*4.4.3 Uptake on strategy level*

The most frequently used strategies in the design briefs are presented in **Figure 2**. As one can see, most of the strategies fluctuated between 0 and 18%, with an exception for the strategy "optimization of initial lifetime". This strategy was most popular for all the company types.

### *4.4.4 Uptake on sub-strategy level*

The results on sub-strategy level are presented in **Figures 3** and **4**. Overall, the most popular sub-strategy was reliability and durability (6.1) followed by modular

#### **Figure 1.**

*The integration of ecodesign in the analyzed design briefs on the different product levels (in percentage).*

**67**

**Figure 3.**

**Figure 2.**

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief…*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

*Environmental profile of the design briefs on strategy level (according to [30]).*

*Percentage of design briefs where a particular sub-strategy occurred, split up by company type.*

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

**Figure 2.** *Environmental profile of the design briefs on strategy level (according to [30]).*

**Figure 3.** *Percentage of design briefs where a particular sub-strategy occurred, split up by company type.*

*Design and Manufacturing*

**Table 3.**

*4.4.2 Uptake on product level*

the SMEs in all the product levels.

most popular for all the company types.

*4.4.4 Uptake on sub-strategy level*

*4.4.3 Uptake on strategy level*

**66**

**Figure 1.**

*The integration of ecodesign in the analyzed design briefs on the different product levels (in percentage).*

industry-specific institutions). SMEs scored poorly: in 43% of all the SME design briefs, there was an ecodesign component found. The results are presented in **Table 3**.

*The uptake of ecodesign elements in the analyzed design briefs, split up by company type.*

**Type of company Uptake (%)** SMEs 43 Large enterprises 64 Other 86

**Figure 1** gives an insight into the environmental profile of the design briefs on the different product levels. A distinction is made between SMEs, large enterprises, and "other" companies, demonstrated in the three bars. Large enterprises exceed

The most frequently used strategies in the design briefs are presented in **Figure 2**. As one can see, most of the strategies fluctuated between 0 and 18%, with an exception for the strategy "optimization of initial lifetime". This strategy was

The results on sub-strategy level are presented in **Figures 3** and **4**. Overall, the most popular sub-strategy was reliability and durability (6.1) followed by modular

**Figure 4.** *The frequency of found sub-strategies in the 80 design briefs.*

product structure (6.3) and lower energy consumption (5.1). Sub-strategy dematerialization (0.1) was not found once. The least found sub-strategies were less production waste (3.4), saver incineration (7.4), lower/cleaner energy consumption of production techniques (3.3), fewer/cleaner production consumables (3.5), less/ cleaner reusable packing (4.1), and energy-efficient logistics (4.3). On average, in each design brief 1.6 sub-strategies were detected.

## **5. Study 2: focus group and interview**

### **5.1 Research approach**

Is there an explanation as to why certain design briefs more frequently mentioned environmental sustainability elements in the design briefs than others? And furthermore, is there a reason as to why certain sub-strategies are more frequently mentioned in the design briefs than others?

Before one can answer these questions, one must first have a clear view on the design brief process in the FEI. The assumption was that by having insight into this design briefing process, it would be possible to define possible entry points for sustainability. To give an answer to these questions, the following study was carried out.

First of all, a focus group was organized with representatives from 14 Belgium SMEs and large enterprises. There were two major criteria to participate in the focus group: being located in Belgium and having an active product development department, either by an in-house design team or in collaboration with an external design agency. All persons volunteered on the focus group after a call for participation. Background of the participants ranged between senior management, project management, product design, engineering, and research and development, as shown in appendix A. The focus group was organized as an interactive group setting where

**69**

**5.2 Findings**

interview.

departments in the company.

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief…*

participants were divided in teams of four and five and lasted 1.5 h. Each team could make notes and schemes on big sheets of paper in order to visualize their thoughts

In the first part, the participants were asked to visualize and discuss their innovation process with the team members. Special attention was given to the FE of the process and the flow of the design brief. In the second part, the teams shared their experiences in integrating sustainability in the early stages of a design process and the design brief. Findings of the teams were summarized and presented plenary to all the participants of the focus group. In the end, the presented results were

The focus group session and final presentation were recorded with notes and partly with audio. They were transcribed chronologically by use of sentences, key words, and statements. The sheets of paper were analyzed and summarized. In addition to the focus group session, a double semi-structured in-depth interview with two CEOs from two Belgian SMEs was conducted to further clarify issues. The interview was carried out at the office of one of the CEOs, lasted 1 hour and a half, and was recorded both with audio and notes. The two CEOs were selected on their expertise. Both have a background in industrial product design; one has a specialization in Front End Innovation (>10 years of experience), the other in Environmental Sustainability and Sustainable Business Models (>15 years of experience). None of them has set any of the briefs that were analyzed in 4.1. They are both active in different sectors in product design and consultancy, and do not see each other as competitors. The idea of doing a double interview, instead of

