ideo   3042

« earlier    

Design Thinking is Kind of Like Syphilis — It’s Contagious and Rots Your Brains
"Miller never bothers to define all the modes, and we will consider them more below. But for now, we should just note that the entire model is based on design consulting: You try to understand the client’s problem, what he or she wants or needs. You sharpen that problem so it’s easier to solve. You think of ways to solve it. You try those solutions out to see if they work. And then once you’ve settled on something, you ask your client for feedback. By the end, you’ve created a “solution,” which is also apparently an “innovation.”

Miller also never bothers to define the liberal arts. The closest he comes is to say they are ways of “thinking that all students should be exposed to because it enhances their understanding of everything else.” Nor does he make clear what he means by the idea that Design Thinking is or could be the new liberal arts. Is it but one new art to be added to the traditional liberal arts, such as grammar, logic, rhetoric, math, music, and science? Or does Miller think, like Hennessy and Kelly, that all of education should be rebuilt around the DTs? Who knows.

Miller is most impressed with Design Thinking’s Empathize Mode. He writes lyrically, “Human-centered design redescribes the classical aim of education as the care and tending of the soul; its focus on empathy follows directly from Rousseau’s stress on compassion as a social virtue.” Beautiful. Interesting.

But what are we really talking about here? The’s An Introduction to Design Thinking PROCESS GUIDE says, “The Empathize Mode is the work you do to understand people, within the context of your design challenge.” We can use language like “empathy” to dress things up, but this is Business 101. Listen to your client; find out what he or she wants or needs.

Miller calls the Empathize Mode “ethnography,” which is deeply uncharitable — and probably offensive — to cultural anthropologists who spend their entire lives learning how to observe other people. Few, if any, anthropologists would sign onto the idea that some amateurs at a “boot camp,” strolling around Stanford and gawking at strangers, constitutes ethnography. The Empathize Mode of Design Thinking is roughly as ethnographic as a marketing focus group or a crew of sleazoid consultants trying to feel out and up their clients’ desires.

What Miller, Kelly, and Hennessy are asking us to imagine is that design consulting is or could be a model for retooling all of education, that it has some method for “producing reliably innovative results in any field.” They believe that we should use Design Thinking to reform education by treating students as customers, or clients, and making sure our customers are getting what they want. And they assert that Design Thinking should be a central part of what students learn, so that graduates come to approach social reality through the model of design consulting. In other words, we should view all of society as if we are in the design consulting business."

In recent episode of the Design Observer podcast, Jen added further thoughts on Design Thinking. “The marketing of design thinking is completely bullshit. It’s even getting worse and worse now that [Stanford has] three-day boot camps that offer certified programs — as if anyone who enrolled in these programs can become a designer and think like a designer and work like a designer.” She also resists the idea that any single methodology “can deal with any kind of situation — not to mention the very complex society that we’re in today.”

In informal survey I conducted with individuals who either teach at or were trained at the top art, architecture, and design schools in the USA, most respondents said that they and their colleagues do not use the term Design Thinking. Most of the people pushing the DTs in higher education are at second- and third-tier universities and, ironically, aren’t innovating but rather emulating Stanford. In afew cases, respondents said they did know a colleague or two who was saying “Design Thinking” frequently, but in every case, the individuals were using the DTs either to increase their turf within the university or to extract resources from college administrators who are often willing to throw money at anything that smacks of “innovation.”

Moreover, individuals working in art, architecture, and design schools tend to be quite critical of existing DT programs. Reportedly, some schools are creating Design Thinking tracks for unpromising students who couldn’t hack it in traditional architecture or design programs — DT as “design lite.” The individuals I talked to also had strong reservations about the products coming out of Design Thinking classes. A traditional project in DT classes involves undergraduate students leading “multidisciplinary” or “transdisciplinary” teams drawing on faculty expertise around campus to solve some problem of interest to the students. The students are not experts in anything, however, and the projects often take the form of, as one person put it, “kids trying to save the world.”

One architecture professor I interviewed had been asked to sit in on a Design Thinking course’s critique, a tradition at architecture and design schools where outside experts are brought in to offer (often tough) feedback on student projects. The professor watched a student explain her design: a technology that was meant to connect mothers with their premature babies who they cannot touch directly. The professor wondered, what is the message about learning that students get from such projects? “I guess the idea is that this work empowers the students to believe they are applying their design skills,” the professor told me. “But I couldn’t critique it as design because there was nothing to it as design. So what’s left? Is good will enough?

