 |
 |
Don and all, An interesting polemical piece. I view it from the micro world of information design. From that point of view I make an observations based on monitoring implemented designs. I use the term ‘monitoring’ here in a formal sense: it’s the description we apply to the seventh stage of the design process we follow—a stage in which a design which has been implemented is subject to on-going testing and review once it's being used in the field. Our work follows a recognisable human-centred approach and when a design we create is implemented we already have concrete evidence from testing during its development to show that it is likely to be used by the people we have designed it for in the ways we anticipated. In the monitoring stage we retest the designs following implementation to see whether or not they maintain their performance. In most cases, the performance begins to deteriorate and change after about 6 months. When this first happened in a project we undertook in the 1980s, it was a bit of a revelation. Now we treat is as routine. Which brings me to my observations about Design X. I see none of the pre and post data collection forming a necessary part of any demonstration that Design X will produce useful outcomes. So far, most of the consultants who work in this area use the logic of rain making ceremonies to support their claims. Just because it rains after some ceremonies is proof of nothing. Given that conventional design process descriptions used in designX do not involve pretesting or post-testing (with a mention being made of only iterative testing during development), I remain profoundly skeptical about your ability to solve large-scale problems, let alone persuade me that you have done so. And our repeated observation that even in the micro world of information design the ‘systems’ we design start to deteriorate as soon as they walk out the door, leads me to believe that the larger scale systems you are proposing to play with may have an even shorter life. The difference is that no one will know, because there will be no evidence collected pre and post to say so. Hubris or Snake oil? What I see at the moment is a repetition of a few well worn phrases about the supposed power of Design to bring about useful change—a mantra that becomes more convincing to you the more you recites it. As Lewis Carol put it in the Hunting of the Snark: “If I stay it three times, it is true”. Persuade me that it is otherwise. David -- blog: http://communication.org.au/blo <http://communication.org.au/blo>g/ web: http://communication.org.au <http://communication.org.au/> Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA CEO • Communication Research Institute • • helping people communicate with people • Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795 Phone: +61 (03) 9005 5903 Skype: davidsless 60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------