INTRODUCTION

“DESIGN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CREATING INTENTIONALLY DISRUPTIVE CREATIVE INTERVENTIONS THAT ARE FUNCTIONALLY IMBUED WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF CHALLENGING THE STATUS QUO AND MAKING POSITIVE CHANGE.” — L. ACAROGLU, 2016

Disruptive design, as a catalyst for sociopolitical change, is not a foreign concept. When we consider the realm of social design — for inclusivity, accessibility, and even human rights protection — we see how being calculative in process can lead to powerful, impactful outcomes. In similar fashion, social change can be achieved with disruptive design. History witnessed successful examples of disruptive change as early as the 20th century during the women’s suffrage movement, to the Extinction Rebellion (XR) in 2019 and more recently, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) demonstrations in 2020. Despite having faced unfavourable odds, their sociopolitical goals were still largely achieved due to a united intention: to selectively intervene the system, perhaps even radically so, and therefore enact change to last. Evolved throughout decades of activist movement — this intention to think, behave and design disruptive tactics for change — is precisely what my dissertation will explore.

Defining ‘disruption’ or even ‘disruptive design’ can be a challenge. Plainly speaking, ‘disruption’ is defined as “a disturbance or problem which interrupt an event, activity, or process” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020). Yet, the visualisation of disruption (Fig 1) displays an array of abstract images, conveying a juxtaposed sense of both urgency and inspiration (Google Images, 2021). The reception of disruption is also somewhat conflicting, subject to one’s feelings towards change. No design is absolutely inclusive, and disruptive design is no different. However, ‘disruption’ hailed positively in the discourse of innovation and technology — but for whom, and in what sense exactly?

Fig 1. Screenshot of Google Image result page of ‘disruption’

The meaning of disruption can be explored differently through respective technological, sociological and cultural contexts. Technologically, ‘disruption’ has manifested into somewhat of a zeitgeist of the industry from the 21st century. As we embrace rapid acceleration of innovation, disruptive tech has also presented a considerable overturn of shiny new products like Apple — likening disruption to a business philosophy of ‘survival of the fittest’ (Hollestelle, 2019). Sociologically, definition is defined as “the alteration, dysfunction or breakdown of social life, often in a community setting” (Ulrich, 2016, p.46). An example of social disruption may be a crowd-sourcing platform for neighbourhood projects (Ioby, 2020). Culturally, being ‘disruptive’ can allude to mindsets and behaviours towards societal change, for instance. Mindsets also pertain beyond race and culture; in an organisation for example, an agile start-up might embrace disruption, whereas larger, less lean corporations tend to see disruption as a complication.

This dissertation looks at disruption engaged to navigate sociopolitical change. Overtime, this idea has evolved into the design of forms such as mindsets, theory and methodology. Having said that, disruption can still be perceived as a niche way of thinking (likened to ‘design thinking’), despite gaining a foothold in academic theory and social frameworks. However niche, disruptive change is now being used as a problem-solving approach towards ‘wicked’ problems — namely Hong Kong’s political crisis, my dissertation topic. The effectiveness and reception of disruptive methods still remains controversial: to some, disruption is viewed as extremist, and even ostracised by the public. XR is an example of this: their tactical disruption of public commute garnered immediate attention from those questionable, but also led to many angry commuters, wavering public support. On the other hand, disruptive tactics for sociopolitical change remains popular and likened amongst the youth generation. A survey found that XR rallied the most support from those aged 18 to 24 years old (YouGov, 2019). Since disruptive change is often associated with new technologies, and essentially, means rendering the old ‘obsolete’, it rationalises an appeal to younger generations, namely the youth activists of Hong Kong.

As a youth born and raised in Hong Kong myself, this dissertation is uniquely connected to me through identity, culture and politics. Having never taken part in the political movement myself, I intend for my research to understand and analyse the idea disruptive design and how it can be a tool for sociopolitical change, in the most objective way possible. In light of my direct connection to the dissertation topic, and for the sake of political sensitivity, I respond to my research question from a purely design-oriented point of view.

Chapter One will dissect the topic of disruptive design, through its manifestation in three forms: as disruptive mindsets (Brett, 2018), systems thinking (Meadows, 1997) and structured method (Acaroglu, 2017). Chapter Two then establishes the links between the aforementioned forms of disruptive design and youth activism culture in Hong Kong. This draws upon my own research methods in surveys and insider ethnography, paired with secondary findings through digital safari and literature. Chapter Three, as a subject analysis, evaluates the reception and effectiveness of disruptive design for sociopolitical change, from cultural and ethical standpoints.