Multimodal Semiotics and Collaborative Design

Meaning-oriented
design theories
The knowledge carried in the objects of our
material culture (Cross 2007 [1982])
The practices and products of designing are only
meaningful within a symbolic ecology of interacting
actors, objects, and environments (Thackara 2005,
Krippendorff 1990, 1998, 2006).
Product semantics studies symbolic qualities of
man-made forms in their cognitive and social
contexts of use, and formulates the application of
the knowledge embedded in products of design
(Krippendorff 1998).
‘Systems thinking’ as a model for the new paradigm
of design. “The focus is no longer on material
systems—systems of “things”—but on human
systems (Buchanan 2001a)
Sustainable design should be “synchronized with
social innovation in everyday practices” (Simonsen
et al. 2010)
‘Design culture’ (Julier 2006, 2008) shifts the focus
of study from a ‘problem-solving activity’ to a
‘problem-processing activity’,
One way to understand
design is to observe the
products as cultural
objects. The semiotic
perspective on
language can be
applied to design
through the product
semantics approach,
while the socio-cultural
dimension should be
supported. The
perspective of ‘design
culture’ is, thus, helpful
for exploring the
networks of actors,
resources and practices
of design.
Ill-defined
nature of design
problems and
creative
problem-solving
Design ability is “a reflective conversation with the
situation” (Cross 2007 [1990]: 37)
The role of intuition, emotion and aesthetic
judgment (Simonsen et al. 2010)
‘Ill-defined’ (Cross 2007 [1982]) or ‘wicked’
(Buchanan 1992) problems in design
The ‘double status’ of ‘problem’ and ‘solution’ in
design as mutually constructive, emergent notions
(Wisser 2006)
Another objective is to
observe the processes
in which designs came
to be. But this is
challenging, as the
problems and the
potentials solutions
evolve
interdependently
during design.
Collaborative
design, co-design
and social
creativity
Collaborative design tasks involve complex design
problems, the necessary knowledge on which is
usually distributed among various stakeholders
(Arias et al. 2000)
Collaborative work of global design teams as
‘thinking together apart’, and the importance of
‘objects to think with’ distributed design
environments (Larsson 2003)
To understand the complex web of relationships we
need to take account of the social expectations of all
those contributing to a design (McDonnell 2009:
49).
Collective creativity includes both ‘individual
insights’ and ‘momentary collective processes’
(Hargadon and Becky 2006)
Emergence of innovative solutions or unexpected
outcomes is a dialogic process (Grossen 2010),
including the interpersonal relationships among
actors, the characteristics of the task, the quality of
communication, social and institutional contexts
(Grossen 2008).
The process of
collaborative design
gets even more
complex in distributed
design studios. The
analysis should include
not only the ways of
‘thinking together’, but
also the agencies of
relevant human and
non-human factors. In
data production, it is
important to consider
both the ‘individual
insights’ and the
‘collective processes’ to
capture the emergent
design solutions.
Table 4. 1 Theories and concepts in design research that are relevant to the analysis of collaborative place-making
in SL
99