The two CEOs were interviewed about their FE innovation process, their experiences in design briefing, and the integration of sustainability in both of them. The

This section presents the main results based on the focus group and the

As many people believe, the design brief is not a single document. Though processes differ from company to company, a multi-step design briefing process at the FE was found at all innovation processes of the participants. During this briefing process, different documents jump back and forward between different people and

With these insights, a new generic model of the design briefing process is presented in **Figure 5**. It shows the various stages of a design brief at the FEI. Although not all companies had such a formal organized process, there was a consensus in the group on the different stages and activities. The process is presented linear, but with different feedback loops. The model does not represent actual time frames. An earlier version of this model is described in another article of the authors of this

The various stages of a design brief document are explained in **Table 4**. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question "who is involved in the different stages of the design brief process". Different companies manage innovation in the FE in different ways. Also the decision maker(s) and the decision making process vary from company to company and are project-dependent. The people involved in the

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

The following topics were discussed:

separately, came from them, to create a certain dynamic.

interview questions can be found in appendix B of this chapter.

*5.2.1 Design briefing process and entry points for sustainability*

chapter [20] as a result of a preliminary explorative study.

to the other team members.

discussed with the whole group.

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

participants were divided in teams of four and five and lasted 1.5 h. Each team could make notes and schemes on big sheets of paper in order to visualize their thoughts to the other team members.

The following topics were discussed:

In the first part, the participants were asked to visualize and discuss their innovation process with the team members. Special attention was given to the FE of the process and the flow of the design brief. In the second part, the teams shared their experiences in integrating sustainability in the early stages of a design process and the design brief. Findings of the teams were summarized and presented plenary to all the participants of the focus group. In the end, the presented results were discussed with the whole group.

The focus group session and final presentation were recorded with notes and partly with audio. They were transcribed chronologically by use of sentences, key words, and statements. The sheets of paper were analyzed and summarized.

In addition to the focus group session, a double semi-structured in-depth interview with two CEOs from two Belgian SMEs was conducted to further clarify issues. The interview was carried out at the office of one of the CEOs, lasted 1 hour and a half, and was recorded both with audio and notes. The two CEOs were selected on their expertise. Both have a background in industrial product design; one has a specialization in Front End Innovation (>10 years of experience), the other in Environmental Sustainability and Sustainable Business Models (>15 years of experience). None of them has set any of the briefs that were analyzed in 4.1. They are both active in different sectors in product design and consultancy, and do not see each other as competitors. The idea of doing a double interview, instead of separately, came from them, to create a certain dynamic.

The two CEOs were interviewed about their FE innovation process, their experiences in design briefing, and the integration of sustainability in both of them. The interview questions can be found in appendix B of this chapter.

#### **5.2 Findings**

*Design and Manufacturing*

product structure (6.3) and lower energy consumption (5.1). Sub-strategy dematerialization (0.1) was not found once. The least found sub-strategies were less production waste (3.4), saver incineration (7.4), lower/cleaner energy consumption of production techniques (3.3), fewer/cleaner production consumables (3.5), less/ cleaner reusable packing (4.1), and energy-efficient logistics (4.3). On average, in

Is there an explanation as to why certain design briefs more frequently mentioned environmental sustainability elements in the design briefs than others? And furthermore, is there a reason as to why certain sub-strategies are more frequently

Before one can answer these questions, one must first have a clear view on the design brief process in the FEI. The assumption was that by having insight into this design briefing process, it would be possible to define possible entry points for sustainability. To give an answer to these questions, the following study was carried out. First of all, a focus group was organized with representatives from 14 Belgium SMEs and large enterprises. There were two major criteria to participate in the focus group: being located in Belgium and having an active product development department, either by an in-house design team or in collaboration with an external design agency. All persons volunteered on the focus group after a call for participation. Background of the participants ranged between senior management, project management, product design, engineering, and research and development, as shown in appendix A. The focus group was organized as an interactive group setting where

each design brief 1.6 sub-strategies were detected.

*The frequency of found sub-strategies in the 80 design briefs.*

**5. Study 2: focus group and interview**

mentioned in the design briefs than others?

**5.1 Research approach**

**Figure 4.**

**68**

This section presents the main results based on the focus group and the interview.

#### *5.2.1 Design briefing process and entry points for sustainability*

As many people believe, the design brief is not a single document. Though processes differ from company to company, a multi-step design briefing process at the FE was found at all innovation processes of the participants. During this briefing process, different documents jump back and forward between different people and departments in the company.

