Hi Filippo,
thanks for your time and thought. It is interesting to compare design with what happened before the Big Bang.
But if enterprises spend money, at a certain point they are going to evaluate what design will contribute. Since I was many times involved in University decisions, I sometimes asked similar questions. Can we verify an investment, can we justify when we spend money and resources?
The same I am doing when I am reading such posts, even if not quantitatively justified, I will stop reading and posting if I don't see a value anymore. The reason: I have limits, timewise, therefore limited ressources.
It is a valuable statement that we should as well look outside our discipline, in adjacent practise. Many interesting models, theories about design, I didn't find in 'narrow design' research. The body of knowledge is still not big enough and substantial reflecting on designing is often found in adjacent fields, I do agree.
But finding models of measuring in other disciplines and fields, we need to ask always are these models transferable?
Clearifying or getting closer to what happens when we involve design, when we are designing, and whether we can differentiate it from other activities like management isn't an easy task, or might be impossible, or it might not be appropriate, since we have to do with what Buchanan called fourth order design.
Existing in-vivo is another interesting question? The question of exist(ing) might be even oposed to the question of in-vivo, since existing might reduce design to a partial entity and therefore is creates a contradiction to an in-vivo situation.
But all these framing and reframings will help, so I hope, making a decision, whether it is valuable to spend some time researching whether we can measure the impact and value of design.
Jurgen
|