"I've come to a disconcerting conclusion: design research is great when it
comes to improving existing product categories but essentially useless when
it comes to new, innovative breakthroughs" from
http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.html
Frankly, Don Norman's statement from the link was really disconcerting for
me as well. I tried to find a case from my experience but failed.
I spent most of this decade in mobile phone business as design researcher
and user interface designer.
As Don said, design research has been really useful to improve and to evolve
products.
Because design research want to find insights from current trends and what
people saying about it, but often it make us have narrow viewpoint for
innovation rather than inspire new vision of future. In many case, some time
what you heard and saw may be not helpful to make a future. Though it was
really useful to fix problem (Yes, invention makes problem)
But I do believe design research is not essentially useless ( sometimes may
be).
Actually some technological innovation was miserably failed because they
doesn't listen to nor learn from design research.
For example, video call is supposed to be a killer application for 3G
(IMT2000). Multi billion dollars for an each country was spent for it. But
failed.
People still use 3G handset for just talking and texting (browsing for smart
phone users). Actually it is easy to know such a communication style is only
for few special cases. (I don't want to have a video call with any stranger)
Otherwise holding handset while talking is not easy and voice is faded than
usual because it is much far away from mouth.
These insights (Ergonomic, Social, Psychological) could be analyzed easily
from design research.
Yes, history shows often Technology comes first and Needs later. But I think
if invention comes without understanding ____ (Put market, user, users,
culture as you wish), it often fail.
For break through innovation, appropriate advanced design research can be
valuable source as inspiration. At least, it will be smarter invention.
Question is how design research can play a role for it and ignite invention.
Happy Holiday!
Alf Bae
Ph.D candidate, IDAS, Hong ik univ.
Korea
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Rosan Chow <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Charles Burnette wrote on 08.12.2009
>
> "Don Norman seems on our minds these days. Those committing or
> committed to design research should read his latest contribution to
> the discusssion:"
>
> http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.html
>
>
>
>
> Since 2005 I have been arguing that design innovation does not need to
> follow user study (or design research as Donald Norman calls it. I refuse to
> reduce or equate Design Research to user study. Sometimes, I have a feeling
> that Donald Norman has a rather limited view on the potential of Design
> Research). I develop my arguments not from a product development perspective
> or empirically, but from a design theoretical perspective . You might find
> my arguments and a new approach to design in these publications:
>
>
>
> User study might not really drive innovation, but Design(Research) might.
>
>
>
> Happy Holidays!!
>
>
>
> Best, Rosan
>
>
>
>
>
> Chow, R. 2009a. "Abduction Revisit." Pp. 193-197 in Communicating by
> Design, edited by J. Verbeke and A. Jakimowicz. Brussels: Chamlers
> University of Technology & Hogeschool voor Wetenshcp & Kunst.
>
>
>
>
>
> Chow, Rosan2009b. "Projection before Analysis." Design Principles and
> Practices: An International Journal 3:341-346.
>
>
>
> Chow, Rosan. 2005. "For User Study. The Implication of Design."
> Dissertation Thesis, Design, University of Arts Braunschweig, Braunschweig.
>
>
> http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=978483235&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=978483235.pdf
>
>
>
> Chow, Rosan 2008. "Case Transfer Vs. Case Study. An Evaluation of Case
> Study as a Method for Design Research." in Swiss Design Network Symposium
> 'Focused'. . Bern.
>
>
>
> Chow, Rosan, W. Jonas, and N Schaeffer. 2009. "Pericean Abdcution, Signs &
> Design Transfer." Pp. 87-91 in 8th European Academy of Design Conference
> 'Design Connexity', edited by J. Malins. Aberdeen
>
>
>
> Chow, Rosan and Stan Ruecker. 2006. "Transferability. The Wonder on the
> Ground of Design Research." in DRS International Conference "Wonderground".
> Lisbon: IADE.
>
>
>
>
> Rosan Chow, Ph.D.
> Research Scientist
>
> Deutsche Telekom AG, Laboratories
> Design Research Lab
> Ernst-Reuter Platz 7,10587 Berlin,Germany
>
> Office +49 (30) 8353-58357
> Mobile +49 (160) 90-96-6133
> TU Berlin internal: 58357
> Fax +49 (30) 8353-58409
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> http://www.design-research-lab.org <http://www.design-research-lab.org/>
> http://www.telekom.de/laboratories <http://www.telekom.de/laboratories>
>
> Deutsche Telekom AG
> Aufsichtesrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender)
> Vorstand: René Oberman (Vorsitzender)
> Hamid Akhavan, Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme,
> Timotheus Höttges, Guido Kerkhoff, Thomas Sattelberger
> Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794, Sitz der Gesellschaft:: Bonn
> WEEE-Reg.-Nr.:DE50478376
>
>
|