Dear Stephen,

You, David Sless, and Michael Biggs have all asked in different ways
about the streams of creativity research that contribute directly to
the improved practice of design. That is, you wonder whether any
aspects of creativity research focuses on production rather than
reception.

Michael and - earlier - David suggested that no one working with
creativity had yet developed new knowledge to improve design practice.

In an earlier note, you also wrote, "the primary goal of the research
is to advance competence in production, technique, or know how. . . .
I think that its is important that design research provides knowledge
that helps designers to be better designers."

There is no general claim that all creativity research meets this
standard. This is a specific demonstration that some streams of
creativity research absolutely meet this standard. Moreover, a look
into the literature of these streams will show examples of specific
working methods, empirical examples, and applied cases that designers
can put to direct use should they wish to read the material and apply
the findings in their own work. I will give three classes of examples
with some specific references for those who wish to look further.

The history of creativity research shows several authors who have
pursued rich and interesting streams of research that can be applied
directly to improved design practice. Some authors ask how to improve
professional practice. Others examine heuristics and problem solving.
Still others ask how individual and social creativity shapes the
framework within which individuals and organizations innovate. For
many, this question includes asking how different aspects of what
they label creativity can help in the design process. All of these
involve production, and not merely reception.

Nadler (1981), Nadler and Hibino (1994), and Nadler and Hibino with
Farrell (1995) address creative problem solving in engineering and
deign. They do not address reception or analysis after the fact.
Their approach to creativity research involves useful working methods
for the practicing designer or engineer.

Much of the work done in organizational learning and problem solving
fits this stream. Organizational learning emphasizes social
creativity, individual and group problem solving, organizational
innovation, and heuristics. Much of this work focuses on developing
and using of skills in the context of professional practice. This
work is not specific to any one industry or field. It applies to the
development of skill and judgment in many professions. These include
the design professions among them. The literature of reflective
practice is found in this larger domain of organizational learning.

Some of the useful authors include, for example, Argyris (1991,
1992), Argyris and Schon (1974, 1978. 1996), Schon (1983, 1987),
Senge (1990, 1996, 1999), Senge, Roberts, Ross, Smith, and Kleiner
(1994), Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, Roth, and Smith (1999).

Robert Sternberg's (1994) work on creativity also covers issues in
production and professional practice.

Other streams of research are more diffuse. They do not necessarily
apply to design, but they do apply to the conditions under which
human beings become better suited to the application of wise
judgment. Chris Rust's notes on the thread formerly known as
creativity addresses this kind of research.

The writings of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow both fit this
category. So does much of Gregory Bateson's work. Because this stream
is not focused on design production, the conference described in Mary
Catherine Bateson's (1972) Our Own Metaphor is particularly
interesting because the inquiry applies to wise judgment situated in
professional practice.

One specific stream of creativity research focuses on the professions
and on higher education. This stream of research explicitly addresses
the issue of how creativity research applies to the professional
practice of design.

One key book is Finke, Warde, and Smith (1992). They examine
cognitive creativity in terms of theory, recent research, and
applications.

From time to time, Terry Love notes that new knowledge on how our
brains operate is a promising source of ways to understand the design
process. Finke, Warde, and Smith (1992) summarize much of the work
done up to the early 1990s, and their substantial reference list
gives access to applicable research. This book demonstrates the
theoretical links and empirical consequences of many of these issues.

Most of the research in the book is applicable to understanding and
improving design practice. Moreover, Finke, Warde, and Smith (1992)
cover three specific design fields - product development,
human-computer interaction, and architecture - as well as such fields
as education and psychotherapy.
.
One additional stream of creativity research focuses on what Dick
Buchanan and Susan Hagan termed the "systematic arts of invention."
This stream focuses on the classical art of rhetoric and contemporary
work in heuristics.

Both of these arts apply directly to improving design practice and to
production.

Two good examples of the work in heuristics are Polya's (1990 [1945])
work on problem solving in mathematics and Groner, Groner, and
Bischof (1983) book on heuristics. Many of Polya's techniques can be
mapped over from mathematical problem solving onto generalized
heuristics and used effectively in design practice. Much more has
been done in this field.

Many high-level problem-solving skills and strategic planning skills
also function for direct professional production. Because these
processes help to develop creativity, they constitute an example of
the systematic arts of invention to which Dick and Susan referred.
One problem-solving method well known to designers (Skoe 1992, 1994)
is an example of this.

