Greetings All: Yes I find listening to violin music is useful when reading from this list. Often I feel a sense of melancholy when reading here. Not at all surprised to see the gulf between these two worlds still exists. Guessing I will be long gone and this gulf will inevitably no doubt still and always exist. I for one am at peace with that..:-) So be it.

To cut to the chase: We remain interested in and focused on the emerging future of practice, ie: “What design consulting already is and could be in the future” For us everything else is a secondary side road.

Clearly this is not the focus of the PhD design list and coming back here to share glimpses of what we are doing is always an acute reminder of this fact.

Ah sure bumpy storms do happen in a competitive universe. No big surprise there. I do agree with Peter Jones’ characterizations of the focus and the dynamics here on this list so no need for me to elaborate in that direction. There was a time when I used to post over here on a regular basis but have not for several years. Most of the personalities esteemed on this list are well known to me, at least virtually.

Inevitably this focus of ours becomes entangled with education and the degree to which the design education institutions get the already arriving future or not. I think everyone understands that design schools are now just one of several skill-building routes that now exist. That has changed the dynamics of the marketplace for sure and that might make some folks in academia less comfortable.

It seems to me that everything posted on this list is advertising of one kind or another so always chuckle at the hypocrisy when such claims are directed at what we share. As Peter points out, some of what goes on here can get rather personal but honestly there is nothing particularly new there in that kind of posturing. Change generates heat. Heat generates change.

Thanks to Ken, Peter and Christopher for their constructive, insightful perspectives. Perhaps more than others here they will know that Humantific and NextD have never been part of any inside. There is certainly much more clubbiness on this list than anything we participate in. The fact is the design communities do not like outsiders and we have always been just that. Communities including this one want change to come from their our tribal celebrities. We have never been part of the insiders on this list and have no aspirations in that direction. Outside is not really a role we chose for ourselves but it is one that we have come to accept and even embrace.

The reality is if this community was leading the change charge there would be no need for such pictures to ever appear. Understandably such appearances might be irritating to some tribal leaders here who fashion themselves as leading all the change that is required in the direction required.

As far as we can tell this list has been a collective bystander to much of the change that has occurred around design practice in the last ten years and there is no indication that will change anytime soon. In large part most of the PhD list celebrities here have never shown up for many of the most important conversations that took place in that wave of change that is in large part now behind us. So be it.

Would love to sit and chat all day here but duties call elsewhere so I will take a few minutes to reply to at least a few of the comments made by Gunnar Swanson and Filippo A. Salustri as they seem to be front and center in their judgments of the small jump start story doc entitled Teaching CoCreation Now!

For those who might not know jump start or prompter stories are designed to open conversations not explain universes. Their focus is most often problem finding, surfacing, problem explanation with hints at where solution paths can be found. Often solution explanations in detail are better served delivered experientially and so the story shows that such a path exists for those interested in more. Ken did an excellent job of explaining why consultancies feel the need to share knowledge glimpses in this particular way. It would be naïve for anyone to assume that this list somehow serves as judgement gatekeeper for knowledge. It would be clearly unrealistic for anyone to expect that sitting back navigating this list on your computer is the equivalent to experiential skill-building. Judging what gets posted to lists has little to do with acquiring skill.

Teaching CoCreation Now is one of several themes being revisited by NextD in part because there has been such slow adaptation by graduate/postgraduate design schools around some of the issues that we began talking about in 2003. We thought it might be useful to return to some of the central challenges that we see remaining.

As a jumpstart story Teaching CoCreation Now is designed to connect to an audience that we already know exists, who have themselves identified this problem, to communicate that we acknowledge that this problem exists. The underlying theme of the story is that personal readiness is possible in spite of institutional unreadiness. It's a story that resonates with our NextD audience of enlightened mid-career professionals.

Obviously it might be problematic for those still back there struggling with problem recognition and acceptance. As the story points out there are many in that mode still today. The rest of us have moved on and are at this point, more than ten years after, already long since in codified knowledge mode, a zillion miles beyond problem recognition and acceptance.

If you are in a place still debating this particular problem recognition and acceptance it is unlikely that you are anywhere near having any form of solution path knowledge codified around cocreation.

