Intunelabs researchproposal by 1234

Visual Design Method Development

Navigating Complexity as a Visual Designer Through Adopting a Rigorous Method Research Proposal 21 October 2013

By Yessi Arifin

Acknowledgement

Contents

Yessi Arifin Design Research Lead

Overview

1a. Abstract

Maria Gabriele Academic Supervisor

Methodology

2a. Research Framework 2b. Interview Framework

Precedent Literature Review

Precedent Design Review

Crossdisciplinary Literature Review

Primary Research

6a. Novice Designers 6b. Experienced Designers

Analysis Summary

Conclusion

References

With gratitude to design research participants who participated in this research project. The images in this document are for illustration purposes only and do not necessarily represent the ideas, individuals, or contexts which they are used to illustrate. The photos of individuals that appear in this publication do not correspond to those beig discussed in the portion of the text or the respondent quotation in which their image appears.

1. Overview

1a. Abstract

1b. Introduction

The purpose of this project is to study design methodology for visual designers in tackling complex problems, to find out crossdisciplinary approaches, participatory methods, agile development, and other principles that can apply to the process of visual designers. The objective of this study is to help understand the nature of complex problems for visual designers and gain insight on approaches and rule of thumbs to approach them. It was discovered that there has been many design method tool kits developed, but they do not address everyday and routine challenges of designers. Therefore, a focus in this study moving forward would be to incorporate iterative, agile, and participatory approaches to a designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s daily routine, such as work planning and communicating. This introduction to approaches will be placed against the backdrop of an iterative design method outline in order to help understand the iterative process of design.

My interest in exploring the scientific methodology and its relationship to design stemmed from the challenge I encountered in using the design process I was familiar with to work on professional projects that are relatively more ill-defined, has a lot of complexity, and involve multiple stakeholders. I thought I could benefit in being able to navigate through and recognize this complexity through utilizing a more intentional and rigorous process.

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Why is it worth studying? Does the proposed study have practical significance? Whom or what will I study in order to collect data? Who is available for study? How will I reach them? Will it be appropriate to select the sample? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

2. Methodology

2a. Research Framework

5 Why’s I first started with asking five why questions to focus my topic and get to the root of the problem: Why do designers not have the skills to navigate through and finally implement complex projects to generate impact? Hypothesis: • They cannot focus on the impact in complex projects • They lack domain knowledge to carry a project out, such as a systems understanding of how books are published, distributed, and consumed, if they wanted to publish their book independently. Why can’t they focus on impact? Hypothesis: • They don’t know what they are trying to achieve • They are undisciplined Why don’t they know what they are trying to achieve? Hypothesis: • They lack awareness of values and personal investment in the project • They lack the discipline to synthesize and document their process

Why are they undisciplined? Hypothesis: • The design process is a heuristic – a honed intuition and not an overt discipline Why is the design process not a discipline? Hypothesis: Disciplines are often thought to limit creativity and the design process What is the significance? It is challenging to generate impact without discipline and intent to do so. I answered the series of inquiry through assumptions and personal experience. Over the research project I will be mindful of information that challenge or validate these assumptions.

Figure 2.1 Research Framework

Interest from personal experience

13 Idea

Hypothesis

What could be the cause of a visual designer to not being able to adapt to complex projects?

If the visual designer was to gain methods to manage complexity, she or he would be better equipped to tackling complicated projects.

Idea What could be the cause of a visual designer to not being able to adapt to complex projects?

Theoretical understanding Lack of methodology in adapting to complex projects causes visual designers to be lost in project development.

Design Research Hypothesis If the visual designer was to gain methods to manage complexity, she or he would be better equipped to tackling complicated projects. Conceptualization

A. “Complex Projects” B. “Design Methodology” C. “Visual Designer”

Choice of Research Method

One-on-one interviews

— Design students Design professionals

Conceptualization A. “Visual Design Complex Project Characteristics” What are characteristics of complex projects in visual design terms?

Operationalization

1. Where there is accountability and need to see project through • Where the designer is in charge of implementation • Where success is measured through real metrics, such as amount of sales or number of participants. Data Collection

2. Where there is a lack of direction • Where deliverable of the project is ill-defined • Where criteria for success and completion of the project is ill-defined

Require more understanding for application and revision of the problem Analysis Develop more understanding and clarity of the issue and revise the idea, problem statement, and hypothesis Design Proposal Develop more understanding and clarity of the issue and revise the idea, problem statement, and hypothesis

3. Where there is a lack of knowledge, experience, or information • Where there is a lack of set processes or knowledge of it • Where there is a lack of knowledge in the context of the project, such as history, culture of the community, and institutional barriers 4. Where there is a lack of constraints • Where there is a lack of constraints with time and budget • Where there are a lot of external and internal factors to consider

5. Where various stakeholders and partners with different agendas are involved in the process • Where there is accountability and need to see project through • Where the designer is in charge of implementation • Where success is measured through real metrics, such as amount of sales or number of participants. 6. Where there is a lack of direction • Where deliverable of the project is ill-defined • Where criteria for success and completion of the project is ill-defined • Where there is a lack of knowledge, experience, or information • Where there is a lack of set processes or knowledge of it

C. “Visual Designer Characteristics” Who are the visual designers that are ill-equipped to tackle complex problems? 4. “Characteristics of Visual Designers that are Ill-equipped to Tackle Complex Problems” • Lack of experience in executing real-life projects • Require expertise and activity beyond visual design • Lack of experience in implementation and considering diverse stakeholders • Lack of domain-knowledge in tackling social issues, including sustainability and development

7. Where there is a lack of constraints • Where there is a lack of constraints with time and budget • Where there are a lot of external and internal factors to consider • Where various stakeholders and partners with different agendas are involved in the process

5. “Variables of Visual Designers that Usually Possess Characteristics” • Young Student • Newly graduated

B. “Lack of Rigour in Design Methodology” How do the methods designers utilize lack in being able to tackle complex projects?

6. “Characteristics of Visual Designers that Usually End Up Tackling Complex Problems” • Doing social-impact projects • Doing high-level work • Doing work in start-ups • Doing work in communities • Doing work in emerging industries

1. “Methods Visual Designers Utilize in Implemented and Real Projects” • Self-reflection on past projects • Interview with other postsecondary and upcoming designers 2. “Shortcomings in Current Design Methodology” • Lack of regiment and discipline • Lack of documentation 3. “Identifying Need and Issue” • Sharing process is challenging without documentation and a regimented timeline • Incremental adjustments in working style and improvement, ie. Agile development, becomes easier with documentation of relative successes and failures and inentional processes.

