Our most current in-class assignment was to create and prototype an idea for the Sauder Open House on March 1. More specifically, we had to demonstrate a typical day in the D-Studio to the guests that will be passing through the studio. Seeing how, in my opinion, the D-Studio’s focus is on the design process, this idea seemed to be Inception-like in its essence. I have to go through a design process to share a design process? (My teammates may have found it a bit strange that I kept spinning my pencil/totem to make sure it stopped eventually… but, to be fair, you can never be too certain in situations like this).
Trippy Hollywood flashback aside, I found the project to be a fascinating experience. While trying to decide which process to focus on for the open house-Moura’s “Ask, Try, Do”, Beckman’s “Observation, Framework, Imperatives, Solutions” or “Brainstorm, Prototype, Presentation and Feedback, Implementation” –we realized the process we were using to design the project differed from the process we were featuring in our open house demonstration. We decided to highlight “Brainstorm, Prototype, Presentation/Feedback, Implementation”, but found that Beckman’s “Observation, Framework, Imperatives, Solutions” could be nestled into the “brainstorm” part of the former.
More specifically, we started out the project reading over the assignment sheet and outlining what needed to be done. We then looked around the room, viewing the resources we had to decorate, and listed the criteria we needed to fulfill.
We then moved on to the “framework” portion, where we brainstormed ideas for each section of the process, which we decided to set up in different areas around the room. In the article, Beckman mentions that the frameworking stage is the most time consuming and challenging, due to the generation of ideas and creativity needed. For each stage, we brainstormed and listed ideas, not leaving out anything (except for one idea about a celebrity endorsement-not sure if we would have the budget to bring in Jay-Z).
We then listed “imperatives”, or decision criteria, in order to narrow down the list of possibilities for each table. By listing the requirements, we were able to make sure each table reflected the global, creative Sauder student that we wanted to convey in the d-Studio.
Our narrowed down list revealed the final solutions- which we then went on to prototype, present to the class, and (hopefully!) implement for the open house.
Throughout the course of this project, I had a serious epiphany- design processes aren’t meant to be used as separate entities. In order to maximize the benefits from this type of design thinking, I found that combining the aspects that work for me into one “master design process” is the most useful application of the processes. I’m excited to see where we can apply this learning in our next project (which is, for those interested, hopefully playing in a garden with retired people!) (And yes, I know there is more than that, but gotta focus on those simple pleasures sometimes)
I love the Inception metaphor (and thank you for my daily dose of Leo). Sometimes it seems as though we do have the ideas already developed in our minds, and it just takes asking the right question, brainstorming freely, or even asking the wrong question to set that idea “free”. Design is intertwined, an ongoing cumulation of ideas, techniques, approaches, and insights. Your epiphany is one that I can relate to – best of luck playing in that garden!!!
There are so many different design processes out there…Moura’s “Ask, Try, Do” or Beckman’s “Observation, Framework, Imperatives, Solutions” or the “Brainstorm, Prototype, Presentation/Feedback, Implementation” that you came up with. I think the beauty of design thinking is that there is no right or wrong procedure to follow. It may be completely dependent on the situation or the given project..but I guess you just have to ask, try & do..or observe and implement until you find the one that works!