Year closure and a new beginning: towards better engineering design research

Abstract

We just closed the 2013 volume and are opening the new 2014 volume of Research in Engineering Design. In 2013 we had papers that covered diverse aspects of design from idea generation to tolerance design; and from philosophy of design to industrial practice. The methods used by studies ranged from arguments to defend positions, to building tools and demonstrating them, and finally, to empirical studies in industry. We tapped a significant diversity that makes up the engineering design landscape. We also published a special issue on design theory marking its fundamental role in engineering design research. Design theory has the ability to guide research and be the subject of research. It is so critical that it begs the question whether one can do engineering design research without having a design theory in mind. The issue of foundational thinking has also manifested itself in the new interest in design science. In contributing to this debate, we published two editorials on this topic. The first editorial presented two positions (Reich 2013a). One position concluded that science is not superior to engineering design and that in fact; it might be subsumed by engineering design. The second position stated that science is not more than an artificial object and consequently the subject of design. If so, it becomes important to develop science that will serve our purpose. The second editorial reviewed some history of engineering demonstrating that engineering has traditionally been a source of knowledge and an impetus for scientific research and not vice versa (Reich and Subrahmanian 2013b). We could practice the methods of engineering design to get answers to the above issues and other human challenges. While the goals of engineering design or the science of design are broad, the goal of the journal is very specific: undergo constant improvement to improve its value to its stake holders. Therefore, I wish to use this opportunity to thank authors that submit their papers to the journal. There is no quality or impact without these submissions. I thank you for trusting your work in our hands. We, the editorial board team, work hard to handle it carefully and improve the journal quality to give long lasting value to your work. I call readers of this editorial, whether you submitted a paper in the past or not, to select RED as the outlet of your next best paper. As a high impact journal, publishing in RED adds value to your work. It is particularly important in a world of exponential growth in the number of publications, through the proliferation of journals and conferences on design, that readers be able to comfortably appreciate sources of good quality papers. The editorial board team has completed another year of great effort to improve the journal quality and they deserve the full credit. There have been several changes in the board last year and these changes will continue more pronouncedly this year as we face the challenge to improve the service to authors. Three members joined the editorial board: Andy Dong, Ben Hicks, and Irem Tumer; two members left the editorial board: John S. Gero and Norbert F. M. Roozenburg; and Claudia Eckert became an Area Editor for Industry Studies. I want to congratulate the new members and thank those who left for their service to the journal and the community. My final thanks with deep gratitude go to the numerous reviewers who made the bulk of the work, making the journal what it is. The reviewers, outside the editorial board, who completed a review this year, are: Y. Reich (&) Tel Aviv, Israel e-mail: yoram@eng.tau.ac.il