Blog for Project I
At the beginning of the project I, I’m so confused about the aim of this project since I used to study Computer Science and Technology whose programming project normally has a clear purpose, meaning that I know what to do in the next steps and what problems I need to solve. In the first several lectures, I felt no directions in the classes, but after attending studio, I gradually understand the meaning of this course. Design thinking is a tool to tackle the unknown and there is no maps or destination provided, so it’s normal that I don’t know what products can be created finally. It pays more attention to the processes rather than results.
For the Project I, the first thing we get is just a brief to introduce that we are designing for promoting social inclusion, but what is social inclusion and how it happens in our life I have no ideas. In order to address this confusion, the group conducts some research, including observing, interviewing and reading literature, about social exclusion and inclusion in our lives. During this process, the themes can emerge and the design directions are identified. To be specific, after reading a journal article by the authors Martina Boese and Melissa Phillips, one of the key discussion drivers was how multiculturalism affected the idea of social inclusion in Australia. An idea put in question was what social inclusion meant when it came to targeting different cultures integration into a new place. Therefore, we identify one direction that is Integration vs Incorporation. There are three directions in our project in total, and the rest two directions are Current events and the media’s coverage and Stepping into another person’s shoes respectively. And then we conduct research portfolio followed by concept portfolio, concept maps, and scenario portfolio. The final products we get are a product website and a “Kickstarter” video.
The most impressive step in this design process for me is brainstorming. I used to think that I’m not a creative person and a little bit worried about that I can’t think up any ideas when listening that I need to develop three concepts alone. This is because that I had participated in some Brainstorm session in the past and I find it was little helpful for me. During the process of Project I, I change my perception. Brainstorming provides us with an atmosphere in which they can give vent to the thoughts and ideas that they have developing in response to perceived problems. The reason for why I had a negative experience of brainstorming is that the processes are wrong. According to the research from the Institute of Design at Stanford, brainstorming has several rules and the successful design company, IDEO who celebrates Design Thinking normally use it:
- Set a time limit
- Start with a problem statement, point of view, possible questions, a plan and stay focus on the topic.
- Defer judgement or criticism, including non-verbal
- Encourage weird, wacky and wild ideas
- Aim for quantity
- Build on each other’s’ ideas
- Be visual
- One conversation at a time
Follow the right instructions, it is easy to come up with ideas. From my own experience, the studio class of design thinking teaches me how to inspire my potential creativity and I learn a lot from this process. Just calm down and make a list of requirements from the brief, the constraints, the focus group and make sure which design direction that we want to follow, if we do not have any ideas about how to develop a concept. When finishing this preparation, I find it is easier to have some ideas. We did many exercises in the class. For example, there are six cards to help us develop concepts. Three of them are requirements of concepts from different directions. The first one is the purpose of the concept (promote social inclusion in populated urban areas, used by more than just a single person at a time, trigger people’s interest in community involvement and social interaction in their urban environment). The second one is from the brief. The concept must be a good product, be possible, be original and employ design principles. We choose to skip into another person’s shoes from design direction as our last requirement. Constrain, Focus, and People are in the rest three cards. We design physically disabled person as a target group and focus on how to make them smile, but we must take constraints into consideration. The constraint about this exercise is on the bus. Combining above conditions, what kind of concepts that I need is clear. I need to consider what kind of things can be installed on a bus to let physically disabled people smile, which can help them feel social inclusion in the urban city. In the limited time (about 3 to 5 minutes) to come up with a concept to tackle this issue. It’ s better to sketch the scenario to help group members to understand your thought. I feel at this moment we do not need to worry about whether ideas are unusual or not since everyone can get feedback from others. Sometimes a weird idea can be changed to the best concept. This method is applied to the latter development of concepts since every group member should have three concepts. After this class, I feel brainstorming is really a way to spark innovative ideas and I look for more information about brainstorming. I find brainstorming can be used helpfully in many different fields, but some problems may occur in this process. There is an example of how to use brainstorming to help employees eliminates these fears of ridicule. The survey shows that some employees reluctant to share their thoughts since they fear that their ideas are not practical and may be strange. Hence, before using brainstorming, we cannot ignore how to motivate people’s willingness. The writer suggests that If the company can set up brainstorming sessions conducted by an experienced leader and participants are peers, the employees may feel comfortable and are willing to share their problems and responsibilities. With a better brainstorming process, can we collect more satisfied concepts and select final concepts more easily.
Reference
Brainstorming. (1980). The CPA Journal, 50(000004), pp.95–96.