Jump to content

Design methods

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nigel Cross (talk | contribs) at 17:37, 22 December 2018 (→Influence on professional design practice: Corrected citation to A Pattern Language). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Design methods are procedures, techniques, aids, or tools for designing. They offer a number of different kinds of activities that a designer might use within an overall design process. Conventional procedures of design, such as drawing, can be regarded as design methods, but since the 1950s new procedures have been developed that are more usually grouped together under the name of "design methods". What design methods have in common is that they "are attempts to make public the hitherto private thinking of designers; to externalise the design process".[1]

Design methodology is the broader study of method in design: the study of the principles, practices and procedures of designing.[2]

Background

Design methods originated in new approaches to problem solving developed in the mid-20th Century, and also in response to industrialisation and mass-production, which changed the nature of designing.[3] A "Conference on Systematic and Intuitive Methods in Engineering, Industrial Design, Architecture and Communications", held in London in 1962[4] is regarded as a key event marking the beginning of what became known within design studies as the "design methods movement", influencing design education and practice. Leading figures in this movement in the UK were J. Christopher Jones at the University of Manchester and L. Bruce Archer at the Royal College of Art.

The movement developed through further conferences on new design methods in the UK and USA in the 1960s.[5][6][7] The first books on rational design methods,[8][9][10] and on creative methods[11][12] also appeared in this period.

New approaches to design were developing at the same time in Germany, notably at the Ulm School of Design (Hochschule für Gestaltung–HfG Ulm) (1953–1968) under the leadership of Tomás Maldonado. Design teaching at Ulm integrated design with science (including social sciences) and introduced new fields of study such as cybernetics, systems theory and semiotics into design education.[13] Bruce Archer also taught at Ulm, and another influential teacher was Horst Rittel.[14] In 1963 Rittel moved to the School of Architecture at the University of California, Berkeley, where he helped found the Design Methods Group, a society focused on developing and promoting new methods especially in architecture and planning.

At the end of the 1960s two influential, but quite different works were published: Herbert A. Simon's The Sciences of the Artificial and J. Christopher Jones's Design Methods.[15][16] Simon proposed the "science of design" as "a body of intellectually tough, analytic, partly formalizable, partly empirical, teachable doctrine about the design process", whereas Jones catalogued a variety of approaches to design, both rational and creative, within a context of a broad, futures creating, systems view of design.

The 1970s saw some reaction against the rationality of design methods, notably from two of its pioneers, Christopher Alexander and J. Christopher Jones.[17] Fundamental issues were also raised by Rittel, who characterised design and planning problems as wicked problems, un-amenable to the techniques of science and engineering, which deal with "tame" problems.[18] The criticisms turned some in the movement away from rationalised approaches to design problem solving and towards "argumentative", participatory processes in which designers worked in partnership with the problem stakeholders (clients, customers, users, the community). This led to participatory design, user centered design and the role of design thinking as a creative process in problem solving and innovation.

However, interest in systematic and rational design methods continued to develop strongly in engineering design during the 1980s; for example, through the Conference on Engineering Design series of The Design Society and the work of the Verein Deutscher Ingenieure association in Germany, and also in Japan, where the Japanese Society for the Science of Design had been established as early as 1954.[19] Books on systematic engineering design methods were published in Germany and the UK.[20][21][22][23] In the USA the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Design Engineering Division began a stream on design theory and methodology within its annual conferences. The interest in systematic, rational approaches to design has led to design science and design science (methodology) in engineering and computer science.

Methods and Processes

The development of design methods has been closely associated with prescriptions for a systematic process of designing. These process models usually comprise a number of phases or stages, beginning with a statement or recognition of a problem or a need for a new design and culminating in a finalised solution proposal. In his 'Systematic Method for Designers' L. Bruce Archer produced a very elaborate, 229 step model of a systematic design process for industrial design,[24] but also a summary model consisting of three phases: Analytical phase (programming and data collection, analysis), Creative phase (synthesis, development), and Executive phase (communication). The UK's Design Council models the creative design process in four phases: Discover (insight into the problem), Define (the area to focus upon), Develop (potential solutions), Deliver (solutions that work).[25] A systematic model for engineering design by Pahl and Beitz has phases of Clarification of the task, Conceptual design, Embodiment design, and Detail design.[26] A less prescriptive approach to designing a basic design process for oneself has been outlined by J. Christopher Jones.[27]

