Friedman
Creating design knowledge: from research into practice
Ken Friedman Department of Knowledge Management, Norwegian School of Management
Abstract This paper considers how we create design knowledge. It examines the ways that research contributes to design knowledge in theory and in practice.
The paper will ask seven important questions:
What is the nature of design? How does the nature of design involve knowledge of certain kinds? What are the sources of knowledge? How does research function as a source of knowledge? How does research relate to other sources of knowledge? How do we create design knowledge through research? How does new knowledge move from research into practice?
The paper will outline answers to these questions. It will also provide information and resources for those who want to explore further.
1 Introduction further. The main paper is followed by two Design knowledge involves many questions. endnotes that contain condensed literature What is the nature of design? How does the reviews. The first covers the subject of nature of design involve knowledge of certain knowledge. The second deals with innovation. kinds? What are the sources of knowledge? Now, let’s start with a few basic definitions. Knowledge has many sources. Research is one of them. Research also involves questions. 2 A prehistoric prelude on design and How does research function as a source of evolution knowledge? How does research relate to other As professions go, design is relatively young. sources of knowledge? How do we create The practice of design as a thing that people design knowledge through research? Finally, do predates professions. In fact, the practice how does new knowledge move from research of design – making things with a useful goal into practice? in mind – actually predates the human race. Making things is one of the attributes that In this presentation, I will consider all these made us human in the first place. questions. I promise not to answer them, though! Answering these question is far more It’s fair to say that design began over two and than an hour’s work. My promise is both a a half million years ago when homo habilis reality check and guarantee that we will be manufactured the first tools. Human beings done on schedule. were designing well before we began to walk upright or attend conferences. Four hundred Along with this guarantee, however, I do thousand years ago, we began the promise to unfold a range of rich ideas. I’ll manufacture of spears. By forty thousand years outline issues and answers, I’ll offer a few ago, we had moved up to specialized tools. conceptual maps, and I’ll present some valuable sources for those who want to go Urban design and architecture came along ten
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 5 Friedman thousand years ago in Mesopotamia. Interior change to the genetic structure, through other architecture and furniture design probably forms of mutation or through some form of emerged with them. It was another five biological breakdown to a prior genetic thousand years before graphic design and structure. In the infinitely vast majority of typography got their start in Sumeria with the cases, these mutations were not successful, development of cuneiform. Since then, things and the creatures went extinct. Over the have picked up speed. billions of years of life on the planet, most life forms have died out. Today, many of us have replaced cuneiform with ASCII characters. Instead of chipping In some few, rare case, mutations conferred rock, we download it with Napster or Gnutella. advantage on a specific life form in a specific While we haven’t yet replaced our spears with environment. These advantages were pruning hooks or our swords with preserved and passed on. ploughshares, we do provide a far wider range of goods and services than the world has The environment forms the context within known before. which initially random adaptations create successful species. Success, in the sense of All these goods and services are designed. The evolutionary development, is not purposeful. urge to design, to take a situation, imagine a It simply means that a species is selected for better situation, and act to create that situation survival by the environment based on its goes back to those first, pre-human ancestors. physical and behavioural characteristics. When a mutation proved well suited to the Design, in short, helped to make us human. environment, the species survived. The It did so in several ways. Among the frequent descendants of creatures whose misunderstandings of evolution theory is the characteristics were defined by beneficial notion that evolution somehow programmed mutations inherited what had once been new us to become something or to behave in a genetic matter. The human species and its certain way. This is not quite so, and the subtle predecessor species emerged in and adapted distinctions are significant to how we can to a specific physical world. The physical world develop further. to which we adapted defined us.
The initial stimuli of evolution were random. Complexity theory (Aida et al 1985; Casti 1995; Biological life on our planet has existed for Waldrop 1992) offers a rich series of billions of years. The many forms of life over explanations of how adaptation takes place. those years shaped a rich enough One of the salient paradigms of complexity environment to permit hundreds billions of theory is the notion of the way that complex different events, manifestations, behaviours, adaptive systems shape their behaviour within evolutionary streams. Some of those what is known as a “fitness landscape.” As manifestations gave the creatures manifesting complex adaptive systems fit themselves to the them competitive advantage in local landscape, the context itself takes on different environments. These creatures survived to shapes and meanings. Complex adaptive pass their genes on. When those genes systems include all biological creatures: plants, possessed the same traits, they sometimes animals, individual humans. They also include survived to pass the genes further. When a the communities or societies that these large enough population pool existed to creatures create. Their evolutionary paths permit the gene-carrying population to move through time and history. Some vanish, spread, these traits sometimes spread further others appear. Either way, there is no going still into larger environments. back.
In earlier forms of biological evolution, all At some point, life forms became sufficiently stimuli were random. Genetic endowment advanced to capture behavioural adaptation changed through chance. Chance arose as well as genetic adaptation. Those creatures through mutation caused by radioactive that adapted their behaviour in a way that
6 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman conferred evolutionary advantage did better bone or antler. Even in this primitive form, than other creatures. The interaction between information tools began to “reshape the way behaviour and biology, nature and nurture is we think” (Burke and Ornstein 1997: 29-31). complex. A creature survives better because This was “the first deliberate use of a device it possesses a larger brain with a richer brain which would serve to extend the memory, structure. The continually improving brain because with it, knowledge could be held in enables the creature’s offspring to do better recorded form outside the brain or the still. New behaviours make survival more sequence of a ritual.” The relationship secure. Secure survival preserves the gene between these tools and the human mind is pool. And so on. significant, in that “the cognitive facilities needed to make the batons required a brain This is how tool making helped us to become capable of a complex series of visual and what we are. Tool-making probably preceded temporal concepts, demanding both recall language behaviour. Tool making therefore and recognition. These are exactly the same preceded conscious imagination, the ability to mental abilities which are involved in modern imagine and to plan. Animals other than reading and writing.” humans make tools. At the start, our ancestors – homo habilis – weren’t humans. They were At this point, and many points like it, the among the advanced animals that made tools. random workings of natural selection were taken over by the complex human phenotype In evolutionary terms, we developed the – the properties that are caused by the modern brain in the relatively recent past. The interaction of genotype and environment. physical potential of this brain gave rise to our current habits of mind, the habits that support In our case, this environment includes the our mental world. The forces that give rise to development of culture and all that it entails. the modern mind go back over two and a half Tool making relates to the many qualities that million years to the unknown moment when make us human, and they all relate to tool homo habilis manufactured the first tools making. These issues involve a large range of (Friedman 1997: 54-55; Ochoa and Corey conceptual tools and symbols. 1995: 1-8). This may seem like going the long way round Our tools and our tool-making behaviour to get to a definition of design, but there is a helped to make us human. As tool-making and reason for it, and this reason has to do with tool use became the conscious subject of the nature of the design profession. willed imagination, our tools and tool-making behaviour helped us to survive and prosper If, on the one hand, design helped to make us as humans. There is no way to know when or human, on the other, the act of designing has exactly how we began to create conscious in some way been so closely linked to human mental symbols, and there is no way to know culture that we haven’t always given it the exactly when symbols became our preeminent thought it deserves. From homo habilis to tool. baton, product design precedes symbolization by just under two and a half million years. Ten If we don’t know when we began to use or twenty thousand years is a sprint in this language, we do know when we created the grand marathon. However, in exactly this first external documentation and information sense, tool making is more deeply integrated systems. This took place some 20,000 years into our behaviour and our culture than ago (Burke and Ornstein 1997: 29-30). symbolization.
