communication in design innovation

imo the highest priority in innovation goes to communication and being able to build the communicative tools at all levels of the process. not just for ideas that are new, intangible, or hidden but also those which require greater specialisation in acquisition.

Speaking of communication - can you clarify?

Are you talking about innovation in creating tools used for by everyone for communication? Like, nominally, cell phones?

Or are you referring to the need to fill the innovation process (or others) with effective communication tools such as, I don’t know, reporting, models, representations, etc.?

now that you mention it both plus one other type that my initial comment was focused on.

the tools i’m talking about mainly rely on language. of course by language i mean the essence of a design process from concept’s communicative idea to process/es’ communicative definitions which could be real or non-existant. hence it’s more like creating a problem than addressing one simply for innovative input. to give a clearer example i demonstrate here one concept starting with its formula, then naming it for abriviation:

when we look at a designed object, specially one that’s newly availabe and on the market, we tend to think that the object has incorporated all innovative features that’s possible and it’s finished until next generation of technology/material becomes available.or when a new product comes out based on a new technology (most likely patented) the issue is similar.

but there’s another side to the equation sometimes parallel, sometime non-parallel and often transparent, although not reciprocal or resultive, but always algorithmic which i call _f_eather **w**eight **o**verloaded _c_ommunicative.

to give an example:

we know what an object is and how that object would function in real world but we seek another reality where the new object resembles the old object in algorithmic structure but differs in function. here we need a valid fwoc as a tool to give the new object its legitimacy as a concept and therefore we put it through a new communicative mainly the new algorithm. then we decide on other elements of that communicative formula. we can also add to the formula other k-factors or constants just as they exist in other sciences like physics, or economics. the values we enter in our formula depend on our further research and examination and whatever else we can verify as measurable or identifiable. so obviously it makes sense that it requires a scientific approach rather than an experimental type usually assigned or attributed to creative designers.

ie a USB memory that functions like a lipstick. so the communicative tool is created through design concept at the same time that it already existed in another realm. some people confuse this example with mere creativity or awareness but this actually has a scientific methodology. or as the catchphrase goes: there’s method to this madness!

the fwoc is just one communicative tool in this category. there’re other tools that either exist or can be developed depending on the concepts or projects.