Dear Birger,

Thanks for your interesting query Friday. It 
seems to me that we may agree on more things than 
not, and that careful clarification of terms 
resolves some of the issues.

Since your comments focus on research and you ask 
me a direct question based on my life experience, 
perhaps I'm wise enough to answer. If not, I'll 
sign up for "Know Thyself 101. If I do, though, 
I'll keep Woody Allen's experience in mind. Allen 
once said that his college expelled him for 
cheating on the final exam in the first-year 
metaphysics class. They caught him looking into 
the soul of the student next to him.

(1) Many kinds of research

We agree "there is a special type of knowledge 
generated that is neither possible by just 
practicing or just by research."

The are many kinds of research. Merriam-Webster's 
Dictionary defines research in a way that 
clarifies the term as living speakers use it: "1: 
careful or diligent search 2: studious inquiry or 
examination; especially: investigation or 
experimentation aimed at the discovery and 
interpretation of facts, revision of accepted 
theories or laws in the light of new facts, or 
practical application of such new or revised 
theories or laws 3: the collecting of information 
about a particular subject" (Merriam-Webster's 
1993: 1002; for more, see the Oxford English 
Dictionary).

These definitions cover clinical, applied, and 
basic research; theoretical and practice-led 
research; qualitative, quantitative, descriptive, 
interpretive, logical, mathematical, empirical, 
positive, normative, hermeneutic, 
phenomenological, and philosophical research, as 
well as expressive research. Design involves many 
kinds of research: naturalistic inquiry, 
statistical, analytical, mathematical, physical, 
historical, sociological, ethnographic, 
ethnological, biological, medical, chemical and 
many more.

(2) Trade-offs

Robson's evaluation of the trade-offs between 
different kinds of advantages and problems in 
different research methods is good. Karl Weick 
(1979: 35-42) also writes well about the need 
acknowledge trade-offs in different kinds of 
research.

In some fields, people use Weick's SAG clock to 
explain the position of a research project in 
terms of trade-offs between simplicity, accuracy, 
and generality. The clock is a simple thought 
device that looks like an ordinary 12-hour clock 
with numbers from 1-12. At 12, place the word 
"general." At 4, place the word "accurate." At 8, 
place the word "simple."

Weick proposes that any given research project in 
the social sciences -- and possibly other fields 
-- can meet two of these three criteria at the 
cost of neglecting the other. Case study 
research, for example, can be simple and 
accurate, but it cannot be general. This would be 
the case for much practice-based research located 
in a specific design project, and it applies to 
most forms of clinical research.

Many kinds of research combine simplicity and 
generality at the cost of accuracy. Quantitative 
research based on massive comparison of many 
cases tends to function this way. The specific, 
accurate details of a given case or project 
vanish in the weight of evidence through which 
one sifts to achieve generality.

This is not the best place to address the wide 
range of issues this involves, or to examine 
possible exceptions in the social sciences or the 
differences to other sciences. For example, some 
kinds of research in such fields as logic or 
mathematics may be simple and accurate while 
remaining completely general.

(3) Linkages between theory and practice

Robin Adams's point is well taken. In saying that 
it is probably impossible to ask that all theory 
merge seamlessly with practice, I am aware of 
genuine real-world difficulties that attend 
transforming puzzling problems into reasonable or 
reliable knowledge, either or both.

As one of the world's leading scholars in 
innovation studies, Andrew van de Ven has long 
done good work in this area. I had the pleasure 
of hosting him in Norway last year as a keynote 
speaker when I co-chaired the European Academy of 
Management conference.

Those who wish to sample chapters from van de 
Ven's important new book will find them available 
on the web site for van de Ven's course in Theory 
Building and Research Design at the University of 
Minnesota.

http://webpages.csom.umn.edu/smo/avandeven/MGT8101/MGT8101.HTM

(There is lots of good material in general on his main web site:

http://webpages.csom.umn.edu/smo/avandeven/AHVHOME.htm)

(4) Rigor

What distinguishes research from other activities 
is what Mario Bunge (1999: 251) describes as the 
"methodical search for knowledge. Original 
research," he continues, "tackles new problems or 
checks previous findings. Rigorous research is 
the mark of science, technology, and the 'living' 
branches of the humanities." Synonyms for 
research include exploration, investigation, and 
inquiry.

The term rigor need not mean that something is 
universal or even general. To me, the term has 
more to do with the kinds of claims we make in 
relation to the warrants that support our claims.

If some who watched 128 people pass through a 
door between 1 pm and 2 pm last Friday, the 
statement, "128 people walked through this door 
between one and two o'clock last Friday" is a 
rigorous statement.

If we begin to invent reasons for this without 
asking those people, our account of the reasons 
is no longer rigors. If we ask and report what 
they say, we are once again engaging in rigorous 
research. It may be simple research on Weick's 
SAG clock, but it is accurate, located at 6 
o'clock.