2b. Interview Framework Testable Hypothesis

A. “Visual Design Complex Project Characteristics”

“Other Methods in Tackling Complex Problems” can be relevant and effective for visual designers to apply.

0. General

“Other Methods in Tackling Complex Problems” • Social science research for regiment and discipline • Intentional synthesis after every data collection session “Measure of Relevance and Effectiveness of Methodology” • Peer reviewing • Testing

• • • • • • •

What was the most challenging project you’ve worked on? What aspect of it was challenging? Why was it challenging for you to _____ ? How did you tackle the project and what was your process like? Did you successfully complete the project? Are you still in the midst of the project or have you completed it? If you could do the project again, would you approach it differently, how so?

—

1. Accountability

Research goal

Does more responsibility over the project’s life cycle translate into a more complex and challenging project?

By considering what factors designers have to factor in “Visual Design Complex Project Characteristics” and how “Methods Designers Utilize” lack in addressing these problems, I hope to be able to identify “Other Methods in Tackling Complex Problems” that are relevant for visual designers to apply.

• • • • • • •

What were your responsibilities in the project? Were you in charge of carrying out the project? While you were working, how did you decide when the project was “done”? What was the objective and goal of the project? How did you measure the success of the project? Did you think your project is successful so far by that measure? Why or why not? Were you responsible to see the project through from beginning to the end, such as distribution and implementation as well?

2. Lack of direction

5. Various stakeholders

Does lack of external direction make a project challenging?

Does having various stakeholders make a project challenging? Why and how?

•

• •

• • • • •

Did your partners or clients have a firm idea about what the project will be about? Did your partners or clients have a firm mission statement or idea of value that their company or organization is offering? How did the project kick off? Did you direct your project development process? What kind of a “brief” were you given at the start of the project? Was there anyone to provide you with direction for the project?

• • • • •

What industry would you classify the project you are working on? What kind of people did you work with? What were their professions and skills? Who did you work with in the project? How were they involved? What were their roles in the project? How many clients did you actually have? Whose voice do you have to listen to and take into account? What were their values? Did they conflict? Were they explicitly said and made? How did you involve them throughout the process?

3. Lack of knowledge Does a lack of knowledge make a project challenging? • • • •

Did you need to learn new skills outside of school to execute on that project? What were these skills or knowledge? How did you begin to learn it? How did you know you needed to have these skills?

—

B. “Lack of Rigour in Design Methodology”

1. Lack of Intention and Discipline • •

4. Lack of constraints • Does a lack of constraints with media, time, and budget make the project challenging? • • •

Did you have a set timeline to the project? Did you have a set budget for the project? What were the constraints you worked with and how did that affect your process?

What guided the project development? Was some kind of a framework, schedule, and agenda set up in the beginning of the project? How were meetings and check-in’s brought up?

2. Lack of Documentation • •

Were meeting minutes or records taken? Why did you think it was important to do this? Or why not? How did documentation help you in the process?

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; What have others said about this topic? What theories address it and what do they say? What research has been done previously? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

3. Precedent Literature Review

3a. Precedent Designers like Chris Alexander, John Chris Jones, and more recently Richard Buchanan have lead the discussions not only on the history of the discipline of design thinking, but how the profession has evolved.

evaluating. Buchanan describes this matrix as the history of design thinking, formed through encounters with new problems. A new problem can, for example, be the complex and ever-changing environment within which human participants are involved in design. Participants include not only the designer, but also the design client and the design user.

Richard Buchanan First-order: Communication The first-order of design thinking is communication and is marked by the primary activity of inventing.

A. “Visual Design Complex Project Characteristics” Image and content from: 3a. http://www.dmi.org/dmi/html/conference/academic08/papers/van%20 Zyl/Ria%20van%20Zyl.pdf 3a. http://www.ida.liu.se/~steho/und/viskult/468816.pdf Richard Buchanan is a well-known design theorist and head of doctoral studies at Carnegie Mellon in the United States. He describes design in four broad areas, which he dubs as “orders”. These are communication (signs and words), construction (things), strategic planning (action) and systemic integration (thought). Buchanan then intersects these orders with designer abilities, which are inventing, judging, deciding and

Second-order: Construction Construction is the second order of design thinking and is marked with the primary activity of judging The first and second orders are modes of thinking common to designers starting from the industrialisation period, between mind 18th to 20th century. This period was characterised by the development of large and stable market leaders. They focused on gaining advantage of local competition and market share. Business plans were developed by executive management periods of 10 years and longer. There are businesses that started at this time that are now currently features as one of the top 100 brands, such as Coca-Cola. Within these orders, designers generally worked in a modernist paradigm, with a focus on aesthetics and functionality. The designer was thought of as a stylist. The designer was involved in specific ad hoc projects. These had few direct links to strategic operations in an organisation. Third-order: Strategic Planning In the third-order, where the primary activity is deciding, client-designer interaction occurs at the senior management level. Teams are also formed to deal with tasks that are too complex to handle on an individual basis. The designer’s role includes the provision of insight and knowledge, rather than only technical skill and isolated project management. In the third and fourth orders, the output of a designers work has shifted from two dimensional communication and three dimensional artifacts to behavior, organizational change, policy, and systems. The material, here - the thing that is shaped - is behavior, action and thought.

Frequently, the tool that is used to shape this material is language, rhetoric, and argument. Strategic planning requires a community vision, but the approach does not provide that vision.

A5. Various stakeholders These are the different stakeholders and actors throughout the design process that add to the complexity of the project:

Fourth-order: Systemic Integration Fourth-order thinkers would continue to rework ideas, moving into various related and unrelated solutions. Unique to fourth-order design problems is their recursive and inclusive nature, for systems design output typically includes printed material, objects, environments, software, policy, rules, ideas, and actions. And so an interaction designer’s material is frequently a wide array of physical, digital, and cultural substance that can be shaped over a long period of time to affect change. Given new expression and development in the context of integration in the fourth-order, knowledge and participation of many different people in backgrounds are required for effective product development. 3a ii. Image and content from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/ pdf/10.1162/desi.2008.24.1.2 In the diagram, the “fourth-order” design is the design of organizations, environments,and systems that serve the diverse purposes of human beings. Human interaction is defined as collective interaction in complex environments. This “fourth-order” marks the new and expanded forms of design practice. It is not an abandonment of the traditional concerns of form-giving and making that have defined design in the past, rather the concept of form has grown more supple and complex, embracing the social and environmental context of design. This approach is characterized by a focus in the prediction of sideeffects early on in the design process, reaching agreement in standard to enhance or allow compatibility, and being Sensitivity to human overlap. This approach is also driven by the fact that increasingly high investments do not allows for design errors anymore, it is difficult to apply information from outside sources, it is challenging to make rational decision sequences when so many new things emerge.