With these insights, a new generic model of the design briefing process is presented in **Figure 5**. It shows the various stages of a design brief at the FEI. Although not all companies had such a formal organized process, there was a consensus in the group on the different stages and activities. The process is presented linear, but with different feedback loops. The model does not represent actual time frames. An earlier version of this model is described in another article of the authors of this chapter [20] as a result of a preliminary explorative study.

The various stages of a design brief document are explained in **Table 4**. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question "who is involved in the different stages of the design brief process". Different companies manage innovation in the FE in different ways. Also the decision maker(s) and the decision making process vary from company to company and are project-dependent. The people involved in the

#### **Figure 5.**

*The various stages of a design brief in an innovation process.*


#### **Table 4.**

*The various stages of the design brief.*

briefing process can be a fixed team, an ad-hoc composed team, or it can even be one person where the entire FE is in his head.

After the interview it became clear that the converging funnel model, as presented in **Figure 5**, does not reflect the daily reality in many companies. A convergent and divergent stage, as well in the strategic stage as in the operational stage is a more common practice. The British Design Council has described such a model called the "Double Diamond" design process model [32]. Divided into four distinct phases, discover, define, develop, and deliver, it maps the divergent and convergent stages of the design process.

The design briefing process, shown in **Figure 5**, was revised and adapted based on this double diamond model. The result is presented in **Figure 6**.

**71**

**6. Conclusions**

**Figure 6.**

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief…*

*5.2.2 Crucial factors for integrating sustainability in the design brief*

*The design briefing process integrated into the double diamond design process model [32].*

and will set, whether or not, the environmental sustainability goals.

tough exercise, as one has to make decisions in uncertain conditions.

This book chapter aims to contribute to the FE of eco-innovation literature. The main research question was whether companies mention certain ecodesign principles

All participants agreed on three crucial factors for integrating sustainability in the design brief. Firstly, the integration of sustainability in the FE and the design brief largely depends on who is involved in the design briefing process and who is making the decisions in the FE. People are dominant factors; they make decisions, not tools or methods. They determine what will be written down in the design brief

A second crucial factor is the commitment of the CEO and the management team. A sustainable product has to be embedded in a strategic sustainable framework, set up in the FE and translated in a design brief. These decisions cannot be taken down the chain; bottom-up does not work on innovation process level for sustainable product innovation without an engagement from the management team. Thirdly, there are basically two reasons why the decision makers integrate environmental sustainability in the design brief; either they do it because they see business opportunities (market demand, cost reduction, product differentiation, marketing…) or they do it because it is required (legislation, retailer demands…). These drivers are also mentioned in the ecodesign literature [30]. The decision makers need to have a clear view on the business opportunities, needs, risks, and costs of sustainable product innovation in the FE. As long as these topics are not obvious, it will be difficult to convince the stakeholders, and to adapt it in the design brief. Cynically, due to the characteristics of the FE phase as explained in 2.1, it is a very

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

The different stages in the design briefing process as presented in **Figures 5** and **6**, also mark the different entry points for sustainability. The earlier in the process, the more room there is for improvement.

*Integrating Sustainability in the Strategic Stage of an Innovation Process: A Design Brief… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89604*

**Figure 6.** *The design briefing process integrated into the double diamond design process model [32].*

## *5.2.2 Crucial factors for integrating sustainability in the design brief*

All participants agreed on three crucial factors for integrating sustainability in the design brief. Firstly, the integration of sustainability in the FE and the design brief largely depends on who is involved in the design briefing process and who is making the decisions in the FE. People are dominant factors; they make decisions, not tools or methods. They determine what will be written down in the design brief and will set, whether or not, the environmental sustainability goals.

A second crucial factor is the commitment of the CEO and the management team. A sustainable product has to be embedded in a strategic sustainable framework, set up in the FE and translated in a design brief. These decisions cannot be taken down the chain; bottom-up does not work on innovation process level for sustainable product innovation without an engagement from the management team.

Thirdly, there are basically two reasons why the decision makers integrate environmental sustainability in the design brief; either they do it because they see business opportunities (market demand, cost reduction, product differentiation, marketing…) or they do it because it is required (legislation, retailer demands…). These drivers are also mentioned in the ecodesign literature [30]. The decision makers need to have a clear view on the business opportunities, needs, risks, and costs of sustainable product innovation in the FE. As long as these topics are not obvious, it will be difficult to convince the stakeholders, and to adapt it in the design brief. Cynically, due to the characteristics of the FE phase as explained in 2.1, it is a very tough exercise, as one has to make decisions in uncertain conditions.