Remember the old children's riddle: "Why do 
firemen wear red suspenders?" The answer - "To 
keep their pants up." - may or may not be 
rigorous. If we ask, and they answer that this is 
why, it is a rigorous claim based on a good 
warrant.

I'd argue that rigor and relevance go together 
more often than not in good research. A 
proposition, even the wildest proposition, lacks 
rigor only when we cast it as a truth claim.

There are many forms of rigorous description. 
Terry has often mentioned mathematics. Eduardo 
mentioned the art of drawing. In the natural 
sciences, drawing and diagramming often 
constitute an aspect of rigorous description. One 
of my favorite essays on this theme is a book 
chapter by chemist and Nobel Laureate Roald 
Hoffman. Nicely balanced between workday science 
and playful poetry, "Writing (and Drawing) 
Chemistry" explains how people report the 
research involved in designing chemicals. Hoffman 
wrote "that it is impossible to write chemistry 
without drawing molecules" in an elegant 
discussion showing how words, equations, and 
images come together to describe original 
scientific contributions to his field. This also 
touches on comments by Chris and David.

On some occasion, it would be interesting to look 
more closely into what we mean by such terms as 
rigor and relevance. It would also be useful to 
examine how such terms function in different 
fields - and in different areas of design 
research.

(5) Truth and truth claims

There are many kinds of truth claims. This is 
what I was getting at in my note on truth and 
hypotheses. I was probably trying to cram too 
much into a short sentence or two, because I do 
not mean that all forms of research require 
hypotheses. Nevertheless, many kinds of research 
require truth.

The statement "x is y" is a truth claim. To say 
that something happens is a truth claim. To state 
that an event took place or did not is a truth 
claim. The claim that something is so "because" 
is also a truth claim.

This is not the place for a comprehensive 
consideration of these issues. It is important to 
say that some kinds of statements may be true or 
false even when the overall research project may 
not be a matter of true and false. Even though 
the entire research program may involve such 
criteria as interpretation, goodness of fit, 
judgment, or heuristic advances rather than final 
claims, specific problems within the larger 
project may involve truth or false statements.

This is often the case in historical research. To 
say that Buckminster Fuller intended something by 
a certain statement is an interpretation claim, 
and we may not be able to know with certainty 
that the interpretation is correct. A statement 
has one context in the 1920s when Fuller was a 
young designer creating innovative housing 
systems, another in the 1980s at the end of his 
career. The date of the speech involves a truth 
claim. It may be true or false, correct or 
incorrect. That date, in turn, may shed light on 
our interpretation.

(6) Grounded theory

Grounded theory offers many such cases of 
different kinds. We build grounded theory 
inductively. We ground it in the information that 
allows us to begin to theorize. Some aspects of 
the ground require description, that is, 
statements about what is so. A statement of what 
is so is a truth claim. A truth claim must be 
true or false.

There are many kinds of research questions - 
especially in exploratory research. My favorite 
discussion on research methods remains the first 
chapter of Herbert Blumer's book. Blumer take a 
rich, pluralistic approach in search of 
responsible inquiry rather than methodological 
dogma.

While explicitly criticizing methodological 
fetishism, Blumer (1969:40) writes, "...This is 
not a simple matter of just approaching a given 
area and looking at it. It is a tough job 
requiring a high order of careful and honest 
probing, creative yet disciplined imagination, 
resourcefulness and flexibility in study, 
pondering over what one is finding, and a 
constant readiness to test and recast one's views 
and images of the area."

Grounded theory grew out of Blumer's symbolic 
interactionist perspective, which was anchored in 
the earlier work of George Herbert Mead. Mead's 
version of pragmatism in turn builds on Wilhelm 
Dilthey's hermeneutics of the human sciences. If 
you examine these thinkers and their approach to 
research, you find an open approach that involves 
multiple methods and rigorous inquiry.

As I say, I crammed too much into one sentence in 
my earlier note. Discussing hypotheses was 
misleading. The concept of truth in terms of 
responsible truth claims is useful.

(7) Fluxus

Your question on Fluxus is especially interesting 
because I have just finished editing two special 
issues of the journal Visible Languages together 
with Owen Smith in which I research the Fluxus 
material historically. Therefore, I can do more 
than speculate on what this involves.

In some of the articles for that I wrote for this 
issue (some with Owen) - and for other studies - 
I inquire about what happened and sometimes 
reflect on why. For Visible Language, however, 
Owen and I did something quite specific to your 
query. We examined the explicit range of 
historiographic issues that this research entails 
(Friedman 2006; Friedman and Smith 2005, 2006a, 
2006b). I'll send these off-list.

You've asked an interesting range of further 
questions. Let me answer these briefly, and save 
a deeper consideration for another day

[Birger] Can you establish a hypothesis and verify it?

[Ken] No, but this is a different kind of research

[Birger] Or could you speculate about it from the 
research through practice point of view?

