPER


5

Figure2.TDRG-WorkshopScheduleSource:TDRG–AnnaPiper

Abriefgiventotheworkshopparticipants includedapackof informationabouttheworkshop includingaimsandobjectives,thescheduledprogramandbackgroundsofthefacilitators(Figure3).Theaimsoftheworkshopwere:• Todevelopdesignconceptsdemonstratingpotentialapplicationsforthetechnologiesbeingdeveloped

atNTU.• Toexplorewhatchangesinapproachtodesign(decision-makingandthinking)arerequiredwhen

workingwithsmarttechnologies.• Toconsiderhowamulti-disciplinaryapproachcanhelptointegratesmarttechnologiesanddesign.

WALKER&PIPER


6

• Toreflectonandsuggesthowmulti-disciplinaryapproachescanbedevelopedandfacilitated.

Figure3.TDRG–WorkshopBrief

Source:TDRG–AnnaPiper

WorkshopParticipantsThe ‘Designing with eTextiles’ workshop attracted participants from a number of fields. The groupconsistedoftextiledesigners,fashiondesigners,productdesignersandachemicalengineer,whowereatvaryingstagesintheircareers–fromstudentstoacademicresearchers,practitionersandlecturers.Theyhad different levels of experience of working with both textiles and smart technologies. The

WALKER&PIPER


7

multidisciplinary nature of the group resulted in the development of distinct ways of working andoutcomes to address the workshop brief, and raised questions concerning the integration of multipledesignthinkingapproachesandopportunitiestofacilitatecross-disciplinaryworking.WorkshopLayoutandResourcesThelayoutofthespacewasorganisedbythefacilitatorspriortotheeventandincludedworkspacesformakinganddevelopingprototypes, tablesof resources forbothparticipants and facilitators,pinboardsandpresentationequipment(Figure4).

Figure4.TDRG–WorkshopLayoutSource:TDRG–SarahWalker

Materialsandequipmentfortheworkshopincluded:• Electronictextilecomponents• Sewingandembroiderymaterials• Fashionmannequins• Textilefabrics• Textilesamplesandsketchbooksfromthefacilitators• Researchpostersandconceptmoodboards • Fashionabletechnologybooks

WALKER&PIPER


8

Theprovisionsofthematerials,equipmentandspacegiventotheparticipantsofferedamixofspecialisttoolstoassistinco-designdevelopment(Figure5).Thefacilitatorsfounditbeneficialtoprovideexamplesfromtheirownworktorelatetoanyconcepttheorydevelopmentemergingfromthegroupdiscussions.

Figure5.TDRG-WorkshopEquipmentSource:TDRG-SarahWalkerandAnnaPiper

Figure6.TDRG-DataCaptureSource:TDRG-SarahWalkerandAnnaPiper

DataCollectionandAnalysisData gathered from the workshop included primarily consisted of taking photographs of participantsworkinginthespaceswithtoolsandequipment(Figure6.).AvisittotheAdvancedTextilesResearchlabhadalsoprovidedanotheropportunitytogatherevidence.Thefacilitatorsalsogatheredobservationsoftheparticipantsworkingaswellasinformalfeedbackonaday-to-daybasisvianotetakingandthroughtheround-upgroupdiscussionactivityscheduledattheendofeachworkshopday.Attheendofthethirdandfinal day, a formal presentation of outcomes by the participants in theirmultidisciplinary groups askedthemtocommentontheirpersonalexperiences,learninganddevelopmentaswellasprovidefeedbackonthestructureandfacilitationoftheevent.Thisfeedbackcontributedtotheanalysisofworkshopoutcomesandprovidedvaluableinsightsintogroupdynamics,andparticipantandfacilitatorroles.MakingwitheTextilesLedbySarahWalker(aspecialistworkingwitheTextiles),the‘eTextiles’workshopintroducedparticipantsand (co)facilitators to basic eTextile circuits and soft switches. Those that were familiar with textileprocesseswereabletoassisttheirlessexperiencedteammateswith‘stitching-out’theircircuits,whilstthetextile engineers provided knowledge of electronics and circuits. Together they were able to workcreativelytoexploretechniques,solve-problemsanddevelopsamples(Figure7andFigure8).The experience of undertaking hands-on making gave the group a shared understanding; discussionsrelatingtothedevelopmentofconceptsfacilitatedthroughthemakingexperience,notonlythroughthehands-onengagementwithmaterials,butalsobygivingthemacommonlanguageandexperiencethroughwhich toexpress and communicate their ideas.Differing levelsof skill and knowledgeacross the group

WALKER&PIPER


9

resultedinacollectivequestioningofmaterials,technologiesandpossibilities,andfosteredasupportivesharingenvironmentwhilstchallengingindividualandgroupskillsandunderstanding.

