The core of design practice (Frame creation and changing frames ( “to…
The core of design practice
Frame creation and changing frames
“to reframe a problematic situation in new and interesting ways is widely seen as one of the key characteristics of design thinking”
the problem situation as is first presented to the designer – the change manager or project manager – is often implicitly framed by the client organization. Designers actively uncover this implicit frame and develop new frames in close cooperation with their client.
Briefing and the role of the designer
The designer and the client engage in a series of interactions, in order to develop a mutual understanding of the project.
Roles of the designers:
Dorst and Patton (2011)
o Technician: the designer is given a solidly defined brief and is expected to carry this out.
o Facilitator: the client knows what he wants, but not what is required to achieve it
completely. The designer gives expert advice.
o Expert/Artist: the client knows what he needs, and the designer is responsible for framing the project with the client to a workable outcome
o Collaborator: both client and designer work mutually on framing the project in terms of
both problem and solutions space.
(most successful ones)
The abstraction of the mood board allows the designer to highlight desirable aspects of the outcome, but not the particular resolution.
Another way to negotiate new frames is identified as contextual engagement: designers create interaction and activities with the client that facilitate reframing the project with the client.
Language plays an important role in this form of co-creation: the process of reframing comes through regular dialogue, and through sharing a context-specific language framework.
in Project Management Literature
Characteristics of Design Thinking are echoed in some of the terminology used in Agile: customer collaboration, iterative development cycles, welcome change.
Nerur and Balijepally (2007) corroborate this view, but provide a critical note by observing a lack of academic foundation of Agile methods. The authors argue that Agile has the same theoretical basis as conceptual shifts in patterns of thought in other disciplines (Design and Strategy), but the rich perspectives that these other disciplines could provide for the emerging Agile philosophy is conspicuously absent in research. They argue that the metaphor of design offers a strong theoretical basis for the conceptual foundation of Agile methods.
Designing serves the purpose of establishing and conceiving the problem space, while keeping it open to welcome potential emerging solutions.
milestone planning and configurations management, are examples of solutions that originate in the “control space”. This type of uncertainty can be anticipated, planned and managed.
This calls for the need to develop less tangible management processes associated with building trust, sense-making, organizational learning and building a culture that is more suited to deal with high levels of uncertainty
rational view of PM in which the accomplishment of clearly defined goals within budget, quality requirements and time is dominant, does not address the fact that innovation is first and foremost characterized by divergence and unforeseeable uncertainties that render the rational approach irrelevant. (Lenfle, 2008).
Value-based Project Management. Based on chaos theory, it describes an format to deal with projects that are complex, ambiguous and uncertain.
All authors argue that dealing with uncertainty, ambiguity and creating value for customers are key issues around which Project Management theory should evolve.
Project Management should be more focused on the problem space, instead of the solution space. Where the goal of projects are unclear, more time should be dedicated to sense-making and reformulating objectives along the way
This sense- making is especially important in the concept stage of the project life-cycle, and during preliminary design and planning activities.