Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Design theory - Lecture 04: Design Expertise / Design Thinking / Key concepts
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Design theory - Lecture 04: Design Expertise / Design Thinking / Key concepts

3,302

Published on

Published in: Design, Technology, Business
0 Comments
13 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,302
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
355
Comments
0
Likes
13
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Design Theory Communication & Multimedia Design Bas Leurs (b.l.f.leurs@hr.nl) March, 2014 Key concepts Lecture 04: Design Expertise / Design Thinking /
  • 2. what we discussed last week...
  • 3. Snow shovel case Sensemaking Questioning Prototyping Sketching UNITiD Studio space
  • 4. Today’s programme Modes of thinking Design expertise Key concepts Design Thinking
  • 5. design thinking
  • 6. Lucy Kimbell (2011) Design Thinking as a cognitive style Design Thinking as a business resource Traditional design practice (“studio life”) Business and organizational practice Problem solving Innovation Traditional design disciplines (e.g. architecture, product design) Any context from healthcare, education to sustainability Design schools MBA’s / Design schools Purpose Focus Context Training Different discourses Design Theory Innovation management
  • 7. Business Design Mindset Mindset Maintaining the status quo Challenging the status quo
  • 8. Design is more than an agent of change, it is change... While change is exciting for some, it is positively terrifying for others. Scott Doorley & Scott Witthoft (2012)
  • 9. BUSINESS DESIGN Rationality, objectivity, reality is fixed and quantifiable Subjective experience, reality is socially constructed Analysis aimed at providing one "best" answer Experimentation aimed at iterating toward a "better" answer Planning Doing Logic, numeric models Emotional insight, experiential models Pursuit of control and stability, discomfort with uncertainty Pursuit of novelty, dislike of status quo Abstract or particular Iterative movement between abstract and particular Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011) Underlying assumptions Method Process Decision drivers Values Levels of focus
  • 10. Tim Brown (2008, 2009) • Empathy • Integrative thinking • Optimism • Experimentalism • Collaboration
  • 11. Tim Brown (2008, 2009) harvard business review • june 2008 page 3 identify new directions that further proto- types might take. The design that emerged for shift changes had nurses passing on information in front of sign methodology, they were able to create a relatively small process innovation that pro- duced an outsize impact. The new shift changes are being rolled out across the Kaiser A Design Thinker’s Personality Profile Contrary to popular opinion, you don’t need weird shoes or a black turtleneck to be a de- sign thinker. Nor are design thinkers neces- sarily created only by design schools, even though most professionals have had some kind of design training. My experience is that many people outside professional design have a natural aptitude for design thinking, which the right development and experi- ences can unlock. Here, as a starting point, are some of the characteristics to look for in design thinkers: Empathy. They can imagine the world from multiple perspectives—those of col- leagues, clients, end users, and customers (current and prospective). By taking a “peo- ple first” approach, design thinkers can imag- ine solutions that are inherently desirable and meet explicit or latent needs. Great de- sign thinkers observe the world in minute de- tail. They notice things that others do not and use their insights to inspire innovation. Integrative thinking. They not only rely on analytical processes (those that produce either/ or choices) but also exhibit the ability to see all of the salient—and sometimes contradictory— aspects of a confounding problem and create novel solutions that go beyond and dramatically improve on existing alternatives. (See Roger Martin’s The Opposable Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking.) Optimism. They assume that no matter how challenging the constraints of a given problem, at least one potential solution is better than the existing alternatives. Experimentalism. Significant innovations don’t come from incremental tweaks. Design thinkers pose questions and explore con- straints in creative ways that proceed in en- tirely new directions. Collaboration. The increasing complexity of products, services, and experiences has re- placed the myth of the lone creative genius with the reality of the enthusiastic interdisci- plinary collaborator. The best design thinkers don’t simply work alongside other disciplines; many of them have significant experience in more than one. At IDEO we employ people who are engineers and marketers, anthropolo- gists and industrial designers, architects and psychologists.