The externalized representation of knowledge The Greek philosophers went to work, they through documentation and information devoted their attention to the relatively new created a new kind of human being. The first, tools of structured thinking rather than to the rudimentary information tools took the form old physical tools that seemed so self-evident of what archeologists call the baton, a carved in the world around them. It is the everywhere
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 7 Friedman and all-the-time nature of tools, so obviously the importance of the design profession as an self-evident, that has obscured the importance important service profession in the post- of design rather than making it clearer. industrial knowledge economy.
This self-evident and everywhere, all-the-time It is significant that design entered the quality of design has buried design in university in a time of economic transition. everything that humans think and do. For that The years between 1950 and 2000 were the very reason, design – a conscious profession years in which the economy shifted from an focused on the design process – has been a industrial economy to a post-industrial long time in development. economy to an information society and a knowledge economy [See endnote 1]. Many of the acts of design, especially the Contemporary design takes place in this new physical acts, have been embodied in craft economy – including the process of shaping practice and guild tradition (Friedman 1997). artifacts through industrial design and product These slowly evolved into a distinct practice design. of design only in the aftermath of the industrial revolution. The move from a practice to a At the same time that the development of profession has been more recent still. The university-level design programmes clarified notion of a design profession is an innovation the importance of the design profession, it of the twentieth century. began to make clear the gaps in our understanding of design knowledge. The The idea of a design discipline is more recent emergence of a new professional training was still. We are still debating whether the arena not accompanied by the deeper of design knowledge constitutes a discipline, understandings of ontology and epistemology a field, or a science. My view is that it is, in that serve as the foundation of other fields. some measure, all of these. Design entered the university curriculum in most places only The first professional schools located in during the past half century. universities were medicine, law, and theology. Admission to these schools presumed a This development has taken different courses foundation of knowledge developed in the in different nations. In North America, for general faculty. The professional faculties were example, design courses began to enter the sometimes called the higher faculties, and they colleges and universities with art programmes. were contrasted with the lower faculties in an Most of these began in the late 1940s and important sense. The higher faculties trained since. Many – perhaps most – university-level professionals for the services of medicine, programmes with a specific focus on design church, and state. The lower faculties provided are innovations of the past two decades, as the basis of understanding and interpretation, contrasted to the occasional design courses reason and knowledge on which society itself available in larger and somewhat older art was established. programmes. In other nations, design programmes grew within and then grew out When art and design came into the university, from architecture schools or technical they often came in as art and craft schools or colleges. In the United Kingdom, design professional schools. The educational entered the university when the colleges of foundation they offered was not the basic art and design that had become polytechnics philosophical foundation offered for were merged into the new universities. admission to the other professional schools. It was often a combination of vocational All these many changes were rooted in many training and pre-professional education. Even kinds of transformation. The new location of colleges and universities with general design education in the university clarified the education requirements sometimes cut nature of design as a professional practice corners in training students for art and design. rather than a vocation or a trade. Placing In university systems that administer design in the university also rendered visible professional training from first admission up,
8 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman there were no corners to cut. written citation of the verb “design” dates from the year 1548. Merriam-Webster (1993: 343) We find ourselves, therefore, in strange defines the verb design as “to conceive and territory. On the one hand, design is anchored plan out in the mind; to have as a specific in a range of trades or vocations or crafts. purpose; to devise for a specific function or These have never been defined in end.” Related to these is the act of drawing, philosophical terms because they have had no with an emphasis on the nature of the drawing basis in the work of definition. Instead, they as a plan or map, as well as “to draw plans for; are rooted in unspoken assumptions to create, fashion, execute or construct anchored in the inarticulate nature of a according to plan.” practice going back, not simply to prehistory, but rooted in our prehuman development. Half a century later, the word began to be used as a noun. The first cited use of the noun On the other hand, the design profession is a “design” occurs in 1588. Merriam-Webster contemporary field growing within the (1993: 343) defines the noun, as “a particular university. Having few historical roots in the purpose held in view by an individual or philosophical tradition deeper than the last group; deliberate, purposive planning; a few decades, we have yet to shape a clear mental project or scheme in which means to understanding of the nature of design. We do an end are laid down.” Here, too, purpose and not agree, therefore, on whether design planning toward desired outcomes are central. knowledge constitutes a discipline, a field, or Among these are “a preliminary sketch or a science, one of these, two or even all three. outline showing the main features of As I develop my presentation, I will explain something to be executed; an underlying why I see design knowledge as all three. At scheme that governs functioning, developing this point, I will simply point to the or unfolding; a plan or protocol for carrying disagreement as evidence of a growing, out or accomplishing something; the healthy debate. arrangement of elements or details in a product or work of art.” Only at the very end 3 Defining design do we find “a decorative pattern.” The The rich and growing literature in the definitions end with a noun describing a philosophy of design makes clear that there process: “the creative art of executing is no longer an apparently tacit consensus on aesthetic or functional designs.” the undefined nature design that once seemed to obtain. Instead, this literature has begun to Although the word design refers to process develop a deep concept of design. rather than product, it has become popular shorthand for designed artifacts. This This concept is being rendered explicit. shorthand covers meaningful artifacts as well Explicit conceptualization permits fruitful as the merely fashionable or trendy. I will not inquiry and reflection. use the word design to designate the outcome of the design process. The outcome of the To understand the nature of design design process may be a product or a service, knowledge, we must define what we mean by it may be an artifact or a structure, but the the term design. Since there is no common outcome of the design process is not “design.” and well understood definition for design, I will offer some definitions and parameters. A Using the term design as a verb or a process clear definition is vital to the issues I will description noun frames design as a dynamic address in this paper. process (Friedman 1993). This makes clear the ontological status of design as a subject of Design is first of all a process. The verb design philosophical inquiry. describes a process of thought and planning. This verb takes precedence over all other Before asking how design can be the subject meanings. The word “design” had a place in of inquiry, it is useful to identify some of the the English language by the 1500s. The first salient features of the design process.
