 |
 |
Dear Jon, Just back from a trip to Europe and still lagged out, but I’ve got to take a whack at your question. There’s lots of good design research underway in lots of places. The fact that design teachers and design students nearly never use it or cite it says more about the culture of design schools than about design research. But it does point to a troubling problem that you describe. IMHO, the problem is this: too many design teachers and design students engaged in research refuse to see their work as part of a larger world. Instead, they take a “we are the world” attitude toward their work and the place it has in solving problems. It’s not an “inferiority complex.” It’s a form of passive-aggressive behavior. You encounter this kind of behavior in immature disciplines where people are insecure about their status in elation to mature or respected research fields. You also see it in second-rate and third-rate departments that teach in mature disciplines. The fear that we may not be good enough leads many people to ignore and neglect research other than their own or work outside their own field. They neglect it to avoid feeling weak by comparison. What is particularly telling is the fact that design teachers and design students don’t read the literature of their own field. Design students cite the designers they see in design magazines heavy on pictures and personal praise much like art students admire the artists they read about in art magazines. That means they focus on designers who show up in Wallpaper, Domus, or Metropolis rather than examine topics that show up in Design Issues or Design Studies. The conferences where these teachers and students present their work are heavy on show and tell sessions, but weak on carefully framed examples of outstanding design solutions or discussions of intriguing problems located in relation to research issues. We work with researchers from several fields, and my experience of good researchers is an explicit awareness of research. This includes research-oriented designers and design groups as well as people in marketing, strategy, economics, consumer research, anthropology, and sociology. We find that the people we meet are aware of work by others in their own field. Many are aware of work in other fields. More importantly, they feel no shame in borrowing from other fields. Those who publish promote their work from a position of engagement and humility, not a position of vanity. If their work is known, it’s not because they promote it a la Wallpaper or Metropolis. It’s because the work is good, and because they work in a context where others cite the work and use it. There’s hope, though. I’ve mentioned Liz Sanders, and you’ll find excellent work on her web site. Don Norman and Jakob Nielsen have great sites. So do Edward Tufte. These are all professional practitioners who come to design with research backgrounds in other fields. You’ll also find some design schools with a solid research basis – Ivrea, Illinois Institute of Technology, Milan Polytechnic, and Stanford are certainly good examples. I’ve been enjoying the interviews in the NextD journal. There are also a few good books that demonstrate solid work. MIT Press published a new book on design research recently. I’ve also made good use of an older book on product development by Susan Squires and Byran Byrne. We do have good examples of design research perspectives on this list. On this list, I particularly enjoy Rob Curedale’s contributions because his industrial background allows him to think about research issues with the experience of a senior professional practitioner. That’s uncommon among design school teachers, and the combined lack of senior professional experience with the lack of senior research experience makes for some of the problems you describe. While I don’t always agree with Prof. Curedale, I find his well-grounded viewpoint allows me to agree or disagree in an informed way. I also like Ken Friedman’s notes. He takes a rigorous theoretical approach that appeals to me. I like his willingness to talk his position through step by step, and I like the fact that he makes his evidence explicit. My all-time favorite is Keith Russell. As a philosophy major in college, I developed a taste for sly puzzles and sparkling footwork. If Muhammad Ali had been a philosopher, he would have been Keith Russell. There are more … I won’t go through the whole list, but I find this an informative and entertaining place. Fields grow through dialogue in central meeting points. This is a place where we can generate ideas and debate research concepts. One important step we can take here is to cite the work that interests us when we write, developing a richer sense of the field as a whole. These are a few personal thoughts. If we’re going to make progress, it’s time to face up to some of the structural problems in our field rather than worry about the structural problems of academia. Design research is an important field for the future, so I don’t want to get sidetracked by questions of vanity vs. modesty. Design research is young. It’s still got a lot to be modest about. The real question is how to improve the field so that we can contribute. Sincerely, Cindy Jackson _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963