Hi Ken,
Taking a second look, in terms of definition as opposed to comment, Leifer's
'four rules' are at most partial heuristics. Rules definitely not!
As soon as I can get time and better access to the net I'll relook at the
engineering design discussions on design thinking.
One of the key 'rules' of engineering design thinking is 'quantify
everything' especially for social collaboration in design.
Best,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Tuesday, 14 January 2014 1:13 AM
To: PhD-Design PhD-Design
Subject: Re: Questions about design thinking
Dear Stef,
So much for my good intentions about avoiding this thread.
It seems to me that we cannot say that "design thinking" and "designing" are
the same.
Much "designing" is done without using the array of understandings, skills,
and approaches that typify "design thinking," "strategic design," "design
integration," or "integrative thinking."
A great deal of design is top-down, specified by a brief, or in some
determined in ways that do not involve iterative engagement with clients,
customers, or end-users.
The majority of professional design studios still operate on the craft-guild
culture, where the master of the studio (partner or principal) is the
central figure surrounded by the senior designers (journeymen), and the
junior designers (apprentices).
An excellent article by anthropologist Bryan Byrne and designer Ed Sands
(2002: 47-69) describes the culture of the typical design studio. The
problems they describe map onto artisan craft guild culture, and these
problems work against the approach that one might describe as design
thinking. Many design studios do excellent design work using traditional
design approaches and effective design methods - but these may not include
design thinking. An even greater number of design studios do problematic
work using the top-down, directive approach that is contrary to the design
thinking approach.
Larry Leifer and Christoph Meinel (2014: 3-5) articulate what they consider
the four rules of design thinking. They write,
"We now have evidence in support of several design thinking activities that
have long been considered important, but until this time we have not had an
explanation or understanding of their value. Of these, the over-arching
truth lies in the fact that every physical product delivers a service; that
every service is manifest through physical products. Our research suggests
that four 'rules of design thinking' are particularly relevant. The
challenge of this section is to translate these rules into innovation
eco-system design requirements.
"1. The Human Rule: All Design Activity is Ultimately Social in Nature.
Never Go Hunting Alone.
"2. The Ambiguity Rule: Design Thinkers Must Preserve Ambiguity. Never Go
Home Empty Handed.
"3. The Re-Design Rule: All Design Is Re-Design. Take the Big Idea Home. It
Has Been Done Before.
"4. The Tangible Rule: Make Ideas Tangible. Facilitate Human Communication."
Every member of this list has seen examples of design process that do not
follow this kind of model. Even so, these other forms of design process are
examples of designing.
With this in mind, I'd argue that most robust approaches to design through
design thinking are quite different to common processes of software design,
engineering design, or even consumer design as it often takes place.
The point of design thinking - or its cognate forms - is to design better
through an appropriate range of iterative processes and focal concerns.
Design thinking is an approach to designing. It is not synonymous with
designing. In saying this, I'm not describing design thinking as the cure
for all problems, and I am not defining either design or design thinking.
I'm simply stating that they are not synonyms.
It seems to me that you are attempting to exclude from design those design
processes that are flawed in conception, practice, or completed execution.
This is something one often hears in a colloquial sense: a couple of
designers look at an incomprehensible signage system, and say, "this isn't
design!" [noun]. Or a senior designer watches a junior designer make
elementary mistakes in specifying a product, saying, "That's not designing!"
[verb]. Or an angry client yells at the producer of buggy software that
clutters up the company, "you can't design!" [verb].
We understand the meaning of such a statement. Even so, these are cases of
design and designing. They are bad examples and poor cases, but they
nevertheless remain instances of design and designing.
It is in this sense that I'd say that design thinking is not synonymous with
designing. Design thinking is an approach to design process, and not all
designers use it when they work.
Yours,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor |
Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia |
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830
462 | Home Page
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<h
ttp://www.swinburne.edu.au/design> Academia Page
http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman About Me Page
http://about.me/ken_friedman
Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University |
Shanghai, China
--
Reference
Byrne, Bryan, and Ed Sands. 2002. "Designing Collaborative Corporate
Cultures." In Creating Breakthrough Ideas, Bryan Byrne and Susan E. Squires,
editors. Westport, Connecticut: Bergin and Garvey, pp. 47-69.
Leifer, Larry and Christoph Meinel. 2014. "All Design Activity Is Ultimately
Social in Nature. Introduction." Design Thinking Research. Building
Innovation Eco-Systems. Hasso Plattner, Larry Leifer, and Christoph Meinel,
eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International, pp. 3-11.
--
Stefanie di Russo wrote:
--snip--
This is why i suggest that we could equally rid the term 'design thinking'
and simply just call it *designing*, as in my opinion, both are one and the
same.
--snip--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