  • 12. Exploration Exploitation The invention of business The administration of business Roger Martin (2009) Preferences Mysteries Discovery Long-term High risk Preferences Algorithms Efficiency Short-term Minimal risk Inventor Manager (Accountant) Designer Intuitive Thinking Analytical Thinking Design Thinking
  • 13. Helen Walters (2011) http://helenwalters.com/2011/03/21/design-thinking-wont-save-you/
  • 14. modes of thinking
  • 15. Nigel Cross (1990) Abductive Thinking Abduction is the logic of conjecture. “vermoeden” “gissen”
  • 16. Kees Dorst (2010) ??? + HOW leads to VALUE tion-2 ??? + ??? leads to VALUE (thing) (scenario) (aspired) WHAT + ??? leads to RESULT productive professions? The basic reasoning pattern then is Abduction: WHAT + HOW leads to VALUE (thing) (scenario) (aspired) Abduction comes in two forms—what they have in common is that we actually Abduction-1, that is often associ lem solving’, we also know the ‘how’, a ‘working principle’ and how that will h ??? + HOW leads to VALUE Abductive Thinking And why design is such a complicated act
  • 17. Deductive reasoning • Deduction means determining the conclusion • Deductive reasoning moves from the general rule to the specific application Inductive reasoning • Induction means determining the rule • Inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general. Taking your best shot! Doing a best guess! • Abduction means determining the precondition. • Abduction has been described as the “logic of what might be,” (Martin, 2009) • Abduction can be thought of as “the argument to the best explanation”. (Kolko, 2009) Conclusion merely likely! Abductive reasoning Conclusion guaranteed! design natural sciencemathematics Black Swan? All of the swans that all living beings have ever seen are white Therefore, all swans are white. Syllogism All men are mortal Socrates is a man Therefore, Socrates is mortal Types of reasoning See the paper of John Kolko (2009) Aha Erlebnis “The abductive suggestion comes to us like a flash. It is an act of insight, although extremely fallible insight.” (Pierce, 1998) Think of: Dr House, Sherlock Holmes and other TV personas who solve unsolvable puzzles.
  • 18. A B C B Therefore, we are absolutely certain that all the marbles in the bag are red (because all the marbles are from bucket B) There are three buckets A, B and C. We can see and we know that all the marbles in bucket B are red. It is the case that someone has put some marbles from bucket B in the bag (but we cannot see what’s in the bag). All the marbles from bucket B are red. Rule The marbles in the bag are from bucket B. Case The marbles in the bag are red. Result conclusion! Deductive reasoning: conclusion guaranteed! Deduction means determining the conclusion Deductive reasoning moves from the general rule to the specific application
  • 19. A B C B When we open bag, we see that the marbles are red. So, all the marbles in bucket B are red (although this might not be true if there is blue marble in bucket B, but we cannot see if that is the case) It is the case that someone has put some marbles from bucket B in the bag. All the marbles from bucket B are red. Rule The marbles in the bag are from bucket B. Case The marbles in the bag are red. Result Inductive reasoning: conclusion merely likely! Induction means determining the rule Inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general.
  • 20. A B C B We have a bag, when we open it, we see that the marbles are red. There are three buckets A, B and C. We see and we know that all the marbles in bucket B are red. So, it is the case that someone has put some marbles from bucket B into the bag. All the marbles from bucket B are red. Rule The marbles in the bag are from bucket B. Case The marbles in the bag are red. Result Abductive reasoning: taking your best shot! / best guess! Abduction means determining the precondition. Abduction has been described as the “logic of what might be,” (Martin) Abduction can be thought of as the argument to the best explanation. (Kolko)
  • 21. Henry Mintzberg & Frances Westley (2001) “Thinking first” “Seeing first” “Doing first” Decision making approaches •Science •planning / programming •Verbal •Facts •Art •Visioning / imagining •Visual •Ideas •Craft •Venturing / learning •Visceral •Experiences Works best when: • The issue is clear • The data is reliable • The context is structured Works best when: • Many elements have to be combined into creative solutions • Commitment to those solutions is key • Communication across boundaries is essential Works best when: • Situation is novel and confusing • Complicated specification would get in the way • A few simple relationship rules can help people move forward established production processes new product development disruptive technologies
  • 22. Henry Mintzberg & Frances Westley (2001) “Thinking first” “Seeing first” “Doing first” Decision making approaches •Science •planning / programming •Verbal •Facts •Art •Visioning / imagining •Visual •Ideas •Craft •venturing / learning •Visceral •Experiences Works best when: • The issue is clear • The data is reliable • The context is structured Works best when: • Many elements have to be combined into creative solutions • Commitment to thos solutions is key • Communication accros boundaries is essential Works best when: • Situation is novel and confusing • Complicated specification would get in the way • A few simple relationship rules can help people move forward established production processes new product development disruptive technologies Design