Perhaps explaining some other related context might be useful to some readers.

Regarding Gunnar Swanson comments:

Some here might not know that what appeared here was really somewhat of a Chapter 2 in that it was one month previous that we first posted the little Teaching CoCreation Now flipbook story to the NextDesign Leadership Network list over on LinkedIn.

As is our typical practice we post all new material there on NextDesign Leadership Network.

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=1617827&trk=anet_ug_grppro

That list has remained active since 2007. Called Transforming Transformation for several years it remains focused at the intersection of next practice and next practice skill building so it is not for everyone. Since 2002 we have via NextD been pointing out a terrain of application for design thinking beyond product and service creation much of the design community did not really get that for a really long time although that is certainly changing now. When we started we were probably ten years out in front of the marketplace. Still today most schools have not even begun to think about what were talking about and already doing around skill-building in NextD in 2003 and that would include cocreation.

As far as I can tell this list remains focused on the mechanics, procedures, protocols and values of PhDland. It was only as an afterthought that I reposted the Teaching CoCreation Now link here approximately 3 weeks after it was posted to NextD.

By that time I had already responded to Gunnar who had posted comments over on the NextD list. That public exchange went like this:

Gunnar Swanson: "So what? You state that people don't know what they are doing. What does that help? Unless you offer resources for people to learn better, all you are doing is kvetching. 

Assuming, for a moment, that there are some reasonably bright people out there trying to improve design education, why don't you give them (us) a break and provide some direction beyond "You're so stupid and screwed up"? I've heard what retrograde twits we are from you many, many times. It hasn't helped me one bit. If ignorance is the problem, stating that people are ignorant is not even close to a solution.”

After 5 or so days passing I responded this way:

GK VanPatter: “Been in Buenos Aires helping a friend with a new project so not online everyday. So nice to see spring arriving in October! Everything seems possible again in spring.:-)

Gunnar: Not sure where you have been but we have via NextD we been running public workshops every summer since 2003. As far as I know you have never attended any.

We are miles beyond "kvetching". If you never show up don't expect to understand whats going on outside your bubble. Unless a miracle occurs it is unlikely that you are going to find the future of practice over on the PhD design list...:-)

If you want to get some input on what possible outcomes might be you should connect with Christopher Vice at Herron. An outsider school the leaders at Herron got it early on while other mainstream graduate design schools have not even begun to recognize that change around cocreation is needed. With some wonderful exceptions, in general we have found that new generation graduate/postgraduate students who have alot at stake in the near future get the need for new skills much more so than older generation faculty members who have more at stake in the present. So be it.
Change for any community is often difficult.

Signaling need for change always creates bumps as not everyone is aligned with the change trajectories. Alot of heat gets generated as various forces hope for and advocate different change, less change, no change, their change, etc. In the design community some question the authors of change. Many are most comfortable with historical members of design royalty defining and modeling change. Royalty is not us. Who are we to even suggest change is needed as we are relative outsiders. So be it. These have become rather common dynamics and we have seen them come and go over many years but the change that we have been talking about since 2003 is now all around us whether everyone likes it or not.

In a community with deep roots in tactical thinking alot of heat tends to get generated around any suggestions even remotely related to the notion that design could become more strategically useful more strategically involved. Any movement upstream tends to generate considerable oppositional heat often as much from within as externally. This dynamic is typical of any robust highly competitive dysfunctional family so no big surprise there. The futures are arriving regardless.
What we say in our NextD workshops in that there is not one future of design but rather many. In the face of globalization some activity spaces are shrinking while others are expanding. We advocate understanding this landscape. If you are in a school where the faculty cannot or will not help you understand this picture...go talk to the dean. Choose your future, Choose your precisions. There are challenges and opportunities involved in every route.
If you have a different vision of change and the future feel free to post it and share with others Gunnar. I'm sure many would love to see what you have in mind.”

We followed up with Gunnar and invited him to participate in the Humantific research project called Design Thinking Made visible. Participation in that project has typically been offered to graduate program educators but we made an exception for Gunnar in the spirit of collaborative research. Design Thinking Made Visible is designed as a classroom exercise in which the students and instructor undertake a form of research on themselves. The results are made transparent by them for them. We offer participation in exchange for the results which we share in virtual book form.