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 9 Friedman
Fuller (1969: 319) describes the process in a design knowledge requires systemic thinking. model of the design science event flow. He The designer is one member of a team or divides the process into two steps. The first is network that generally involves several a subjective process of search and research. elements described by the matrices implicit The second is a generalizable process that in the taxonomy. Here arises a difficulty. moves from prototype to practice. When we speak of manufacturing complex The subjective process of search and research, industrial products or shaping complex Fuller outlines a series of steps: services, we necessarily involve a large network of interacting systems. When the teleology --> intuition --> conception --> process works well, nearly every part of the apprehension --> comprehension --> system in some way affects every other part experiment --> feedback --> of the system. When parts of the system affect each other adversely, the entire system suffers. Under generalization and objective Again, this emphasizes the role of designer as development leading to practices, he lists: thinker and planner. Organization theory suggests building teams or networks to engage prototyping #1--> prototyping #2 --> the talent for each problem. In today’s prototyping #3 --> production design --> complex social and industrial environments, production modification --> tooling --> the designer works in teams or heads teams. production --> distribution --> installation --> maintenance --> service --> Systemic thinking gives perspective to the reinstallation --> replacement --> models of design offered here. The designer removal --> scrapping --> recirculation is neither the entry-point nor pivot of the design process. Each designer is the For Fuller, the design process is a psychological centre of his own perceptual comprehensive sequence leading from process, not the centre of the design process teleology to practice and finally to itself. The design process has no centre. It is a regeneration. This last step, regeneration, network of linked events. Systemic thinking creates a new stock of raw material on which makes the nature of networked events clear. the designer may again act. While the specific No designer succeeds unless an entire team terms may change for process design or succeeds in meeting its goals. services design, the essential concept remain the same. Herbert Simon defines design in terms of goals. To design, he writes, is to “[devise] A designer is a thinker whose job it is to move courses of action aimed at changing existing from thought to action. A taxonomy of design situations into preferred ones” (Simon 1982: knowledge domains (Friedman 1992, 2000) 129). Design, properly defined, is the entire describes the frames within which a designer process across the full range of domains must act. Each domain requires a broad range required for any given outcome. of skills, knowledge, and awareness. Design involves more skill and knowledge than one The nature of design as an integrative designer can provide. Most successful design discipline places it at the intersection of several solutions require several kinds of expertise. It large fields (See Figure 2). In one regard, is necessary to use expertise without being design is a field of thinking and pure research. expert in each field. In another, it is a field of practice and applied research. When applications are used to solve Understanding the issues these domains specific problems in a specific setting, it is a involve and the relationships between and field of clinical research. among them offers a useful framework for considering design knowledge (See Figure 1). One model for the field of design is a circle of six fields. A horizon bisects the circle into fields To work consciously with the relationships of theoretical study and fields of practice and among the several domains and areas of application.
10 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman
Domains of Design Knowledge: a Taxonomy
Domain 1: Domain 2: Domain 3: Domain 4: Skills for Learning The Human World The Artifact The Environment and Leading
Problem Solving The Human Being Product Development Natural Environment Interaction Method Human behavior Methodology Ecology Coaching Information semantics Market research Evolution Mind mapping Knowledge creation Innovation research Environment Research Skills Physiology & ergonomics Problematics Impact Analysis Research & methodology Product generation Built Environment Rhetoric The Company Cityscape Logic Creating new products Organizational Economy Mathematics Transforming old management & behavior products Language Social web Business economics Editing Product regeneration Infrastructure Company culture Writing Correcting problems Traffic Presentation Skills Leadership Improving products Telecommunication Public speaking Administration Positioning Airports Small group Future planning Re-engineering Food distribution Information graphics Process management (lean production) Human ecology Design Change management Architecture Product design Process skills Informated buildings Company functions Ergonomics Usage Governance Product semantics Architecture as idea Logistics Product graphics Architecture as corporate Production Functionality identity Marketing Graphic design Profile architecture Finance Visual ergonomics Interior Society Typography Furniture Trends Corporate design Interior as corporate identity Legal issues Behavioral design Psychology Media Information design Function Social economics Knowledge design Social structure Communication Process design The shape of work The World Manufacturing World trade Technology The shape of play European Union Operations The shape of private life USA Statistical quality control Installation Philosophy of space Asia Logistics Culture theory Cross-culture Issues Process management Art ideas Political economics Inquiry Theory Basics Culture theory Sociology of knowledge Reception theory History of design Sociology of taste Content analysis World history Paradigm analysis Models
Figure 1 Domains of design knowledge
The triangles represent six general domains of design. Moving clockwise from the left-most triangle, these domains are (1) natural sciences, (2) humanities and liberal arts, (3) social and behavioural sciences, (4) human professions and services, (5) creative and applied arts, and (6) technology and engineering.
Design may involve any or all of these domains, in differing aspect and proportion depending on the nature of the project at Figure 2 Model of the field of design hand or the problem to be solved.