  • 23. design expertise
  • 24. Unselfconscious culture Selfconscious culture Form-making is learned informally, through imitation and correction. Form-making is taught academically, according to explicit rules. Christopher Alexander (1964)
  • 25. Unselfconscious culture Selfconscious culture Form-making is learned informally, through imitation and correction. Division of labour is limited, specialization of any sort is rare (there are no architects). Each man builds his own house. The technology of communication is underdeveloped (no written records or architectural plans, “direct design”). Form-making is taught academically, according to explicit rules. Division of labour is abundant, there are many specializations (architects, bricklayers, carpenters) Each man buys or rents his own house. The technology of communication is well developed (many written records, “indirect design”). Christopher Alexander (1964)
  • 26. Nigel Cross (1990) Design ability designers... • produce novel, unexpected solutions • tolerate uncertainty, working with incomplete information • apply imagination and constructive forethought to practical problems • use drawings and other modelling media as means of problem solving. • resolve ill-defined problems • adopt solution-focussing strategies • employ abductive/productive/appositional thinking • use non-verbal, graphic/spatial modelling media. The nature and nurture ofdesign ability Nigel Cross DesignDiscipline, Faculty of Technology, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK Understanding the nature of design ability can betterenable designeducatorsto nurture its development in their students. Such understanding has beenpromoted by a wide variety of studies of design activity and designer behaviour. From a review of these studies, design ability is summarised as comprising resolving ill-defined problems, adopting solution-focussedcognitive strategies, employing abductive or appositional thinking and using non-verbal modelling media. These abilities are highly developed in skilled designers, but are alsopossessedin somedegreeby everyone.A caseis thereforemadefor design ability as afundamentalform of human intelligence. The nurtureof this ability throughdesigneducation is discussed, with particular reference to the problem of providing design education through the distance-learningmedia of the Open University.Keywords: design education, design ability I hope that the title of this paper makes clear that it really has two parts. The first is concerned with the nature of design ability - the particular ways of thinking and behaving that designers, and all of us, adopt in tackling certain kinds of problems in certain kinds of ways. The second part is concerned with the nurture of design ability - that is, with the development of that ability through design education, and in particular with the attempts made at the Open University to nurture design ability through distance-learning media. My view is that through better understanding the nature of design ability, design educators may be better able to nurture it. I therefore see these two - nature and nurture - as complementary interests, and I do not intend to venture into those corners of psychology where fights go on over nature vs nurture in the context of general intelligence. However, I shall try to make a claim This paper is based on the author's Inaugural Lecture as Professor of Design Studies, given 31 May 1989 at the Open University. that design ability is, in fact, one of the several forms or fundamental aspects of human intelligence. The appellation 'designer' has been helping to sell products for some time now. I think it started with 'designer jeans' - trousdrs which, though derived from workmen's garments, were clearly not meant for work- ing in. A wide range of 'designer' products then appeared, from designer cars to designer pens. However, the appellation has now become virtually a term of abuse - ranging from the 'designer stubble' seen on the faces of fashion victims to the 'designer socialism' seen in some sections of the British Labour Party. I even saw a magazine article about 'designer diseases' such as the 'Stendahl syndrome' which is supposed to afflict those overcome by the beauty of Florence. 'Designer' products are now recognizable by their dominance of form over function. 'Designer' therefore currently seems to mean some- thing trendy, fashionable and insubstantial. But fortu- nately the idea that good design can actually be a selling Vol 11 No 3 July 1990 0142-694X/90/03127-14/$3.00© 1990Butterworth-HeinemannLtd 127
  • 27. Experts Novices Nigel Cross (2004) Experts vs Novices deductive reasoning ‘depth-first’ approach to problem solving ‘generative’ reasoning breadth-first approach to problem solving Experts have been exposed to a large number of examples of the problems and solutions Experts are able to store and access information in larger cognitive ‘chunks’ than novices can, and to recognise underlying principles, rather than focussing on the surface features of problems Expert designers move rapidly to early solution conjectures, and use these conjectures as a way of exploring and defining problem- and- solution together.
