DRS2012 Bangkok Proceedings Vol 4 - Design Research Society

Anna Valtonen
of it before. I see it now as more of methodology similar to that of the scientific method,
but with a cultural subjectivity. Where the scientific methodology of analyzing a problem
addresses all the inputs into a system no matter how seemingly unrelated but with a strict
objectivity. I believe design thinking also has this very all-encompassing regard for input
but uses a cultural subjectivity to analyze problems and suggest solutions. This makes it
more people based and gives the solutions a resonance that people can really appreciate.
(17/1)
Instead of dissecting the empirical and obvious causation of problems they try to see what
seemingly non-related pressures are actually having bigger influences than one would
assume. After identifying these influences they try not to use standard methods or models
to apply to them but invent new models that are more specific to the dilemma” (17/1)
Interestingly, and probably as a counter-reaction to the more action-focused approaches,
there was also an increased request for basic philosophy. Therefore, the philosopher Per
Nilsson gave ‘Writing Images vs. Reading Visuals: A workshop about reflective thought
processes, were the main question was about poeticizing objects and eroticizing the
world.
Hitting a moving target
This paper has shown some areas in which design is changing. The aim has been to
describe the larger phenomena behind the changing areas, but also to give practical,
tangible examples of what these new areas in industrial design could be.
The examples that have been presented are naturally not the only changes needed, nor
are they always entirely new, but they serve in illustrating what type of knowledge might
be expected from designers in the future. The working groups were initially able to
identify hundreds of areas that would have been interesting, so the twenty topics chosen
by a group of design and education professionals or students, is of course a limitation.
This choice was most likely influenced not only by the individuals’ personal experience
and preferences, but also by what was already considered part of the curricula, and
hence not “new”. What does remain evident is that the professional practice of industrial
design is changing, just as is the world around it, and we are better off if we actively react
to it rather than deny it or wait for it to happen. As the participants put it:
I think that it is very likely that I within time will be working more with facilitating
creative processes rather than sitting in CAD further on in my career. I therefore think
that this course has given me a lot of insights and knowledge of something that used to be
very abstract to me. (18/2)
And it also reminds us as designers there are many different avenues of design that we
can walk down in the future. There are many other possibilities other than consumer
electronics or cars…including rideable snow sculptures! (5/1)
Making the new areas tangible has made them easier to discuss and we can now start
debating whether this is the direction we as a professional practice want to go in or not.
At the same time as we have been questioning our own abilities in design, the project has
also allowed the invited experts a platform to develop their new thoughts and the
Conference Proceedings 1929