How does a designer turn a pile of research into a clear, justified specification that drives the rest of the project?
Write a justified design specification from research findings, covering function, ergonomics, materials, safety, cost and aesthetics, with measurable points where possible
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on specifications. Building justified, measurable specification points from research across function, ergonomics, materials, safety, cost and aesthetics.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
SEAB wants you to turn finished research into a design specification: a list of clear, justified requirements that the solution must meet. The points should cover several categories (function, ergonomics, materials, safety, cost, aesthetics), be measurable where possible, and each be justified by research. The specification is the contract for the rest of the project, because every later stage is judged against it.
The answer
The specification is the yardstick
A design specification is the detailed list of requirements a solution must satisfy. It is written after research, at the end of the investigation stage, and it drives everything that follows: ideas are generated to meet it, development is judged against it, and the final product is evaluated against it. A weak specification leads to an aimless project; a strong one keeps the design on target.
Cover the right categories
A complete specification considers the product from several angles. Common categories include:
- Function. What it must do, and how well.
- Size and weight. How big and heavy it may be, with figures.
- Ergonomics. How it must fit and suit the user.
- Materials. What properties the materials need.
- Safety. What hazards must be avoided.
- Cost. The budget per unit.
- Aesthetics. How it should look and appeal.
- Manufacture and sustainability. How it will be made, and how it can be recycled or disposed of.
Covering only function leaves a specification incomplete; a real product must also be safe, affordable, and usable.
Make points measurable
Wherever a category allows, write a measurable point with a figure, unit or clear condition. "Must be light" cannot be tested; "must weigh under 1.5 kg" can. Measurable points make idea selection and final evaluation objective. Some points (aesthetics, for instance) are harder to measure, but even there you can be specific: "must use calm colours suited to a bedroom" is better than "must look nice".
Justify every point with research
The mark of a strong specification is justification. Each point should trace back to a research finding: a measurement, a user need, a property, a safety rule, a competitor's price. "Must be openable by a 7-year-old with one hand" is justified by observing children struggle with stiff catches. A justified point can be defended and is far more likely to produce a product that works; an unjustified point is a guess.
Examples in context
Example 1. A specification for a child's night light. Research into bedtime routines, child safety standards and parent preferences yields justified, measurable points: must give a soft glow readable at under 50 lux, must run cool to the touch (under 40 degrees Celsius), must have no small detachable parts, must switch off automatically after a set time, must cost within budget. Each point defends itself with a finding, so the design has clear, testable targets.
Example 2. A specification for a workshop tool guard. Drawn from safety regulations and product analysis, the points are safety-led and measurable: must fully cover the moving part, must stay fixed under workshop knocks, must allow the tool to run without removal, must withstand repeated use. Because every point is justified by a safety finding, the guard can be evaluated objectively against real requirements.
Try this
Cue. Name five categories a complete specification should cover. Answer: any five of function, size/weight, ergonomics, materials, safety, cost, aesthetics, manufacture/sustainability.
Cue. Rewrite "must be safe" as a measurable, justified point for a toy. Answer: e.g. "must have no detachable parts smaller than 32 mm (justified by choking-hazard safety standards)", which is testable.
Cue. Explain why a specification is written after research, not before. Answer: each point should be justified by a research finding, so writing the specification first would mean guessing the requirements rather than grounding them in evidence.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of SEAB exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Original6 marksA designer has finished researching a desk tidy for storing stationery. Write six specification points covering at least four different categories (such as function, size, materials, safety, cost, aesthetics), and make them measurable where possible.Show worked answer →
Six specification points (categories in brackets):
- Must hold at least 6 pens, a ruler up to 300 mm, and a pad of sticky notes (function).
- Must occupy a footprint no larger than 150 by 150 mm on a desk (size).
- Must be made from a durable, easy-to-clean material such as a thermoplastic (materials).
- Must have no sharp edges or corners (rounded to at least 2 mm radius) (safety).
- Must cost no more than the set budget per unit to manufacture (cost).
- Must be available in colours that suit a study desk and look tidy (aesthetics).
What markers reward: at least four different categories covered, points that are measurable (figures, units, counts) where the category allows, and requirements that clearly come from a real desk-tidy need rather than generic filler.
Original4 marksExplain why each point in a specification should be justified by research, and give an example of a justified specification point.Show worked answer →
Each point should be justified by research so that the specification reflects the real needs of the user and the realities of the problem, not the designer's assumptions. A justified point can be defended and is more likely to lead to a product that actually works for its user; an unjustified point is just a guess that may be wrong.
For example, research might show that the average reach of the elderly users is 1.75 m, justifying the point "the highest control must be no higher than 1.75 m so all users can reach it". The figure comes from anthropometric research, so the requirement is grounded in evidence rather than picked arbitrarily.
What markers reward: the idea that justification ties the specification to real evidence and the user rather than assumption, and a clear example where a finding (e.g. a measurement) leads directly to a measurable point.
Related dot points
- Distinguish primary from secondary research, select appropriate methods such as interviews, observation, surveys and product study, and turn findings into design requirements
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on research. Primary versus secondary methods, when to use interviews, observation and surveys, and how findings become requirements.
- Apply anthropometric data and ergonomic principles, including the use of percentiles, to size products so they fit and suit their intended users
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on anthropometrics and ergonomics. Body measurement data, percentiles, designing for a range of users, and the difference between the two terms.
- Carry out product analysis of an existing product, examining function, materials, construction, ergonomics, aesthetics and cost, to inform a new design
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on product analysis. Analysing an existing product by function, materials, construction, ergonomics, aesthetics and cost, and using the findings.
- Write a clear design brief from an analysed situation, and turn research into a measurable design specification against which solutions can be judged
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on briefs and specifications. What a design brief states, how a specification is written as measurable points, and how the two differ.
- Evaluate a product or prototype systematically against each point of the design specification, reaching evidenced judgements and identifying improvements
A focused answer to the O-Level Design and Technology outcome on evaluation. Judging a product point by point against the specification, using evidence, and identifying improvements.