  • 28. Bryan Lawson (2004) Gambits Experts have studied a substantial body of precedent in order to have developed schemata that enable them to recognise underlying structures in design situations that allow them to employ and adapt gambits. tricks to solve recognisable problems Chess masters rarely analyse a board situation, rather they recognised it.
  • 29. Herbert Dreyfus (2003), Kees Dorst and Isabelle Reymen (2004) Expertise levels Novice ... will follow strict rules to deal with the problem Advanced beginner ... is sensitive to exceptions to the ‘hard’ rules of the novice. Competent ... selects the elements in a situation that are relevant, and chooses a plan to achieve the goals. Proficient ... immediately sees the most important issues and appropriate plan, and then reasons out what to do. Expert ... responds to specific situation intuitively, and performs the appropriate action, straightaway. Master ... sees the standard ways of working that experienced professionals use not as natural but as something they rely on. A master displays a deeper involvement into the professional field as a whole Visionary ... consciously strives to extend the domain in which he/she works. The world discloser develops new ways things could be, defines the issues, opens new worlds and creates new domains. Rule based thinking Situation based thinking Strategybased thinking
  • 30. Bachelor level Skills novice advanced beginner competent expert visionary (Lawson & Dorst, 2009) master Expertise levels Rule based thinking Situation based thinking Strategybased thinking
  • 31. 10,000 hour rule
  • 32. Ericsson (2001) Expertise levels Many thousands of hours of deliberate practice and training are necessary to reach the highest levels of performance. P1: JzG 052184097Xc38 CB1040B/Ericsson 0 521 84087 X February 28, 2006 6:17 694 the cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance Figure 38.4. Estimated amount of time for solitary practice as a function of age for the middle-aged professional violinists (triangles), the best expert violinists (squares), the good expert violinists (empty circles), the least accomplished expert violinists (filled circles), and amateur pianists (diamonds). (From “The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance,” by K. A. Ericsson, R. Th. Krampe, and C. Tesch-R¨omer, 1993, Psychological Review, 100(3), p. 379 and p. 384. Copyright 1993 by American Psychological Association. Adapted with permission.) musicians had spent over 10,000 hours prac- ticing, which averages 2,500 and 5,000 hours back. Hence, the requirement for concentra- tion sets deliberate practice apart from both
  • 33. key concepts of design theory
  • 34. DESIGN = . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  • 35. such as building new hospitals, or creating an after-school program Traditional Performance Measures OutputsProcesses (Activities) Inputs Resources used to deliver the products and services of a program or organization Series of actions or operations conducted to achieve an end goal The final products, goods or services produced by a program or organization Outcomes Initial Intermediate Long-term The impacts, benefits or consequences for stakeholders resulting from the outputs of a program or organization Public Service Value Measures Outcome FIGURE 2.1 Inputs, Processes and Outputs versus Outcomes DESIGN = CHANGE Design is more than just a product (output), it is about the change (effect) it initiates
  • 36. transformation function DESIGN = FUTURE ORIENTED Design is about how things ought to be, and making it happen. state 1 process state 2 initial state future state
  • 37. DESIGN = ENVISIONING POSSIBILITIES Making stuff... envisioning posibilities and possible futures through sketching, prototyping, enacting, storytelling etc...
  • 38. learning designing taking an action that transforms the internal (knowledge, beliefs) doing an intervention that transforms the external (world, context) DESIGN = LEARNING PROCESS
  • 39. DESIGN = SENSEMAKING Understanding reality in a specific way, identifying patterns that have been overlooked by others
  • 40. DESIGN = ABOUT FIT ProductProblem User Business fitFIT fit FIT fitFIT Coordinating the alignment of discourses; resolving conflicts of interest
  • 41. DESIGN = TO IMPROVE THE HUMAN CONDITION Product User T fit FIT fit
  • 42. Salut!

×