A previous round of results was published on Issuu. To date there have been more than 17 thousand viewers of that virtual book.

http://issuu.com/humantific/docs/humantificthinkingmadevisible

We have already learned a lot from this ongoing project.

Regarding Filippo A. Salustri comments:

I was quite amazed to see the oddball comments that Filippo A. Salustri made in the direction of the Teaching CoCreation Now story. They were among the most intriguing by far. I will naturally assume that your posturing about definition struggles and F grading does not represent the views of everyone on the list.

Quite incredibly you said: “A very quick scan of google scholar tells me "co-creation" is a marketing thing, not a design thing.  It would appear to involve some kind of collaboration between a firm and a customer.  Wow.  As far as I know, that's been going on for years at least.”
Unbelievable!
I can tell you Filippo that if you were/are the lead change driver over at Ryerson you would be the first person that I would fire. Anyone who is posting on public lists that they do not know in 20011 what cocreation is has no business positioning himself or herself as a change making leader or any kind of organizational leader. In our world you would be out the door tomorrow.
You said: “That anyone could possibly equate "Learning by doing" and "teaching each other" boggles my mind.” Planet earth to Filippo: we have not equated one with the other. We are talking about is what goes on in many design education settings in that one is often being sold as the other. In case you might not know students are fed up with this little switcheroo that places the responsibility to teach cross-disciplinary cocreation on them. Students are increasingly aware that the Teach Yourself Model does not result in skills that they will need to compete in the marketplace today. Again if you are at this late date unaware of this issue I would fire you tomorrow.
Lets get real: Ryerson design school is well known as an aging dinosaur, the leaders of which have not appeared anywhere in the mix of the design change revolution that has occurred over the last ten or so years and remains ongoing so not sure how that equates with the high flying comments coming from you Filippo. As far as I can tell this list is where you appear. Honestly I am often baffled by your preposterous commentaries. I feel sorry for your students. I would fire you tomorrow if you were working for me.
Except for the graduate program that Peter Jones is involved with in Toronto there are, as far as we know, no design schools in Canada including Ryerson that have even begun teaching cocreation as an explicit skillset.

If you are teaching in a design school and you are thinking of cocreation as is in his comments its time to knock it off with the posturing and get your own ass into a cocreation workshop asap.

Frankly speaking right now we see a lot of folks with design related PhDs running around who do not seem to have the foggiest fucking idea what is going on in leading practices today and why. Some seem to have no clue what the arguments even are today let along what is being done to address various issues.

Regarding literature: Those studying across multiple streams of innovation enabling history will know that cocreation has deeper, broader roots in applied creativity history than in design history. It is not possible to understand where we are by looking at historical design literature as it is focused primarily on Design 1&2. For this reason we get a lot of requests from PhD students to come visit us and we try to accommodate numerous such requests as best we can every year.

We also give many talks and make ourselves available in various public workshops. We have certainly done our share of sharing above and beyond what most consultancies do.

Hope this is helpful. Have a good afternoon all.

Related for those interested:

ReReThinking Self Organizing Innovation

http://issuu.com/humantific/docs/humantific_whitepaper_01

 

Rethinking Wicked Problems:

Unpacking Paradigms, Bridging Universes (Part 1 of 2)

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/conv28

 

Next Design Geographies: Understanding Design Thinking 1,2,3,4.

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/nextdfutures2011_v02

 

The Third Lens: Making Sense of Thesis Complexities Now!

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/asknextd_thirdlens

 

What Matters?

Analysis of proposal to create a new design school at the University of California and Irvine (2003)

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/whatmatters

 

NextD At Hyperwerk

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/hyperwerk_feedback_2005

 

Towards Adaptable Inquiry

http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/adaptable_inquiry

 

 ...

GK VanPatter
Co-Founder

Humantific
SenseMaking for ChangeMaking

NEW YORK / MADRID

6 West 18th Street, 9th Floor
New York City, NY 10011
T: 212-660-2577

http://www.humantific.com 


Follow Humantific on twitter: http://twitter.com/humantific

...