This example demonstrates that the systemic arts of invention offer
value to experts as well as to beginners. At one point, John Feland
wrote a cautionary note on this issue. Articulated systematic methods
are often more helpful to beginners than to experienced
practitioners. Nevertheless, experts and beginners both use such
methods to great advantage.

In some cases, however, these methods work BETTER for experts than
for beginners. Experts have a greater foundation of experience, more
information and knowledge, and a larger range of skills. In some
cases, this baseline makes systematic invention more useful for
experts than for people with lower levels of experience, knowledge,
and skill.

Another virtue of the systematic arts of invention is that they can
be applied in teams. Many design production problems today require
teams. Certain processes help experts to solve problems that neither
expert individuals nor groups of beginners would be likely to solve.

Those who took Skoe's workshop in La Clusaz and in different design
schools are aware of this specific example. Skoe has used his method
with design teams in several industries in Europe, the Americas, and
Asia. Skoe has worked with professional design firms in industrial
design, product design, and communications design to solve problems
for the clients and end users. He has also worked with companies in
service design, systems design, engineering design, and logistics.
The method also helps to develop robust solutions to production
process problems. The general statement of such a problem is, "What
must we do as a company to perform a specific range of processes
successfully?" Another way of asking this would be, "How can we best
produce a specific cluster of goods and services for our customers,
clients, or end users?"

There are many research streams in the area of creativity research.
The examples I cite here and many more support the kind of design
research you favor.

Best regards,

Ken


References

Argyris, Chris. 1991. "Teaching Smart People How to Learn." Harvard
Business Review, May- June: 99-109.

Argyris, Chris. 1992. On Organizational Learning. Oxford: TJ Press.

Argyris, Chris, and Donald A. Schon. 1974. Theory in practice:
increasing professional effectiveness (1st ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Argyris, Chris, and Donald A. Schon. 1978. Organizational learning: a
theory of action perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company.

Argyris, Chris, and Donald A. Schon. 1996. Organizational learning
II. Theory, method, and Practice. Reading, Massachusetts:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Bateson, Mary Catherine. 1972. Our own metaphor. A personal account
of a conference on the effects of conscious purpose on human
adaptation. New York: Knopf.

Finke, Ronald A., Thomas B. Ward, and Steven M. Smith. 1992. Creative
Cognition. Theory, Research, and Applications. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Groner, Rudolf, Marina Groner, and Walter Bischof, editors. 1983.
Methods of Heuristics. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Nadler, Gerald. 1981. The Planning and Design Approach. New York:
John Wiley and Sons.

Nadler, Gerald, and Shozo Hibino. 1994. Breakthrough Thinking. The
Seven Principles of Creative problem Solving. Revised Second Edition.
Rocklin, California: Prima Publishing.

Nadler, Gerald, and Shozo Hibino with John Farrell. 1995. Creative
Solution Finding. The Triumph of Full-Spectrum Creativity over
Conventional Thinking. Rocklin, California: Prima Publishing.

Polya, G. 1990 [1945]. How to Solve It. A New Aspect of Mathematical
Method. London: Penguin Books.

Schon, Donald A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books Inc.

Schon, Donald A. 1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications.

Senge, Peter M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of
the Learning Organization. London: Century Business.

Senge, Peter M. 1996. "Leading learning organizations." Training and
development. 50, 12: 36-37.

Senge, Peter. 1999. Creative Tension. Executive Excellence, 16, 1: 12-13.

Senge, Peter, Charlotte Roberts, Richard Ross, Bryan Smith, and Art
Kleiner. 1994.  The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. London: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.

Senge, Peter, Art Kleiner, Charlotte Roberts, Richard Ross, George
Roth, and Bryan Smith. 1999.  The Dance of Change. The Challenges of
Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations. London: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.

Skoe, Anders (1992) Fra problem til løsning. Oslo, Norway: TI-forlaget.

Skoe, Anders (1994) Creating Customer Care. Neuilly sur Seine,
France: SITA - Societe Internationale de Telecommunications
Aeronautique.

Sternberg, Robert J., editor. 1994. Thinking and Problem Solving. San
Diego: Academic Press.

--

Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
Department of Leadership and Organization
Norwegian School of Management

Visiting Professor
Advanced Research Institute
School of Art and Design
Staffordshire University