Hi Amanda,

Thank you for your message. My apologies for the delay in writing back to
you.

You asked 'about behavioural changes in the world that are design outcomes'.
Good question!

Perhaps easiest is to look at a concrete example such as the iPod. 

The iPod was designed  to change behaviours in the world. That is its
purpose - like all designs.
In addition to outcomes that might be part of the design brief,  there are
outcomes due to the design of iPods that are less obvious. There are
'changes in behaviours' that are part of the design outcomes but not
necessarily intended by the designers. 

Part of looking at design activity in this more comprehensive way is to look
at ALL  the changes in behaviour that result from the way something was
designed - not just the ones that are local, easy to spot, intended or
politically or culturally convenient.

The most obvious changes in behaviours to do with individuals and customers
include:
For people to pay Apple or its dealers for an iPod
For people to have an increasingly favourable feeling about Apple
For people to be preconditioned to  buy more Apple products
For people to promote Apple products to others

Other obvious changes include:
Changes to the behaviour of the music distribution industry
Changes to the marketing behaviours of musicians
Changes in consumer stores' layout and staff behaviours and advice
Changes in the behaviour of the economic dynamics of the music retail
industry

Also on the personal individual side are:
Changes in behaviour towards greater isolation of individuals
Change in legitimation behaviours in public private spaces (requirements to
keep sound down).
Change in behaviours of interpersonal interactions (listening to iPod,
sharing iPod with a single other person, etc)
Change in individual behaviours (e.g. those with long play lists spending
higher proportion of time searching for music items or listening to music
randomly selected)

On the technical side, high sales of iPods = high sales of iPod chips and
hardware
Results in 
Behaviour changes  of chip manufacturers and designers
Behaviour changes in  the balance of effort between chip types
Behavioural changes in terms of different attention to different hardware
(e.g. ultra small hard drives)
Behavioural changes in the software industry in terms of different attention
to new OS and control softwares

On the social side are:
Changes in status-drive behaviours of individuals and groups aligned with
iPod ownership - particularly in poorer communities
Changes in crime behaviours (iPod advertising and attractiveness creates a
driver for theft - particularly in poorer communities)
Changes in  behaviour of crime processes (iPods are ideal theft items - easy
to steal, easy to hide, easy to sell)

Perhaps less obviously,
Increase in sales of iPods essentially requires more rare earths (used in
various magnetic parts of iPods and earpieces) 
Rare earth supplies are running out. Rare earth  resources are limited
mainly at present to China (who has recently decided they are selling them
much too cheaply) and a small amount in Australia (who hasn't start mining
them).  Rare earths are also essential for computers, mobile phones, medical
equipment, vehicles and a host of other designed technologies on which
current Western 'civilisation' depends.
 The design of the IPod will contribute to changes in behaviour of
political, economic (and perhaps military) negotiations and actions relating
to rare earths.
The design of the iPod may also contribute to changes in recycling
strategies.

All these are examples of behavioural changes that are outcomes of a design.
Similar patterns of behavioural changes in the world occur as a result of
any design - we design in order to cause behavioural changes!

I'm suggesting that behavioural changes caused by designs are central to all
forms of design theory and are an aspect of all forms of design research.
By implication, this implies that  competent designers should be aware of
the wider behavioural changes that their designs cause. This implies that
behavioural changes due to designs are also a central issue in design
education. 


Best wishes,
Terry
____________________

Dr. Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM
Director Design-focused Research Group, Design Out Crime Research Centre
Researcher, Digital Ecosystems and Business Intelligence Institute
Associate,  Planning and Transport Research Centre
Curtin University, PO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845
Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, [log in to unmask]
Member of International Scientific Council UNIDCOM/ IADE, Lisbon, Portugal
Honorary Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development
Management School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
____________________



-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bill,
Amanda
Sent: Thursday, 12 August 2010 5:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: types of design research

Hi Terry,
Thanks for this thought-provoking  thread.
Can you expand a bit more on what you mean by 'behavioural changes in the
world'?
I'm thinking that the main behavioural change in the world designers are
responsible for is to make products cool/beautiful so that customers will
buy them over other products. As you say, this is  'much the same as what we
currently see'.
What other vision do you have for design, design education and the design
profession?

