Dear Professor Ranjan,

There is much to be said about this, but i don't think the list is  
the place to do it. 'Flying under the radar' is often a dangerous  
business. Much to discuss off-line.

David
On 19/04/2007, at 10:09 PM, M P Ranjan wrote:

> Dear Jerry
>
> I too am in complete agreement with your views and experiences  
> about the group processes that influence design thought and action.  
> Many a times official funding or the lack of it determines the  
> scope and directions of design action and rersearch even if groups  
> of designers wish to act in a certain direction, it may or may not  
> be possible if support is not forthcoming from a variety of sources.
>
> We have experienced this in our own work and as designers working  
> with communities in areas of development initiatives we see this  
> even more starkly than in industry funded design research since the  
> stakeholders are many and the forces that act on the design process  
> to enable and empower design are manifold and complex. At times .  
> as designers we have a clear conception of new and exciting  
> opportunities but without official financial support it is  
> difficult and time consuming to take it forward to the next level  
> of action and the gestation time required for social and financial  
> sanction is pretty long drawn and fraught with many political  
> discussions and 'flying under the radar" types of action where the  
> design intent is not visible for a long period of time. As design  
> activists and development advocates, yes there is such a space, in  
> the areas of environmental, social & political change, we will need  
> to foster many new kinds of communication activities to sensitise  
> the stakeholders before any meaningful action can take place and  
> this can be a long and frustrating journey indeed if the objectives  
> are significantly large and the mission is to achieve massive  
> change which may indeed be needed.
>
> The "Flying under the Radar" is the title for my new paper which  
> has my reflections and critique on the new Indian National Design  
> Policy and you can see it at the "Design with India" website at  
> this link below which was posted today. In case anyone is  
> interested in obtaining pdf files of the 1979 "Ahmedabad  
> Declaration" from the UNIDO-ICSID conference at NID as well as the  
> "Major Recommendations" that I have mentioned in the paper, do  
> write to me directly so that I can forward it off list to your  
> address directly.
> <http://web.mac.com/udaydandavate/iWeb/Site/Ranjan_Paper.html>
>
> My comments will show how difficult it has been to get the  
> Government of India to accept design as a critical discipline for  
> development action in India although much work has been done here  
> in India but these are yet to come into the frame of acceptance by  
> the political bosses as much as science and technology and  
> management disciplines have found such acceptance and drawn in the  
> tax dollar for Govenmnent funded action in India today. Our  
> National Design Policy which can be seen at this website link below  
> is a beginning (much delayed) that we hope will bring in a better  
> understanding of what design can do in a complex social and  
> economic landscape such as India, in the years ahead.
> <http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=24647>
>
> I hope that members from this list will be able to give some  
> direction to the debates that are taking place in India,  
> particularly about how we can muster the support of diverse  
> stakeholders in the country and through these we can hope to find a  
> foothold at the policy level for serious design use in the  
> developing world as a whole.
>
> With warm regards
>
> M P Ranjan
> from my office at NID
> 19 April 2007 at 5.35 pm IST
>
> Prof M P Ranjan
> Faculty of Design
> Head, Centre for Bamboo Initiatives at NID (CFBI-NID)
> Chairman, GeoVisualisation Task Group (DST, Govt. of India)  
> (2006-2008)
> Faculty Member on Governing Council (2003 - 2005)
> National Institute of Design
> Paldi
> Ahmedabad 380 007 India
>
> Tel: (off) 91 79 26623692 ext 1090 (changed in January 2006)
> Tel: (res) 91 79 26610054
> Fax: 91 79 26605242
>
> email: [log in to unmask]
> web site: http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp/
> web domain: http://www.ranjanmp.in
>
> On 19-Apr-07, at 4:34 AM, Jerry Diethelm wrote:
>
>> 3Users2
>>
>> I consider the terms users and user groups, stakeholders,  
>> constituents, and
>> shareholders under discussion as all being central to the political
>> structure of designing. The variation in their use and meaning is  
>> probably
>> mostly due to an historically situated professional semantic.  But  
>> they all
>> relate to the power of deciding - who and how people participate in
>> transformative processes - who initiates and how a process is  
>> initiated -
>> how an existing situation is described and who gets to do the  
>> describing -
>> who decides and how it is determined that a situation has been  
>> resolved.
>>
>>> From my perspective as a planning and urban design consultant,  
>>> the political
>> dimension of designing is a major contributor to the wickedness of
>> 3problems2 in designing. The social construction of 3existing  
>> conditions2 is
>> hardly ever tidy, and the designer (usually a design team of  
>> consultants)
>> plays an important role in setting up a process in which  
>> 3problems2 evolve
>> and everyone learns - one of the public ways I prefer to explain  
>> designing
>> (instead of having to say heuristic).
>>
>> In the 70s and 80s, I worked with 3users2 and 3user groups,2  
>> mainly as a
>> result of the University of Oregon9s 3Oregon Experiment2 with the  
>> pattern
>> language. The process as most everyone remembers had 3users2 doing  
>> the
>> designing.  Deans and others with administrative responsibility  
>> weren9t
>> considered 3users,2 at least initially, and professional designers  
>> were
>> asked to try to keep their experience to themselves so as not to  
>> corrupt the
>> process.
>>
>> It is more common these days for the design teams I am a part of  
>> to work
>> with stakeholders, Citizen Advisory Committees, and Technical  
>> Advisory
>> Committees.  The makeup of these groups is every bit as political and
>> power-oriented as ever, with interest groups all maneuvering to  
>> put their
>> people in a position to influence the outcome.  It really does  
>> matter what
>> mind sets are brought to the table. People who view themselves, to  
>> use
>> Terry9s example, as investors in a university conceived as a  
>> business, tend
>> to process information, describe situations and desirable outcomes  
>> from that
>> point of view.
>>
>> Which is why I believe that theoretically it is important to see  
>> designing
>> (of the kind that I practice, anyway) as a valuing experience from
>> initiation in the poly-perception of difference - with a will to do
>> something about it - to a state of resolution in some manner of  
>> politically
>> achievable formative expression.
>>
>> Best to all,
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> -------
>> Jerry Diethelm
>> Architect - Landscape Architect
>> Planning & Urban Design Consultant
>>
>>     Prof. Emeritus of Landscape Architecture
>>            and Community Service
>>     2652 Agate St., Eugene, OR 97403
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

David
-- 
blog: www.communication.org.au/dsblog
web: http://www.communication.org.au

Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
CEO • Communication Research Institute •
• helping people communicate with people •

Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
Phone: +61 (0)3 9489 8640

60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068