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 11 Friedman
The taxonomy of design knowledge and the 16th century scholar and a founder of the generic model of design raise implications for scientific method, noted this difference in his design research. These also involve Religious Meditations, Of Heresies, where he understanding the kinds of knowledge that wrote that, “knowledge itself is power” (in form a foundation for the research act. This, Mackay, 1991: 21). Peter Drucker respects that in turn, will reveal how knowledge moves from difference, too, and describes the research into practice. transformation of information into knowledge: “Knowledge is information that Before we focus on design research, I will changes something or somebody — either by consider the subject of knowledge itself. becoming grounds for action, or by making an individual (or an institution) capable of 4 What is knowledge? different and more effective action.” (Drucker, Merriam-Webster defines knowledge as “2 a 1990: 242) (1) : the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through Knowledge embodies agency and purpose. In experience or association (2) : acquaintance this, it differs from information (Friedman and with or understanding of a science, art or Olaisen 1999). Information may be stored in technique b (1) : the fact or condition of being information systems. Knowledge is embodied aware of something (2) : the range of one’s in human beings. Knowledge creation is an information or understanding
12 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman our field of the problem of knowledge. Our practice and rich learning cycles. This is also understanding of design has grown and the basis of discussion teaching (Christensen, developed in recent years. Our understanding Garvin and Sweet 1991) and case method of knowledge much become richer still if we teaching (Barnes, Christensen and Hansen are to apply the problem of knowledge to 1987). design. It is through this work that we will develop a proper understanding of what will These issues are subtle and require care. All be required to generate design knowledge. domains of human knowledge embody some form of tacit knowledge. Even the most The definitions of knowledge and design offer articulate fields involve assumptions, shared a basis for definitional reflections on design experience, and personal development. All knowledge that form the foundation of what these create a background of tacit knowledge follows. that can never be fully stated.
5 Experiential and reflective knowledge In many ways, this tacit knowledge forms a Design is a process. The design process is central basis for any kind of work. rooted in and involves both theoretical disciplines and fields of practice. As all fields As Bunge (1996: 104-107) suggests, of practice do, design knowledge involves knowledge arises through the interaction of explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. many forms of learning. Thinking, experience Disciplines are also practices, and they, too, and action all play a role. Although the process involve explicit knowledge and tacit of learning and the nature of knowledge are knowledge both. The challenge of any not completely understood, there is wide evolving field is to bring tacit knowledge into agreement that knowledge creation requires articulate focus. This creates the ground of experience. Kolb’s (1984: 38) definition of shared understanding that builds the field. The learning as “the process whereby knowledge continual and conscious struggle for is created through the transformation of articulation is what distinguishes the work of experience” offers a useful perspective. a research field from the practical work of a profession. Any kind of experience may, in principle, be transformed into knowledge. Kolb emphasizes Professional excellence requires articulation. the relationship between experience and This means rendering tacit knowledge explicit. knowledge as a dynamic process of This is the foundation of what Nonaka and continuous reproduction and regeneration. It Takeuchi (1995) describe as the knowledge contradicts the static model of learning as creation cycle. This is also the basis of Schon’s acquiring knowledge external to and concept of reflective practice. Reflective independent of the learner. Information and practice is not a form of silent meditation on facts are external to and independent of the work. In reflective practice, reflection takes the learner. Knowledge inheres in human beings form of bringing unconscious patterns and and the specific form of knowledge is often tacit understandings to conscious contingent on the learning process. understanding through articulation. This is related to the therapeutic process. It is related Because knowledge is human, developing to the way that therapists work with knowledge requires thinking and practice, supervisors and to the way that teachers work mind and body both. Mindless recording will with master teachers. It is related to the not transform experience into knowledge. dialogue between professionals in training and Learning requires human agency, a concept their mentors. synonymous with Heidegger’s concept of care, the human tendency for each person to Schon (1983, 1990), Argryis and Schon (1992), care about his own existence (Heidegger 1993: and Argyris (1961, 1968, 1982) address these 238). For Heidegger, both practical knowledge issues in their books and articles on and theoretical knowledge express of human professional development through reflective care in an intimate relationship between action
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 13 Friedman and knowledge. projecting future possibilities in a complex network of cause and effect. Things are Human knowledge is not only the product of understood through their perceived positions past experience, but also the product of in these networks. anticipating the future. Knowing things involves feedforward as well as feedback, The interaction between experience, anticipating how things may be used, anticipation, critical comprehension, and manipulated or acted on in the future. As knowledge is only part of the story. Situated children, we all discover that anticipatory knowledge also relies on generalized knowledge – prediction – is not always knowledge distinct from – and abstracted from accurate. Politicians and scientists know this, – immediate situations and intentions. too. It is part of the knowledge cycle nonetheless. Generalized knowledge guides perception and thus it guides action. It is common Kolb’s definition of learning fits together with knowledge shared among groups of actors. Heidegger’s concept of care to suggest a Community among actors depends, in part, model of individual learning that shifts the on shared common knowledge and the shared focus of learning from the adaptation of nature of general knowledge implies a social external behaviour to the internal process of process. This social process plays a major role knowledge creation. The model outlines the in knowledge creation. While individual actors ways in which human beings monitor and also create generalized knowledge, every control knowledge through three human creator of new knowledge builds in part on capacities. These capacities are 1) the ability what has come before. Even the greatest to act, 2) the ability to apprehend action and individual creators see farther because they the environment within which action takes stand, as Newton famously put it, “on the place, 3) critical comprehension. shoulders of giants.” Even individual knowledge creation is thus a social process. Kolb (1984: 107) writes that, “Comprehension ... guides our choices of experience and directs Two more aspects of human agency drive our attention to those aspects of apprehended knowledge creation, habit, and tacit experience to be considered relevant. knowledge. Garfinkel’s (1967) experiments Comprehension is more than a secondary demonstrate that a general store