frameworks

The 3 Types of Designers According to John Maeda

March 18, 2018 Design

Designers are moving into mainstream business and as a key element of an innovation strategy, I have pondered on the definition of a ‘designer’ moving beyond their traditional roles of delivering aesthetics and prototypes, though that’s just one way of approaching design. Just recently, I discovered a unique categorization on Time by the renowned designer and technologist John Maeda. It was interesting to gain insights into the groups which he calls Classical, Commercial, and Computational, each coming with a unique set of skills and perspective.

[perfectpullquote align=”right” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]“classical” designers, who create physical objects or products for a specific group of people (think architects as well as industrial, furniture and graphic designers); “commercial” designers who innovate by seeking deep insights into how customers interact with products and services (think teams of researchers huddled around whiteboards and mosaics of brightly colored Post-it notes); and “computational” designers, who use programming skills and data to satisfy millions or even billions of users instantaneously (think tech firms like Amazon and Facebook).

Classically trained designers are apt to look askance at the artistic abilities of designers from the other groups. Commercial designers question how computational designers can empathize with millions of people they’ve never met. Computational designers complain that the methods of the other two groups can’t be scaled.[/perfectpullquote]

Though every organization has a tailored in-house design plan (or not) to meet its tactical objectives, from a strategic viewpoint, it’s prudent to delineate the role of a ‘designer’ that’s based on a certain competency framework which would enable managers to structure innovation opportunities by optimizing the proficiency of the team to effectively meet the targets and to also build the competencies relevant to a project’s long-term vision.

Design Thinking

5 Insightful Design Thinking Frameworks

March 8, 2018 Design

During a recent consulting engagement, I was asked by an inquisitive team member on what “value” would a design thinking methodology (abbreviated to ‘DT’) deliver to a business, and also, which “DT process” from a long list would be more suitable for a software development project. The value that is delivered from a collaborative design effort is well documented and could be easily articulated, however, in the case of design processes there are several DT frameworks for reference which would leave anyone to grope for answers, and this encouraged me to compile some knowledgeable DT frameworks into an article. On the onset, the objective behind compiling these frameworks into a single post wasn’t about verifying the efficacy of the frameworks, it was about grasping the ethos behind the design process and to comprehend how various forms of co-creation exercises are conducted. This isn’t an exhaustive list of DT frameworks but just some of the more well-known ones that I have come across regularly during my research.

To ‘Design’ Is ‘Design Thinking’

Industry analysts have widely supported the adage “Good design is good business” meaning that design must be at the core of an organization’s innovation strategy, and indeed, there are myriad design frameworks which outline a collaborative thinking process towards arriving at that objective. Also, just as the numerous frameworks there is a corresponding list of definitions for design thinking, such as, Idea Couture’s Global CEO and co-founder Idris Mootee who terms ‘design thinking’ as a “new management wonder drug” which companies look upon hopefully to save them from the uncertainties and failures of traditional management styles. My personal favourite remains a quote from IDEO’s CEO Tim Brown, which is all-inclusive and repeatedly mentioned during presentations and workshops:

Design thinking is a human-centred approach to innovation that draws from the designer’s toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.

Many in the industry have relegated ‘design thinking’ to merely a jargon or a figment of business school terminology, though it would be quite naive on their part to ignore the peaking interest amongst a global audience in the subject over the last 5 years.

With its varied forms and definitions, it’s not surprising that Design has remained an enigma for many. At its very least, a design could be construed as a process associated with ‘aestheticism’ but in terms of strategic thinking, it could bring together vast amounts of resources — finance, manpower, ideas, or even tech sources, to achieve an optimum target. Particularly since it almost never aspires to follow a linear set of actions and tools design remains focussed on finding answers to ‘How’ something could be accomplished not ‘What’ is to be accomplished, this basic presumption immediately broadens the horizon and enables to capture divergent opinions for an outcome.

Finally, this selection of design thinking frameworks reflects upon the underlying ideology of its respective organization, those which are striving to achieve a common vision for their customers. Their benefits as a model for co-creation exercise is therefore undisputed.

Continue reading…

Understanding The Scope of Lean UCD Methodology

October 31, 2017 Design
from Using the User-Centered Design (UCD) and Human-Centered Design (HCD) Methodologies, this is an attempt to capture the meaning and to introduce the ‘Lean UCD’ framework.

As a consultant and architect, I’m privileged to be using both the User-Centered Design UCD) or Human-Centered Design (HCD) frameworks in complex projects, and it’s natural to have pondered over the difference between the two. These frameworks have helped me set aside deep-rooted biases and bring empathy into product designs which the end-users were delighted to use. I did write about the difference between Usability vs UX some time ago, though I always wanted to present a third approach to this methodology called Lead UCD that I predominantly use in the context of reactive product design strategy, in that, I’ve to strategize upon a user-friendly product within limited time and budget and with no prior knowledge of its background is critical. The challenge would be judging user behavior patterns purely based on cynical user data.

While bringing a user-centric focus on the problems individuals & teams often consider several frameworks to reach a consensus on the design in collaboration with cross-functional leads particularly in the guidance of a UCD expert. So what would be a better framework to follow – UCD, HCD or a Lean UCD? Read on.

Continue reading…