thirdnorth
step three
step three
Posts: 100
Joined: January 13th, 2009, 4:22 pm
carton wrote:No there are never any hard feelings, this is a place to relax and tell it like you think it is. However, people start to draw conclusions about who you are the moment you start talking, so maybe we all need to think about what we are saying. I would still call you or anyone out for saying things like what your post talked about. There were other points to disagree with besides the hype part. I am all about questioning the validity and value of ideas, in fact, maybe we want to be the only people who know how to fix the big problems, that would place us in demand.

So for instance, can you elaborate on everyone being able to think creatively, and not everyone being able to use design thinking?


Does anyone remember how much flack Starck took on here (in absentia anyway) for declaring design dead?

By the way the only connections I've drawn are to other ideas that became popular to dismiss during introduction. History is important, and teaching is a great way to learn and perfect your skills, maybe you should pose as a history teacher.
The hype part has already been documented as you can see here. So why not talk about hype? Myth - my own interpretation and maybe the wrong choice of words but there's no need to be so offended. But I agree with almost everything Kevin McCullagh posted here.

http://www.core77.com/blog/featured_ite ... _16277.asp

About the need for designers to flatly reject design thinking to protect their validity, I don't think designers have all the answers. Architects hire engineers to solve the problems architects can't. Designers elect politicians so they can solve problems designers can't. Designers work for companies so they can design instead of having to run the business. There are different career paths for a reason. If the owner of our company fired all the designers working for him and hired design thinkers, work would stop and the business would fail. Same if our designers had to fill the role of the owner. I know we're talking about using design processes to solve problems outside of the design realm, but how did humanity survive the past 100,000 years? They did it by using mankind's natural creative skills to solve problems they faced. Long before the invention of the design profession, humans invented solutions to making spears and arrows fly straighter, improved dwellings, solved relationship problems, created better experiences, built businesses. Look, maybe 'creative problem solving' and design thinking' interchangeable and i might just be annoyed by the use of the design thinking term. But it really says something when at a design thinking convention, they talk about everything else but design thinking.

Is everyone a design thinker/creative problem solver? In their own sphere, maybe. It just got defined, repackaged and re-sold. Poorly, IMO.
Design without purpose is impossible.
carton
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 786
Joined: January 26th, 2005, 2:19 pm
thirdnorth wrote:
carton wrote:No there are never any hard feelings, this is a place to relax and tell it like you think it is. However, people start to draw conclusions about who you are the moment you start talking, so maybe we all need to think about what we are saying. I would still call you or anyone out for saying things like what your post talked about. There were other points to disagree with besides the hype part. I am all about questioning the validity and value of ideas, in fact, maybe we want to be the only people who know how to fix the big problems, that would place us in demand.

So for instance, can you elaborate on everyone being able to think creatively, and not everyone being able to use design thinking?


Does anyone remember how much flack Starck took on here (in absentia anyway) for declaring design dead?

By the way the only connections I've drawn are to other ideas that became popular to dismiss during introduction. History is important, and teaching is a great way to learn and perfect your skills, maybe you should pose as a history teacher.
The hype part has already been documented as you can see here. So why not talk about hype? Myth - my own interpretation and maybe the wrong choice of words but there's no need to be so offended. But I agree with almost everything Kevin McCullagh posted here.

http://www.core77.com/blog/featured_ite ... _16277.asp

About the need for designers to flatly reject design thinking to protect their validity, I don't think designers have all the answers. Architects hire engineers to solve the problems architects can't. Designers elect politicians so they can solve problems designers can't. Designers work for companies so they can design instead of having to run the business. There are different career paths for a reason. If the owner of our company fired all the designers working for him and hired design thinkers, work would stop and the business would fail. Same if our designers had to fill the role of the owner. I know we're talking about using design processes to solve problems outside of the design realm, but how did humanity survive the past 100,000 years? They did it by using mankind's natural creative skills to solve problems they faced. Long before the invention of the design profession, humans invented solutions to making spears and arrows fly straighter, improved dwellings, solved relationship problems, created better experiences, built businesses. Look, maybe 'creative problem solving' and design thinking' interchangeable and i might just be annoyed by the use of the design thinking term. But it really says something when at a design thinking convention, they talk about everything else but design thinking.