of knowledge process of representing selected aspects of is essential even to the most mundane activity. apprehended reality. The process of critical This general store of knowledge depends on comprehension is capable of selecting and many factors. These include habituation, tacit reshaping apprehended experience in ways knowledge, and the larger social stock of that are more powerful and profound. The generalized knowledge, together with learning power of comprehension has led to the based on experience, anticipation, and critical discovery of ever new ways of seeing the comprehension. world, the very connection between mind and physical reality.” Critical comprehension is the One fascinating aspect of habitualization is the pivotal force in learning. fact that it plays a role in many different theories of knowledge creation. Berger and This process integrates experience into Luckman (1971: 70-71) write that, “All human knowledge through cycles of action and activity is subject to habitualization. Any action feedback. Knowledge, in turn, supports the that is repeated frequently becomes cast into human capacity to understand present a pattern, which can then be reproduced with situations and shape future action. Experience an economy of effort and which ipso facto, is is transformed into knowledge in several ways. apprehended by its performer as that pattern One is reflection on the past. The other is the ... In terms of the meanings bestowed by man strategic judgment that human agents make upon his activity, habitualization makes it as they design the future. These judgments unnecessary for each situation to be defined link human beings to the environment by anew, step by step. A large variety of situations
14 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman may be subsumed under its predefinitions.” demographic facts. It is reflected in the fact that few university design teachers have had Habitualization need not prohibit critical a broad university background. It is reflected comprehension. The two processes work in the fact that doctoral programs in design together in dialectical relationship. They are are developing at a pace that far surpasses the distinct yet related dimensions of learning that availability of trained research faculty – and it depend intimately on each other. One form is reflected in the shortage of design of habitualization results from repeated acts professors and doctoral supervisors who have, of critical comprehension that transform themselves, earned a PhD. The demographics experience into knowledge. Critical of design programs reveal many similar comprehension depends on a generalized problems and challenges. The fact that we are store of knowledge generated by coming to recognize these challenges as habitualization. The knowledge spiral problems is, in itself, an important step describes the relationships between these forward. Diagnosis precedes cure. aspects of knowledge. These problems are not, however, the fault of The knowledge management framework craft practice. Quite the contrary. Craft practice posits knowledge creation as a spiral moving is eminently suited to reflective practice. Craft through epistemological and ontological practice is also well suited to theory dimensions (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995: 70- development and research. 73). The epistemological dimension can be portrayed as a spectrum running from explicit We are now seeing an increasing number of knowledge to tacit knowledge. The craft practitioners who also generate ontological dimension describes levels of significant research. Some of the work knowledge moving from individual knowledge emerging from this field is so significant that through group knowledge, organizational it is helping to revolutionize research methods knowledge, and inter-organizational training in other fields. An important example knowledge. One can extend the scale to social is seen in the work of Pirkko Anttila. and cultural knowledge. Pirkko Anttila, a professor in craft research, Human beings shift knowledge from one has become central in defining the challenges frame to another. As they do so, they embrace of research methodology in design. Anttila’s knowledge, enlarging it, internalizing it, (1996) book promises to revolutionize the transmitting it, shifting it, recontextualizing learning and use of research methods by and transforming it. Humans create new designers. The book is rooted in a rich, knowledge by acting on and working with structural approach that assesses design knowledge. Knowledge creation requires methods in terms of challenges, needs, and social context and individual contribution. desired outcomes. The book enables the This involves an effort to render tacit or individual reader to locate and begin to unknown explicit and known. explore a variety of research concepts through a pedagogically sophisticated program of 6 Theory and research accessible self-learning. At the same time, the The difficulty of fitting research into the field comprehensive overview makes this book a of design is not rooted in the nature of design. helpful guide to experienced researchers. Neither is it rooted in the nature of design Researchers in social science, management, knowledge. The great difficulty arises from a and economics as well as in art, craft, and field of practice with a huge population of design are using the Finnish edition. practitioners who were trained in the old vocational and trade traditions of design. This The problems that arise in a population of craft is, in part, to be expected in a profession so practitioners (Friedman 1997) have to do with new to the university. educational traditions rather than subject matter. This involves the failure of educators This situation is visible in many simple and practices in the arts and crafts – including
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 15 Friedman design – to keep up with the knowledge development of a professional research revolution. community, “...discussion about the scope and content of a young field of research helps to This is a sad paradox. Artisans and shop-floor form the identity of its scientific community. engineers were leading actors in the industrial Internal organization and boundary revolution. Artisans and artisan engineers definitions are central means for the social helped to develop the foundations of institutionalization of a specialty. The industrial practice. Some played important exchange of opinions and even disputes roles in the birth of new approaches to concerning the nature and limits of a field help education and learning. A few — such as to construct identity and thus become bases bookbinder Michael Faraday or printer for social cohesion” (Vakkari 1996: 169). Benjamin Franklin — even played a role in the birth of modern science. In this context, “conceptions of the structure and scope of a discipline are social constructs The problem we face today is that arts and that include certain objects within that domain crafts training – and design training in the art and exclude others. Depending on the level schools – is rooted neither in the rich craft of articulation, the outline of a discipline tradition nor in the research tradition of the dictates what the central objects of inquiry are, universities. This gives rise to a culture of how they should be conceptualized, what the people who mistake silence for tacit most important problems are and how they knowledge and confuses unreflective should be studied. It also suggests what kinds assertion with reflective practice. of solutions are fruitful. Although articulation is usually general, it shapes the solutions to The immature state of the academic discipline specific research projects. This general frame and the immature state of the profession in a is the toolbox from which researchers pick knowledge economy are two causes of failure solutions without necessarily knowing they are in design practice. doing so” (Vakkari 1996: 169).
