The Hole in the Whole, and other notes from Design Research 2008

Way back in late September, I had the inspiring opportunity to attend the Design Research 2008 conference and workshops sponsored by the Illinois Institute of Technology: Institute of Design, held at Chicago’s Museum of Contemporary Art. This conference, in its 7th year (formerly known as About, With & For) gathers design professionals and students across various disciplines to share insights on emergent and innovative research methodologies as well as to discuss organizational strategies for promoting the value and advancement of design research practices.

Both the challenge and the excitement of attending conferences is finding the kernels of wisdom that are not only going to shift your own processes and perspective, but when shared with enthusiasm, will also inspire others to get on board and take action themselves. Here are my kernels:

Engage your users in the research process

Active co-creation is something of a buzzword in the design research world at the moment, and for a good reason. Engaging users as partners in the research process creates a paradigm shift away from the prevailing “expert mindset” of gathering user data (usability testing, focus groups, surveys, etc) and toward a more participatory model, where the users have more tactile and tangible opportunities to express their goals, motivations, aspirations, and even behaviors.

Shifting the locus of control from the researcher to the user is a significant step in addressing a common bugaboo of user research- the disparity between what people say and what they do. Putting the tools in the hands of the users to create artifacts of their experiences and perceptions can reveal needs and desires other research methods might not uncover. A popular and much-discussed “generative” tool is a cultural probe; a kit of materials assembled to stimulate the user’s self-expression. Common components include journals, scrapbooks, cameras, stickers, imagery, words and the like, limited only by the imagination of the design researcher.

Of course, in fairness, another common bugaboo of user research is the accuracy of self-reporting. Which is why…

Absence is interesting

In what was my personal favorite session of the conference, Laura Richardson, of M3 Design discussed the notion of deconstruction and abstraction for understanding essential truths and searching for meaning. Absence is interesting; what you don’t see or hear can be as meaningful and revelatory as what you do. Combining participatory methods with observational methods can guide design researchers closer to seeing the “hole in the whole.”

Relying only upon self-reporting methods, researchers could miss opportunities for uncovering information and attributes that a user deemed insignificant, arbitrary, or possibly embarrassing. Observing users in their environment (their homes, their workspaces, their gyms, etc) allows the researcher to not only factor in gesture, tone of voice, and eye contact but also the ability to examine the environment itself for clues that make connections and fill gaps in the user’s story.

Methods that synthesize experience, emotion, interaction and context generate purposeful and holistic outcomes for empathic design. Seeing what everybody is seeing, but thinking what nobody else has leads to the poignant and powerful insights that build a foundation for innovation.

Harness the power of design thinking

Speaking of buzzwords, driving innovation with the power of design thinking is what’s on the tip of every executives’ tongue if even a whisper of “leapfrogging” is heard somewhere in the organization. But what does it really mean ? Design thinking is actually grounded in design seeing, acting, and doing, as illustrated in the examples above. However, the true power of design thinking shines through in the synthesis that organizes and interprets the research findings in whatever form they take, making sense of the connections and synergies that illuminate a design strategy.

Methods of design synthesis are based on inferential reasoning that generate hypotheses of what people might do, as opposed to the more deductive reasoning of what people can or are likely to do. Why put my trust (and my budget!) in an educated guess, the client wonders?

The informed intuition that is the foundation of design thinking sets the path for moving beyond the obvious, the known, the easy. Designers (and design researchers) are trained in the art of seeing- perceiving the presences or absences that offer some clues or information about the social or physical world that can be interpreted meaningfully. With time, the data they have gathered and interpreted transforms from knowledge into insights. The magic of a Design Innovation happens as these insights plus a finger on the pulse of emergent design paradigms, market trends, and business initiatives take shape as a design pattern.

So what’s the big takeaway that I’m sharing with enthusiasm? The culmination of two engaging and thought-provoking days was best captured in renowned user-centered design advocate and cognitive scientist Don Norman’s closing remarks:

Simplicity isn’t the goal; understanding is.*

As an overarching kernel of wisdom that sets the trajectory for design research and strategy, reductionist principles to “simplify” forms and functions to their distilled essences are not at the core of user-centered design. Being able to craft and tell a compelling and real story about your users that brings clarity and meaning and resonance to your audience is.

*Read Norman’s excellent essay, Simplicity Is Not the Answer