Is everyone a design thinker/creative problem solver? In their own sphere, maybe. It just got defined, repackaged and re-sold. Poorly, IMO.
How did the human race survive for the last 100k years? lol, not well, since the life expectancy has only passed 30-35 in the last few hundred years. If you want to live in a cave and catch a plague be my guest, I have work to do.

The examples you use are vast generalizations, that cannot be substantiated and most of them aren't really even germane to the topic at hand. If you do something all day every day you had better be able to build the "better mousetrap" but that doesn't make you a designer. Creativity is knowing what to do next once the rules stop applying, and most people actually do not know how to proceed once established procedures fail.

We talked about engineers and problem solving, they use a different method, which we refered to earlier as analytical thinking, or even subtractive or deductive reasoning. The creative process is additive and then subtractive, and is different then analytical thinking.
Just some guy, trying to figure it out too.
thirdnorth
step three
step three
Posts: 100
Joined: January 13th, 2009, 4:22 pm
carton wrote:How did the human race survive for the last 100k years? lol, not well, since the life expectancy has only passed 30-35 in the last few hundred years. If you want to live in a cave and catch a plague be my guest, I have work to do.

The examples you use are vast generalizations, that cannot be substantiated and most of them aren't really even germane to the topic at hand. If you do something all day every day you had better be able to build the "better mousetrap" but that doesn't make you a designer. Creativity is knowing what to do next once the rules stop applying, and most people actually do not know how to proceed once established procedures fail.

We talked about engineers and problem solving, they use a different method, which we refered to earlier as analytical thinking, or even subtractive or deductive reasoning. The creative process is additive and then subtractive, and is different then analytical thinking.
Life expectancy has almost doubled in the last 150 years in western culture. So yeah, not very well. Relating individual survival to survival of the species as a whole doesn't make sense though, because they are on such different scales. Individuals die every day, but the human race flourishes. Our ability to manipulate our surroundings and create solution to problems ensured our survival.

The reason I brought this up was to illustrate how people have been using design processes for thousands of years. With a wave of the hand you discount this as not relevant to the discussion? Okay... why? Because I'm not in ideological lockstep with you? What about the views of all the other designer's referenced in the article I referenced? Are their opinions not relevant either? It's pretty telling when you have a forum on design thinking at a university that has a degree in Design Thinking, and no one talks about design thinking.

I understand what you're saying about different types of thinking. Your mousetrap analogy is very similar to the farmer analogy. Just because you grow crops doesn't mean you're a farmer. So you built a better mouse trap. That doesn't make you a designer. But the principles are the same, are they not? The mouse trap engineer used creative thinking processes or design thinking or whatever you want to call it to make a better mouse trap. And the mouse trap designer used some of those analytical thinking skills to design it in the first place. There has to be some crossover between thinking methods. You remember the movie Apollo 13? They had an emergency on board the spacecraft and the engineers back home had to create a solution for the problem. They were engineers who designed a device by additive and subtractive processes and then used analytical thinking to verify the results.

"If you want to live in a cave and catch a plague be my guest, I have work to do." What does this mean, anyway? How does this statement add value to this discussion?
Design without purpose is impossible.
MoShake
step three
step three
Posts: 116
Joined: February 27th, 2008, 10:41 pm
ip_wirelessly: Can you Define Design Thinking?




myself: ... no ...




.
User avatar
jon_winebrenner
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3151
Joined: October 26th, 2004, 10:56 am
Coroflot: 44466
Location: Vancouver, BC
MoShake wrote:ip_wirelessly: Can you Define Design Thinking?

myself: ... no ...
Not a chance. And, unfortunately after watching this thread, I am not too sure anyone else can either.

Well, correct that. I think a few can, but most can't.

Also unfortunately, is that after following this thread, it turns out that my gut/confusion was right. There may be a relatively small group of individuals that understand what DT is, but it is VERY confused in general. My current position is that either there is a flaw in what DT is, or there is a flaw in how the message is being delivered.
User avatar
Travisimo
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1868
Joined: September 4th, 2005, 2:28 pm
Location: UK
It's amazing to me how there is so much confusion about DT, even what exactly it is and if it is even worth a darn... especially since its the big buzz in design circles these days.

Part of me wonders if this is going to be the next "ethnography" (circa 2000) which was the buzz then, and has played out into being a very important design tool.

