Design Thinking in the World of Media Ethnography
Design Thinking is a process of solving problems where the focus is more on the solution rather than on the problem. Instead of going into why the problem exists or what was the cause of it, design thinking goes into how to reach the solution(s). Another way of thinking about design thinking is that it does not revolve around past tense “what if” scenarios, instead focusing on the solution(s), the steps to get there, and the viability of the entire process.
When used in the field of Media Ethnography, design thinking is in a way thrown on its head, as the two are nearly antithetical to each other. As Alvarado points out in her interview with Santee, “… anthropology defines clear problems to research, reviews the history of the issue itself (including case studies that exemplify it), combines separate elements in order to form a coherent whole, and learns from the process and the people involved. Design thinking diverges in its deep brainstorming and prototyping phases, which can be very enlightening and useful when it comes to solving problems.”
While they are not directly correlated, design thinking and ethnography are integral to each other. Without design thinking, ethnography would lack innovation as it would lead to comparable results most of the time. Without ethnography, design thinking lacks the knowledge of what has failed before, which would lead to a similar outcome in a lot of cases. Being a masterful innovator or businessman will only get so far when you lack basic comprehension of the other. Notable examples of this can be drawn from historical figures such as Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison. Tesla was a great innovator that came up with modern technological ideas well over 60 years ago, but was bad with money. Edison was a great businessman that capitalized off the innovations of Tesla and others.
It is a strange relationship when you compare it the relationships others have with design thinking. In the case of ethnography, the relation is balanced for the most part and stays relatively close to the middle. Human nature usually stays relatively the like its previous incarnations. In something such as computer programming, the relation is stifled when it comes to innovation as it is forced into parameters. However, in say art or architecture the relation is seems to be all over the place as there are some metaphorically trying to recreate the wheel, others just trying to tweak it a bit, and everything in between.
All in all, the best results usually come from the middle ground.