In the engineering design process systematic models tend to be linear, in sequential steps, but acknowledging the necessity of iteration. In architectural design, process models tend to be cyclical and spiral, with iteration as essential to progression towards a final design. In industrial and product design, process models tend to comprise a sequence of stages of divergent and convergent thinking. The Dubberly Design Office has compiled examples of more than 80 design process models,[28] but it is not an exhaustive list.

Within these process models there are numerous design methods that can be applied. In his book of 'Design Methods' J. C. Jones grouped twentysix methods according to their purposes within a design process: Methods of exploring design situations (e.g. Stating Objectives, Investigating User Behaviour, Interviewing Users), Methods of searching for ideas (e.g. Brainstorming, Synectics, Morphological Charts), Methods of exploring problem structure (e.g. Interaction Matrix, Functional Innovation, Information Sorting), Methods of evaluation (e.g. Checklists, Ranking and Weighting).[29]

Nigel Cross outlined eight stages in a process of engineering product design, each with an associated method: Identifying Opportunities - User Scenarios; Clarifying Objectives - Objectives Tree; Establishing Functions - Function Analysis; Setting Requirements - Performance Specification; Determining Characteristics - Quality Function Deployment; Generating Alternatives - Morphological Chart; Evaluating Alternatives - Weighted Objectives; Improving Details - Value Engineering.[30]

Many design methods still currently in use originated in the design methods movement of the 1960s and 70s, adapted to modern design practices. Recent developments have seen the introduction of more qualitative techniques, including ethnographic methods such as cultural probes and situated methods.[31]

Emergence of design research and design studies

The design methods movement had a profound influence on the development of academic interest in design and designing and the emergence of design research and design studies.[32] Arising directly from the 1962 Conference on Design Methods, the Design Research Society (DRS) was founded in the UK in 1966. The purpose of the Society is to promote "the study of and research into the process of designing in all its many fields" and is an interdisciplinary group with many professions represented.

In the USA, a similar Design Methods Group (DMG) was also established in 1966 by Horst Rittel and others at the University of California, Berkeley. The DMG held a conference at MIT in 1968[33] with a focus on environmental design and planning, and that led to the foundation of the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA), which held its first conference in 1969. A group interested in design methods and theory in architecture and engineering formed at MIT in the early 1980s, including Donald Schön, who was studying the working practices of architects, engineers and other professionals and developing his theory of reflective practice. In 1984 the National Science Foundation created a Design Theory and Methodology Program to promote methods and process research in engineering design.

Meanwhile in Europe, Vladimir Hubka established the Workshop Design-Konstruction (WDK),which led to a series of International Conferences on Engineering Design (ICED) beginning in 1981 and later became the Design Society.

Academic research journals in design also began publication. DRS initiated Design Studies[34] in 1979, Design Issues[35] appeared in 1984, and Research in Engineering Design[36] in 1989.

Influence on professional design practice

Several pioneers of design methods developed their work in association with industry. The Ulm school established a significant partnership with the German consumer products company Braun through their designer Dieter Rams. J. Christopher Jones began his approach to systematic design as an ergonomist at the electrical engineering company AEI. L. Bruce Archer developed his systematic approach in projects for medical equipment for the UK National Health Service.

In the USA, designer Henry Dreyfuss had a profound impact on the practice of industrial design by developing systematic processes and promoting the use of anthropometrics, ergonomics and human factors in design, including through his 1955 book 'Designing for People'.[37] Another successful designer, Jay Doblin, was also influential on the theory and practice of design as a systematic process.[38]

Much of current design practice has been influenced and guided by design methods. For example, the influential IDEO consultancy uses design methods extensively in its 'Design Kit' and 'Method Cards'.[39][40] Increasingly, the intersections of design methods with business and government through the application of design thinking have been championed by numerous consultancies within the design profession. Wide influence has also come through Christopher Alexander's pattern language method,[41] originally developed for architectural and urban design, which has been adopted in software design, interaction design, pedagogical design and other domains.

Current state of design methods

There is no one way to practice design methods. John Chris Jones recognized this by stating:

Methodology should not be a fixed track to a fixed destination, but a conversation about everything that could be made to happen. The language of the conversation must bridge the logical gap between past and future, but in doing so it should not limit the variety of possible futures that are discussed nor should it force the choice of a future that is unfree.[1]

The focus of most post-1962 enhancements to design methods has been on developing a series of relevant, sound, humanistic problem-solving procedures and techniques to reduce avoidable errors and oversights that can adversely affect design solutions. The key benefit is to find a method that suits a particular design situation.

The benefits of their original work has been abstracted many times over; but in today's design environment, several of their main ideas have been integrated into contemporary design methods:

  • Emphasis on the user
  • Use of basic research methods to validate convictions with fact
  • Use of brainstorming and other related means to break mental patterns and precedent
  • Increased collaborative nature of design with other disciplines

A large challenge for design as a discipline, its use of methods and an endeavor to create shared values, is its inherent synthetic nature as an area of study and action. This allows design to be extremely malleable in nature, borrowing ideas and concepts from a wide variety of professions to suit the ends of individual practitioners. It also makes design vulnerable since these very activities make design a discipline unextensible as a shared body of knowledge.[42]

In 1983, Donald Schon at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published The Reflective Practitioner.[43] He saw traditional professions with stable knowledge bases, such as law and medicine, becoming unstable due to outdated notions of "technical rationality" as the grounding of professional knowledge. Practitioners were able to describe how they "think on their feet", and how they make use of a standard set of frameworks and techniques. Schon foresaw the increasing instability of traditional knowledge and how to achieve it. This is in line with the original founders of design methods who wanted to break with an unimaginative and static technical society and unify exploration, collaboration and intuition.

Design methods has influenced design practice and design education. It has benefited the design community by helping to create introductions that would never have happened if traditional professions remained stable, which did not necessarily allow collaboration due to gate keeping of areas of knowledge and expertise. Design has been by nature an interloper activity, with individuals that have crossed disciplines to question and innovate.

The challenge is to transform individual experiences, frameworks and perspectives into a shared, understandable, and, most importantly, a transmittable area of knowledge. Victor Margolin [citation needed] states three reasons why this will prove difficult:

  • Domain knowledge is a mixture of vocation (discipline) and avocation (interest) creating hybrid definitions that degrade shared knowledge
  • Intellectual capital of design and wider scholarly pluralism has diluted focus and shared language which has led to ungovernable laissez-faire values
  • Individual explorations of design discourse focuses too much on individual narratives leading to personal point of view rather than a critical mass of shared values

In the end, design methods is a term that is widely used. Though conducive to interpretations, it is a shared belief in an exploratory and rigorous method to solve problems through design, an act which is part and parcel of what designers aim to accomplish in today's complex world.

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Jones, J. Christopher (1980). Design Methods. UK: Wiley.
  2. ^ Cross, Nigel (1984). Developments in Design Methodology. UK: Wiley. ISBN 0471102482.
  3. ^ Cross, N. (1993) "A History Of Design Methodology", in de Vries, J., N. Cross and D. P. Grant (eds.), Design Methodology and Relationships with Science, Kluwer Press, The Netherlands. 15–27.
  4. ^ Jones, J. C. and D. G. Thornley, (eds) (1963) Conference on Design Methods, Pergamon Press, UK.
  5. ^ Gregory, S. A. (ed.) The Design Method. Butterworth, UK.
  6. ^ Broadbent, G. and A. Ward (eds) (1969) Design Methods in Architecture, Lund Humphries, UK
  7. ^ Moore, G. T. (ed.) (1970) Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning, MIT Press, USA.
  8. ^ Asimow, M. (1962) Introduction to Design, Prentice-Hall, USA.
  9. ^ Alexander, C. (1964) Notes on the Synthesis of Form, Harvard University Press, USA.
  10. ^ Archer, L. B. (1965) Systematic Method for Designers, The Design Council, UK
  11. ^ Gordon, W. J. (1961) Synectics, Harper & Row, USA.
  12. ^ Osborn, A. F. (1963) Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking, Scribener's Sons, USA.
  13. ^ Krampen, M. and G. Hörman (2003) The Ulm School of Design, Ernst & Sohn, Germany. p.85
  14. ^ Rith, C and Dubberly, H, "Why Horst W J Rittel Matters", Design Issues, 23, 72–91
  15. ^ Simon, H. A. (1969) The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, USA.
  16. ^ Jones, J. C. (1970) Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures, Wiley, UK
  17. ^ Cross, N. (1984) Developments in Design Methodology, Wiley, UK.
  18. ^ Rittel, H. and M. Webber (1973) "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning", Policy Sciences 4, 155–169
  19. ^ https://iasdr.net/member-societies/
  20. ^ Hubka, V. (1982) Principles of Engineering Design, Butterworth Scientific Press, UK.
  21. ^ Pahl, G. and W. Beitz (1984) Engineering Design: a systematic approach, Springer/Design Council, UK.
  22. ^ Hubka, V., Andreasen, M. M. and Eder, W. E. (1988) Practical Studies in Systematic Design, Butterworth, UK
  23. ^ Cross, N. (1989) Engineering Design Methods, Wiley, UK.
  24. ^ http://www.dubberly.com/concept-maps/archers-design-process.html
  25. ^ https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/news-opinion/design-process-what-double-diamond
  26. ^ Pahl, G. and W. Beitz (1984) Engineering Design: a systematic approach, Springer/Design Council, UK.
  27. ^ Jones, J. Christopher. "design methods for everyone". publicwriting.net. Retrieved 21 December 2018.
  28. ^ Dubberly, H. (2004) How do you design: a compendium of models. Dubberly Design Office, San Francisco, USA. http://www.dubberly.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/ddo_designprocess.pdf
  29. ^ Jones, J. C. (1970) Design Methods: seeds of human futures. Wiley, UK.
  30. ^ Cross, N. (2008) Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. Wiley, UK.
  31. ^ Simonsen, J. et al. (2014) Situated Design Methods. MIT Press, USA.
  32. ^ Bayazit, N. (2004) "Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research." Design Issues 20, 1, 16-29.
  33. ^ Moore, G. T. (ed.) (1970) Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning. MIT Press, USA.
  34. ^ https://www.journals.elsevier.com/design-studies
  35. ^ https://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/desi
  36. ^ https://link.springer.com/journal/163
  37. ^ Dreyfuss, Henry. Designing for People. Allworth Press; 2003. ISBN 1-58115-312-0
  38. ^ https://www.doblin.com/dist/images/uploads/A-Short-Grandiose-Theory-of-Design-J.-Doblin.pdf
  39. ^ http://www.designkit.org//resources/1
  40. ^ https://www.ideo.com/post/method-cards
  41. ^ Alexander, Christopher; et al. (1977). A Pattern Language. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-501919-9. {{cite book}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |last1= (help)
  42. ^ John Chris Jones perspective about "Design Methods for Everyone"
  43. ^ Schon, Donald A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books, 1983. ISBN 0-465-06878-2.

Books

  • Alexander, Christopher. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. Oxford University Press, 1977. ISBN 0-19-501919-9
  • Cross, Nigel. Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. John Wiley & Sons, 2000. ISBN 0-471-87250-4
  • Jones, John Christopher. Designing Designing. London: Architecture Design and Technology Press, 1991.
  • Jones, John Christopher. Design Methods. Wiley, 1992. ISBN 0-471-28496-3.
  • Margolin, Victor. The Politics of the Artificial: Essays on Design and Design Studies. University of Chicago Press, 2002. ISBN 0-226-50504-9
  • Protzen, Jean-Pierre and David J Harris. The Universe of Design: Horst Rittel's Theories of Design and Planning. Routledge, 2010. ISBN 0415779898
  • Schön, Donald. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, 1983. ISBN 0-465-06878-2
Wikiquote has quotations related to Design.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Design_methods&oldid=874943665"