Dear David,
Thanks for your reply. I agree with a great deal of what you write.
The difficult and nuanced issues require thought and care — this is why these kinds of reflective and carefully developed conversations are so important.
The wisdom and experience of skilled designers is central to evidence-based practice. The problem is that every design firm selling its wares claims to possess that wisdom and experience. The situation is similar to that of design schools, where half claim to be in the top 10%.
In general, we agree. That’s because the vast majority of cases in design rely on the skill, wisdom, and experience of seasoned professionals.
In a slightly different context, that’s what I said in paraphrasing Don Norman:
1. Design theory is probably the best way to proceed: theory supported by evidence. Unfortunately, the disciplines that support the design field are extremely young. As a result, we do not have evidence-based theories to support our decisions in most of the problems and cases we address. In this respect, design practice resembles 19th-century medical practice.
2. The case that most areas of design today do not have theories supported by evidence is one problem. A second, related problem, is that it may be impossible to develop appropriate theories for many areas of design, and many kinds of design practice. In cases where we cannot develop appropriate theories, evidence-based design offers a good way to proceed. The nature of evidence-based design is the issue of an evolving conversation, and skilled professional practitioners have a key role in that conversation.
3. To add to these first two challenges, few areas of design even have a base in evidence. It may further be impossible to develop appropriate evidence in many areas of design. Where this is the case, we must rely on the skills and insights of skilled professional practitioners as the best way forward.
To point once again to medical practice, there is much to be said for the wisdom of experienced general practitioners, women and men who meet and work with patients in a full practice linked to wide concern for the comprehensive human being in his or her family setting. Alas, we also know that there are far too few of these GPs at work today, and there are similar problems in the practice of design.
At this point, I am just going to thank you for a lucid, thoughtful reply. While acknowledging my agreement, I’d have to think deeply to explain why I agree on some points while remaining somewhat skeptical to the way that these issues play out in the real world.
Warm wishes,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|