Sponsors The sponsors often give only a limited brief to the designers. The designers may in turn come up with a wider revised brief which they find needed to achieve a gross rather than a marginal improvement. The sponsors may not be able to like or accept this new vision for their own future. Design Team Often new team members will be added to a design team in order to account for shifting boundaries within the project. This gives rise to a number of problems: team members don’t know enough about each other; they may be tied to much to current systems or practice; existing components will operate under changed conditions, and hence should be retested. Suppliers Suppliers may underestimate their abilities to meet demands for a radically new design. However, they do not have a vested interest in the current product, so they may provide a valuable stimulus. Producers The producers (i.e. production engineers) have problems estimating the cost of proposed design changes before detailed manufacturing specifications have been worked out. Commen reactions are “impossibly expensive” and “no problem at all”. Distributors Briefly put the influence of distributors on proposals for radical improvements depends upon the degree to which customers have begun to ask for it. Purchasers Not always the same as the users! Purchasers often base their decision on their ability to predict how they can use the product. B3. “Identifying Need and Issue”

Different Functions of Research • The scholarship of discovery conventional research, commitment to knowledge for own sake, inquity. • The scholarship of integration cross disciplinary connections. • The scholarship of application involves a service to communities and social contexts where theory and practice are in dynamic interaction from where new intellectual understandings may arise from every act of the application. • The scholarship of teaching is making academic work understood by others. Teaching extends knowledge in a new way. • Scholarly research creates and sustains intellectual infrastructures, maps field for issues and problems, documents and complies knowledge and resources. • Pure research investigates fundamental questions and develops original theories. • Developmental research identifies limitations of existing knowledge, test existing knowledge to evolve special solutions. • Applied research is a systematic investigation within a context to solve identified problem • The process of formalizing design knowledge, writing it down, privileges a written record of design experience, is a problem for practice-based or practice-lead research. C. “Visual Designer Characteristics”

John Chris Jones 3a i. http://degraaff.org/attic/design-methods.html A. “Visual Design Complex Project Characteristics” Jones claims that design should not concern itself solely with the components and products levels, but also with the systems and community levels. While this larger scope allows for much more attention to the consequences of design, it also greatly reduces stability, and enhances complexity. This instability is much more representative and is a permanent condition. Designing then is not an activity to increase the stability of the man-made world, but to alter the process by which the world is developing. New kinds of design problems are being tackled by experts coming from many professions and who lack design experience. There are also experienced designers who are tackling a problem that has ramifications outside of their area of competence, which make a project seemingly complex and challenging. B. “Lack of Rigour in Design Methodology” Jones identifies a number of reasons for the failure of traditional design methods to cope with modern complex design issues. He suggested these four critical questions to unearth strengths and weaknesses of traditional methods:

3c i. http://www.ida.liu.se/~steho/und/viskult/468816.pdf Designers may have limited insight into the client organisation’s needs. Designers often struggle todescribe and explain what they do, and often prefer to let the design ‘speak’ for itself.

• • • •

How do traditional designers cope with complexity? In what ways are modern design problems more complicated than traditional ones? What are the interpersonal obstacles to solving modern design problems? Why are the new kinds of complexity outside the scope of the traditional design process?

Thinking about new systems, products and components, is too complex for rational search and too unfamiliar to be penetrated and simplified by the judgements of those whose education and experience has been limited to the existing design and planning professions. Jones suggested that we needed multi-profesional designers and planners whose intuitive leaps are informed by knowledge and experience of change at all levels from community action to component design. Jones proposed that designers

needed new methods that provide sufficient perceptual span at each of these levels.

B1. “Methods Visual Designers Utilize in Implemented and Real Projects”

Most design methods are concerned with “externalized thinking” and thus is based on rationalization than assumptions. However, externalized reality is also subjective to the designer, especially when not implemented fully. While the design process is externalized, practicing designer often are unable to give convincing reasons for decisions they take. B3. “Identifying Need and Issue”

Jones proposes a definition of design as a transformation from something complicated to something simple. To him, such a transformation depends on two things: • •

Knowledge of the sensitivity of the problem situation to major changes in design Freedom from constraints upon unconventional thought and action.

3b i. http://books.google.ca/books/about/Design_Methods. html?id=IR7KZXa1Nl8C&redir_esc=y Jones also noted some limitations and challenges that surface in the application of current design methods: •

B2. “Shortcomings in Current Design Methodology” • In traditional design methods, the complexities of designing are approached by first using a tentative solution as a rapid means of exploring both the situation that the design is to fit and the relationships between components of the design. • Compatability between the problem and design is mainly achieved through experience and imagination, since using certain tools like the mood board or scale drawing cannot help to predict how the product will fit into its environment or how people will receive the visual piece. The kind and degree of experience and imagination that informs design is not conclusive or defined so far, but three common items always seem to surface:

•

Medium for expression: A medium to communicate the essence of the design is lacking, drawings only illustrate sub-problems and cannot capture the whole problem. Drawing inhibits innovations. Technology for rapid judgement: No systems are available to allow rapid judgement of the feasibility of critical details. This makes it hard to transform a complicated problem into a simple one. The information needed to assess this feasability is scattered beyond recognition. Stakeholder engagement: Many of the people who have information upon which the new design depends will make biased judgements because of their vested interests. Group dynamics: Group members can share and repattern original conflicting input into a pattern emerges. Externalizing design thinking seems to depend oon finding corporate language into which forms of problems nd solutions can be mapped and presented. Thoughts of a designer can be matched to design problem.

Following image and content from (John Chris Jones 1992) •

•

Often the designers does not seem to make any or only trivial progress. This signifies that the designer is still in the midst of taking in information. It is also known as incubation. Solutions to difficult problems often come suddenly and take the form of dramatic change. Often this transforms a complicated problem into a simple one. The enemies of originality are mental rigidity, which means keeping with familiar grounds and wishful thinking, ignoring external realities.

John Chris Jones differentiated design approaches between “black box” and “glass box.” Black box approach • In the black box design approach, the output of the designer is governed by inputs received recently and from his or her previous problems and experiences. • Outputs are speeded up, but are random.

