Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Design Thinking' keyword pg.2 of 7
01 NOVEMBER 2013

d.school: Design Thinking Bootcamp

"The Bootcamp Bootleg is an overview of some of our most–used tools. The guide was originally intended for recent graduates of our Bootcamp: Adventures in Design Thinking class. But we've heard from folks who've never been to the d.school that have used it to create their own introductory experience to design thinking. The Bootcamp Bootleg is more of a cook book than a text book, and more of a constant work–in–progress than a polished and permanent piece. This resource is free for you to use and share – and we hope you do."

(d.school at Stanford University)

1

CONTRIBUTOR

Neal White
09 JUNE 2013

Sketch-thinking: the processes of 'seeing as' and 'seeing that'

"Sketches are obviously pictorial, for they refer to shape and orientation, and often to approximate size even if they maintain a varying degree of abstractness. Yet it is impossible to confirm that there is a direct one–to–one correspondence between shapes and figures on paper and the images they stand for. It is therefore proposed to refer to the (pictorial) reasoning evident in interactive imagery at the time of sketching as consisting of two modalities. The designer is 'seeing as' when he or she is using figural, or 'gestalt' argumentation while 'sketch–thinking'. When 'seeing that', the designer advances no figural arguments pertaining to the entity that is being designed. The process of sketching is a systematic dialectics between the 'seeing as' and 'seeing that' reasoning modalities. To examine this proposition, design moves and arguments were inspected as they are established through protocol analysis. The notion of 'seeing as' and 'seeing that' will be further elucidated as we proceed, so as to best exploit documentation from the protocols."

(Gabriela Goldschmidt 1991, p.131)

Goldschmidt, G. (1991). "The dialectics of sketching." Creativity Research Journal, Routledge 4(2): 123–143.

Fig.1 Donald Owen Colley [http://buttnekkiddoodles.com/2012/12/26/knockin–about–chicago/]

1

TAGS

1991abstract thinking • abstractness • concept developmentconcept generationconceptual schemeconceptualisation • concrete thinking • creativity research • Creativity Research Journal • design • design reasoning • design thinkingdrawingdrawing as enquirydrawing researchdrawing studiesdrawing study • figural • figural arguments • Gabriela Goldschmidt • gestalt argumentation • gestalt principlesidea generationinteractive imagery • Israel Institute of Technology • pictorial reasoning • problem-solvingprotocol analysis • reasoning modalities • reflexive technology • seeingseeing asseeing that • sequence of design moves • shape and orientation • sketch-thinkingsketchessketchingsketching ideas • systematic dialectics • visual thinking

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
26 MARCH 2013

Drawing as a conversation which prompts new imaginings

"Perception of external sources of inspiration prompts new imaginings. Research on the role of externalisations in design thinking has concentrated on the role of sketching[14]. Schön[15] has shown that for many architects, sketching is an essential part of creative design, and creation is driven by making and perceiving sketches; Schön characterises design as an interactive conversation between mind and sketch. Designers directly appreciate different types of information in their own sketches[16], alternating between seeing that and seeing as[17]. Ambiguity in sketches facilitates reinterpretation triggered by dissatisfaction with the current design[18]. For designers who make active use of sources of inspiration in designing, they play a similar role to designers' own sketches."

(Claudia Eckerta, Martin Stacey, p.526, 2000, Design Studies)

[14] Purcell, A T and Gero, J S 'Drawings and the design process' Design Studies Vol 19 (1998) pp 389–430
[15] Schön, D A The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action Basic Books, New York (1983)
[16] Schön, D A and Wiggins, G 'Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing' Design Studies Vol 13 (1992) pp 135–156 [17] Gabriela Goldschmidt 'The dialectics of sketching' Creativity Research Journal Vol 4 (1991) pp 123–143 [https://blog.itu.dk/DIND–E2010/files/2010/10/goldsmidt_dialectics_paper.pdf]
[18] McFadzean, J, Cross, N G and Johnson, J H 'Notation and Cognition in Conceptual Sketching' in Proceedings, VR'99 Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design MIT Press, Cambridge MA (1999)

Claudia Eckerta, Martin Stacey (2000). "Sources of inspiration: a language of design", Design Studies, Volume 21, Issue 5, September 2000, Pages 523–538

