Dear Chuck (and Klaus , Harold,  the List and Jasti)

Short post with a very long tale...

I like the idea of a "Dynamic reasoning agent" in the context that has 
been used to justify the term "intention" as a point of origin for the 
design process, I find myself nodding in agreement.

I would like to qualify this as being a process of "informed and 
reasoned intention", eventually leading to "deep conviction"  and not 
just a "flash of inspiration kind" although it could well start from 
here as well. Just as Harold has told us about his use of the term to 
signify a sort of "taking aim" it is indeed a direction setting and 
goal seeking exercise, a goal that is not yet clear but will be 
increasingly clear as the "designerly efforts progress" through a 
number of iterations, sometimes meandering and seemingly pointless, at 
times intuitive, and at other times well documented and argued with 
stats and facts to support the current direction, subject to change of 
direction, if new facts warrant such a change. This is why we think the 
a designer or someone using design as a process needs to be flexible in 
their attitude and to be able to cope with the ambiguity of the process 
as it unfolds. If at this stage the "specifications are too stringent 
the  innovative solution is impossible or untenable, since it is 
outlawed by the very "proposal" that is to be met in the first place. 
Corporate designers usually get a well structured brief from 
management, where the task begins, but some of us who are working 
outside this domain (for a large part but not entirely) in the field 
and in development contexts, where the rules of engagement for a 
designer are far from clear, have to struggle for many years to get a 
handle on what needs to be done and then we can set about doing what 
indeed needs to be done or can be done within the stringent constraints 
of the particular complex situation at hand.

As a result of my lecture on "Appreciating Design: Intentions, Values & 
Judgment" to the batch of Strategic Design Management students that I 
spoke about in my previous post, one of my students has submitted an 
email summary, in her own words of what she took away from my lecture, 
as part of her assignment,  and I am quoting her submission and my 
response to her for the list below. Design intention starts with an 
insight or sense of a gap or an opportunity, and in my mind like a drop 
of a pebble in a pond, (intentional or accidental) but as the design 
process unfolds it tends to encompass the growing rings of the ripples 
and the resonating interactions giving the designers (teams) a sense of 
direction and a deeper understanding of the contours of the task at 
hand, usually of great complexity, (otherwise it is not design). My 
response to her (Jasti Pooja Cornelius) assignment submission and her 
description of the discussion are quoted below as a further elaboration 
of our position of "Intention" as a goal setting design action in the 
early stages and as the task progresses,  a more "conviction filled 
pursuit" of both the elusive understanding of the whole context, as 
well as an "apprehension of the possible scenarios" that can provide a 
comfortable fit in the "real" gaps that are discovered or realised 
through this process of search and articulation, usually using models 
in the widest usage of this term, as suggested by Klaus in his recent 
post, takes place. The result is a "composition" that is up for 
discussion debate and decision.

With warm regards

M P Ranjan
from my office at NID
12 August 2005 at 11.45 pm IST

PS: the long...tale......... is quoted below.

SNIP SNIP

On 12-Aug-05, at 10:09 PM, Charles Burnette wrote:
>  I view intention as a "dynamic reasoning agent" (to use your 
> language).
> Plans, proposals specifications, artifacts, etc are "content" or 
> "formal
> states" that express an intention at some point in time when one seeks 
> to
> apprehend, express or communicate it. I think your use of "intention"
> confounds "operation" and "state". You need other terms for the state 
> that
> you use to capture and objectify an otherwise unresolved process.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Chuck
>
>

Quote

Dear Jasti Pooja

Your paper is among one of the finest that I have recieved for some time
now as a design teacher, wonderful. Thank you for the insightful sharing
of your "tsunami experience" in Pondicherry and for connecting it to the
pond and pebble metaphor that I used to introduce design concepts from
the "Design Way" and the "NID Way" to your class. Design at the
"strategic level" can in my view be compared to an earthquake driven
tsunami, and not just a ripple in a smallpond, which is perhaps more
suitable as a metaphor for the "tactical level of design", or "page 3
design" as I now call it, or in other words, design that is seen all
over in our society pages, it drives busines and industry no doubt, but
this not my area of emphasis, I believe design is far bigger that what
industry can do for making profits, although this is an important
application as well, and an area of vast employment for many of our
students. But design at the strategic level is a whole new ballgame
waiting to be discovered by.....humanity? Values is at the heart of our
definition of design.

