• Archives of design research
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.63-97
• /
• 1989

There is nothing more important than the form and function in design, because every design product can be done on the basis of them. Form and Function are already existed before the word of design has been appeared and all the natural and man-made things' basic organization is based on their organic relations. The organic relations is the source of vitality which identifies the subsistance of all the objects and the evolution of living creatures has been changed their appearances by the natural law and order. Design is no exception. Design is a man-made organic thing which is developed its own way according to the purposed aim and given situations. If so, what is the ultimate goal of design. It is without saying that the goal is to make every effort to contribute to the -human beings most desirable life by the designer who is devoting himself to their convenience and well-being. Therefore, the designer can be called the man of rich life practitioner. This word implies a lot of meanings since the essence of design is improving the guality of life by the man-made things which are created by the designer. Also, the things are existed through the relations between form and function, and the things can keep their value when they are answered to the right purpose. In design, thus, it is to be a main concern how to create valuable things and to use them in the right way, and the subject of study is focused on the designer's outlook of value and uk relations between form and function. Christopher Alexander mentioned the importance of form as follows. The ultimate object of design is form. Every design problem begins with an effort to achieve fittness between the form and its context. The form is the solution to the problem: the context defmes the problem. In other words, when we speak of design, the real object of discussion is not form alone, but the ensemble comprising the form and its context. Good fit is a desirable property of this ensemble which relates to some particular division of the ensemble into form and context. Max Bill mainatined how important form is in design. Form represents a self-contained concept, and its embodiment in an object results in that object becoming a work of art. Futhermore, this explains why we use form so freguently in a comparative sense for determining whether one thing is less or more beautiful than another, and why the ideal of absolute beauty is always the standard by which we appraise form, and through form, art itself. Hence form has became synonymous with beauty. On the other hand, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy stated the importance of function as follows. Function means the task an object is designed to fulfill the task instrument is shaping the form. Unfortunately, this principle was not appreciated at the same time but through the endeavors of Frank Lloyd Wright and of the Bauhaus group and its many collegues in Europe, the idea of functionalism became the keynote of the twenites. Functionalism soon became a cheap slogan, however, and its original meaning blurred. It is neccessary to reexamine it in the light of present circumstances. Charles William Eliot expressed his idea on the relations between function and beauty. Beauty often results chiefly from fittness: indeed it is easy to manitain that nothing is fair except what is fit its uses or functions. If the function of the product of a machine be useful and valuable, an the machine be eminently fit for its function, it conspicuously has the beauty of fittness. A locomotive or a steamship has the same sort of beauty, derived from the supreme fittness for its function. As functions vary, so will those beauty..vary. However, it is impossible to study form and function in separate beings. Function can't be existed without form, and without function, form is nothing. In other words, form is a function's container, and function is content in form. It can be said that, therefore, the form and function are indispensable and commensal individuals which have coetemal relations. From the different point of view, sometimes, one is more emphasized than the other, but in this case, the logic is only accepted on the assumption of recognizing the importance of the other's entity. The fact can be proved what Frank Hoyd wright said that form and function are one. In spite of that, the form and function should be considered as independent indivisuals, because they are too important to be treated just as the simple single one. Form and function have flexible properties to the context. In other words, the context plays a role as the barometer to define the form and function, also which implies every meaning of surroun'||'&'||'not;dings. Thus, design is formed under the influence of situations. Situations are dynamic, like the design process itself, in which fixed focus can be cripping. Moreover, situations control over making the good design. Judging from the respect, I defined the good design in my thesis An Analytic Research on Desigh Ethic, "good design is to solve the problem by the most proper way in the situations." Situations are changeable, and so is design. There is no progress without change, but change is not neccessarily progress. It is highly desirable that there changes be beneficial to mankind. Our main problem is to be able to discriminate between that which should be discarded and that which should be kept, built upon, and improved. Form and Function are no exception. The practical function gives birth to the inevitable form and the $$\mu$ti-classified function is delivered to the varieties of form. All of these are depended upon changeable situations. That is precisely the situations of "situation de'||'&'||'not;sign", the concept of moving from the design of things to the design of the circumstances in which things are used. From this point of view, the core of form and function is depended upon how the designer can manage it efficiently in given situations. That is to say that the creativity designer plays an important role to fulfill the purpose. Generally speaking, creativity is the organization of a concept in response to a human need-a solution that is both satisfying and innovative. In order to meet human needs, creative design activities require a special intuitive insight which is set into motion by purposeful imagination. Therefore, creativity is the most essential quality of every designer. In addition, designers share with other creative people a compulsive ingenuity and a passion for imaginative solutions which will meet their criteria for excellence. Ultimately, it is said that the form and function is the matter which belongs to the desire of creative designers who constantly try to bring new thing into being to create new things. In accordance with that the main puppose of this thesis is to catch every meaning of the form and function and to close analyze their relations for the promotion of understanding and devising practical application to gradual progression in design. The thesis is composed of four parts: Introduction, Form, Function and Conclusion. Introduction, the purpose and background of the research are presented. In Chapter I, orgin of form, perception of form, and classification of form are studied. In Chapter II, generation of function, development of function, and diversification of function are considered. Conclusion, some concluding words are mentioned.ioned.

• Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science
• /
• v.98 no.1
• /
• pp.66-81
• /
• 2009

From a new perspective of "humans and the culture of forming and conserving the environment", the sustainable forest management can be reformulated under the concept of "cultural sustainability". Cultural sustainability is based on the emphasis of the high contribution to sustainability of the culture of forming and conserving the environment. This study extracts the implications to cultural sustainability for the modern world by investigating a historical case of the culturo-social pine forestry in the Joseon period of Korea. In the legendary and recorded acts by the first king Taejo, Seonggye Yi, Korean red pine (Pinus densiflora) was the "Royal tree" of Joseon and also the "Sajik tree" related intimately with the Great Sajik Ritual valued as the top rank within the national ritual regime that sustained the Royal Virtue Politics in Confucian political ideology. Into the Neo-Confucian faith and royal rituals of Joseon, elements of geomancy (Feng shui), folk religion, and Buddhism had been amalgamated. The deities worshipped or revered at the Sajik shrine were Earth-god (Sa) and crop-god (Jik). And it is the Earth god and the concrete entity, Sajik tree, that contains the legacy of sylvan religion descended from the ancient times and had been incorporated into the Confucian faith and ritual regime. Korean red pine as the Royal-Sajik tree played a critical role of sustaining the religio-political justification for the rule of the Joseon's Royalty. The religio-political symbolism of Korean red pine was represented in diverse ways. The same pine was used as the timber material of shrine buildings established for the national rituals under Neo-Confucian faith by the royal court of Joseon kingdom before the modern Korea. The symbolic role of pine had also been expressed in the forms of royal tomb forests, the Imposition Forest (Bongsan) for royal coffin timber (Whangjangmok), and the creation, protection, conservation and bureaucratic management of the pine forests in the Inner-four and Outer-four mountains for the capital fortress at Seoul, where the king and his family inhabit. The religio-political management system of pine forests parallels well with the kingdom's economic forest management system, called "Pine Policy", with an array of pine cultivation forests and Prohibition Forests (Geumsan) in the earlier period, and that of Imposition Forests in the later period. The royal pine culture with the economic forest management system had influenced on the public consciousness and the common people seem to have coined Malrimgat, a pure Korean word that is interchangeable with the Chinesecharacter words of prohibition-cultivation land or forest (禁養地, 禁養林) practiced in the royal tomb forests, and Prohibition and Imposition Forests, which contained prohibition landmarks (Geumpyo) made of stone and rock on the boundaries. A culturo-social forestry, in which Sajik altar, royal tomb forests, Whangjang pine Prohibition and Imposition forests and the capital Inner-four and Outer-four mountain forests consist, was being put into practice in Joseon. In Joseon dynastry, the Neo-Confucian faith and royal rituals with geomancy, folk religion, and Buddhism incorporated has also played a critical humanistic role for the culturo-social pine forestry, the one higher in values than that of the economic pine forestry. The implications have been extracted from the historical case study on the Royal-Sajik tree and culturo-social forestry of Joseon : Cultural sustainability, in which the interaction between humans and environment maintains a long-term culturo-natural equilibrium or balance for many generations, emphasizes the importance that the modern humans who form and conserve environment need to rediscover and transform their culturo-natural legacy into conservation for many generations and produce knowledge of sustainability science, the transdisciplinary knowledge for the interaction between environment and humans, which fulfills the cultural, social and spiritual needs.

• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.68-79
• /
• 2009

The interplay between hedonic and utilitarian attributes has assumed special significance in recent years; it has been proposed that consumption offerings should be viewed as experiences that stimulate both cognitions and feelings rather than as mere products or services. This research builds on previous work on hedonic versus utilitarian benefits, regulatory focus theory, customer satisfaction to address two question: (1) Is the shopping goal at the point of purchase different from the shopping value? and (2) Is the customer loyalty after the use different from the shopping value and shopping goal? We surveyed 345 peoples those who have bought the electronic-goods within 6 months. This research dealt with the shopping value which is consisted of 2 types, hedonic and utilitarian. Those who pursue the hedonic shopping value may prefer the pleasure of purchasing experience to the product itself. They tend to prefer atmosphere, arousal of the shopping experience. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "hedonic" to refer to their aesthetic, experiential and enjoyment-related value. On the contrary, Those who pursue the utilitarian shopping value may prefer the reasonable buying. It may be more functional. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "utilitarian" to refer to the functional, instrumental, and practical value of consumption offerings. Holbrook(1999) notes that consumer value is an experience that results from the consumption of such benefits. In the context of cell phones for example, the phone's battery life and sound volume are utilitarian benefits, whereas aesthetic appeal from its shape and color are hedonic benefits. Likewise, in the case of a car, fuel economics and safety are utilitarian benefits whereas the sunroof and the luxurious interior are hedonic benefits. The shopping goals are consisted of the promotion focus goal and the prevention focus goal, based on the self-regulatory focus theory. The promotion focus is characterized into focusing ideal self because they are oriented to wishes and vision. The promotion focused individuals are tend to be more risk taking. They are more sensitive to hope and achievement. On the contrary, the prevention focused individuals are characterized into focusing the responsibilities because they are oriented to safety. The prevention focused individuals are tend to be more risk avoiding. We wanted to test the relation among the shopping value, shopping goal and customer loyalty. Customers show the positive or negative feelings comparing with the expectation level which customers have at the point of the purchase. If the result were bigger than the expectation, customers may feel positive feeling such as delight or satisfaction and they would want to share their feelings with other people. And they want to buy those products again in the future time. There is converging evidence that the types of goals consumers expect to be fulfilled by the utilitarian dimension of a product are different from those they seek from the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004). Specifically, whereas consumers expect the fulfillment of product prevention goals on the utilitarian dimension, they expect the fulfillment of promotion goals on the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan, and Majahan 2007; Higgins 1997, 2001) According to the regulatory focus theory, prevention goals are those that ought to be met. Fulfillment of prevention goals in the context of product consumption eliminates or significantly reduces the probability of a painful experience, thus making consumers experience emotions that result from fulfillment of prevention goals such as confidence and securities. On the contrary, fulfillment of promotion goals are those that a person aspires to meet, such as "looking cool" or "being sophisticated." Fulfillment of promotion goals in the context of product consumption significantly increases the probability of a pleasurable experience, thus enabling consumers to experience emotions that result from the fulfillment of promotion goals. The proposed conceptual framework captures that the relationships among hedonic versus utilitarian shopping values and promotion versus prevention shopping goals respectively. An analysis of the consequence of the fulfillment and frustration of utilitarian and hedonic value is theoretically worthwhile. It is also substantively relevant because it helps predict post-consumption behavior such as the promotion versus prevention shopping goals orientation. Because our primary goal is to understand how the post consumption feelings influence the variable customer loyalty: word of mouth (Jacoby and Chestnut 1978). This research result is that the utilitarian shopping value gives the positive influence to both of the promotion and prevention goal. However the influence to the prevention goal is stronger. On the contrary, hedonic shopping value gives influence to the promotion focus goal only. Additionally, both of the promotion and prevention goal show the positive relation with customer loyalty. However, the positive relation with promotion goal and customer loyalty is much stronger. The promotion focus goal gives the influence to the customer loyalty. On the contrary, the prevention focus goal relates at the low level of relation with customer loyalty than that of the promotion goal. It could be explained that it is apt to get framed the compliment of people into 'gain-non gain' situation. As the result, for those who have the promotion focus are motivated to deliver their own feeling to other people eagerly. Conversely the prevention focused individual are more sensitive to the 'loss-non loss' situation. The research result is consistent with pre-existent researches. There is a conceptual parallel between necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits and luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha 2007; Higginns 1997; Kivetz and Simonson 2002b). In addition, Maslow's hierarchy of needs and the precedence principle contends luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits higher than necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits. Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha (2007) show that consumers are focused more on the utilitarian benefits than on the hedonic benefits of a product until their minimum expectation of fulfilling prevention goals are met. Furthermore, a utilitarian benefit is a promise of a certain level of functionality by the manufacturer or the retailer. When the promise is not fulfilled, customers blame the retailer and/or the manufacturer. When negative feelings are attributable to an entity, customers feel angry. However in the case of hedonic benefit, the customer, not the manufacturer, determines at the time of purchase whether the product is stylish and attractive. Under such circumstances, customers are more likely to blame themselves than the manufacturer if their friends do not find the product stylish and attractive. Therefore, not meeting minimum utilitarian expectations of functionality generates a much more intense negative feelings, such as anger than a less intense feeling such as disappointment or dissatisfactions. The additional multi group analysis of this research shows the same result. Those who are unsatisfactory customers who have the prevention focused goal shows higher relation with WOM, comparing with satisfactory customers. The research findings in this article could have significant implication for the personal selling fields to increase the effectiveness and the efficiency of the sales such that they can develop the sales presentation strategy for the customers. For those who are the hedonic customers may be apt to show more interest to the promotion goal. Therefore it may work to strengthen the design, style or new technology of the products to the hedonic customers. On the contrary for the utilitarian customers, it may work to strengthen the price competitiveness. On the basis of the result from our studies, we demonstrated a correspondence among hedonic versus utilitarian and promotion versus prevention goal, WOM. Similarly, we also found evidence of the moderator effects of satisfaction after use, between the prevention goal and WOM. Even though the prevention goal has the low level of relation to WOM, those who are not satisfied show higher relation to WOM. The relation between the prevention goal and WOM is significantly different according to the satisfaction versus unsatisfaction. In addition, improving the promotion emotions of cheerfulness and excitement and the prevention emotion of confidence and security will further improve customer loyalty. A related potential further research could be to examine whether hedonic versus utilitarian, promotion versus prevention goals improve customer loyalty for services as well. Under the budget and time constraints, designers and managers are often compelling to choose among various attributes. If there is no budget or time constraints, perhaps the best solution is to maximize both hedonic and utilitarian dimension of benefits. However, they have to make trad-off process between various attributes. For the designers and managers have to keep in mind that without hedonic benefit satisfaction of the product it may hard to lead the customers to the customer loyalty.