[Ken] Probably. I certainly did so in the 1960s, 
and I even used the term "research art" in 
relation to some projects. Explaining this today 
requires more time and reflection than I can give 
it now.

[Birger] Let's say you would imagine a research 
by design project interlocked with your practice 
at that time, how would your research design look 
and what kind of rigour would be needed?

[Ken] Imaging this now about what I did then also requires time and reflection.

[Birger] How would it (looking back) influence 
and feed back into that art practice and vice 
versa?

[Ken] My reflections and the research I did in 
several fields clearly influenced my artistic 
practice. I never studied in an art school, but 
rather I studied psychology, social science, and 
education, and I also audited courses in 
theology. In the 1970s, I did my doctoral work in 
leadership and human behavior, as well as doing 
research on the sociology and economics of art. 
All this influenced my practice, especially in 
sharpening the kinds of questions I asked as I 
undertook projects.

[Birger] Or would you regard these as totally 
separate processes which would not benefit from 
being "laminar"?

[Ken] It's fair to sat that there was a laminar 
effect - but examining it would require time and 
careful unpacking of the layers of experience and 
memory through time and in the present.

Let's look into those questions another time. 
They are good, but they are deep, and this post 
is already long.

Warm wishes,

Ken



References

Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism. 
Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, New 
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., pp. 1-59. [Reprinted 
1998 by University of California Press.]

Bunge, Mario. 1999. The Dictionary of Philosophy. 
Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.

Friedman, Ken. 2006. "The Literature of Fluxus." 
Fluxus After Fluxus. Visible Language. Vol. 40, 
No. 1, 90-112.

Friedman, Ken, and Owen Smith. 2005. "History, 
Historiography, and Legacy." Visible Language. 
Vol. 39, No. 3, 308-317.

Friedman, Ken, and Owen Smith. 2006a. "The 
Dialectics of Legacy." Fluxus After Fluxus. 
Visible Language. Vol. 40, No. 1, 4-11.

Friedman, Ken, and Owen Smith. 2006b. "A Fluxus 
Bibliography." Fluxus After Fluxus. Visible 
Language. Vol. 40, No. 1, 114-127.

Hoffman, Roald. 2002. "Writing (and Drawing) 
Chemistry" Writing and Revising the Disciplines. 
Jonathan Monroe, editor. Ithaca: Cornell 
University Press, pp. 29-53.

Merriam-Webster, Inc. 1993. Merriam-Webster's 
Collegiate Dictionary. Tenth edition. 
Springfield, Massachusetts.

Weick, Karl. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill.




Birger Sevaldson wrote:

-snip-

I believe that in-between these practices there 
is a special type of knowledge generated that is 
neither possible by just practicing or just by 
research. Š

My point is that there is a trade-off between 
different knowledges. This does not mean lowering 
the standards but that the emphasis and mix of 
backgrounds and knowledges will vary in different 
modes of design research some times on the cost 
of the depth of academic knowledge. We need to 
realize this trade off or i would prefer to call 
it negotiation of knowledges but it seems very 
few do. Š

-snip-

I think I basically agree with most of what you 
say, like not all design research can seamlessly 
integrate with practice, sure but some of it 
should (and i think we agree). Robin Adams 
mentioned an upcoming book by Van de Ven where 
this is seen as a contradiction between those who 
emphasize rigour and generalisation (academics) 
and those closer to practice who emphasize 
relevance. I think we need to look for relevance 
with rigour!

-snip-

I am a little confused about your way of using 
the word "true" and hypothesis. I thought since 
long that "true" and "false" are terms hard to 
use in many areas of design research or related 
fields. I would suggest terms like valid or 
justified. Also the term hypothesis is difficult 
in all inductive research as stated by grounded 
theory. A hypothesis in the traditional sense is 
a pre-stated statement that is to be verified or 
falsified through experiments (deduction). The 
term "research question" is in my mind a more 
openly stated hypothesis. Grounded theory takes a 
different starting point, avoiding any 
preconception of the research field to avoid 
biasing an explorative research.

-snip-

Ken, I coincidentally just stumbled across some 
of your work from the FLUXUS period. Great 
stuff!! Just out of curiosity, could you 
speculate about how you might research this 
material historically? Can you establish a 
hypothesis and verify it? Or could you speculate 
about it from the research through practice point 
of view? Let's say you would imagine a research 
by design project interlocked with your practice 
at that time, how would your research design look 
and what kind of rigour would be needed? How 
would it (looking back) influence and feed back 
into that art practice and vice versa? Or would 
you regard these as totally separate processes 
which would not benefit from being "laminar"?

-snip-



-- 

Prof. Ken Friedman
Institute for Communication, Culture, and Language
Norwegian School of Management
Oslo

Center for Design Research
Denmark's Design School
Copenhagen

+47 46.41.06.76    Tlf NSM
+47 33.40.10.95    Tlf Privat

email: [log in to unmask]