Best wishes
Amanda

Dr Amanda Bill
Institute of Design for Industry and Environment
College of Creative Arts
Massey University, Wellington
New Zealand

+64 4 8012794 ext 6886

email: [log in to unmask]





On 12/08/10 3:26 AM, "Terence Love" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi Gunnar,

Thank you for your message.

You wrote,
<snip>Is this a tautology--design creates a design and art creates art  and
that's the difference? <endsnip>

That difference appears to result in  a lot of implications for design
theory, design education, professional design practice, design contracts,
design processes, design evaluation, when  a 'design'  is defined as a set
of instructions to make or do something..

You wrote,
<snip> If the purpose of design is to create a design, it would seem that
the  primary professional skill of a designer is to create a design.
<endsnip>

I agree. The need to focus on behaviours of outcomes comes as a result of
asking about the skills and processes needed to create designs and to
improve designs. It comes in asking what are the cores skills needed for
design education. Skills at understanding and predicting how designs change
behaviours of people, objects, systems etc seem to be prior and more
significant than study of say aesthetics or developing a good visual sense.
I suggest that if these are given priority over understanding and predicting
behaviours then the proportion of failed designs is unnecessarily higher and
it results in attitudes in designers that tend to unnecessarily explain
design in terms of magic, talent, coolness or in terms of high and low
status individuals and organisations - much the same as what we currently
see.

You ask, who makes the claim that creativity is the central skill of design?
I've found it  a common explicit description of the skills of design and
implicit in many other explanations of the skills needed for design. Do you
feel the situation is different?

You ask,
<snip> If one person creates a design (or several) and another  person
selects a design to implement, which one is the designer? <endsnip>
Good question.

You commented,

< Terry> The creativity needed for generating those options is relatively
routine and potentially trivial if one has the skill of being able to
predict behavioural outcomes of designs being implemented. <>

<Gunnar> Sure. And tennis is easy once you know that you should just keep
hitting the ball back into the other side of the court in a manner  that
makes it hard for your opponent to do the same.<>

I'm suggesting something different from how you seem to be interpreting.
There are already available many straightforward easy to use approaches for
predicting the changes and differences in changes in behaviours of design
outcomes resulting from choosing different potential designs.  These are not
commonly taught to designers. My guess is in part because this approach
contradicts many culturally-based assumptions held by designers, design
educators and design researchers.

You wrote,
<snip> Huh? How did we get from a claim that prediction is the primary
design  skill to excluding everything else from design research? That
doesn't
make sense even if I agreed with your premises. (You can probably  guess
that I don't.) <endsnip>

The previous email suggested a primary skill is predicting the 'behavioural
changes in outcomes' resulting from a design or potential design. The focus
is 'behavioural changes in outcomes' - not 'prediction'.

The essential purpose of any design is to change the way the world behaves
as a result of that design being implemented.

Put simply 'design' => 'behavioural changes in the world'.

This is so central to design that by implication it is central to any
research relating to design.

I asked,
> If you can think of aspects of design research that don't fit this  >
view, I'd > love to hear about them!

You proposed,
<snip>  Inquiries into design ethics? Consideration of the social structures
of the design business? Investigations into the idea that all aspects of
design other than  outcome prediction are trivial? . . .<endsnip>

'Design ethics' is about the  implications of 'behavioural changes in the
world' that result from a design.

' Consideration of the social structures  of the design business' can be
viewed simply as design at an organisaitonal level. The study of the social
structures id meaningless without understanding 'behavioural changes in the
world' implied by design business using different designs of social
structures.

' Various sorts of historical studies. ' - Do you mean about design?
'Behavioural changes in the world' resulting from different historical paths
is central to historical study.

' Investigations into the idea that all aspects of design other than
outcome prediction are trivial? . . .'   To investigate this idea is
implicitly grounded in the assumption that there will be different
'behavioural changes in the world'  when this idea is used rather than  some
other idea.

Best wishes and thanks,

Terence

==
Dr Terence Love FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Mob: 0434 975 848
Fax: +61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
===