• •

Social inhibitions also do not factor into the results from a black box approach. His 0r her capacity to produce outputs relevant to the problem is dependent on himself to asimilate and manipulate the images that represent the structure of the problem. He may suddenly perceive a new way of structuring problems. This is called “leap of insight,” where complicated problems are transformed into a simple one. The solution depends on his or her intelligent control of the forms in which problems are presented and structured. The way the problem is structured can also increase chances of obtaining outputs relevant to design problem.

Glass box approach • Has fixed objectives, variables, and criterias in advanced. • Analysis is completed before solutions are sought. • Evaluation is linguistic and logical, not experimental. • Strategies are fixed and sequential, parallel, conditional. • Design problems be split up, decomposed, and solved in a series or parallel. If a problem can be split, more intelligence can be applied to the sub problem. The stage in which splitting up can be done varies from one product to another. The complexity and rapidity in which simple, yet complex design problems happen doesn’t suit it for splitting since they go back and forth. • Is a “flow system” that have have one-to-one relationship, and the assembly of input and output can be specified. • Criteria and problem structure needs to be fixed to carry out a glass box calculation. There needs to be circularity to deal with instabilities.

Discussion on the strategy control method Designers can try to foresee external consequences of his intentions and alter his strategy. One approach is the strategy control method, which is relating each part to ultimate objective, even though objectives are in the state of flux. The detailed evaluation is to be achieved that the outcome of each subaction is shown to be compatible or incompatible. To guide this process, the cost of not knowing must exceed the cost of finding out. Difficulty of controlling strategy in novel design situations and when many people are engaged upon a single design project.

Discussion on design strategies Jones described design disciplines are enablers of natural abilities of human beings. Natural ability is not enough. The history of design is the history of the character and discipline of design thinking as they are formed through encounters of new problems. This process leads to new understanding of purposes and ends. Critique serves as a less individual example of self-monitoring in design. Design serves a strategic and tactical purposes in inquiry. They do not settle matters once and for all. They allow an investigator or a group of individuals to clarify the direction of their work and move ahead. General guidelines to framing design problems • Has a fixed frame of reference is chosen that is meant to reflect realities of situation. Turning complicated problem into simple one by choosing what to emphasize and what to overlook • Objectives, briefs, and problems are fixed, critical variables are identified and constraits are recognized • Problem is split up into sub problems and sections of the problem are defined • Subgoals are subject to change to avoid major compromises in speed and delivery First steps to crafting a design strategy 1. Identification and review of critical decisions: Every decision which carries a high penalty must be identified as early as possible. These decisions should be taken tentatively at first and reversible if they conflict with reliable evidence or informed opinion. These include initial assumptions, objectives, choice of models, choice of strategy, and procedure for changing strategy. 2. Relating the cost of research and design to the penalties for taking wrong decisions: Identify the questions in which the action will provide answers. 3. Matching design activities to the person who are expected to carry them out: Capable, confidence, carried out. Tackling novel problem challenging. 4. Identifying usable source of information

Discussion Design team construct its own strategies, using combination of new or old methods that may seem appropriate. It seems that having a general theory or set of principles to which one can reffer to in selecting and combining design methods is not appropriate, since mixing judgment and calculation of design methods depends on the skill and experience for those doing the mixing. One can instead pose questions, decide where to go for answers, and estimate how rough or precise the answers need to be, should be given to the most experienced people. Destructure or destroy the orignal brief, identify features of design situation as well as valuable and feasible degree of change. Search for new experience to counteract false assumptions that members or sponsors held.

designing through interchangeable and standardized components. Circularity appears at the higher level in the problem with rules for joining standardized components together. This black-box magic of extremely orderly and systematic outputs has glass box basis. Invention of components and rules, designing standardized components is a black-box mistery.

(John Chris Jones 1992, 49) Identification of variables Identifying variables, such as identification of objectives and criteria in which good design is to be judged is challenging since this will not be apparent until critical design decisions have been taken. Lack of experience A need for a development of design methods rise because the risk of expensive design errors are high. Often, in complex issues, the necessary experience does not exist. Thus, experience has to be generated artificially through texting and research. We seem to be most in need of new design methods that combine both the glass and black box approaches. Linear vs. Circular process An objective in design methodology is to make designing a more linear and less circular process. Linearity implies that critical problems have been identified with little to no risk. Circularity implies that sub-problems lie undiscovered until late in the process and may need revisions or cancellation. Thus, there is little or no risk to writing off large quantities of design efforts at later stages. The obstacle in designing linearly is unpredictability of relationships at the start. The interdependencies between problems vary depending on other inputs. Thus, the problem structure and framework is unstable until critical design decisions have been taken. Thus, linear sequences cannot be applied. The first approach to linearity is to convert problem to a flow system

Splitting up processes Since design is a constant negotiation between final product, stakeholders, performance, cost, it becomes hard to split up in a regular and flow sequence. Functions are not allocated to distinct parts but are spread in complicated or unpredictable way in integrated assembly.. Often the solution to this is to give the lead designer complete responsibility to oversee all the important decisions. Research can instead focus on building adaptive strategies that has a greater generality. This can be a predictor of the designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s room for manouvre if critical sub problems are to be solved. 3b ii. http://www.ac4d.com/2012/05/18/without-design-methods-i-feellike-i-am-cheating/#sthash.oMT5x4gi.dpuf Action and reflection An experience of action is critical in design for building a foundation of skill, for self-reflection, and most importantly, for critique. You have to design something, and then reflect on the process of design, in order to learn how to design. A method forces this to occur. Each method is a series of artificial constraints that are introduced into a particular design context in order to help frame it, examples include personas, flow diagrams, and ecosystem diagrams. These are ways of structuring problems and solutions, but they do not in itself draw out speak of the particulars. That is the benefit of the method, and the drawback. However, each method draws out particular insights by illustrating relationships different elements have with one another.

Jon Kolko B1. “Methods Visual Designers Utilize in Implemented and Real Projects” Craftsmanship not toolkit of methods According to Kolko from the Austin Center for Design, one of the most fundamental failings of “design thinking” education is the lack of craftsmanship. Learning a honed, tacit, and careful “innate” sensibility for making is beneficial to designing. , and simultaneously, they don’t appear to have developed an intimate understanding of the medium they are responsible for shaping. Instead, they are equipped with a toolkit of methods. 3b. http://jonkolko.com/writingCraftsmanship.php By focusing on a simple, contained, and tedious task, designers can form tacit skills necessary for visual decision making - for a thoughtful process of design, related to the creation of form-based objects. Specifically, these projects offered these major benefits to designers: 1.