Successful design practice requires a rich The concept of profound knowledge foundation in experience. Successful design establishes prerequisites for a toolbox of also requires explanatory principles, models, design knowledge that will permit broad and paradigms. The design profession has understanding linked to predictable results. developed few of these. Achieving desired change requires a foundation in theory. This Some kinds of design function within well- demands a conception of preferred situations defined domains such as industrial design, in comparison with other possible situations graphic design, textile design or furniture and an understanding of the actions that lead design. Other forms of design involve several from a current situation to a preferred one. design disciplines and several professions. General principles are required to predict and These include information design, process measure the outcome of decisions. This is design, product design, interface design, what W. Edwards Deming (1993: 94-118) terms transportation design, urban design, design profound knowledge, comprised of “four leadership and design management. parts, all related to each other: appreciation for a system; knowledge about variation; No single factor determines the location of any theory of knowledge; psychology” (Deming given design practice in a specific domain. In 1993: 96). today’s knowledge economy, therefore, designers must maintain a broad general The fact that design is young poses challenges perspective linked to a range of specific skills to the development of a rich theoretical in leadership, learning, analysis, knowledge framework. In order to develop this acquisition, research, and problem solving. framework, a community of researchers must [See figure 1] The demands of the knowledge identify themselves and enter dialogue. This economy distinguish design professionals process has only recently begun. In the from the design assistants who execute
16 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman specific applications required by the design have been misleading. Statements that process. conflate research with positivism are equally misleading. So, too, are essays that proclaim Intelligent designers are moving beyond craft systematic, rigorous research to be inflexible skill and vocational knowledge to professional or uncreative. One recent note asked knowledge. They do this by integrating plaintively, “where’s the search in research?” specific design knowledge with a larger range as though rigorous research involves little of understandings. This includes more than tedious cataloguing of established understanding the human beings whose facts. Many aspects of creative research are needs the design act serves. This includes tedious, but that’s also true of painting, music, understanding the social, industrial and and dance. economic circumstances in which the act of design takes place. This includes Without developing a comprehensive understanding the human context in which linguistic analysis of the word research, I will designed artifacts and processes are used. simply note that the prefix “re” came to this Intelligent designers also develop general word from origins outside English. The prefix knowledge of industry and business. A broad doesn’t seem to modify the core word in the platform enables designers to focus on direction of past or retroactive conditions, but problems in a rich, systemic way to achieve it seems, rather, to emphasize or strengthen desired change. it in some way.
Research is one source of the knowledge that As the dictionaries note (Merriam-Webster’s designers require. 1990, 1993: 1002; Britannica Webster’s 1999: unpaged), the meanings of research are 7 What is research? closely linked to the senses of search in Britannica Webster’s defines research with general, “Middle English cerchen, from Middle elegant simplicity. The first definition dates French cerchier to go about, survey, search, from 1577: from Late Latin circare to go about, from Latin circum round about — more at CIRCUM- “re·search noun Etymology: Middle French Date: 14th century transitive senses 1 : to look recerche, from recerchier to investigate into or over carefully or thoroughly in an effort thoroughly, from Old French, from re- + to find or discover something: as a : to examine cerchier to search — more at SEARCH in seeking something
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 17 Friedman clinical research. synthesist who helps to solve problems and a generalist who understands the range of Basic research involves a search for general talents that must be engaged to realize principles. These principles are abstracted and solutions. The designer is a leader who generalized to cover a variety of situations and organizes teams when one range of talents is cases. Basic research generates theory on not enough. Moreover, the designer is a critic several levels. This may involve macrolevel whose post-solution analysis ensures that the theories covering wide areas or fields, midlevel right problem has been solved. theories covering specific ranges of issues or microlevel theories focused on narrow A designer is a thinker whose job it is to move questions. Truly general principles often have from thought to action. The designer uses the broad application beyond their field of capacities of mind in an appropriate and original, and they may have surprising empathic way to solve problems for clients. predictive power arising from their generative Then, the designer works to meet customer nature. needs, to test the outcomes and to follow through on solutions. Applied research adapts the findings of basic research to classes of problems. It may also Here, we see the first value of research training involve developing and testing theories for for the professional designer. Given the these classes of problems. Applied research location of design practice in a specific, clinical tends to be midlevel or microlevel research. situation, a broader understanding of general At the same time, applied research may principles gives the practising designer a develop or generate questions that become background of principle and theory on which the subject of basic research. to draw. This comprehensive background will never arise in any immediate situation. Clinical research involves specific cases. Developing this background in the field of Clinical research applies the findings of basic practice takes years. In contrast, a solid research and applied research to specific foundation of design knowledge anchored in situations. It may also generate and test new broad research traditions gives each questions, and it may test the findings of basic practitioner the access to the cumulative and applied research in a clinical situation. results of many other minds and the overall Clinical research may also develop or generate experience of a far larger field. questions that become the subject of basic research or applied research. In fact, any of I will consider this issue later in discussing how the three frame of research may generate we move from research into practice. questions for the other fields, and each may test theories and findings from the other kinds Before asking what value research offers to of research. It is important, however, to note practice, it might be valuable to attempt a that clinical research generally involves specific summary definition of research. forms of professional engagement. In the shortest form, research is a way of In the rough and tumble of daily practice, most asking questions. All forms of research ask design practice is restricted to clinical questions, basic, applied and clinical. The research. There simply isn’t time for anything different forms and levels of research ask else. questions in different ways.
In today’s complex environment, a designer What distinguishes research from reflection? must identify problems, select appropriate Both involve thinking. Both seek to render the goals, and realize solutions. A designer may unknown explicit. Reflection, however, also assemble and lead a team to realize goals develops engaged knowledge from individual and solutions. Today’s designer works on and group experience. It is a personal act or a several levels. The designer is an analyst who community act, and it is an existential act. discovers problems. The designer is a Research, in contrast, addresses the question
18 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman itself, as distinct from the personal or As artists, we serve ourselves or we serve an communal. The issues and articulations of internalized vision that is, for all practical reflective practice may become the subject of purposes, a form of the self. In the professions, research, for example. This includes forms of we serve others than ourselves. In exploring participant research or action research by the the dimensions of design as service, Nelson same people who engaged in the reflection and Stolterman (2000) distinguish it from art that became the data. Research may also and science both. My view is that art and address questions beyond or outside the science each contributes to design. The researcher. paradigm of service unites them.
