Hi Rosan and all. I'm not sure about what is design FOR, but I include
below an extract from a Study Guide I produced for our distance learning
program 5-6 years ago (it is still in use with a few revisions) that may be
of interest to this discussion thread:

__________________________
Theory and design
We might ask, 'what is design, and is there a theory of design?'
Definitions of design are notoriously difficult to articulate and vary
tremendously both from people outside the design field, but also between
designers themselves. The Australian Academy of Design, which was formed in
1990 following the Australian Design Summit of May 1989, at one stage used
the catchphrase

 'anything that doesn't happen by accident is a design'.

This slogan leaves the field wide open for everyone to have a go at
designing, but the object of the campaign was to raise awareness about
design, and in particular, how design could play its part in the growth of
the Australian manufacturing and economic development. It was intended to
identify everyone who was dealing with design in the management arena as
designers of a kind - what had been described as the 'silent designers'
(Dumas, A & Gorb, P, 1987). However, although everyone is 'designing' in
whatever they plan to do, the particular designing that is performed by
'designers' is clearly something else. The Academy then borrowed from
Zeisel (1987) a more reasonable, but still very broad definition in 'design
is a process of imaging, representing and testing a course of action'
(Miller, Peter, 1990).

The answer to the question 'what is design' can be answered - if not by the
definition above, then by a number of variations to suit the discipline, or
disposition of the definer. I would certainly want to add some keywords to
the above, like 'elegant concept, or solution to a problem which requires a
course of action', where elegance is meant to imply more than just
aesthetic quality (although aesthetics are an integral part) but rather a
resolution of a problem which imaginatively and economically assembles the
parts into a coherent whole. And so we could go on. And we have also
answered the second half of the question - 'is there a theory of design?'

As soon as we begin to explain an activity we have theory. Whenever we
attempt to describe just how we have designed something, we are expounding
a theory. When the theory is articulated, it should inform the practice of
design. Every designer has some kind of method of working, and 'design
methods' have received reasonable attention in the last few decades. We
shall be exploring some of this methodology in the activities and readings.

The articulation and promulgation of design theory is different from design
journalism, even though any discourse is contributing to the theoretical
base. Although we now have a number of books and magazines that cover a
wide range of design areas, the serious investigation of design in all its
activities, as well as its potential impact on the social environment, is a
comparatively new debate and so the design texts are still thin on the
bookshelves. The understanding and appreciation of theoretical issues, as
distinct from the doing of design by 'creatives', is not only lacking, but
to a large extent it is often dismissed as being an interference to
creative thinking.

Ask some practising designers to theorise about their work and they will
often become reticent and vague. It is not always easy to explain the
complex and internal process of thinking, and within the field of design we
take a lot for granted. The creative process is implicitly shared knowledge
by practitioners; 'theoretising' makes it explicit. Research is part of the
design process and is perhaps even more hidden in our implicit
understanding. Designing is a complex enterprise upon which to embark, and
I have used the term 'the research enterprise' as a deliberate echo of
Helen Connole's chapter heading (Reading 6), for it aptly reflects the
spirit of adventuring into problem-solving. The following is a teasing-out
of research from the practice, and the beginning of an enquiry into what
might be a theoretical basis for design research - an epistemology of
design research.

Activity two. How would you define design in your area? Does a theory of
design tell us anything about the practice of design? Is there a
methodology of design which you consciously use each time you embark on the
design enterprise?
Take 20 minutes to think about the above questions and jot down your
thoughts in your journal. You might use one or two examples of recent
designs that you have carried out to describe your method.
Compare notes with your ERG (Electronic Reading Group).


Some definitions of design were accumulated by Arts Training Australia
('Analysing the design process; a consultative document', 1992) including
the definition
'the provision of solutions to requirements concerning the aesthetics,
function, marketing, manufacturability or construction of products,
materials and environment for the benefit of the user',
which indicates that definitions do not always have to be short, and you
may have found it necessary to write a paragraph to adequately express your
concept.

Jens Bernsen  (1989), Director of the Danish Design Centre wrote: 'Design
is a process. It starts with a definition of a purpose. It progresses via a
series of questions and answers, one being generated by the other, and ends
with an: I have found it!' A definition with which many designers will
identify.

The Arts Training Australia document quotes three paragraphs from Geoffrey
Caban's book, and you may search for further attempts at explication in
some of the professional design organisations publications - ICSID,
ICOGRADA, IFI.

Perhaps for some designers theories about designing are too difficult to
articulate, or may serve to confuse what is for them, an intuitive
procedure. I would suggest that where the design situations are
comparatively well known, the act of designing is largely an expressive one
- and can be accomplished intuitively. Solving problems which involve more
profound and socially complicated resolutions requires conscious analysis
of the many factors that impinge on both the process of designing and on
the ultimate 'user benefit'.

The analysis of the process, the factors taken into account as well as the
itemisation of all the social implications for the design outcome comprise
a design theory - without which we are unable to justify the concept to
those who will legitimise design - whether they be the manufacturers, the
users, or society at large. Instinct for what is good, or a 'right'
solution is very important, and is often left out in those cold-blooded
definitions of design. But neither is it a stand-alone in the complex world
of technology and urbanisation which is now the condition of our lives.

We have to know that our instinct is right.
_________________

Cal (a retiring kind of designer/researcher  (;-) )


_______________________________________________________________

Professor Cal Swann MA FDIA FCSD
School of Design, Curtin University of Technology
PO Box U 1987.  Perth WA 6845. Australia
Phone 08 9266 4018. Fax 08 9266 2980
Cal Swann home page:
http://staff.curtin.edu.au/~rswannc/

Conference 'Re-inventing Design Education in the University' Website:
http://www.curtin.edu.au/design/DesEd2000

_______________________________________________________________