Dear Don,
I agree about the gap ("the gap you speak of, yes, I find it so" - James K. Baxter - NZ poet)
The example of Apple case studies, put together by an academic, for use in an Apple "university", to teach product etc. people, about knowledge derived from practice, sounds a lot like a research guild.
It also sounds like product etc. people are not very confident about their ability to meta-cognitively articulate their practice, which sounds like a magic as well as secret society of do-ers.
As a person who practices theory, (and several other things) I've never had any problems talking with product people about theoretical stuff except when you ask them to pay for listening. Can you bend it? Can you stretch it? Will it take powder coatings? No? Then it must be free!
cheers
keith
>>> Don Norman <[log in to unmask]> 01/11/12 1:01 PM >>>
Glenn asks:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Glenn Johnson
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> The fact that the Apple story is extremely opaque ... speaks volumes about the growing gap between the design profession and research.
>
> There are many side stories connected to this lack of insight. For example;
>
> - are any other areas of post grad research as similarly disconnected?
>
> How can one study a closed 'guild' as it were?
This is NOT a closed guild. This is the standard research-product gap.
This is NOT a gap between the research profession and research. It is
a gap between academicians and researchers and product delivery in
EVery field: computer science, mechanical engineering, ... This
mailing list is primarily made up of academics and researchers --
hence the gap between what many on this list know and understand and
how product people do their jobs.
Academics and researchers try to examine fundamental issues. They
produce lots of research and theory that is then read by other
researchers and students. In turn, this leads to more research and
more theory.
Practitioners ignore all that. Practitioners practice: they have to
deliver products with tight deadlines. They do not read the journals
nor do they attend scientific conferences. When a research conference
claims it contains both academics and industry people, they don't: the
industry people usually come from the research side of industry.
People in the product side have no time.
this is true in ALL fields. When I am not in design, I am in computer
science. Same thing here. As a product person, my conferences are CES
and DEMO. My computer science friends have never heard of Demo and
although they have heard of CES, they never go. (see
http://www.demo.com)
I've written about this:
The Research-Practice Gap
http://jnd.org/dn.mss/the_research-practice_gap_1.html
also see
http://jnd.org/dn.mss/talk_research_practice_gap_2_kinds_of_innovation_1.html
don
|