Something that makes me slightly skeptical (IMHO), is that the term is almost interchangeable with IDEO. They are amazing, don't get me wrong, but since almost all the design consultancies have their particular tools (Mode-Mapping by SKD, Psycho-Aesthtics by RKS, etc, etc..), is this just an advertising PR term for something that designers already do, or strive to do?
User avatar
Electroflux
step four
step four
Posts: 225
Joined: July 16th, 2008, 3:56 pm
DT is confusing because in a way, AT is about making a template. DT is making a template for making templates.
No one is going to use the same process, since DT, as far as I see it, is about adapting the process to the problem.
User avatar
NURB
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4762
Joined: November 10th, 2005, 1:31 pm
Location: MPLS
thirdnorth wrote: You remember the movie Apollo 13? They had an emergency on board the spacecraft and the engineers back home had to create a solution for the problem. They were engineers who designed a device by additive and subtractive processes and then used analytical thinking to verify the results.
"We gotta find a way to make this, fit into a hole designed for this, using nothing but this. Ok, I'll get a pot of coffee going."
My favorite part of that movie.
Chris Haar

twitter:@chrishaar

Those who define design as knowing how to use Illustrator will be condemned to using Illustrator their entire career. - @monteiro
User avatar
Greenman
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1217
Joined: April 26th, 2004, 10:31 pm
I think that you can find ways to explain it, show examples of it, and of tools used to implement it, but I don't think that you can absolutely define it because of the intuition and open-minded nature that it all requires. I think to try and package it all up to sell it or legitimize it with a solid definition would undermine it because Design Thinking is something that is always changing.
All dots connect, even the tiny blue one
User avatar
bennybtl
step four
step four
Posts: 581
Joined: October 31st, 2007, 8:27 am
well that's just like your opinion, man

design thinking, it's a state of mind
User avatar
Greenman
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1217
Joined: April 26th, 2004, 10:31 pm
Let's simplify the process, it works like this:

The money goes in, the design thinking comes out.

The first rule of design thinking is that you don't ask questions.
All dots connect, even the tiny blue one

Re: Can you Define Design Thinking?

April 30th, 2010, 11:09 am

User avatar
yo
Administration
Administration
Posts: 17355
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:57 pm
Coroflot: 67242
Location: SoCal
This thread kind of reminds me of something a mentor once said to me "Beethoven could appear and explain to you exactly how he wrote the 5th Symphony, it still wouldn't mean that you could write a masterpiece"

I think Design Thinking is a bit like that in some regards, when done right. You can either do it or you can't.

A few years back I took a course from Franklin Covey on "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People". It was an intensive 3 day class, and it was great for me. It really helped reshape some of my thinking. But I couldn't help but think that if I hadn't taken that class just one or two years earlier, it would have been worthless because I just wasn't there yet.

Since design thinking can said to be a process as well as a state of mind, andy prescriptive set of instructions is just half the story.
GURU
step four
step four
Posts: 319
Joined: February 12th, 2008, 4:02 pm
Location: OC, CA.
" Connecting your right brain and your left brain to produce a creative solution to a problem"

GURU
MoShake
step three
step three
Posts: 116
Joined: February 27th, 2008, 10:41 pm
ip_wirelessly wrote:
Well, correct that. I think a few can, but most can't.

ok, ok , ok don't mad with me!!!! it was jsut a personal opinion......

GURU wrote:" Connecting your right brain and your left brain to produce a creative solution to a problem"

Nowadays, the only thing i know about design thinking is that you have to think a lot about design if you're a designer , as a lawyer thinks a lot about law.... as a musician thinks about music...and an surgeon thinks about surgery...etc...

if design thinking exists...then "science thinking" also exist... "sport thinking"... "Anthropology thinking" ...etc ...and all of them have the potential to make a revolution to the world... "because" the nature of the science/discipline/methodology/activity etc,etc,etc,,,

Greenman wrote:design thinking, it's a state of mind

.. so.... ..... is an indication of a person's mental health? ... and if is a state of mind... what about feelings? design feelings?

so what is design feeling?


because when i see a "great design / good design" ... i feel great!!!
User avatar
ADD
step four
step four
Posts: 561
Joined: April 22nd, 2007, 6:54 am
I would like to share this link that I came across for "Design thinking"(by Roger Martin)

http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/video-m ... 009-martin

Interesting to see how design process of product ( mix of AT+IT)... could be applicable for the business model.
Reply