As others put it to me, Design Thinking gives students an unrealistic idea of design and the work that goes into creating positive change. Upending that old dictum “knowledge is power,” Design Thinkers giver their students power without knowledge, “creative confidence” without actual capabilities.

It’s also an elitist, Great White Hope vision of change that literally asks students to imagine themselves entering a situation to solve other people’s problems. Among other things, this situation often leads to significant mismatch between designers’ visions — even after practicing “empathy” — and users’ actual needs. Perhaps the most famous example is the PlayPump, a piece of merry-go-round equipment that would pump water when children used it. Designers envisioned that the PlayPump would provide water to thousands of African communities. Only kids didn’t show up, including because there was no local cultural tradition of playing with merry-go-rounds.

Unsurprisingly, Design Thinking-types were enthusiastic about the PlayPump. Tom Hulme, the design director at IDEO’s London office, created a webpage called OpenIDEO, where users could share “open source innovation.” Hulme explained that he found himself asking, “What would IDEO look like on steroids? [We might ask the same question about crack cocaine or PCP.] What would it look like when you invite everybody into everything? I set myself the challenge of . . . radical open-innovation collaboration.” OpenIDEO community users were enthusiastic about the PlayPump — even a year after the system had been debunked, suggesting inviting everyone to everything gets you people who don’t do research. One OpenIDEO user enthused that the PlayPump highlighted how “fun can be combined with real needs.”

Thom Moran, an Assistant Professor of Architecture at the University of Michigan, told me that Design Thinking brought “a whole set of values about what design’s supposed to look like,” including that everything is supposed to be “fun” and “play,” and that the focus is less on “what would work.” Moran went on, “The disappointing part for me is that I really do believe that architecture, art, and design should be thought of as being a part of the liberal arts. They provide a unique skill set for looking at and engaging the world, and being critical of it.” Like others I talked to, Moran doesn’t see this kind of critical thinking in the popular form of Design Thinking, which tends to ignore politics, environmental issues, and global economic problems.

Moran holds up the Swiffer — the sweeper-mop with disposable covers designed by an IDEO-clone design consultancy, Continuum — as a good example of what Design Thinking is all about. “It’s design as marketing,” he said. “It’s about looking for and exploiting a market niche. It’s not really about a new and better world. It’s about exquisitely calibrating a product to a market niche that is underexploited.” The Swiffer involves a slight change in old technologies, and it is wasteful. Others made this same connection between Design Thinking and marketing. One architect said that Design Thinking “really belongs in business schools, where they teach marketing and other forms of moral depravity.”

“That’s what’s most annoying,” Moran went on. “I fundamentally believe in this stuff as a model of education. But it’s business consultants who give TED Talks who are out there selling it. It’s all anti-intellectual. That’s the problem. Architecture and design are profoundly intellectual. But for these people, it’s not a form of critical thought; it’s a form of salesmanship.”

Here’s my one caveat: it could be true that the DTs are a good way to teach design or business. I wouldn’t know. I am not a designer (or business school professor). I am struck, however, by how many designers, including Natasha Jen and Thom Moran, believe that the DTs are nonsense. In the end, I will leave this discussion up to designers. It’s their show. My concern is a different one — namely that… [more]
designthinking  innovation  ideas  2017  design  leevinsel  maintenance  repair  ideation  problemsolving  davidedgerton  willthomas  billburnett  daveevans  stanford  natashajen  herbertsimon  robertmckim  ideo  singularity  singularityuniversity  education  schools  teaching  liberalarts  petermiller  esaleninstitute  newage  hassoplattner  johnhennessey  davidkelly  jimjones  empathy  ethnography  consulting  business  bullshit  marketing  snakeoil  criticism  criticalthinking  highereducation  highered  thomamoran  tedtalks  openideo  playpump  designimperialism  whitesaviors  post-its  transdisciplinary  multidisciplinary  crossdisciplinary  art  architecture  complexity  simplicity  methodology  process  emptiness  universities  colleges  philipmirowski  entrepreneurship  lawrencebusch  elizabethpoppberman  nathanielcomfort  margaretbrindle  peterstearns  christophermckenna  hucksterism  self-promotion  hype  georgeorwell  nathanrosenberg  davidmowery  stevenklepper  davidhounshell  patrickmccray  marianamazzucato  andréspicer  humanitariandesign 
20 days ago by robertogreco
Applying human-centered design to emerging technologies
Earlier this year, Google Play approached IDEO to find out what emerging technologies like Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, digital assistant, and ephemeral apps (apps that you don’t have to download and install) may actually be good for. With the advent of these new technologies come infinite possibilities for their application. In this future, many things are possible, but what is useful and desirable? How will people integrate these technologies into their lives? When they think of what these technologies can do for them, what do they dream of? Where do they want to go? What do they imagine? Google was eager to find out.
design  augmentedreality  virtualreality  ideo  google  mobile 
8 weeks ago by oliverw
Design thinking’s big problem | Copernicus Consulting
The inconvenient truth is that the science of management fails because it treats people as either mere inputs into the production process or as faceless “consumers” who have no real stake in outcomes. Design thinking allows for these truths to remain unaddressed, thereby avoiding any discussion of power itself. Workers are cast as something to be organized or “incented.” Consumers are to have their “needs met.” And neither group is granted a meaningful stake in the creative process.
ideo  Design  critique  Education  neoliberalism  power 
11 weeks ago by jstenner
Exclusive: Ideo’s Plan To Stage An AI Revolution | Co.Design
Today, the design consultancy Ideo announced that it has acquired Datascope, a Chicago-based data science company. The acquisition is meant to help Ideo, one of the country’s most prominent firms, respond to demand from AI-powered clients and can be read as a harbinger of where the design industry is headed.
ideo  design  datascience  trend 
12 weeks ago by euler

