Terry takes issue with my characterization of the gap between research and
practice communities, which I argue extends to all fields, not just design
or computer science or...
Terry, however, gives specific examples that contradict my claim.
Is Terry right? Yes. AM I therefore wrong? No, but I was not precise in
characterizing the space in which my claims apply. Let me try to correct
that deficit here.
My argument is for product-driven industries, especially those with very
short product cycles. Therefore, the most relevant would be consumer goods
(and my own practical experience is primarily in consumer electronics).
Situations where a single solution is required for a particular situation
are different (and this covers many of Terry's examples). In other words,
one-off designs.
A second place is where there is large lead time, which applies to many
military and space projects in the United States, but also to some items
such as major automobile design changes which take place every 5 or 6
years. Thus, I am working with one of the major automobile companies on a
research project, but previous research projects -- and hopefully this one
-- do impact products.
It is also important to distinguish development from research, even though
they are traditionally lumped, as in the phrase "R & D." Development
sometimes looks like research, but it invariably involves existing
principles and knowledge, with a lot of development required to make it
practical.
In these industries, research informs practice through a very slow process.
Students learn the latest research while in school (it isn't even the
latest, because it takes years to get fundamental research into the
textbooks). They eventually go to industry and eventually become managers.
Then they can apply the latest research findings, which by then are 10
years old.
If you look at Apple's products ver the past 10 years, it all has come from
development. Apple closed its research labs (I used to head it). It now
relies on development efforts, plus purchasing companies. Siri came out of
the research labs of SRI, but the basic research was done over a decade
ago. Siri was a small startup that Apple bought. Multi-touch displays
were in the labs over 20 years ago. Apple bought the technology, although
some of the patents came from work done in my days at the ATG in Apple, but
a decade before the product came out. . Android was purchased by Google. So
too was Google earth, google maps, google docs.
etc. The full story would take a book. And although i write books, I am
not going to do this one.
Don Norman
Nielsen Norman Group
[log in to unmask] www.jnd.org http://www.core77.com/blog/columns/
IDEO Fellow. Latest book: "Living with
Complexity<http://www.jnd.org/books.html#608>
"
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Don,
> From experience as a member of the IMechE Management Panel here in Western
> Australia and as a designer and researcher, the relationship between
> practicing engineering designers and research is much closer than you
> describe. The cutting edge of engineering design practice depends heavily
> on
> information from research. Similarly, much social policy design and design
> of government interventions in areas such as crime prevention and social
> support depends heavily on up to the minute research.
> This may be a difference between technical and non-technical design fields.
> It might, however be a matter of scale in which the big design industries
> (oil and gas, aerospace, power and ICT infrastructure, mining, vehicle
> design, etc) and government can afford to use research in their design
> activity?
> Regards,
> Terry
> ____________________
> Dr. Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
>
> Senior Lecturer, Design
> Researcher, Social Program Evaluation Research Unit
> Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia
> Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, [log in to unmask]
>
> Senior Lecturer, Design
> Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia
>
> Director, Design Out Crime Research Centre
> Honorary Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development
> 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 Don
> Norman
> Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2012 10:01 AM
> To: Dr Terence Love
> Subject: Re: Opaque
>
> 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.htm
> l
>
> don
>
|
