Hi Ken,
The concept and term, 'design thinking' has been around since at least the
1970s around 50 years. The description you refer is one recent version that
has become mass-media popular recently in that timescale.
Second, you will find the principles I listed apply just as powerfully to
the principles espoused by the current populist version of design thinking.
In terms of the use by graphic designers of the principles I listed, it
would be more accurate to say that graphic designers and their design
outputs crucially *depend* on the use of these principles in almost all they
do. If you use a graphic design program then the solutions you create and
the way you think using the programs are determined by these principles
embedded in the way the software works.
Incidentally, the principles I listed are also, if you think about it, the
foundation of most of the design theories and conventions taught in design
schools such as Swinburne. They are particularly relevant when designers
want to avoid failures or wish to identify the best designs.
Best wishes,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI
Director,
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
--
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Monday, 5 May 2014 7:46 AM
To: PHD-DESIGN PHD-DESIGN
Subject: Guidelines on Design Methods
Dear Terry,
Before responding to the issue of mathematical skill for designers, I can
explain something about your guidelines.
Your guidelines (Love 2010) use the title "design thinking." The term design
thinking, despite its ambiguities, refers to a specific range of issues.
Design thinking involves iterative problem solving for human beings. Some of
the common features of the term involve working in interdisciplinary teams,
working with stakeholders, and using frequent and rapid iterative prototypes
or mapping exercises. There is a massive peer-reviewed literature on design
thinking, along with an extensive professional literature. (If you'd like
access to a digital collection of more than 600 such items, drop me a note
off-list.) If you read a good cross-section of the literature, you will see
that you are using the term "design thinking" in a different way to wide
current usage. Design thinking refers to design with and for the human
beings who will benefit from the design solution. It does not refer to
machine design, technical design, or engineering design.
Your explanation of the guidelines (Love 2014, below) makes the difference
clear. You write about what most people label "design methods." You are
right to state that many people in technical design fields and engineering
work this way. But this is not the process designated by the term "design
thinking."
The term "design thinking" has come to mean something quite different. I'd
suggest considering a new title.
Yours,
Ken
p.s. It is unreasonable to suggest that everyone who uses graphic design
software uses these methods simply because some of the engineers,
programmers, and designers of graphic design software use these methods.
While some methods may in a sense be embedded in the software, that does not
mean that everyone who uses the software uses the methods. If that were so,
you could argue that everyone who uses a computer uses the methods of
physics and mathematics because fundamental research contributions by Albert
Einstein and Alan Turing are embedded in every computer. We use products to
which these methods contribute - we do not ourselves use the methods.
--
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor |
Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | University email
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Private email
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830
462 | Academia Page http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman
Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University |
Shanghai, China ||| Adjunct Professor | School of Creative Arts | James Cook
University | Townsville, Australia
--
References
Love, T. 2010. Guidelines for Design Thinking. Love Design and Research.
URL:
http://www.love.com.au/index.php/thoughts/20-guidelines-for-design-thinking
Date accessed 2014 May 4.
Love, Terence. 2014. "Re: Ten Thousand Hours for Expertise" PhD-Design List.
Monday 5 May, 2014.
--
Terry Love wrote:
--snip-
Incidentally, I was surprised about your comment about the guidelines for
design thinking I listed. The guidelines I gave for design thinking are in
common use in many areas of technical design (the largest group of design
fields) and used by all who use graphic design software as they are embedded
in e.g. Adobe products. They were earlier described by authors such as John
Chris Jones, Christopher Alexander, Nam Suh, Henri Petroski, Michael French,
Archer, Asimow, Nigel Cross, Dasgupta, W Gordon, and many others and are
explicit in codes such as VDI 2221. Hardly just my way of designing?
-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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|