« earlier    

related tags

'90s  10  2017-03-07  2017-03-08  2017-03-09  2017-03-10  2017  abcd  acquihire  advertorial  agency  agile  ai  algorithms  alire  ambient_computing  andréspicer  apple  apps  ar  architecture  archive  art  article  artificialintelligence  asset  augmented_reality  augmentedreality  ausaid  auto  automation  autonomous  autonomousvehicles  behaviour  best  bestpractice  billburnett  blockchain  bot  bots  brainstorm  brainstorming  bullshit  business-models  business  cars  case  cases  centric  change  changement  chat  chatbot  christophermckenna  circular-design  circular  circulardesign  collaboration  colleges  community  complexity  computer  conception  consultancy  consulting  corporateculture  course  creative_difference  creativity  criticalthinking  criticism  critique  crossdisciplinary  culture  customer_expectations  data  datascience  datascope  daveevans  davidedgerton  davidhounshell  davidkelly  davidmowery  design  designer  designimperialism  designkit  designthinking  development  deviance  devil  digital  discovery  documentaries  education  elizabethpoppberman  emergency  empatheticdesign  empathy  employee  emptiness  entrepreneurs  entrepreneurship  ephemeral  esaleninstitute  ethnography  experiences  faces  facilitators  failure  fastcodesign  font  fonts  formation  framing  future  gatopolis  georgeorwell  google  guides  hassoplattner  hcd  help  helpfulness  herbertsimon  highered  highereducation  hiring  history  homeoffice  howmightwe  howto  hucksterism  human-computer  human  humancentered  humanitariandesign  hype  ideas  ideation  ideou  industrialdesign  innovation  inspiration  instant  interaction  interactive  interview  jimjones  jobs  johnhennessey  june  kelley  kids  kit  knowlaboratories  kodak  lawrencebusch  leevinsel  lemannfoundation  lesson  liberalarts  lists  machinelearning  maintenance  make  man-computer  man-machine  map  margaretbrindle  marianamazzucato  marketing  medium  method  methodologies  methodology  methods  microsoft  mit  mobile  mobility  mr  multidisciplinary  natashajen  nathanielcomfort  nathanrosenberg  neoliberalism  newage  of  openideo  organizationaldesign  orgchange  orgdesign  ovetta  patrickmccray  pervasive_computing  petermiller  peterstearns  philipmirowski  playpump  podcast  politics  portfolio  positive  post-its  power  problem-solving  problemsolving  process  product-management  productivity  prototyping  questions  quote  radio  readlater  recruitment  reference  refugees  repair  research  resources  retirement  ridesharing  robertmckim  robots  schools  self-promotion  selfdrivingcars  simplicity  singularity  singularityuniversity  snakeoil  social  sociology  solutionism  sottsass  speaking  stanford  startup  stevenklepper  summer  sustainabledesign  talk  teaching  technique  techniques  technology  tedtalks  ten  the  the_human_condition  thinking  thomamoran  timbrown  tips  tolisten  tom  tool  toolbox  toolkit  tools  top  training  transdisciplinary  transportation  trend  trends  trens  typography  ubongo  ucd  ucucd  ucucd17  ui  uncharted_problems  universities  utility  ux  video  virtualreality  visualization  vr  walter_mossberg  whitesaviors  willthomas  创新  思维方式  기업  혁신 

Copy this bookmark: