Last week, the IASDR 2009
conference (International Association of Societies of Design Research) took place in Seoul, South Korea, and all videos of the keynote speeches are already available.
Donald A. Norman: Science and Design
I start with three contradictory views: First, that a science of design is already here; Second, that a science of design is possible, but not yet here; Third, that a science of design is neither possible nor appropriate. How can all three views be true? Because each speaks to a different aspect of the complex set of activities we lump together as design.
Three examples make the point: Engineers design, and for many, there already exists a science of design based upon rigorous methods of optimization, perhaps governed by critical axioms. Practitioners of interaction design, such as the human- or activity-centered approaches that I espouse, are active in the creation of a robust, repeatable science base. And finally, design has its creative and artistic side, developing novel solutions to “wicked” problems while providing aesthetically pleasing structures. Neither this kind of creativity nor its aesthetic sensibilities seem amenable to science, at least not yet.
But as the world grows more complex, more interconnected, with the underlying infrastructure less and less visible, hidden inside electronic and optical mechanisms, conveyed as all-powerful yet invisible information and knowledge, design more than ever needs a body of reliable, verifiable procedures. Science is the systematic method of building a reliable, verifiable, repeatable, and generalizable body of knowledge. Science is not a body of facts: it is a process. Design is the deliberate shaping of the environment in ways that satisfy individual and societal needs. Scientific methods can inform design. Designers can create a science of design.
Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders: Co-creation through generative design thinking
Co-creation is not just the next new thing in marketing. It is an alternative way of seeing and being in the world. Existing and thriving in the emerging co-creative landscapes will require the creation and application of new tools, methods and methodologies for connecting, innovating, making, telling and sharing. These generative tools must be useful and usable for all types of people. Generative design thinking provides a design language for all of us, designers as well as non-designers, to use in provoking the imagination, stimulating ideation, stirring the emotions, discovering unmet needs and facilitating embodiments of future possibilities. Examples of this generative design language in action, from projects ranging from consumer product and service development to the planning and architecture of new healthcare campuses, will be shared.
Building on the emerging co-creative landscapes will require that we hold new attitudes and mindsets about the people formerly known as ‘consumers’ or ‘users’. It will also require that designers and researchers take on new roles in addressing the rigor, relevance and sustainability needed for human-centered designing.
Kees Overbeeke: Eindhoven interaction design
The Eindhoven Industrial Design Department (ID) focuses on how to design for highly interactive intelligent systems. Our approach is shifting its research and teaching context from Human Product Interaction (HPI), mainly focused on opening up the functionality of a product, towards a broader approach to enhance dynamical aspects, interpersonal and societal values, including personal, aesthetic and socio-cultural ones, through the application of highly interactive intelligent systems.
The skills involved in designing systems are different from the skills that were needed before, (see figure 1). There will be overlap between the skills needed for ‘design for interaction’ and ‘design for appearance’ but there will also be a need for new skills.
In this talk, I expand on how far we are on this new road. What does it mean to design for systems? What does it mean for the educational system? And for practice? And for research? What sort of new (dynamical) design language will emerge? What sort of theories and philosophies can support this approach?
I give our answer to these questions. We developed a new design process, a new educational system and a new approach to research. Keyword in all this is integration: integration of disciplines, teaching and research, paradigms, technology and design etc. I strongly believe in the knowledge generation power of design as integrator. So, above all we need a new professionalism based on thinking with the hands, reflection on making.
Kazuo Kawasaki: Progressive Inclusive Design for the BOP
The capitalism has already ended.
When socialism was over, the capitalism also died.
However, because of having just dead capitalism system, we have faced the current global deceptions.
We, designers, have a duty to create new economic system, international political system, and a construction system of the information culture globally by design method.
The design is a possess to force innovation in every world system as business technique.
The design has been considered and treated as only the professional ability in developed, capitalism economy so far.
However, our design must be the leading role as methodology to solve the various problems which current Earth has.
Therefore, I will speak the logic to the focus of the design area.
Aiming of the design should innovative the evolution called Progressive Inclusive Design as the business studies-like method.
The Inclusive design can support the logic basis characteristics as logic from of the grammar in the human talks called the first person, the second person, and the third person as the national audiologies verification.
I will show my design works about the utility and the effect in the example which regards this Progressive Inclusive Design as design object for reverse the Bottom of the Pyramid in the world.
My expression is in this concept for the Bottom of the Pyramid, and businesses are required to overcome the current global deceptions.
Kyung-won Chung: “Caring for Citizens”: The New Value System of Seoul Design Excellence
I will start with how the meaning and roles of design have changed as the term is increasingly used in diverse fields in recent years. Traditionally, design used to refer to ‘fashion’ or ‘styling’ in close relationship with visual art. It, however, is frequently used in other disciplines such as engineering, management, even politics. Design can be categorized into three distinctive areas: visible design mainly for hardware; invisible design for services and hybrid design that is both visible and invisible. Design also deals with various issues such as green (sustainable, eco-friendly), universal (trans-generational) and others.
I will explain how Seoul City has performed various design initiatives since June 2006 when Mayor Oh Se-hoon’s took office as Mayor of Seoul City. Mayor Oh fully understands the importance of good design and set up the Seoul Design Headquarters (SDH) in April 2007. Under the new vision of “Caring for Citizens” and strategy of “Citizen-First Design”, I am directing the SDH that is composed of about 100 public servants who are undertaking 55 projects with about US $ 80 Million for implementing principles of public design, green design, and universal design in various activities of subsidiary headquarters, bureaus, and 25 autonomous districts in Seoul. SDH is also developing city’s design DNA such as the Seoul’s symbol Haechi (an imaginary animal that protects human beings from demons), Seoul fonts, Seoul colors, and Design Seoul guidelines.
I will discuss how Seoul city has pursued design initiatives in order to upgrade the quality of citizens’ lives and enhancing the competitiveness of the city through its new value system.