Dear Francesca,
Of course design is for use, consume, making sense, creating value,
provoking emotions.
However, what are you focusing on?
Your framework is wide and your goal is under defined (as every good
goal is at the beginning of a research).
If the focus is that triangulation, I suggest opening the framework to
conceptual design as well.
Best regards,
Carlo
2012/5/7 <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
> I am reflecting on the difference (if any) between designing for emotions,
> for values or for meanings. I would really appreciate your view on this
> ‘triangle’.
>
>
>
> Briefly: Emotional design says that designers should understand how
> products/services are experienced in order to understand the importance of
> emotions. Designers should therefore design in order to elicit certain
> emotions.
>
>
> There is also research on the importance of a product’s value. For example
> there is who thinks that the producer adds value to the product through the
> different stages of the design process, manufacturing and distribution (Porter,
> 1985). Boztepe (2007) argues that relating value to design one should
> consider the use of the product because, as Heskett (2002) notes, it is
> difficult to consider utility/use and significance/meaning of an object
> separately. An experientialist approach in fact considers value as being
> created at the interface of the product and the user (Frondizi,
> 1971)because ‘value resides not in the product purchased, not in the
> brand
> chosen, not in the object possessed but rather in the consumption
> experience derived therefrom’ (from Boztepe, 2007; Holbrook, 1999, p. 8).
>
>
> And finally Verganti shows how radical innovation is driven by meaning
> change (Verganti, 2009). (This is for me the core of Verganti’s
> contribution, so I won’t expand on this third point, hoping the reader will
> be familiar with it)
>
>
> (note: I have not included designing for experiences because I consider the
> experience the process that transforms interactions into an outcome:
> emotions, knowledge, memories)
>
>
>
>
> What I’m trying to understand, and what I would like your opinion on, is
> this: do these three ‘design goals’ actually exist? Or are we talking about
> the same thing (designing ‘beyond the object’ (Redstorm, 2006))?
>
>
> Is there a difference between designing for (focusing the design on) values
> or meanings? Or are these two different words for the same concept?
>
>
> Also: considering Norman’s (Norman, 2004; Ortony, Norman, & Revelle,
> 2005)analysis of the affective system (divided into reactive (or
> visceral)
> level, routine (or behavioural) level, and reflective level), where
> emotions are the final outcome of the human-product interaction, when are
> meanings attributed to the product? When are meanings created? Just after
> emotions have been elicited, or simultaneously?
>
>
> If designing for meanings is the contemporary design ‘trend’, why is it so?
> I understand why a radical change in meaning can produce radical
> innovation, so I do understand why one should choose to pursue that. But my
> question is related to the way we experience a product that presents a
> radical change in meaning. What happens in the affective system? When does
> the radical meaning ‘affect’ the experience of the product? Is there a
> psychological/cognitive reason why designers should design for meanings?
> (as there was for designing for emotions?)
>
>
>
>
> I really hope the extensive knowledge and expertise of many you could help
> me tackle this point.
>
> Thank you!
>
>
>
> Boztepe, S. (2007). User Value: Competing Theories and Models. *International
> Journal of Design, 1*(2), 55-63.
>
> Frondizi, R. (1971). *What is value?* LaSelle, IL: Open Court.
>
> Heskett, J. (2002). *Toothpicks and Logos: Design in Everyday Life.* New
> York: Oxford University Press.
>
> Holbrook, M. B. (Ed.). (1999). *Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis
> and Research.* New York Routledge.
>
> Norman, D. A. (2004). *Emotional Design. Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday
> Things*. New York: Basic Books.
>
> Ortony, A., Norman, D. A., & Revelle, W. (2005). The role of affect and
> proto-affect in effective functioning. In J. M. Fellous & M. A. Arbib
> (Eds.), *Who needs emotions? The brain meets the machine.* New York: Oxford
> University Press.
>
> Porter, M. E. (1985). *Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining
> Superior Performance.* New York: Free Press.
>
> Redstorm, J. (2006). Towards user design? On the shift from object to user
> as the subject of design. *Design Studies, 27*(2), 123-137.
>
> Verganti, R. (2009). *Design-Driven Innovation. Changing the rules of
> competition by radically innovating what things mean.* Boston,
> Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely
>
> Francesca
>
>
>
>
> *Francesca Zampollo*
>
> PhD Student – London Metropolitan University
>
> Organizer and Chair of International Conference on Designing Food and
> Designing for Food.
--
Carlo Franzato
Pesquisador do PPG em Design
Escola de Design UNISINOS
www.unisinos.br/design
Rua Luiz Manoel Gonzaga, 744 - Três Figueiras
90470-280 - Porto Alegre (RS)
Tel +55. 51. 35911101
Fax +55. 51. 35911204
|