3. Methodology — Design Thinking, Design Research & Action Research
Chapter 3 of Design for Human Connection within Global Communities — An exploration through digital experience design and participatory action research
Design Thinking
Design has grown as a subject and is continually evolving. In 1992, Buchanan’s defined design as a way of dealing with wicked problems without a particular solution and replacing the accepted gradual model with two big stages: problem definition and problem solution (Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla and Çetinkaya, 2013). The divergent and convergent design process of creating and making choices (Figure 6) was essential for this research and the structure of this paper, coupled with the use of the Design Principles (Design Council, 2019):
- Put people first.
- Communicate visually and inclusively.
- Collaborate and co-create.
- Iterate, iterate, iterate
Tim Brown (2008) introduced Design Thinking to the bigger audience in Harvard Business Review advocating that the design process should open the innovation ecosystem by looking for possibilities to co-create. On the other hand, Sheahan (2019) claims that the most important concept in Design Thinking is to capture the final word — thinking — and tools and techniques should support the application of the methodology allowing repeated iterations. This research generated different paths towards clarifications and explorations, proactively co-creating with the ecosystem and responding to opportunities. In other words, the design process embraced the possibility of questioning the conventional way of doing, giving the researcher ownership to adapt and innovate.
Design Research
Design research can take different forms, amongst ‘Research for Design’ and ‘Research through Design’ (Golsteijn et al., 2014). While they vary in their focus and result — the first informs the creation of an artefact and the second aims for creating knowledge (Figure 7), they are complementary and were both used in this research.
Over the years, designers have progressively integrated within the human-computer interaction (HCI) community (Gaver, 2012) and their projects take the form of research through design (Frayling, 1993; Zimmerman, Forlizzi and Evenson, 2007). In this methodology, the design practice is brought to perform on situations chosen for their potential, understanding legitimate means to approach the opportunities and difficulties inherent in such circumstances. Reflection on these results provides a variety of insights to be combined.
The methodology was invented in 1993 by Frayling and addressed by many authors (Zimmerman, Forlizzi and Evenson, 2007; Zimmerman, Stolterman, and Forlizzi, 2010; Blythe, 2014; Bardzell, Bardzell, and Hansen, 2015). Bardzell, Bardzell, and Hansen (2015) defines research through design as “the practice of using design thinking, processes, and products as an inquiry methodology”. Gaver also examines the debate around the methodology and explains it as “a generative discipline, able to create multiple new worlds rather than describing a single existing one.” (Gaver, 2012).
This approach is close to the understanding that more than creating or describing, designers suggest how it might be (Lawson, 2006). Gaver (2012) believes that there exists a set of shared values among those that practice Research through Design
- is user-centred, arguing that “some contact with the potential audiences for the things we make is desirable before, during or after design work”;
- is exploratory and detailed, suggesting that “whether through sketching, scenarios, narratives or design proposals”;
- is a learning process, concluding that “the practice of making is a route to discovery, and that the synthetic nature of design allows for richer and more situated understandings than those produced through more analytic means”.
By using Research through Design as a way of doing HCI research, it includes problem setting and the possibility of exploring potentialities outside of the prevailing paradigm (Fallman, 2003). Research through Design was essential to this study because it allowed creating proposals to serve as an open-ended cultural and social analysis of reality and the field of study (Bardzell, Bardzell and Hansen, 2015). These include one digital platform named Teaming, creation of The Unspeakable workshop, and facilitation of Designing Futures workshops.
Research for Design was used to validate the hypothesis that emerged from the problem setting, academic research and the exploration based on research through design. It happened in forms of online surveys, structured and semi-structured interviews with users and industry leaders that gave the necessary inputs to define next experimentations and iterations. For instance, the multiple fields linked with this investigation made the academic research broad, which was essential to be able to design and reflect with a holistic perspective.
Action Research
Judy Marshall (2016) researches ideas are generated and tested throughout our own living space to improve the quality of our practices. While exploring the book Becoming Critical (Carr and Kemmis, 1994), I acknowledged how Action Research is a way of collaborating between my own’s life reflection and engaging with people’s conceptions as well.
Real presence to a situation requires that we are aware of ourselves at the same time that we are observing and making sense of the circumstances. We are reflecting while we are observing, and we are observing ourselves, observing and reflecting on the situation. That presence also requires that we are grounded in our bodies, aware of the physical space and context, rather than entertained with many other — unrelated — ideas and sentiments. Reflection — in this way — gathers the past into the present moment in service of the future.
Action Research was carried out, not just for the experiences created for Research through Design, but also exploring museums, festivals and facilitating workshops. It was a practice of simultaneous planning, action, observation and reflection: it is all happening at the same time, all the time. Notably, action research is a constant process of separating these moments, taking time to step out and pause, to reflect, to understand; making notes to support the observation; thinking through — for the next time — what kind of design or intervention might work best.
The journey of living life as an inquiry while developing this research was essential to the evolution of the understanding of the purpose of the platform and workshops created and how it enters different territories and perspectives.
Read 4.1 Being in Action — Context & Purpose
