 |
 |
Sorry for the "only" at the beginning. I meant "specifically". Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:44, livier serna<[log in to unmask]> wrote: Hello,I'm writing to you only, because I have a technical question and not an argument to offer to the discussion thread. I find your posts on design thinking very accurate, and I agree with you. Moreover, I find your explanations clear, to the point, precise. I think it is very important companies (not research circles I mean) understand as clearly as possible what the term "design thinking" is when they see it. With more and more consultants calling themselves, or being wrongly called "design thinkers" (I've been a victim of that and don't like it), it is very important to have understandable explanations such as yours to avoid further damage. I would like to quote what you've said in this thread, but I think this is not a public forum and thus it would be unacceptable. So I would like to know if you have published, quotable works where you discuss these "design thinking" issues.In any case, thank you. Livier Serna-Mansoux Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 3:15, Klaus Krippendorff<[log in to unmask]> wrote: dear cameron, please don't fear my denouncing abstractions, just the opposite. to me, the wall of post-it notes you mentioned is not a manifestation of collectively warranted mental models but the result of conversations with the aim of coming up with something that makes sense to all participating designers, each in their own terms. if this joint accomplishment would be a collectively shared mental model, you would have to open up each participant's brain and see whether their mental models are the same. however, all you can observe each participant brings to the wall of pot-it notes, visible to everyone, but always only with their own eyes. my reason for elaborating on marcio's paper was that the fashionable claim of designers to possess a distinct mentality -- the claim of being a design thinker -- does a disservice to the community of designers by trying to establish a professional identity one cannot argue with -- regardless of successes or failures. most articulations in language include abstractions. however, they may not be shared. they indicate at best a coordination of diverse individual understandings, among which you know only your own. just approach a wall with post-it notes created by a group of which you haven't been a member and try to discern the collective warranted cognitive model and then talk to the members of the group to see whether you got it right. klaus -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of cameron tonkinwise Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 11:53 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Design Thinking is not design article Klaus, While sympathetic to your epistemological ‘facts,’ we should perhaps recall that the iconography of ‘design thinking’ is the wall of post-it notes. Whatever else is going on in these sessions, the least is that ‘thinking’ is being externalized for the purposes of demonstrative communication. They are perhaps better understood as creative extensions of Conklin’s Dialogue Mapping, if not materializations of Vygotskian ‘social cognition.’ While not aimed at attaining the level of rarefied ‘theories,’ they are very much attempts to develop collectively warranted ‘mental models.’ I fear you are denouncing an abstraction, not a practice. Cameron > On Nov 20, 2015, at 3:24 AM, Klaus Krippendorff <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > consider these simple epistemological facts: > > · thinking is a personal experience > · one’s thinking resides in articulations not in someone’s inaccessible mind. > · designers need to be able to explain to others what they are proposing > · design theories, design research, design methods, design ethics -- everything that designers need to learn to practice -- has to be communicable, using linguistic, visual, performative media, or demonstrations. > · designers who work in interdisciplinary development teams are unlikely to be taken seriously when withdrawing into their subjectively convenient design thinking abilities, implicitly denying this ability to team members from other disciplines. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------