Figure7.AneTextilesamplemadewithaswitch,conductivethreadandaLED

Source:SarahWalkerandAnnaPiper

Figure8.AneTextilesamplemadewithpressstuds,abatterywithswitchandLEDs

Source:SarahWalkerandAnnaPiper

Textiledesignersfoundthatengagementwithprocessandtechnologiesraisedquestionsaboutwhatthematerials could do, leading to further group discussion andmaterial experimentation. This allowed thetextiledesignerstoconsiderandformideasofwhattheymightwantthetechnologytodo,providingthetextile engineers with new challenges and opportunities to enhance the functionality and usability oftechnologies. Meanwhile, the non-textile specialists brought knowledge and experience of their owndisciplines, offering different perspectives and a questioning approach to working with textiles andtechnologies.Theywerenotconstrainedbypre-conceivedlimitationsoftextileprocesses.Thenon-textilespecialists instead applied their established approaches (thinking and methods) to finding a commongroundas tohow toworkwith textiles.Thedevelopmentofnewskillsallowed themtoask simplebutfundamentalquestionsabouttextileprocesses(why?how?whatif?),questionsthattheothertextileandproductdesignersmayhaveoverlookedduetotheirestablishedexperience.WorkshopOutcomesTheaimoftheworkshopwastoexplorecurrentapplicationsofavailabletechnologiesandtodevelopafuture concept with eTextiles. The brief also insisted that reflection on the process of integratingtechnologieswas required so thatnew interdisciplinarymethodologiesemerged.Technologies fromtheAdvanced Textiles Research Group provided workshop participants in their groups to reflect on thepotentials and barriers of integrating technology into textile materials. The participants had to choosewhether to develop a future concept for a fashion,medical, health andwellbeing, sports and lifestyle,home, sustainability or retail application. Each group recorded their concept development process andpresentedtheoutcomeusingapresentationformattoconveytheirindividualgroupconcepts.ApanelofeTextile specialists, students and a textile design lecturer and embroidered specialist came to offerfeedbacktotheteamsontheirconcepts.Concept Team #1 - Luz Illuminating Snood: the team consisted of a textile designer, fashion designer,chemical engineer, weaver and product designer. The team adopted a problem centred approachrespondingtoexistingresearchinthefieldofmentalhealthasthebasisfortheirconceptdevelopment.Significantdiscussionundertakenbytheteamestablishhowlight isusedwithinagarmentprototypeto

WALKER&PIPER


10

provide‘lighttherapy’.Theteamidentifiedbeneficiariesoftheprototypetothosewhosufferfrommentalhealthproblemswithpossiblydementiaordepression.Focusesofthegroupconsideredusabilitybythewearerformaximumcomfortandbenefit(Figure9).Theteam’sdesignprocesswasstructured,organisedandcontrolledwitheachmemberbeingdesignatedspecificrolesandresponsibilitiesthatdrewupontheirexistingstrengthsandskills.This,demonstratedinthe group’s concept presentation, included branding and a logo to communicate their concept. APowerPoint presentation supported the communication of their concept development and a prototypeprovidedademonstrationtotherestoftheworkshopparticipantsandpanellists.Thediversityof the group led tomisinterpretation andmisunderstandingof languageand terminology,specificallyinrelationtotheterm‘structure’andthescaleonwhichstructuresareenvisagedandappliedindifferentfields(particularlybetweentheweaverandthechemicalengineerinthegroup).However,thismisinterpretationprovidedaplatformforfurtherdiscussionandthegenerationofideaswithinthegroup,aswellasallowingthegrouptodevelopashared languageandunderstanding.Theconcept itselfhadaspecific application but several iterations of the design informed the team’s unique aspects of theirconceptandprototype.

