Page 1 of 1 pages
Creative (imaginative) thinking could have eliminated the morass Iraq has become. It could have given the U.S. a workable energy policy at some point between the 1970s oil lines and today’s $100/bbl price.
As a former graphic artist and packaging designer (with a bit of product design here and there)
Posted by whattheheck on Jan 13, 2008 at 9:28 AM
The author reminds us of some important questions to keep in mind, but seems to have missed what design thinking is really about.
To me, this assumption is where she goes wrong: “They accept the given problem, the specs and the budget, and get the job done.”
Isn’t NOT accepting the given problem what “design thinking” is all about? Anyone who has ever worked as a designer or with a designer will know that very few accept the given problem.
As they say, tell a designer to make a door handle, and the designer will identify the door as the real problem and soon they want to design a new house…
Challenging the conceptualisation of the problem is something we do in every project. When taken to a higher level this way of challenging the given problem is what I see as “design thinking”.
Posted by Ludo on Jan 13, 2008 at 3:52 PM
The points in this article are appreciated, I would like to respond with an opinion of my own.
I am a graduate student in the Graduate Design Program at Stanford, and also a student recovering from a day of testing monsoon rain catching structures built for the d.school class called Extreme Affordability. Before coming to graduate school, I worked in wheelchair design in the southern Philippines as well as in production engineering in a fruit factory in Ghana.
I have decided to spend the next 2 years of my life studying design and design thinking because I believe that it will best enable me to make positive change in the world.
My reason for this belief is founded in the history of design, product design in particular, which is the birthplace of design thinking. Product design, a process based method of invention, historically focuses on the physical manifestations of solutions to human problems and dates back to humans turning branches into spears and before.
Over the years the methods behind this type of problem solving have developed. As business have pushed for decreases in product life cycles, the demand on product designers to continually innovate has intensified. IDEO with its success in continually meeting this need has shown that in order to increase ones ability to solve problems one benefits from following a design process, or in other words practicing design thinking.
From my point of view, it was this insight that spurred the d.school and its humanitarian desire to share this knowledge and the underlying skills with disciplines outside of the design field.
While the media may be portraying design thinking as the pathway to a better future in its current state, I believe that the fact that design thinking is continuously reviewing its own process for areas of refinement the most potential.
It is in that light that I invite and would greatly appreciate ideas on potential improvements to the d.school/GPD/ideo method. For, as a designer I know that what I bring to the table is my design process, the basis of design thinking, even though and indeed because of the fact that it is and always will be a prototype.
Posted by Joe Mellin on Jan 14, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Lido,
YES! The “problem” presented is often a result or symptom of the condition to be addressed. A free-thinking approach allows examination from all points of view. By first reducing to the essence and then expanding to ultimate application designers could make life better for all. It is the defining of specifics too early which stifles creativity and is the death of so many ideas.
The best part of the school this article describes is their proposal that “design thinking” be applied to intangible issues. If only our political leaders, elected bodies and policy makers would expand their thinking rather than settling for what they perceive the limitations to be (re-electibility for one) we would see genuine progress.
Joe,
You are entering a challenging and increasingly necessary field. Increasing population and decreasing commodities are currently seen only as cause for conflict. The “what if” factor must be pressed into service.
Whether you work inside a company with an appreciation for your speciality, do as I did (as a free-lancer), service, a wide range of manufacturers and service providers, or apply critical, creative thinking in some other way
Posted by whattheheck on Jan 15, 2008 at 7:45 AM
If you are looking for
Posted by bjelkeman on Jan 18, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Whatttheheck,
I just wanted to thank you for your wishes. I think that even responding to this article has helped me better understand the points which it raises, and value the questioning, or what if factor.
Thanks again,
Joe
Posted by Joe Mellin on Jan 18, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Creative (imaginative) thinking could have eliminated the morass Iraq has become. It could have given the U.S. a workable energy policy at some point between the 1970s oil lines and today’s $100/bbl price.
As a former graphic artist and packaging designer (with a bit of product design here and there)
The author reminds us of some important questions to keep in mind, but seems to have missed what design thinking is really about.
To me, this assumption is where she goes wrong: “They accept the given problem, the specs and the budget, and get the job done.”
Isn’t NOT accepting the given problem what “design thinking” is all about? Anyone who has ever worked as a designer or with a designer will know that very few accept the given problem.
As they say, tell a designer to make a door handle, and the designer will identify the door as the real problem and soon they want to design a new house…
Challenging the conceptualisation of the problem is something we do in every project. When taken to a higher level this way of challenging the given problem is what I see as “design thinking”.
The points in this article are appreciated, I would like to respond with an opinion of my own.
I am a graduate student in the Graduate Design Program at Stanford, and also a student recovering from a day of testing monsoon rain catching structures built for the d.school class called Extreme Affordability. Before coming to graduate school, I worked in wheelchair design in the southern Philippines as well as in production engineering in a fruit factory in Ghana.
I have decided to spend the next 2 years of my life studying design and design thinking because I believe that it will best enable me to make positive change in the world.
My reason for this belief is founded in the history of design, product design in particular, which is the birthplace of design thinking. Product design, a process based method of invention, historically focuses on the physical manifestations of solutions to human problems and dates back to humans turning branches into spears and before.
Over the years the methods behind this type of problem solving have developed. As business have pushed for decreases in product life cycles, the demand on product designers to continually innovate has intensified. IDEO with its success in continually meeting this need has shown that in order to increase ones ability to solve problems one benefits from following a design process, or in other words practicing design thinking.
From my point of view, it was this insight that spurred the d.school and its humanitarian desire to share this knowledge and the underlying skills with disciplines outside of the design field.
While the media may be portraying design thinking as the pathway to a better future in its current state, I believe that the fact that design thinking is continuously reviewing its own process for areas of refinement the most potential.
It is in that light that I invite and would greatly appreciate ideas on potential improvements to the d.school/GPD/ideo method. For, as a designer I know that what I bring to the table is my design process, the basis of design thinking, even though and indeed because of the fact that it is and always will be a prototype.
Lido,
YES! The “problem” presented is often a result or symptom of the condition to be addressed. A free-thinking approach allows examination from all points of view. By first reducing to the essence and then expanding to ultimate application designers could make life better for all. It is the defining of specifics too early which stifles creativity and is the death of so many ideas.
The best part of the school this article describes is their proposal that “design thinking” be applied to intangible issues. If only our political leaders, elected bodies and policy makers would expand their thinking rather than settling for what they perceive the limitations to be (re-electibility for one) we would see genuine progress.
Joe,
You are entering a challenging and increasingly necessary field. Increasing population and decreasing commodities are currently seen only as cause for conflict. The “what if” factor must be pressed into service.
Whether you work inside a company with an appreciation for your speciality, do as I did (as a free-lancer), service, a wide range of manufacturers and service providers, or apply critical, creative thinking in some other way
If you are looking for
Whatttheheck,
I just wanted to thank you for your wishes. I think that even responding to this article has helped me better understand the points which it raises, and value the questioning, or what if factor.
Thanks again,
Joe
register a new account »Posting Security