A few years ago I was invited by an editor of "Design Issues" to
contribute a paper to a proposed special issue on "Indian Design" and my
contribution was called "The Avalanchhe Effect". After a two year wait,
I got a message rejecting my paper since there was an overwhelming
response to the call for papers and my paper was not to be one amongst
the chosen ones. Perhaps the claim that I made sounded too incredulous
in those days and lacked credibility to be carried in the highly
respected Journal which I respect greatly for its quality and substance.
I promptly "published" the same paper on the discussion list, PhD-Design
and got several wonderful responses and comments from the numerous
participamnts on the list. This gave me the confidence to follow my
conviction and more recently, in March 2005 (earlier this year),
submitted two papers at two back-to-back conferences, one at NID,
Ahmedabad and the other at Bremen, Germany. The NID conference was on
Design Education and my paper looked at the Foundation programmes of
Bauhaus, Ulm and NID as a line of development of design education. My
Bremen paper for the EAD06, a conference on Design Theory, and it was
the first time (after the Avalanche Effect) that I prepared a detailed
paper on the "Design Concepts and Concerns" course that I have developed
at NID over the past twenty years, which is the basis of my claim to the
unique "NID Way" which I shared with you in class. Do check out these
papers at my web archives from this link 
<http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp>

With warm regards

M P Ranjan
from my Mac at Home
12 August 2005 at 10.45 am IST

[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> ‘Pebble In The Pond’ Theory
> Submitted by Jasti Pooja Cornelius
>
> The message that made the biggest impact on me during our interaction 
> with
> Professor M. P. Ranjan was his theory of the ‘pebble in a pond’. When 
> you
> throw a pebble into a pond it creates ripples on the surface. The 
> pebble
> sinks below but the repercussions of the ripples are felt for a far 
> longer
> time.
>
> This reminds me of the tsunami that hit the east coast of India last
> December. I was watching the sea from out our guest house balcony early
> that morning in Pondicherry. I’d been noticing the sea-level and felt 
> it
> was unusually high even for high tide. Then it happened right before my
> eyes the usually placid waves broke out and were soaring higher than I 
> had
> seen during my stay there. Pretty soon the water had reached Beach road
> even though there are dykes built to keep the land level high. I asked 
> the
> house staff if this occurrence was normal, they were amazed 
> themselves. No
> sooner had the water level risen that it receded back into the sea 
> again.
> It had receded some 20 feet away from what was usually the waters 
> edge. It
> was the most incredible natural phenomenon I had witnessed so far. This
> swelling and receding of the sea continued at 30 minute intervals
> throughout the day. As I sat there amazed I wondered where all the 
> water
> was going. There was a good 6-7 feet of water level drop. Of course 
> with
> the news of the earthquake and the workings of a tsunami came out 
> things
> became clearer. I understood then that the water that was cause for
> amazement at Beach road in Pondicherry was wrecking homes and lives at
> other ends of the ocean!!
>
> I’ve heard that within nature you’ll find all the answers. In this 
> case it
> is especially true. Design does not end with the use it is required 
> for.
> It will have lasting repercussions just like the pebble had in the 
> pond.
> The question is not why this happens or whether there is a way to 
> avoid it
> and so forth. The question is can we think as far as the lasting
> repercussions of these ripples.
>
> Having raised this line of thought one begins to wonder if it is in 
> fact
> possible to plan so far ahead. An example we’ve been discussing often 
> is
> the new Amul bottle package for chocolate milk and coffee. It is 
> reported
> that the unique design and material of this bottle has made 
> manufacturing
> and overhead expenses cheaper. The sales have also gone up since the
> introduction. One would think that the team behind the product has 
> done a
> good job considering the extent of their goals.
>
> According to the ‘pebble in the pond’ theory the purpose of this bottle
> design doesn’t end as soon as the beverage has been consumed. This 
> bottle
> has actually just started its ripples across the pool. The 
> responsibility
> of the design doesn’t end with the sale. The bottle gets disposed. Is 
> it
> degradable? Is there a recycle or reuse provision? If disposed in a
> regular garbage unit what are the long term effects it could have on 
> the
> eco system? What are the hazards if not disposed properly? Are 
> consumers
> aware of its proper disposal directions? Will the company take
> responsibility for the repercussions caused by the ill disposal of this
> bottle?
>
> Questions like these bring to the forefront issues that are not only
> relevant to our business but also to our existence! There is only one
> planet we can call home. Isn’t it our responsibility to ensure we take
> care of it? Why leave room for a situation to come up when we have the
> ability of foresight and planning to avoid it? Why wait for things to
> happen when we have the power to make it happen? Why can’t we take the
> responsibility to shape our future?
>
> Design today is no longer just about cosmetic/ aesthetic appearances. 
> The
> design way emphasizes on the holistic awareness of life and everything 
> in
> it. To use this awareness to create something that is not only a 
> synthesis
> of various aspects but also the sustenance and maintenance through its
> lifecycle. Whether it is a design to build a rural economy or self
> insulated sipping cups. Are we addressing the situation when all things
> must end? Technologies will get obsolete and new ones will emerge. 
> Trends
> and fads will come and go out of fashion. The bottle that has changed 
> the
> sales today will be replaced by something even better tomorrow. What 
> are
> we then going to do with all the leftover garbage? This is not a 
> crusade
> to save the ecology of the planet but a glance at what power and with 
> it
> responsibility lies in our way as designers and future managers.

> Jasti Pooja Cornelius,

> UnQuote