I disagree with Parag when he says 'This knowledge is often implicit,
unarticulated and specific to a design situation and therefore can not be
communicated, analyzed, tested or criticized'

And I second what Johann writes, 
'... goes through the so-called "normal" design process then possibilities
for observing and recording research data are endless, and a rigorous
design-process observation position is what every designer should be
taught... A design process that acknowledges the necessity of user inclusion
becomes inherently research-based, and it is a short step from "just design"
to "design research" ...' 

I practice as a designer and know that if the design is not 'communicated,
analyzed, tested or criticized' we are out of our jobs! An explicit/
implicit expectation of the client is access to all knowledge that has been
generated by our studios in the design process - hence all the design
thinking is articulated, documented and shared (Client funds it!). 

Sneha 
Dig Design Studio 


-----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 Johann
van der Merwe
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 10:41 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Design as Research?

Parag
I cannot agree.
[2] Design is not manipulation of the user, which is what happens when the
designer actively shapes the artifact "so that it is how it ought to be".
That type of design is what I will have nothing to do with, as I teach my
students.
Research comes into the picture when a designer realises that no design
(even when it produces an artifact, it always has to work within a system)
can come into being unless the interactions with user needs are fully
researched, according to accepted research guidelines and principles.

[1] Even hardened scientific researchers are beginning to admit that an
objective observer is only possible if working with, say, chemicals and test
tubes, and even then (at least in the past) the subjectivity of the human
being that is the researcher has interfered with the so-called objective
reporting of the phenomena.

Working with social phenomena as a social being it is impossible for the
observer (the researcher as well as the designer) to stay objective and not
to "interfere" - mere observation IS interference: Heisenberg proved that
this is so.
The job of the design researcher is to minimize this "interference" by the
process of co-design - by letting the user group have as much insight into
the process as possible. This approach is necessary to address the inherent
problem with qualitative research: taking into account the undeniable
possibility of subjective reasoning from the designer/researcher, how do you
avoid bias and insure " scientific" rigour?

[3]  You write: "the knowledge generated in case of an activity of design is
limited to the
designer who actively participates in the process of design. This knowledge
is often implicit, unarticulated and specific to a design situation and
therefore can not be communicated, analyzed, tested or criticized which is
fundamental to the activity of research".

This is absolutely wrong. I for one do not recognise this description of
design. When a designer ( and I do not care whether this design researcher
is doing a fourth year project, a masters or a doctorate in design) goes
through the so-called "normal" design process then possibilities for
observing and recording research data are endless, and a rigorous
design-process observation position is what every designer should be taught.
That is what is creating future design researchers of our design first
years. Your description fits the old-fashioned way of teaching design, in
which versions of the master were turned out as unthinking replicas, taught
to "design" only for themselves, in isolation from any living and thinking
user.

If a first year design student cannot be taught how to accept a crit in
class, cannot participate in the crit of others' work, cannot, indeed,
communicate, analyze, test or critique, then that design education
environment is useless. A design process that acknowledges the necessity of
user inclusion becomes inherently research-based, and it is a short step
from "just design" to "design research" 

Johann



>>> Parag Deshpande <[log in to unmask]> 2008/09/22 05:55 PM >>>
Dear Ken and everyone,

I am enjoying reading your posts. Thank you very much.

I am a designer (architect) working in the field computer science as a
researcher and since last few years, I have been trying to examine
similarities and differences between research and design. To me, the notion
of design as research is problematic because of following reasons * 

1.	Research entails inquiry or examination where the researcher is an
observer. Researcher analyzes what he observes, attempts to make sense of it
and then reports it to the research community. The researcher does not
interfere with what is being observed since the objective of research is to
explain the phenomenon as it is. The researchers then reports on his view on
what has been observed and thus contributes to the knowledge base. 

2.	The designer however does not work in the same manner. The activity
of
design involves active participation of the designer in shaping the
artifact. Therefore, unlike the researcher who simply stands aside, observes
and reports 'what it is', the designer actively involves herself to shape
the artifact so that it is 'how it is ought to be'.

While both research as well as the activity of design generates knowledge,
the knowledge generated in case of an activity of design is limited to the
designer who actively participates in the process of design. This knowledge
is often implicit, unarticulated and specific to a design situation and
therefore can not be communicated, analyzed, tested or criticized which is
fundamental to the activity of research.

Although, I do not have any evidence at the moment, but rather than design
as research, research as design seems plausible to me as like design,
research too begins with an ill-defined problem (question) that evolves and
becomes well defined through the process of research. 

Regards,

parag
PhD candidate,
IDC, UL, Ireland