Craft-oriented design projects help develop “muscle memory” related to visual acuity and fine motor skills. By performing a task over and over, one can focus attention and increase speed, precision, and the “automatic” quality of an action. A sense of fluidity and ease is developed during the process. The public quality of these projects – the studio culture in which they are completed, and the critique in which they are judged – establishes a baseline of comparative quality, and usually serves to raise the collective expectations of “goodness.” designers look at their own work in the context of other examples. The slow and methodical approach to these craft projects introduces designers to the qualities of flow - the desired state of extremely focused creativity - and encourages each designer to structure a physical and social environment to encourage this state of being.

37 How will this “craft” translate for designers who work exclusively on problems of services, software, or organizational change and political influence? Medium 1. The medium of graphic design are symbols, and it is aimed at communication in words and systems. The purpose is to get people to think by making a persuasive argument. 2. Industrial design works with objects as a medium. It produces tangible artifacts, usually mass produced, to provide a physical experience. 3. Interaction design works with the medium of action and is concerned with how human beings select and use products in daily life. While the profile of interaction design has been lifted by the rise of digital products, the concepts of interaction go back further than this and apply to all types of products. Interaction design is about people and how they interrelate with the product or service. It allows for a customized experience. 4. Systems designers look at thought. The systems that designers are concerned with at this level involve humans, not about material things. There is a recognition that people cannot experience a whole system, but rather experience their personal pathway through the system.”

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; What have others built in the past that addresses this need and is on this topic? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

4. Precedent Design Review

4a. Precedent Design There are a lot of toolkits of design methods built and available to the public. They often do not cultivate understanding of process and problem, but merely equip users with a toolkit of methods with no promotion of understanding why, when, and how one applies these methods. Below is a discussion of popular toolkits available. They are measured against needs that I and people I interviewed have identified. Design Method Toolkits 1. SILK Method Deck and Methodology (right) http://socialinnovation.typepad.com/silk/silk-method-deck.html Description: SILK is an innovation hub that promotes building capacity for social innovation. Analysis: SILK provides a bigger picture and flexible toolkit, but does not: 1. Provide a series of principles to always keep in mind 2. Make explicit what approach and paradigm it is operating in and thus what the toolkit is useful for 3. Consider how principles can be manifested in everyday tasks that designers have to handle, such as project management or email correspondance 4. Consider the ability and skills of the designer 5. Provide a guideline on how project can unfold with the SILK method 2. IDEO Method Cards (right) http://www.ideo.com/work/method-cards/ Description: IDEO Method Cards is a collection of 51 cards representing diverse ways that design teams can understand the people they are designing for. They are used to make a number of different methods accessible to all members of a design team, to explain how and when the methods are best used. Analysis: IDEO again does not: 1. Factor in the ability and skills of the designer 2. Consider how principles can be manifested in everyday tasks that designers have to handle, such as project management or email correspondance 3. Provide a guideline on how project can unfold with the IDEO method

User-Centered Design Method Toolkits 3. Design for Usability Methodology (right) http://www.designforusability.org Description: DUI provides insights into how product development practitioners set up user-centred product development projects and how this could be improved. Analysis: DUI communicates the circular nature of product and design development, but does not: 1. Detailed descriptions of method to be applicable. 2. Consider how principles can be manifested in everyday tasks that designers have to handle, such as project management or email correspondance 3. Consider the ability and skills of the designer 4. Provide a guideline on how project can unfold with the SILK method

Human-Centered Design Method Toolkits 4. HCD Toolkit by IDEO (right) https://hcd-connect-production.s3.amazonaws.com/toolkit/en/download/ ideo_hcd_toolkit_ final_cc_superlr.pdf Description: The Human-Centered Design Toolkit was designed specifically for people, nonprofits, and social enterprises that work with low-income communities throughout the world. Overall this is the most robust toolkit and framework that I have come across. Analysis: The HCD Toolkit provides an overall view and robust descriptions and rationale of the methods. It also provides case studies, however, it does not: 1. Consider how principles can be manifested in everyday tasks that designers have to handle, such as project management or email correspondance 2. Consider the ability and skills of the designer 3. Communicate that design can be a circular or spiralling process, and rarely unfolds in a linear way.

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; What have others said about this topic? What theories address it and what do they say? What research has been done previously? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

5. Cross disciplinary Literature Review

5a. Crossdisciplinary 3. Develop methods to be employed in later studies

I am studying methods that other disciplines such as international development and social science research employs in approaching complexity, because I want to find out about principles and methodologies that I can appropriate as designers to tackle practical complex challenges in order to help my reader understand what complex problems mean in the context of working as a visual designer in and learn more rigorous methods to tackle complex challenges.

Social Science & Developmental Research Process 1. Research Design The research design is the structure, program, or strategy whereby hypotheses are evaluated. Each design defines the grounds on which hypotheses can be evaluated, such as how terms are framed and defined. The research design process is meant to overthrow solutions than defend it. Research shapes the development of theory, initiates, formulates, deflects, and clarifies. It does not play the passive role of only verifying or testing theory. The research process is a systematic execution of these operations. The research design offers a rough guiding framework in which specific techniques, methods, and principles can be applied. (Nachmias and Nachmias, 2007) 1A. Overview: The scientific process distinguishes stages such as problem definition, hypothesis, research design, measurement, data collection, data analysis, and empirical generalization (Babbie and Benaquisto, 2011) Stage A: Exploratory Research In the beginning of the project, research is usually exploratory. These studies are useful to: 1. Satisfy the researcherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s curiosity and desire for better understanding 2. Test the feasibility of a more extensive study

However, without an adequate representativeness, a researcher cannot claim that they have solved the problem, but rather have only pointed the way towards an answer. Image from (Babbie and Benaquisto, 2011)

2A. Principle relevant here: Confirm or deny hypothesis, then re-hypothesize All these can be subjected through empirical analysis of actual conditions. The testing of theories follow a transparent and universally accepted procedures. Other researchers also must accept these as valid.

(Mohan, 2001)

Image from (Babbie and Benaquisto, 2011) 1B. Problem definition Problem definition is important, since problems that are too abstract or general cannot be investigated. They need to be concretized. First the researcher expresses an interest, idea, or theory. Alternatively, inquiry may begin with an idea. It is also useful to have minimum standards and a level of clarity of purpose and values. For example, what can be achieved through different methods? It is also helpful to spend time in defining values and purpose through self-analysis and self-awareness. The process of iteration and learning is embedded in the approach from the beginning, by a speculative problem statement that can be changed as one gains a better understanding of the problem. 2A. Principle relevant here: Problem gains clarity over time Often, the development objective is only known after the development process, rather than in the introduction of the initial situation. 1C. Hypotheses Concretization also happens in hypotheses. They are tentative answers to researchable question. A general problem is broken apart to a set of concrete hypotheses. Then, these hypotheses are evaluated through research design to be rejected or accepted. Hypotheses are meant to be subjected through rejection or acceptance, as they are only tentative answers.