Research asks questions in a systematic way. To serve successfully demands an ability to The systems vary by field and purpose. There cause change toward desired goals. This, in are many kinds of research: hermeneutic, turn, involves the ability to discern desirable naturalistic inquiry, statistical, analytical, goals and to create predictable – or reasonably mathematical, physical, historical, sociological, predicable – changes to reach them. Science ethnographic, ethnological, biological, is a tool for this aspect of design, and research medical, chemical and many more. The is the collection of methods that enable us to methods and traditions on which they draw use the tool. are many and several. Each has its own foundations and values. Nevertheless, all 8 Reasons for research involve some form of systematic inquiry, and There are many reasons for research, basic, all involve a formal level of theorizing and applied, and clinical. These include: curiosity; inquiry beyond the specific research at hand. the desire to know something; the desire to know why something is; the desire to know This systemic approach offers a level of robust how something works; the need to solve a understanding that becomes one foundation problem; the desire to serve a client. There of effective practice. To reach from knowing are also practical reasons for research. For to doing requires practice. To reach from university faculty, this includes the doing to knowing, one requires the requirement that we publish. On the surface, articulation and critical inquiry that allows a this is simply a career requirement. At a deeper practitioner to gain reflective insight. W. level, the research requirement is based on a Edwards Deming’s experience in the applied simple fact. Those who create knowledge industrial setting and the direct clinical setting through research have a different and richer confirms the value of theory to practice. relationship to their subject field than those who simply teach the knowledge that others “Experience alone, without theory, teaches create. management nothing about what to do to improve quality and competitive position, nor Research has always been closely linked with how to do it” writes Deming (1986: 19). “If science. Simon’s (1982: 129) definition of the experience alone would be a teacher, then one goal of science in general is understanding may well ask why are we in this predicament? “things: how they are and how they work.” Experience will answer a question, and a This is the goal of science in its larger sense of question comes from theory.” systematic knowledge. This is why some cultures use the term “science” to cover many It is not experience, but our interpretation and disciplines or field of inquiry other than natural understanding of experience that leads to or social science. In the sense of knowledge. Knowledge, therefore, emerges understanding how things are and how they from critical inquiry. Systematic or scientific work, literature, history or theology can also knowledge arises from the theories that allow be seen as sciences. us to question and learn from the world around us. One of the attributes that Campbell, Daft, and Hulin (1982: 97-103) distinguish the practice of a profession from outline the basis for successful research. the practice of an art is systematic knowledge. Successful research requires active research
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 19 Friedman practice and lively involvement with restricted to narrow, immediately practical colleagues. Successful research is frequently goals deemed acceptable to practitioners and marked by convergence. Ideas, methods, judged only by practitioners, there’s no interests, problems and techniques interact in evident purpose to much of the most the work of a researcher. Good research is interesting work in design research today. often intuitive, based on a sense that the time is right for an idea. (This criterion, of course, But, then, if design research is to be restricted is more easily seen in hindsight, since research to narrow, immediately practical goals deemed ideas for which the time is not right tend to acceptable to practitioners, there would have vanish.) Successful research arises from been no purpose to much of the work of concepts and leads to theorization and several significant scholars in design, in theoretical understanding. engineering or industrial practice. Some of the figures of whom this is true are W. Edwards Robson (1993: 26) emphasizes the real world Deming, Donald Schon, Buckminster Fuller, value of successful research, with problems Victor Papanek, Henry Petroski and Edward “arising from the field and leading to tangible Tufte. and useful ideas.” There are powerful theoretical arguments for Here, I will assert the value of free inquiry and research and explanation. The evidence of basic research, research that is not always design research and design practice also concerned with immediate results identified supports these ideas. in terms of the “real world.” Explanation is a profound source of better Free inquiry and science have their uses, even application. While applications lie in the realm in service professions such as design. They are of practice, explanation lies in the realm of especially useful as a foundation for science. To expand the frame of knowledge improvements to practice. within which better applications emerge, we require profound explanations and the Science – vetenskap, wissenchaft – is freedom to seek them in pure form. systematic, organized inquiry and all the domain of theory-based thinking on design Many design researchers – and some designers constitute some form of science in this larger – seek to understand the world to explain it. sense. Scientific method in the restricted sense Let’s consider why a robust design process used for natural science has its uses, too. In requires understanding to explain. To use the sense that scientific inquiry can contribute Simon’s (1982: 129) elegant definition, to to design, it can, indeed match some of the design is to “[devise] courses of action aimed goals of the design discipline. No one has at changing existing situations into preferred suggested scientific inquiry can meet all the ones.” Why would we require an explanatory goals of design. Where science in the large design science for this to happen? To change sense or scientific method in the narrow sense existing situation into preferred ones, we must can be used, however, they should be used. understand the nature of preferred situations and the principles through which we achieve Design is both a making discipline and an them. This means, in Simon’s (1982: 129) integrated frame of reflection and inquiry. This words, understanding “things: how they are means, that design inquiry seeks explanations and how they work.” as well as immediate results. The best argument for the importance of One way to build better artifacts or cause understanding how things are and how they change in a desired direction is to understand work is the frequent failure of design larger principles. This requires philosophy and outcomes. Unintended consequences and theory of design linked to general explanation. performance failures result most often from a I don’t demand that everyone pursue this kind failure to understand how things are, how they of research. If design research is to be work, and – more important – a failure to
20 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman understand the linkages between designed perfect circles to describe celestial orbits. processes or artifacts and the larger context Since the planetary orbits are not circular, the within they are created and found. original Copernican model was less accurate than the Ptolemaic model with its rich Design activity involves goals other than catalogue of documented and precise natural, physical, and social science. It also observations. Practitioners found Ptolemaic involves some of the same goals. What is astronomy far more useful and accurate than different in design is that the framework of Copernican astronomy. The two systems inquiry is both interdisciplinary and competed for over a century after the integrative. The larger frame of design involves publication of Copernicus’s Revolutions. Many issues that are different from the sciences and argued, correctly, that Ptolemaic astronomy it involves issues that are explicitly parallel. was the better system. Despite its lack of Explanation is not our only goal. It is often mathematical elegance, it was far superior in among our goals. In some forms of design predictive power. That made it superior to research, it may well be the essential goal of a practising astronomers and astrologers. (The specific inquiry. largest group of practitioners using astronomical observations was astrologers.) Explanatory power is also the fuel of better practice. For decades, the Copernican model was a strange theoretical artifact with no practical Ideas and projects that do not work mark value. Although the Copernican solar system every growing field of inquiry. Methods, is essentially the correct model, it was deeply theories, even historical accounts, and flawed in practical terms. interpretative frames begin as proposals. These proposals begin in some form of idea Einstein’s theorizing began with discrepancies or inquiry or even in some form of intuition in the implications of theory. Maxwell’s laws or inspiration. The professions, technology, implied a profound problem regarding the the humanities, social science, and natural invariant nature of the speed of light science are all littered with ideas that seemed contrasted against the position of the promising to someone. Proposing ideas must observer. This is the same problem made clear always be free: once proposed, the ideas must by the Michelson-Morley experiments, though be subject to critical inspection, application Einstein began with the theory and not with and perhaps even testing to see which work. the Michelson-Morley observations.
