Dear GK and List,
I read Co-Creation as just a brand name for promoting team/user involvement
and creative process methods in designing. These, as David Sless pointed
out, have been central design interests and human potentials activities over
many years. But if Co-Creation sells and get more people or companies
creatively involved, good on them. When I see the term, I can't help
thinking of Adam and Eve.
I wonder though, how much one can really teach about integrative
(relational, formativeŠ) thinking in a few seminars? The need for it and
the rush of it, perhaps. Maybe some visceral proof of the need to hire more
people practiced in design thinkingŠ
Learning integrative/formative thinking takes time and practice. Learning
what design development means takes design experience. In most design
curricula, one learns to integrate a few things and then works over a number
of years to expand that capacity. There is also the matter of
comprehensiveness, what a situation is about and who gets to say. A shallow
or power-dominated aboutness has predictable formative consequences. One
may happily receive a brief or program for designing in the beginning, but
grows to understand that a lot of designing is in laying out the territory
of a focal situation and its possible horizons.
I didn't find much that was new from the examples given (divergent vs.
convergent thinking CEOs and COOs etc.), and suspect that we all still have
a lot to discover, teach and share with one another. I'm with Rodney King
on this one.
Best to all,
Jerry
On 12/2/11 4:00 AM, "Lars Albinsson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am getting confused over here.
>
> Dr Salustri states that CoCreation is a marketing thing, not a design thing
> but Professor Sless says it has a formal history, even going back to the
> 1930s.
>
> Can someone enlighten me?
>
> /Lars
>
>
>
> .........................................................................
> LARS ALBINSSON
> +46 (0) 70 592 70 45
> [log in to unmask]
>
> AFFILIATIONS:
> MAESTRO MANAGEMENT AB
> CALISTOGA SPRINGS RESEARCH INSTITUTE
> UNIVERSITY OF BORÅS
> LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY
> .........................................................................
>
>
>
>
>
> 2 dec 2011 kl. 12:43 skrev [log in to unmask]:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Wonderful. You beat me to it! I was in the middle of writing a blog on the
> same lines. The provisional title was 'Co-creation: cult or craft?'
>
> Here is as far as I got in my first draft:
> ===
> As a research institute it¹s our job to look at new ideas as they appear and
> evaluate their practical value on behalf of our members.
>
> Sometimes new terms come into use and we welcome them as a way of reshaping
> our craft, or as ways of providing us with useful distinctions which enhance
> our craft. But sometimes terms become mantras in a cult and are repeated over
> and over, as if the term itself rather than its careful usage carries its
> power.
>
> I think co-creation is in danger of slipping from craft into cult. This would
> be sad as there is much of value in the ideas around co-creation.
>
> As new minds discover the joys and thrill of co-creation and the enthusiasm
> which it engenders, it¹s worth reflecting on some of its limitations. To the
> newly enthused this may seem anathema. After all, co-creation is about
> suspending collective critical judgement in order to generate new ideas for
> enriching our lives and transforming our world. But, all is not as it seems.
>
> As researchers into the practical crafts of communication, we ask 6 questions
> of any Œnew¹ idea that people claim will change or enhance our craft:
>
> 1. What are its antecedents?
>
> 2. How rigorously is it defined?
>
> 3. What is the evidence in terms of before and after results, outcomes, and
> unexpected consequences?
>
> 4. Is the evidence replicable in a variety of contexts?
>
> 5. Where does the money trail go: who pays, who gets paid, who benefits
> financially from the outcome?
>
> 6. Who gains and who loses power and control?
>
> Here are our answers to date on co-creation:
>
> 1. The antecedents
> Like many ideas, co-creation, is not new. It has a formal history that can be
> traced back to the 1930s at least, and there was a gathering momentum of
> interest in the USA after the launch of the first Satalite‹Sputnik‹by the
> Russians, leaving America to wonder how the Russians got there first. Among
> the wondering was a resurgent interest in the ideas around creativity. Also,
> alongside this there were a whole series of economic and social changes: the
> emergence of democracy as a powerful social force and the rise of a consumer
> society. These led many to look for new ways to involve ordinary people in the
> creative process of generating new products, processes and institutions. Out
> of this mix came ideas of co-creation, and a exploration of the processes that
> might facilitate it.
--
Jerry Diethelm
Architect - Landscape Architect
Planning & Urban Design Consultant
Prof. Emeritus of Landscape Architecture
and Community Service € University of Oregon
2652 Agate St., Eugene, OR 97403
€ e-mail: [log in to unmask]
€ web: http://pages.uoregon.edu/diethelm/
€ 541-686-0585 home/work 541-346-1441 UO
€ 541-206-2947 work/cell
|