TAGS

2000architectsClaudia Eckert • conceptual prompt • conversation with the situationcreative designcritical investigationdesign inspirationdesign languagedesign methodDesign Studies (journal)design thinkingdesigningDonald Schondoodlingdrawing • drawing experiments • drawing ideasdrawing studyimagining • inspiration prompts • interactive conversation • knitwear design • making sketches • Martin Stacey • new imaginings • reinterpretationseeing and doingseeing asseeing thatshared cultural referencesketchingsources of inspirationthinking through drawingthinking toolstriggering ideasvisual problem-solving • visual prompt • visual study

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
24 MARCH 2013

Interaction design research artefacts intended to produce knowledge

"We differentiate research artifacts from design practice artifacts in two important ways. First, the intent going into the research is to produce knowledge for the research and practice communities, not to make a commercially viable product. To this end, we expect research projects that take this research through design approach will ignore or deemphasize perspectives in framing the problem, such as the detailed economics associated with manufacturability and distribution, the integration of the product into a product line, the effect of the product on a company's identity, etc. In this way design researchers focus on making the right things, while design practitioners focus on making commercially successful things.

Second, research contributions should be artifacts that demonstrate significant invention. The contributions should be novel integrations of theory, technology, user need, and context; not just refinements of products that already exist in the research literature or commercial markets. The contribution must demonstrate a significant advance through the integration. This aspect of a design research contribution makes particular sense in the interaction design space of HCI. Meteoric technological advances in hardware and software drive an aggressive invention of novel products in HCI and interaction design domains that are not as aggressively experienced by other design domains. While product designers might find themselves redesigning office furniture to meet the changing needs of work, interaction designers more often find themselves tasked with inventing whole new product categories.

Our model of design research allows interaction design researchers to do what designers do best: to study the world and then to make things intended to affect change. Our model provides a new channel for the power of design thinking, desired by many disciplines, to be unleashed as in a research context. Design researchers can contribute from a position of strength, instead of aping the methods of other disciplines as a means of justifying their research contribution."

(John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, Shelley Evenson, p.500, 2007)

John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Shelley Evenson (2007). "Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI". In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 493–502. DOI=10.1145/1240624.1240704 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
02 JANUARY 2013

Facing ambiguity differently across design, business and technology

"team[s] of students of mixed disciplines worked together to understand and map a problem–space (identified by the client). They then defined a solution–space before focussing on a particular opportunity outcome. The range of projects included incremental innovation opportunities represented by the Lego and Hasbro projects through radical Philips work to truly disruptive work with Unilever. The studies confirmed stereotypical view points of how different disciplines may behave. They showed that design students were more (but not completely) comfortable with the ambiguous aspects associated with 'phase zero' problem–space exploration and early stage idea generation. They would only commit to a solution when time pressures dictated that this was essential in order to complete the project deliverables on time and they were happy to experiment with, and develop, new methods without a clear objective in mind. In contrast, the business students were uncomfortable with this ambiguity and were more readily able to come to terms with incremental innovation projects where a systematic approach could be directly linked to an end goal. The technologists, were more comfortable with the notion of the ambiguous approach leading to more radical innovation, but needed to wrap this in an analytical process that grounded experimentation. Meanwhile, the designers were unclear and unprepared to be precise when it came to committing to a business model. "

(Mark Bailey, 2010, p.42)

Bailey, M. (2010). "Working at the Edges". Networks, Art Design Media Subject Centre (ADM–HEA). Autumn 2010.

1

TAGS

2007ADM-HEAambiguityambiguity and uncertainty • ambiguous approach • analytical processapproaches to ambiguitybusinessbusiness modelclear objectivesclient needscollaboration • core competency • Cox Reviewdecision making • design outcome • design teamsdesign thinkingdisciplinary culturesdisciplinary knowledge • disruptive work • Dorothy Leonard-Barton • end goal • grounded experimentation • Hasbro • idea generationincremental innovationinnovation practice skillsinterdisciplinarityinterpretive perspective • learning cultures • LEGO • multidisciplinary design • multidisciplinary teamsNorthumbria Universityopen-ended process • pedagogical cultures • phase zero • Philips Researchproblem-solving • problem-space • project deliverablesproject teamsradical innovationrequirements gatheringsolution-space • sub-disciplinary specialisation • systematic approach • T-shaped individuals • T-shaped people • T-shaped skillsthinking stylesUnileverworking methodsworking practices

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.