Jonas, thank G-d! you're here. Great questions and Jim, awesome responses. Like Jonas I have another question regarding education. When you speak of "junior designers" have these designers been through at least a formal bachelor design education like yourself? Are there things that designers should look for in that formal education, such as strong foundation skills.
Lastly, when you review portfolios to understand the potential of a junior designer (future apprentice) what are the clues in that portfolio that highlight their potential. Like Jonas, what I see is actually quite excellent and maps against my own experiences of studio work and what I see us doing here as educators. I think there are a few problems in how we began this conversation that make for some of the antagonistic elements. First, we were assuming that Dan's framing of the 4 types of design is precise, or complete and in doing so, used the reference to "Genius Design" as our starting point. I've always had a problem with "genius" design not so much b/c of the arrogance of the term, but b/c of the way it does not seem to include all the methods that designers have been using for the 100 years previous to HF and HCI inclusion into the design process that makes up both UCD and ACD (to bring back Dan's framework). Actually, despite the seeming "violence" of the conversation, it sounds like what you do is very much fits inside the framework of what I teach & have done in my own work but with some spin and bravado (and hard work) to make the rapid part come together. I think you are right that there is no inherent "competition" here and in many ways, I can see how UCD approaches could actually be integrated into what I'm reading in your existing framework during stage one of information gathering. I still would like answers to my earlier questions about "ideation" and "strategy" (the question about telling got answered). Can this approach of design be used for more open ended problem sets is really what I think I'm trying to get to? Where the manifest requests are not aligned with the true latent problem sets. I.e. the request to design a "sustainable" car, is the manifest request to the problem of transportation, not the problem of cars or even vehicles. You mentioned that you worked on highly complex IxD problems like mobile OSes (HUGE!), but still well defined. Have you done issues that were designing for scales to more about behavioral economics or other scales that are about designing 5-10 years out and what are examples and how did you approach them? -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=37626 ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [email protected] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