Figure9.TDRG-ConceptTeam#1-LuzIlluminatingSnoodSource:TDRG–AnnaPiper

WALKER&PIPER


11

ConceptTeam#2-HeatedBathtub:allteammemberswerefromdesignbackgrounds(eithertextilesorproduct design). The concept built upon specifically the heated textiles technology developed by EkaelMbisefromtheAdvancedTextilesResearchGroup(NTU).Theapproachtothedesignconceptdevelopedon being haptic-led; responding to and engaging directlywith the technology and its visual and hapticproperties,toinspiredesignideasandconcepts(Figure10).The team’s creative and expansive thinking resulted in the development of an ambitious, playful andconceptualdesignidea.Thisgroupdidnotfeelconstrainedbythetechnologyandapproachedtheprocessbybeingmoreopentoquestionssuchas‘whatifthiswaspossible?Asofresultofthisconceptualthinking,anumberofalternativeandviableapplicationsidentifiedmanypossibledirections.Forthepresentation,thisconceptusedmoodboardsandvisual imagery,sketchesandsmall tactilesamples tocommunicate.Theteamhadalsomadeaproptoassistinitsconceptualisationandtactilebehaviour.

Figure10.TDRG-ConceptTeam#2–HeatedBathtubSource:TDRG–AnnaPiper

WALKER&PIPER


12

Bothgroupsadoptedvaryingapproachesanddesignmethodologiestothedevelopmentoftheirconcepts,withoneinspiredbya“real-world”problemandtheotherrespondingdirectlytotheavailabletechnology.Bothapproachesresultedthedevelopmentofinnovativeconceptswithviableandusefulapplications.Thebackgrounds of each individual team member were instrumental the groups’ approach to ideasdevelopmentandprogress,prototyping,andconceptvisualisation.Thegroupfromapredominantlydesignbackground responded to and questioned the potential of the technology andmaterial, using this as aplatform for development.Whereas, the groupwithmore varied backgrounds responded to a specificproblem and to each other – questioning, misinterpreting and responding to ideas and discussion, toexploreandsubsequentlyrefinetheirconcept.KeyThemesThrough group discussion, observation and the development of the ‘Luz: Illuminating Snood’ and the‘HeatedBathtub’Conceptanumberofkeythemes,relatingtodesignthinking,waysofworkingandcross-disciplinarypracticeswhendesigningwithsmart technologies,becameapparent (Table1.).Additionally,the two approaches adopted by the groups and the identified themes (above) have raised interestingquestions about how different methodologies and approaches can be combined, integrated andencouraged through workshop facilitation to develop new approaches and innovative solutions forworkingwith eTextiles.Moreover, the integrative approaches had also informed viable and design- ledsolutionsfor“real-world”problems.Afuturequestionandfuturedevelopmentofsmarttechnologiesandproducts:Howcancreativeexpansivethinkingbeencouragedandfacilitatedaspartofacross-disciplinarydesignmethodology? Should problem-centred and expansive creative thinking be integrated in a singledesign process, or is each approach suited to a achieving a specific type of outcome? Should a sharedlanguage be actively encouraged, or can miscommunication/ misunderstanding lead to creative andinnovativethinking,andnewperspectives?Thesequestionshaveinformedthedevelopmentofa‘toolkit’for textile design facilitators of smart textile workshops that enlists reflexive criteria and utilise textiledesign skills and practices to support innovations in design processes for smart textiles applicable to arangeofapplications,includingfashion,interiors,architectureandhealthcare.

Table1.KeyThemes

Keythemes Description

Problem-centred design thinking Development of concepts and designs inspired by and to provide solutions to a specific identified problem.

Haptic-leddesign Inspired by and using haptic engagement with materials and technologies as a platform for ideas, design and concept development.

Expansivecreativethinking Design thinking not constrained by the limitations of existing materials, processes or technologies – asking “what if this is possible?” and “how can this be achieved/made possible?” to develop innovative solutions,

products and concepts.

Sharedlanguage(s) Language(s) and terminology understood across multiple disciplines, which may be developed through discussion and during concept development.

WALKER&PIPER


13

FacilitatorReflectionsThe dominant challenge for the facilitators was themanagement of expectations and varying skill andknowledge levels within the group while new practice was developing. Although the prospect forinnovationwashigh,itbecameevidentthatthefacilitatorshadtocontendwithnotjusttheexpectationsof theworkshop participants but also of themselves being practitionerswith specialist knowledge. Thecondition to let go of any existing role for the facilitatorswas a challenge. Flexibility of the role of thefacilitator enabled this shift from practitioner to facilitator. This flexibility in attitude towards theparticipantsenabledthemtotakecontroloftheirindividualself-learningprocesses,findvoicewithinthegroupandcontributewithskillsandknowledgetoincreaseproductivityandinnovation.Insomeactivities,facilitatorswerethemselvessupportedbyparticipants.Individualvulnerabilitiesduetothedistinctvariationofpracticeexposedknowledgeinneedofguidance.Transparencyhoweverofsharingthisvulnerabilitydidleadtoaco-researcherrelationshipformingwithparticipants.OnefacilitatorfoundbyrevealingherinexperienceofhandlingeTextilecomponentsmeantthataspartoftheactivityintroducingcircuits and sewing that she could benefit and learn from the process. This is a particular interestingobservation since perceptions prior to the workshop from the facilitators believed that they would bepositionedasmoreexpertsasopposed tobecoming learners.This indicationofblurredboundariesandroles (Jacobs, 2007 and Kientz and Abowd, 2008) informed notions of identity and situated learnerexperiencedincommunitiesofpractice(LaveandWenger,1991;Toveyetal.,2005andDownes,2008).

Figure11.TDRG–RoleTransitionsSource:TDRG–SarahWalker

FutureGuidelinesSubjecttothechallengesexperiencedasafacilitator,theself-reflectionofthisroleidentifiedtransitionalelements. Theco-designmethodologyinformedthreepivotalstagesasseeninFigure11tobecomingaco-researcher.The facilitatorshavebeenable to informanumberofguidelines that subsequentlyhavepotentialforbecomingabasisforatoolkit.Thoseguidelinesderivedfromthestudyinclude:• Expectthatintheroleofafacilitatorskillsandknowledgeasapractitionerisrequiredtofacilitateco-designwitheTextileteams.

WALKER&PIPER


14

• This role is likely to shift both between being a practitioner with a focus on hands on making withparticipantsintoafacilitatorthatguidesoccasionallyandgivesdirectiontobecomingaco-researcheraspartofateam.

• Empathisingwithparticipantvulnerabilitiesbysharingyourownexperiencesisencouragedinco-designprojectstoensurethatpeoplefeelsafeandsecurewiththeknowledgetheyapply.

• Congruenceisacognitivetooltomaintainequalstatusamongstdiversegroupsofpeople.Facilitatorsaretoensurethatmaintainingthisasaconditionisvitalforproductivityandinnovation.

• Theuseoftoolsandmaterialsfromdifferentpracticesareessentialtofindingcommoninterestamongstpeopleinteams–thisistobeaccessibletopeopleinteamswherepossible.

• Where possible extend activities beyond the workshop boundaries and include activities that placeparticipantswithin a different culture or context e.g. this could bewithin a research lab such as theAdvancedTextilesResearchGroup.

ConclusionsTheguidelinesarecontextuallyspecificbuthavethepotentialtobecross-discipline.Thereisalsofurtherscopetodesigntangibletoolstotransferknowledgefromaco-designmethodology.Boththetwotextiledesign facilitators, respectively within their own research projects appreciate that there is futuredevelopmentandmaycontinueaspartoftheirindividualstudiestocontributetothemesofsustainabilityandpractice.Thetwotextileengineerscontinuetofocusonthenextgenerationofelectronictextilesandonprovidingplatformsfordesignresearcherstoenvisagefuturepossibilitiesandapplications.Thispaperreports on a 3-day workshop focused on designing with eTextiles. The collaborators of this workshopincluded two textiledesignersand two textileengineers from theAdvancedTextilesResearchGroupatNottingham Trent University. Participants from the workshop came from different specialisms withindesignandengineeringscienceincludingtextiles,productdesignandinteractiondesignaswellaschemicalengineering. Professions and existing roles included students, lecturers, professors and independentcompaniesspecialisedineTextilecraft.Theworkshopprogramaimedtosupportmultidisciplinaryteamsinco-designing an eTextile concept.Materials and tools provided in the workshop assisted the hands-onmakingofeTextilesandthetwoworkshopoutcomesdeliveredbytheparticipantsintheirmultidisciplinaryteams.Changeinrolewasnecessaryforthefacilitatorsbetweenpractitionerandfacilitatorandconditionsofempathysupportedthedevelopmentofco-researcherrelationships.Asignificantfindingrevealedtheimportanceofthefacilitatorsbecominglearnersduringtheworkshoptofindequalcongruentstatusandidentitywiththeparticipants.Convivialityoftoolsusedinpracticeinformedanumberofguidelinesthatarecross-discipline.Facilitatorsoftheworkshopidentifythataccessibilitytotheguidelinescouldresultinatoolkitmadetoofferbeneficiariesineitherleadership,organisationalormanagerialrolestoappreciatethefullimpactoftheuseofguidelinesandinterdisciplinarymethodsineTextiles.

AcknowledgementsTheauthorswould like toextend thanks to theworkshopparticipants, thepanellistswhoattended theworkshop presentations, the Advanced Textiles Research Group (ATRG) and the ArcInTex Network. AnextendedgratitudeisalsorequiredfortheEPSRCfundedproject‘AnInternetofSoftThings’(IoSoft)andtheVice-ChancellorPhDbursaryawardforsupervisionandfundingsupportofPhDstudies.

ReferencesAbbott,A.,(2004).MethodsofDiscovery:HeuristicsfortheSocialSciences.London:W.W.Norton&CompanyLtd.

Ariyatum,B.,Holland,R.andHarrison,D.K.,(2004).BenefitsandChallengesofCollaborationinSmartClothingDevelopment.InDS32:ProceedingsofDESIGN2004,the8thInternationalDesignConference,Dubrovnik,Croatia.

WALKER&PIPER


15

Ballie,J.,(2012).e-co-TextileDesign:Constructingacommunityofpracticefortextiledesigneducation.TheDesignJournal,15(2),pp.219-236.

Briggs-Goode,A.,Glazzard,M.,Walker,S.,Kettley,S.,Heinzel,T.,andLucas,R.,(2016).WellbeingandSmartTextiles:ReflectingonCollaborativePracticesandtheDesignProcess.JournalofTextileDesignResearchandPractice,Vol.4,Issue.1.

Cork,C.,(2013).ThenextgenerationofSmartandInteractiveTextiles(SMIT).SmartMaterialsWorkshop.TheWelshPolymerProcessingConsortiumforFunctionalApplications(WIP2C),Cardiff,June6th2013.

Clark,A.&Chalmers,D.,(1998).‘TheExtendedMind’.Analysis.pp.7–19.

Downes,T.,(2008).DevelopingCommunitiesofPracticetoEnhanceStudentLearning:Glue,BuzzandIdentitiesofBelonging.M.A.thesis,NottinghamTrentUniversity.

Fischer,G.,(1998).Beyond"couchpotatoes":Fromconsumerstodesigners.InComputerHumanInteractionProceedings(IEEE),pp.2-9.

Gardien,P.andGilsing,F.,2013.Walkingthewalk:puttingdesignattheheartofbusiness.DesignManagementReview,24(2),pp.54-66.

Glazzard,M.,Kettley,R.,Kettley,S.,Walker,S.,Lucas,R.andBates,M.,(2015).Facilitatinganon-judgemental’skillsbasedco-designenvironment.Conferenceproceedingsofthe3rdEuropeanConferenceonDesign4Health,SheffieldUniversity,pp.1-12.

Jacobs,M.(2007).Dualroles:blurringtheboundariesinprofessionalrelationships.Lutterworth:BACP.

Kettley,S.,Downes,T.,Harrigan,K.andGlazzard,M.,(2010).FitforPurpose?Patterncuttingandseamsinwearablesdevelopment.DigitalCreativity,21(4),pp.247-256.

Kientz,J.A.andAbowd,G.D.(2008).Whenthedesignerbecomestheuser:designingasystemfortherapistsbybecomingatherapist.CHI'08extendedabstractsonHumanfactorsincomputingsystems,pp.2071-2078.

Kirstein,T.,(2013).Thefutureofsmart-textilesdevelopment:newenablingtechnologies,commercializationandmarkettrends.Multidisciplinaryknow-howforsmart-textilesdevelopers,pp.1-26.

Lave,J.andWenger,E.,(1991).SituatedLearning:Legitimateperipheralparticipation.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Lehmann,U.,(2012).‘MakingAsKnowing:EpistemologyandTechniqueinCraft’.TheJournalofModernCraft.5(2),pp.149–164.

Lugoda,P.,Dias,T.,andMorris,R.,(2015).ElectronicEngineeringTemperatureSensingYarn.JournalofMultidisciplinaryEngineeringScienceStudies(JMESS),Vol.1,Issue1,pp.100-103.

Pailles-Friedman,R.,(2016).SmartTextilesForDesigners:InventingtheFutureofFabrics.London:LaurenceKingPublishing.

Philpott,R.,(2012).‘CraftingInnovation:TheIntersectionofCraftandTechnologyintheProductionofContemporaryTextiles’.CraftResearch.3(1),pp.53–74.

Piper,A.andTownsend,K.,(2016).‘CraftingtheCompositeGarment:Theroleofhandweavingindigitalcreation’.JournalofTextileDesignResearchandPractice.3(3).pp1–24.

Polanyi,M.,1966.Thetacitdimension.Gloucester:MA:PeterSmith,pp.4-49.

Sanders,E.B.N.andStappers,P.J.,(2008).Co-creationandthenewlandscapesofdesign.Co-design,4(1),pp.5-18.

WALKER&PIPER


16

Sanders,E.B.N.andStappers,P.J.,(2012).Convivialdesigntoolbox:Generativeresearchforthefrontendofdesign.Amsterdam:BISPublishers.

Stappers,P.J.andSanders,E.B.N.,(2005).Toolsfordesigners,productsforusers.InconferenceproceedingsoftheInternationalconferenceonplanninganddesign:creativeinteractionandsustainabledevelopment,2005,pp.1-16.

Steen,M.,Kuijt-Evers,L.andKlok,J.,(2007).Earlyuserinvolvementinresearchanddesignprojects–Areviewofmethodsandpractices.In23rdEGOSColloquium(EuropeanGroupforOrganizationalStudies),July5-7,pp.5-7.

Taylor,J.andTownsend,K.,(2014).‘ReprogrammingtheHand:BridgingtheCraftSkillsGapin3D/digitalFashionKnitwearDesign’.CraftResearch.5(2).pp.155–174.

TenBhömer,M.,Tomico,O.,Kleinsmann,M.,Kuusk,K.andWensveen,S.,(2013).DesigningSmartTextileServicesthroughvaluenetworks:teammentalmodelsandsharedownership.InconferenceproceedingsCo-CreatingServices;The3rdServiceDesignandServiceInnovationConference,pp.53-63.

Tovey,M.,Owen,J.andLand,R.,(2005).InductionintotheCommunityofPracticeofAutomotiveDesign.InRodgers,P.,Brodhurst,L.,andHepburn,D.,ed.CrossingDesignBoundaries.London:TaylorFrancisGroup,pp.195-201.

VonStamm.,(2008).ManagingCreativity,InnovationandDesign.2nded.Chichester:JohnWiley&Sonspublishing.

Walker,Sarah,SarahKettley,TinaDownes,andTilakDias.,(2015).Facilitatingparticipatorypracticeforsmarttextiles.InAdjunctProceedingsofthe2015ACMInternationalJointConferenceonPervasiveandUbiquitousComputingandProceedingsofthe2015ACMInternationalSymposiumonWearableComputers,pp.521-526.

Webster,K.,(2013).Thedeclineofthelineareconomyandtheriseofthecircular.Astoryaboutframeworksandsystems.InMacArthur,E.,ed.Anewdynamic:Effectivebusinessinthecirculareconomy.Cowes:EllenMacArthurFoundationPublishing,pp.7-19

SarahWalkerSarahWalkerisaPhDcandidate,workshopfacilitatorandlectureratNottinghamTrentUniversity.HerPhDresearchfocussesondesignandinnovationmanagementforeTextilesusinginterdisciplinarymethodsbasedinanthropology,psychotherapyanddesignresearch. AnnaPiperAnnaPiperisaPhDcandidate,workshopfacilitatorandlecturerinTextileDesignatNottinghamTrentUniversity.HerPhDstudyfocussesondevelopinga3Dcompositionalweavingmethodologyusingcross-disciplinarysustainabletextileandfashiondesignmethods.

Documents

The textile designer 2.0: A workshop guide for future ...€¦ · possibilities of eTextiles within the market sectors of fashion, interiors architecture and healthcare. Keywords: