Hi Diane: Your Imagineering the Butterfly Effect work sounds interesting and related in the sense that it seems to take place in the context of organizations. Not sure what your starting points are.
We are looking for practice examples of various kinds as described previously. If this is what you are referring to we would be happy to look at your work.
Email expressions of interest to: kickitup (at) humantific (dot) com
Please place The OTHER Design Thinking as the subject.
Good luck on Feb 13...:-)
...
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
NEWSLETTER:
Subscribe to Humantific Quarterly
Follow Humantific on twitter: http://twitter.com/humantific
...
The OTHER Design Thinking / Call for Participants
http://www.humantific.com/the-other-design-thinking/
On Nov 23, 2013, at 4:41 AM, Nijs, Diane wrote:
> GK,
>
> I think that my work might fit in what you are looking for. I defend my PhD next February 13 at the University of Groningen and the phd will also be published as a book afterwards by Eleven/Boom Amsterdam.
> The title of my work: 'Imagineering the Butterfly Effect: Complexity and Collective Creativity in Business and Policy, Designing for Organizational Emergence'.
> If you are interested I can send you a copy of the book but only after February 13. After the defence I would love to talk about participating one way or another. Hope you understand.
>
> Best,
>
> Diane Nijs
> ________________________________________
> Van: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] namens GK VanPatter | NextD [[log in to unmask]]
> Verzonden: zaterdag 23 november 2013 10:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: The OTHER Design Thinking / Call For Participants
>
> Mauricio: I hear you. Clearly you are raising interesting and difficult questions that extend beyond the primary focus of this book project but since you asked me directly I will reply briefly here. I do believe your questions not only apply to the context in Columbia but in one way or another to many countries. It seems highly probable that my answers here will not be liked by everyone on this list.
> You said: quote ..it seems to me that high level professionals in the government, companies, and non-profits tackle wicked organizational and social problems. In this scenario design professionals are hired (sometimes) for complementary design 1 work and barely for design 2. Worst, designers are only prepared to work in design 1. unquote..
> In our corner of the universe: Who gets asked to do what has to do with public perception. Who is prepared to do what has to do with skill which ultimately has to do with education. These are chickens and eggs that we are well familiar with in practice.
> I will first say a few words regarding your most difficult question and that is in reference to the state of public perception. Public marketplace perception differs from country to country and many commonalties exist. To cut to the chase what I see is a void of leadership across several fronts. Courage seems to be in short supply.
> What I suggest to other practice leaders is to recognize that there are or should be not one but rather at least three levels of concern to all of us, that it is not enough just to focus on personal and practice promotion as many tend to do. Beyond personal, beyond practice there are a number of societal level issues and certainly public perception of design is one that needs significant help.
> The traditional players at the societal public perception level; the professional design association leaders, the institutional design academy leaders and the design press leaders have, pardon my French, all but failed on this front. Thanks in large measure to the inactions of those bodies, the public perception of design and design thinking is stuck far back in Design 1 and 2 in many parts of the world. The enormous implications of that public leadership void ongoing for more than a decade cannot likely be overstated in terms of who is being asked to do what in the marketplace today. The costs have been and continue to be enormous as you state yourself.
> Changing public perception is a big job that practice leaders can only chip away at but we can do our part and it is certainly in our best interest to help as much as possible. Many practice leaders most certainly do. Overcoming public perception is often in the mix for many leading practices.
>
> It is no big secret that changing public perception involves, not talking off in the weeds among ourselves, but rather getting out into the various communities to engage, challenge, model and participate. To do that takes some courage.
> What I tell other practice leaders is don't wait for the professional associations or the design media or the institutional design academies to step up and figure this out. The opportunities to shift public perceptions of capabilities will be gone to others by the time that stepping happens.
> The entire NextD initiative has always been based on that realization as is The OTHER Design Thinking book initiative. If we waited for others to figure these things out and step up the opportunity would be long gone.
> Regarding your other questions: quote…How undergraduate education would change if design schools finally change? Should undergraduate education focus on design 1-2 and graduate education on design 3-4, or undergraduate education should encompass 1-2-3-4? How?..unquote.
> You are correct in that the Alto interview was focused on graduate design education and the sense of missed opportunity that I saw there. Other than the practice-based academies there still are very few, if any graduate Design 3&4 programs operating from institutional design schools. It is astonishing really. Not surprisingly there are many design schools still teaching cross-over.
> I will answer the rest of this from a practice-based academy perspective. For the most part we are in the adult education business and what we have found is that it is useful to recognize that this is relatively advanced skill that is best bolted onto an existing skillset whatever that might be. It is a different language and or dialect with numerous implications. Here is not the time or place to explain all of that but suffice it to say that methods and tools are fundamentally different. See 12 NextDesign Leadership Principles and When [Old Design Thinking] LOVE is not Enough below. We advocate letting folks become something first, gain a core set of skills and then bolt this on when ready.
> It is true that in those differences are significant implications for design education. Suffice it to say that not everyone appreciates change drivers being present. It is no secret that new generations of students are interested in becoming involved in challenges at significant scale.
> Right now what we see is that the young people are being expected to do the adaptation in cross-over rather than the adaptation occurring at the academy itself. It seems clear that the cross-over era will come to a close as students learn more about the relationships between toolbox, skill-sets and challenge scale.
> Have a good weekend all.
>
> See
>
> 12 NextDesign Leadership Principles
> http://www.humantific.com/nextd/
>
> When [Old Design Thinking] LOVE is Not Enough
> http://issuu.com/nextd/docs/whenolddesignthinkingloveisnotenough
>
> The OTHER Design Thinking / Call for Participants
> http://www.humantific.com/the-other-design-thinking/
> ...
>
> 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
>
> NEWSLETTER:
> Subscribe to Humantific Quarterly
>
> Follow Humantific on twitter: http://twitter.com/humantific
>
> ...
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2013, at 9:30 AM, G. Mauricio Mejía wrote:
>
>> Dear GK,
>>
>> I have been trying to move beyond artifact/product-based design practice and education. I have been following from the distance some of your contributions. I re-read some of your publications and interview answers to Wycliffe Raduma at Aalto. Much of the discussion focuses on graduate education. I agree that graduate education should move towards design 3-4; however, I wanted to ask you about undergraduate education. How undergraduate education would change if design schools finally change? Should undergraduate education focus on design 1-2 and graduate education on design 3-4, or undergraduate education should encompass 1-2-3-4? How?
>>
>> Also, it seems to me that high level professionals in the government, companies, and non-profits tackle wicked organizational and social problems. In this scenarios design professionals are hired (sometimes) for complementary design 1 work and barely for design 2. Worst, designers are only prepared to work in design 1. Moving to design 3 and 4 represent many challenges. What are your recommendations for design educators and professionals to change this situation? In a country like Colombia, considered a developing country, how could we jump to a strategy-and-systems-centered design?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> G. Mauricio Mejía, PhD
>> Assistant professor University of Caldas, Colombia
>> Twitter: @mmejiaramirez
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
>> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Op deze e-mail zijn de volgende voorwaarden van toepassing :
> The following disclaimer applies to the e-mail message :
> http://www.nhtv.nl/disclaimer
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
