After each member of the team created a drawing of an AEV for the Creative Design Thinking exercise, concept screening and scoring were used to rate the design of each drawing.
Concept screening and scoring are two different ways to evaluate the designs of the AEVs that members of the team designed. The team picked criteria that were important at the time and then gave the different design scores. At the end of the evaluation, each design was given a result of “Yes”, “No”, or “Combine”. “Yes” meant that majors elements of the design should be continued. “No” meant that the design should be discontinued. “Combine” means that certain design aspects should be continued in the next design but others should not.
Concept Screening
For the concept screening, designs that were evaluated as good for the criteria were given a “+”. Designs that were evaluated as neutral were given a “0”. Designs that were evaluated as poor were given a “-“. These values were then summed together and then the net scores were evaluated to determine if the design would be given a “Yes”, “No”, or “Combine”.
| Success Criteria | Reference | Alan’s Design | Chris’s Design | Kyle’s Design | Matt’s Design |
| Stability | + | + | + | + | + |
| Minimal Blockage | 0 | 0 | + | – | 0 |
| Maintenance | + | + | + | 0 | + |
| Durability | + | + | + | + | + |
| Safety | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sum + | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 3 |
| Sum 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Sum – | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Net Score | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| Continue? | Combine | Yes | Yes | No | Combine |
Concept Scoring
Concept scoring is a more precise version of the concept screening matrix. Each criteria was given a weight based on how important the group thought each criteria was. Each design was given a rating between 1 and 5 and this was multiplied by the weight to get the weighted score. These weighted scores were then added together into the total score and evaluated to determine if the design would be given a “Yes”, “No”, or “Develop”.
| Reference | Alan’s Design | Chris’s Design | |||||
| Success Criteria | Weight | Rating | Weighted Score | Rating | Weighted Score | Rating | Weighted Score |
| Stability | 30% | 4 | 1.2 | 4 | 1.2 | 4 | 1.2 |
| Minimal Blockage | 25% | 2 | 0.5 | 2 | 0.5 | 5 | 1.25 |
| Maintenance | 5% | 4 | 0.2 | 4 | 0.2 | 4 | 0.2 |
| Durability | 20% | 4 | 0.8 | 4 | 0.8 | 4 | 0.8 |
| Safety | 20% | 3 | 0.6 | 4 | 0.8 | 3 | 0.6 |
| Total Score | 3.3 | 3.5 | 4.05 | ||||
| Continue? | Develop | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Kyle’s Design | Matt’s Design | ||||
| Success Criteria | Weight | Rating | Weighted Score | Rating | Weighted Score |
| Stability | 30% | 4 | 1.2 | 4 | 1.2 |
| Minimal Blockage | 25% | 2 | 0.5 | 3 | 0.75 |
| Maintenance | 5% | 3 | 0.15 | 4 | 0.2 |
| Durability | 20% | 3 | 0.6 | 4 | 0.8 |
| Safety | 20% | 3 | 0.6 | 3 | 0.6 |
| Total Score | 3.05 | 3.55 | |||
| Continue? | No | Develop | |||
<–Design Analysis Tool Advanced R&D Labs–>