...when 140 characters are not enough

This is the fourth sub-section of the Literature Review section for my Capstone project.

Here is a listing of links to the previous capstone project posts:

• Capstone Project: Part 1 - Abstract
• Capstone Project: Part 2 - Introduction
• Capstone Project: Part 3 - Approach and methodology
• Capstone Project: Part 4 - Disruptive Innovation
• Capstone Project: Part 5 - The Design of Business
• Kristian Andersen - Brand Experience Design (posted previously and incorporated into Capstone project)

Design Expertise

Another book I started reading is "Design Expertise" by Kees Dorst and Bryan Lawson (Lawson and Dorst 2009). Dorst and Lawson note that they believe design is a complex collection of skills that anyone has the ability to learn. Further, talented designers rely on skills, knowledge and understanding.They point out that we are still in the preliminary stages of defining design expertise and this book could not even have been written a few years ago.

As is expected, it is necessary to define some of the fundamental terms so as to reduce confusion and find some common ground before going deeper. Interestingly, Dorst and Lawson choose to not define the term "design" outright due to its “multifaceted nature” and the wide variety of design disciplines. Rather, they attempt to develop an integrated understanding of what constitutes design by looking at the design process from several different perspectives. It is their intention to construct a composite that will be pieced together, resulting in an accurate definition. It is interesting that they note this is the same approach we (designers) typically use to understand our own design problems.

Dorst and Lawson state that design thinking is not one way of thinking. It has been called multidisciplinary by some and others have gone as far as calling the design discipline "transdisciplinary" (Blevis and Stolterman 2008). Designers employ analytical and creative thinking - not necessarily in sequence or in a linear fashion but rather in an integrated, almost simultaneous manner. We live between two worlds with one foot planted in the world of science and analysis while the other foot is firmly grounded in the creativity of the arts. We don't fit entirely within either one. We often find ourselves engaging in our own game of tug-of-war with our peers as some members of the design community try to become more like one discipline or the other. Yet, this balance serves us well in coming up with solutions to all types of "wicked" problems.

Designers focus their energies on the solution, not the problem. They approach problems as if there is no structure to the problem and do not attempt to analyze all the data. Rather, it is a fine balance between analysis and creativity. Experienced designers place constraints on themselves. Perhaps they will limit the amount of time to conduct analysis (research) before moving on to generating concepts and ideation.

As a result of this hybridization of disciplines found in design, designers are often misunderstood. Dorst and Lawson actually compare us to the platypus, an animal that many considered to be a hoax when it was first discovered. The platypus did not fit within the norms and standards that were then known to biologists. Fortunately, this didn't bother the platypus. They didn't know that they were an anomaly and a challenge to the scientific thinking of the day. They certainly didn't make any effort to change who they were in order to fit within the existing conventions. Perhaps we as designers can learn a few lessons from the platypus. If we do, we might find those in other fields less resistant to accepting our authenticity.

Dorst and Lawson identify five key skills of design: formulating, representing, moving, evaluating and managing. They clarify the meaning of each of these skills, relying heavily on work done by Nigel Cross. These skills are situated within four “levels” of design: project, process, practice, and profession. Finally, they identify three types of thinking employed in the design process: convention-based, situation-based, and strategy-based. These three models are used as the foundation for exploring the nature of design expertise, identifying a proposed path to follow towards the development of design expertise and exploration of possible effective methods for teaching the design student.