1D. Conceptualization Conceptualization means coming to an agreement on what terms mean by specifying what we mean. However, concepts are always on continual refinement. Conceptualization is a continuing process. It is vital that we address it in the beginning of any study design. We cannot begin to observe with no preconceptions and anticipated meanings, but scientists must be conscious and explicit about these. What we are going to observe, how we will do it, what interpretations will we place on possible observations? One should make as much variations as possible in every case, but if it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t relevant to research, not to waste their time. In conceptualization, one must be able to classify every observation to only one attribute for analysis later, meaning an observation cannot be in more than one category. On the other hand, methods are specifics on how an approach is operationalized. Issues can arise when the method is not compatible with approach. Individuals employing methods should also be self-aware and skilled for the method to be effective. Participatory and inclusionary approaches are especially rife with difficulty. Power relations with the participants need to be examined and researchers need to be aware of that. Researchers need skills in enabling or facilitating participation of others. Quality of research can be affected by awareness of different issues. Some of these decisions are based on constraints of time and resources, political context, level of skill, or track record of effectiveness. A transparency and discussion on why certain methods are chosen may be warranted for a more informed and complete research report. Approaches that address power dynamics are more likely to contribute to change. Theories surrounding power relations need to be related to real life. Approaches need to work through informal political forces, such as intra-household relations and power dynamics. In this development researchers practice conflict management and mediation.

1D i. Operationalization Operationalization is the process of specifying all variables involved in the project in a way where it can be observed and analyzed. These are operational definition, which is concrete and specific. This reflects the criteria in which observations can be categorized. After defining variables, the process to measuring the variables and different operations must be specified. Using a different set of procedures to measure one’s variables will change the meaning og the hypothesis being tested. 2A. Principle relevant here: Identification and specification of concepts is inseparable to process of observation. When methods are separated from approach to what is intended and how it is carried out, critical analysis and reflection have most likely been diluted or removed. People that participated will also not want to cooperate next time. Stage B: Descriptive Research Many qualitative studies aim at description. Then patterns are observed and researchers find out what they imply. 1E. Data collection Data collection is the stage where scientists make observations and record them. In social science, field observations and survey research fall within this category. Any data-collection method can be used to evaluate a hypothesis. Population and sampling - whom or what to study. 1E i. Observation Actual observation is the stage in which hypothesis can be disconfirmed. Hypothesis must have this element for it to be hypothesis The role of research is to test theories and logic empirically to see if it actually occurs in practice. Certain modes of observations can discover causal relationships. Here are some examples of modes: • Separating independent and dependent variables (cause and effect), eventhough defining these variables may require research. On the other hand, you can make a wide variety of observations during data collection and then determine variables during later analyses. • Pretesting and posttesting. Subjects are measured on dependent variable, then stimulus representing independent variable, posttesting measures dependent variable. In this way, measurements on dependent variable can then be attributed to the independent

•

variable. Having experimental and control groups to compare when stimulus in present and when it is not. Independent variable is isolated and then results are compared between experimental and control group.

1E ii. Sampling Sampling is a technique of selecting a group that is representative of some population. One method is probability sampling, which is a large-scale survey that is meant for its generalizability. Probability samples need to be more than 100. This is a rule of thumb of represetativeness. Randomization is another technique that is effective with a larger number of subjects. The actual data then can be representative in larger populations. Stage C: Explanatory research 1F. Measurement Measurement can be defined as when observations are systematically assigned symbols that can be manipulated mathematically or statistically. This process reveals information that otherwise cannot be revealed. They are added, subtracted, percentaged, introduced in sentences, or used in graphs or diagrams. In operationalization, measurement techniques are defined. The meaning of variables are related to how they are measured. The findings can be aggregated into descriptive statistics, where it summarizes a set of observations into a generalization. Data is reduced from unmanageable details to manageable summaries. A summary can be the direction and magnitude of change in the variables. It is important to state the rate of sampling error in the calculation. 1G. Empirical generalization An empirical generalization is when a universal connection and general law is connected to the phenomena. Observations can be transformed into empirical generalizations through induction. One principle that guides this process is enumeration, where a hypothesis is considered as wellestablished when it has not been refuted by experience of confirmed by not fewer than a predefined number of positive instances. After making observations, a social scientist must interpret what they have observed by processing and classifying data. First of all, one must specify what they would like to identify and the best way to do it.

1H. Theorizing can be described as a conceptual interpretation process, where the causal nature is identified from an empirical generalization. The research process can test or construct theory. Empirical generalizations may generate theories, and theories may generate researchable problems to be tested as hypothesis. A theoretical understanding is a process of reasoning that finds connection between variables. Result of these analyses feed back to initial problem definition – the beginning of the cycle of inquiry.

2. Principles

Constructing one’s theory may include the following processes: 1. Specify the topic 2. Specify range of phenomena the theory will address 3. Identify and specify your major concepts and variables 4. Find out what is known about the relationship between those variables 5. Reason from those propositions to the specific topic

Image from (Babbie and Benaquisto, 2011)

1I. Application Application is communicating one’s findings, suggesting further research on subject, and pointing out mistakes to be corrected in future studies. 1J. Evaluation Evaluation can be conducted through the following frameworks: • • • • •

• • •

Reliability: Applied repeatedly and yields the same result Test-retest method: Make same measurement more than once Split-half method: Make more than one measurements of the same concept Using established methods: Use measures that have proven reliability in previous research Validity: Evaluation can be conducted through measuring validity, if current measure adequately reflects the concept’s meaning. Validity is usually decided in social science through agreements between stakeholders in the objective of the study and meaning of terms. Face validity: Common agreements Criterion-related validity: External criterion predicting future evaluation based on the current test Construct validity: Logical relationship between effect and result

2A. Constant refinement Problem, hypotheses, and research design go through constant refinement and evaluation when more information is gathered. Objectives may shift and evolves as program moves forward (Mohan, 2001). Real development comes from doing, exploring what happened, then deliberately learning from experience. Investment in staff is needed. There needs to be a regular relationship maintained with someone who can provide informed critique, ideas, and encouragement. They should be able to support the building of staff capacity from a position of knowledge. Mistakes should be used as an opportunity to learn what worked and what didn’t and why. There is no best practice in a universal way after all, thus why constant refinement and reflexivity is needed (Dowling, 2005). 2A i. Critical reflexivity Research methods may limit the information one can obtain, which calls for reflexivity of the method of inquiry one employs. One’s social role and nature may also affect the information one is gathering. Here are some questions one can ask before a project to critically reflect on the context they operate in: • What are some power dynamics of general social situation? What sort of power dynamics do I expect of myself and the informants? • In what ways am I an insider/outsider in respect to this research topic and what problems may my position cause? Will any of them be insurmountable? • What ethical issues might impinge upon my research? (Privacy, harm, coercion, deception)?

Here are some questions one can ask during a project: • Am I reproducing racist or sexist stereotypes? Why and how? • What social and conceptual assumptions underlie my research? Here are some questions one can ask after a project: • Did my perspective and opinions change during research? • Were my interactions with participants informed/constrainted by gender or other social relations? • How was I perceived by my informants? 2A ii. Self-awareness One can ask themselves, “What topic is studied, which population is studied, what research methods are used for what purpose?” One’s interests, abilities, and available resources must be taken into considerations. Values and individual preferences are required to be made explicit and stated in social science research. For example, it should be stated the ways in which conclusions and interpretations depend on value premises rather than empirical analysis. For example, approaches can be a combination of empowering, participatory, gender-equitable, inclusionary, disempowering, topdown, male-biased, formulaic, or exclusionary. Approaches have values, beliefs, and attitudes that set its tone. Approaches and methodology are not neutral. These approaches are frameworks whereby methods and techniques can be used. Problems in research arise when individuals are insufficiently skilled or insufficiently self-aware. 2B. State Assumptions Development research in itself includes certain value premises, preconceived opinions, and assumptions. Development concept is concerned with “what ought,” as designers create “what ought” to be in the world. Development theory is hypotheses to base research and processes on promoting and obstructing conditions. Development strategy is described as a means to promote change towards the objective. Investigation looks at how social reality is actually structured than looking at how it ought to or assumed to be structured. Development research in itself includes certain value premises, preconceived opinions, and assumptions. The basis is highly valueloaded. Researchers often have too little insight to determine strategic decisions into promoting a development objective. Thus often prejudices, ideologies, and personal preferences replace empirical analyses and theoretical insights. Some examples of values include how development

researchers want to free up human resourcefulness, intelligence, and creativity to bring human rights and social justice to reality. Scientific theory cannot settle debates about values. These criterias have to be agreed-upon. Paradigms (approaches) are fundamental models or frames of reference we use to organize observation and reasoning. It offers a way of looking. In being aware that one is operating within a paradigm, we can begin to recognize the paradigm that others are operating within. Theories are related statements that flesh out paradigms. Theories explain what we observe. 2C. Develop contextual knowledge In participatory methods, the approach cannot be separated from researcher. A researcher will impact how methodology is applied in terms of power relations, the level of awareness they have, and what skills they have in facilitating or enabling. Approaches that pay explicit attention to power relations ad acknowledge and address the power dynamics in which they operate, are more likely to contribute to change. Approaches need to work, with, and around informal political forces – intra-household relation and power dynamics within communities. Much development work falters when people entrusted with implementing change do not have ownership of the task that they are in charge of. Individuals did not have commitment, skills, knowledge, or wish o make change happen. Interpreting policy into realistic plans – these individuals need to be included in the undertaking just like “beneficiaries”, by considering them as stakeholders. They need to be thought as stakeholders. A strategy should be devised to address those needs. One should think about: • Who are the people to be involved in every step? • How can their needs be addressed? • What are their needs? Developers are confronted with having to acquire changing skills like facilitation, strategic thinking, organisational development, or counselling. They must confront and be open to change about their own attitudes and behaviours. They must actively engage excluded and other minority groups into the centre of the development processes. Methods could be chosen to facilitate active participation. However, this participatory method is vulnerable to misappropriation without self-awareness and skill and also when applied without local

knowledge, since power dynamics will not be visible, local people become vulnerable to eisting power relations. Processes continue to produce existing power relations. If one aims for effective participation, one must invest in learning and experience required to make them effective. There is also a need for accountability and researchers must do work on the ground. Power and control have to be considered in all relationships. Issues on power have to be addressed, inclusionary and transformatory. This approach is also called rigorous pragmatism 3c. Image and content from http://www.unodc.org/documents/humantrafficking/Toolkit-files/08-58296_tool_10-3.pdf 2D. Logical framework Logical framework may be a relevant tool, since it systematically encourages one to be aware of one’s assumptions being made through the planning process. Awareness and understanding of assumptions are needed to address them. In the part of existing systems and institutions, perhaps it is important to not only accept revisions but to regard them as a process of learning and experience.

3. Information Gathering Techniques 3A. Idiographic vs. Nomothetic 3A i. Idiographic This approach is used in development research, where one describes local conditions without a theoretical framework, systematic comparative perspectives, nor trying to generalise. These kinds of studies did not result in the formation of method and theory construction. 3A ii. Nomothetic Causal statements include words such as “on the whole,” “usual,” or “all else being equal” signifies nomothetic research. Nomothetic explanation is a partial explanation. Principles: • Variables must be correlated • The cause takes place before the effect • The variables are nonspurious, meaning they cannot be caused by an intermediary variable. 3B i. Literature review Useful for studying previous research methods and replicating an existing study. 3B ii. Survey Useful for studying public opinion 3B iii. Field research Useful for studying how people interact with one another

– What are designers’ needs to tackling complex problems? What are practicing and experienced designers doing to tackle complex challenges? –

6. Primary Research

6a. Novice Designers I interviewed two design students and up-and-coming designers to find out if they feel challenged by complex problems and if I am addressing a real need. More interviews will be conducted in the next stage to prove the need quantitatively in number of designers Insights 1. Lack of experience One designer noted that her lack of knowledge in photography made the problem challenging to tackle. Another pointed out that their lack of experience made the next steps to take in the design process vague. 2. Need for iterative approach In complex problems, it is a waste of resources to invest time in building design solutions without constant testing. Thus, there seems to be a need to share the design process often with stakeholders so that the project is built in a more iterative way and thus will require less resources. 3. Need for participatory approach Stakeholder engagement seems to be a need in involving clients and partners, as they hold a stake in the project. Thus, a participatory approach is called for. 4. Lack of practical knowledge One designer noted that they did not know how to structure their email messages, when to send emails, and how to specify and write contracts. These practical knowledge are key to building a participatory and iterative approach, as communication is key in involving stakeholders.

6b. Experienced Designers I interviewed four experienced designers so far to find how they tackle complex challenges. Insights 1. Rigour Designers make sure to analyze, be self-reflective, plan, and exhaust options in every stage. 1. Planned The designers make sure to create a plan or framework before starting a project with understanding that it will change as the project progresses. 1. Iterative As illustrated in the last circular diagram, designers go through the process of data collection, analysis, synthesis, and hypothesis for a clearer understanding of the problem.

Scope

Strategy

Activity

Factors

Objectives

Read

Location

Roles

Ask questions

Budget

Stakeholders

Think

Time

Recruit

Train

Framework

5Wâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Themes

Target

Identify actors

Read

People

Objective

Ask questions

Tools

Deploy

Segment & strategy

Fieldwork

Document

ReďŹ ne Framework Data informs revision of framework

Synthesize

Success/Fail

Communicate

Have an answer?

Data informs design Design

Strategy

Organization

Service

Prototype

Evaluation

Pilot

Final deliverable

Advisory/Proposal

Implementation

Evaluation

Understanding of problem

Data collection

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data collection from scope Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Data Collection Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Collection

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Synthesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data collection from deploy/investigation

Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Synthesis Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data collection from deploy/investigation Analysis

Synthesis

Data collection from prototyping Analysis Synthesis

Data collection from all Analysis

Hypothesis Synthesis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Analysis Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Data collection from all

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Data Collection

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Data Collection

Analysis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Analysis

Synthesis

Hypothesis

Synthesis

Synthesis Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Data Collection Synthesis

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Synthesis

Analysis

Analysis Data Collection

Data Collection

Hypothesis

Data Collection

Analysis

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Are there consistent findings or do past studies disagree? Are there flaws in the body of existing research that I feel I can remedy? â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

7. Analysis Summary

7a. Design Application Analysis By studying precedent studies on design methods, looking up design tools that have been built, learning approaches that other disciplines have to complex issues, and interviewing the needs of design students and professionals, I have been able to identify designer’s needs in design methods that have not been addressed yet. There has been enough design toolkits made that fail to address pragmatic challenges that designers have in tackling complex issues.

1. Self-aware

4. Participatory

Design methodology and approaches usually do not take into account the designer’s interests, abilities, and available resources. Values and individual preferences are required to be made explicit for a more critical, effective, and reflexive process in tackling complex challenges.

There seems to be a need to involve clients, users, and partners in the process and manage the complexity that comes with multi-stakeholder project. Thus, a participatory approach will be further studied and applied to the context of the process of visual designers.

2. Explicit Principles

5. Routinized

Designers create “what ought” to be in the world. Design is a means to promote change towards the objective. There should first be an explanation of a method to investigating how social reality is actually structured than looking at how it ought to or assumed to be structured.

If these principles are routinized by individual designeres, they can be systematically encouraged to be aware of their assumptions throughout the planning process. Furthermore, design development comes from doing, exploring what happened, then deliberately learning from experience. Thus by incorporating principles into one’s daily routine, once can be iterative and reflexive throughout their daily tasks.

3. Iterative Problem, hypotheses, and research design should go through constant refinement and evaluation when more information is gathered for agile and efficient development.

– Where may future research and work head to? –

8. Conclusion

8a. Looking Ahead Informed by the research conducted so far, I have identifed a need for more research in certain areas to concretize the design concept of this project.

Investigate Design Routine From interviewing novice and expert designers, there seems to be an opportunity to incorporating approaches and principles and have it manifest in the designer’s routine. This conclusion is drawn from the lack of principles and pragmatic solutions that most existing toolkits out there offer. Thus, this “routine” as in ritual and approaches will need to be defined moving forward.

Explore Need by Interviewing Different Kinds of Designers More interviews need to be conducted with different kinds of designers, to identify whether a more rigorous methodology and principle is a need amongst designers and what characteristics identify the designer that exhibit the need.

Explore How Reflexive, Participatory, and Iterative Principles Can Apply to Routine From interviews with designers, a need is identified in issues in communicating and sharing processeswith stakeholders of the project, which point to a need for an iterative and participatory approach to design. There is need to address practical realities of designers, such as emailing, drafting contracts, including people in discussions, and creating a timeline. Many toolkits do not address everyday routine and realities of designers as it is often not linear but circular. There is also a need to consider the designer’s ability and consraints as that factors into how a process unfolds.

9. References

9a. References

Babbie, Earl and Lucia Benaquisto, Fundamentals of Social Research (Toronto: Nelson, 2002). Bailey, Carol A, A Guide to Field Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 1996). Buchanan, R. 1998. Branzi’s dilemma: design in contemporary culture. Design Issues 14(1):3-20.

Duffy, Katherine, “Evaluating Social Action Programmes”, in Hantrais, Linda and Steen Mangen (eds.), Cross-National Research Methods in the Social Sciences (London: Pinter, 1996). Graff, Hans De. 9 June 2000. “The need for new methods.” Design Methods. http://degraaff.org/attic/design-methods.html.

Buchanan, R. 2001. Design research and the new learning. Design Issues 17(4):3-23.

Humphrey, John, “Forty Years of Development Research: transformations and reformations”, IDS Bulletin 38(2), March 2007, pp. 14-19 (available online via Scott). Rubin, Frances. A Basic Guide to Evaluation for Development Workers (London, Oxfam, 1995).

Buchanan, R. 2008. Introduction: design and organisational change. Design Issues 24(1):2-9.

Jones, John Christopher. 1992. Design Methods. (David Fulton Publishers, London: 1992).

Kolko, Jon. 2011. “Craftsmanship”. In interactions magazine, November/ December, 2011.

Martinussen, John. Society, State and Market: a Guide to Competing Theories of Development (London: Zed Books, 1997).

Kolko, Jon. 18 May 2012. “Without Design Methods, I Feel Like I Am Cheating.” Austin Center for Design. http://www.ac4d.com/2012/05/18/ without-design-methods-i-feel-like-i-am-cheating/#sthash.oMT5x4gi. dpuf.

Nachmias and Nachmias. 2013. Research methods in the social sciences.

Dowling, Robyn. 2005. “Power, Subjectivity, and Ethics in Qualitative Research”, in Hay, Iain ed. Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography. (Oxford University Press).

Rahman, Muhammad Anisur. People’s Self-Development: perspectives on participatory action research (London: Zed books, 1994).

– A design method won’t lead you to a good solution, because a design method has no natural relationship to the content of the problem. – Jon Kolko