The logic of idea generation involves intuition By taking one or two implications of Maxwell’s and deduction as well as induction and equations at face value, Einstein reached a abduction. Kepler got to his laws of planetary stunning new kind of proposal. This proposal motion the long way round, starting with took the form of special relativity. Here, trying to fit the orbits of the planets to Einstein was clear. Theory and hypotheses everything from music scales to a strange arise from intuition and the free play of the Pythagorean model of nested Platonic solids. mind. Theory must then be tested against By testing these against observational data, he empirical data. In Einstein’s case, theory eventually developed a series of laws that contradicted what many physics practitioners explain the model of the solar system we have believed to be common sense. used ever since. This, in turn, led to Newton’s work. No one denies the important of practice. I merely assert that in many cases, the research The earlier predictions of Ptolemaic that seems to serve practice in the short term astronomy worked perfectly well for the often fails to serve the long-term needs of a practitioners of the day. While the Copernican field. In failing to serve significant long-term model of the solar system was essentially needs, research restricted to that which seems better than the Ptolemaic model, Copernicus practical and applicable in today’s terms fails relied on an Aristotelian doctrine that uses to serve the best interests of practitioners.
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 21 Friedman
One of the reasons universities exist — and dramatic. No single advance did more for one of the values of basic research — is health through preventive care than the generating vital knowledge outside the introduction of antiseptic procedures and immediate constraints of practice. pasteurization of food.
9 When practice doesn’t want research Effective design research must be an act of free Even so, there are occasions when practice choice. Each researcher is free to decide what doesn’t want research. Sometimes, whether goals his or her research will serve. Some things work or not, it doesn’t matter. Many of design research ought to serve practice. Not Philippe Starck’s artifacts meet this criterion. all design research should be required to serve The lemon squeezer where the juice runs off practice. down the legs and the kettle that burns the hand in the act of pouring are good examples When a form of research is tied too closely to of these. I have now heard that Alessi actually the practice of any specific era, it is — by offers a guarantee that some Starck artifacts definition – often incapable of creating the won’t work. The guarantee of dysfunction is new knowledge of the future. It leads to supposedly part of the market appeal. I incremental improvements more often than imagine that the next item out will be a breakthrough. Since we do not know what prefilled water kettle, sealed and guaranteed knowledge may be useful in the future, to explode, destroying the stove and injuring demanding that we exclusively serve today’s the cook in the process. perceived needs will not advance a field.
Practitioners sometimes reject vital streams of Campbell, Daft, and Hulin (1982: 102) also research while seeking solutions that do work. outlined the reasons that are often associated One of the best known episodes of this with unsuccessful research. Several of these behaviour comes from medicine rather than reasons involve research done for motives design. other than genuine curiosity. Research undertaken purely for publication, for money In the middle of the 19th century, medical or funding is among these. A research theme practitioners believed that research into forced on a researcher is generally linked to antiseptic practice or bacteria had no practical one of these motives. Nothing is deadlier to value. the spirit of discovery.
A brief look at the history of antiseptic Fortunately, the world is filled with curious treatments of different kinds makes the case. people. As I see it, any robust research Semmelweiss, Lister and Pasteur had rough pursued with genuine vigour and the spirit of going. Semmelweiss, incidentally, got his initial discovery has value. The immediate values and ideas as an intuition that he tested with a the long-term values of any given research simply, rule-of-thumb procedures that were programme change and shift with time. essentially statistical in nature. The research dean at a university once told Medical research of that era made small me that a study of faculty publishing revealed advances. These pioneers made the greatest that it takes nearly one thousand hours of advance of the era with work that was bitterly work to develop a research article from first resisted by practitioners. medical practitioners conception to final publication. Clearly, it is thought this stream of inquiry had no value. hard to pay for the work this requires. This It is nevertheless possible that the medical leaves curiosity and passion as the most innovations arising from this work was the reliable motives for research. most significant advance of the past two millennia in terms of numbers of lives saved 10 From research into practice in medical practice and clinical application. When we began, I promised to address a There have been more astonishing number of issues. We have considered the innovations. Many advances have been more nature of design and reflected on how the
22 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman nature of design involves certain kinds of critical thinking and good mental habits. These knowledge. We have examined the sources of are the reasons that argue for the design knowledge. We have considered research as a science approach to design education source of knowledge, and we have considered (Friedman 1997). research in relation to other sources of knowledge. This has taken us a long way. Concrete research results become visible to practitioners in a myriad of ways. Journal Developing a sound line of reasoning takes results, conferences, corridor talk among time. The time it takes can often lead to colleagues, knowledge transfer in shared surprisingly swift conclusions. To fit these projects, Internet discussion groups. The thoughts in an hour, with time for dialogue, important issue is that a field must grow large I’m going to consider the last two questions enough and rich enough to shape results and in summary form. The first involves how we circulate them. As this happens, the create design knowledge through research. disciplinary basis of the larger field also grows The second asks how new knowledge move richer. This leads to a virtuous cycle of basic from research into practice. results that flow up toward applied research and to clinical applications. At every stage, Creating design knowledge rests open all the knowledge, experience and questions move sources we’ve considered here. Practical in both directions. experience is only one of these. Practice alone cannot create new knowledge. Not even The goal is a full knowledge creation cycle that reflective practice will generate new builds the field and all that practise in it. knowledge in significant measure. The Practice tends to embody knowledge. interplay of experience and reflection, inquiry Research tends to articulate knowledge. The and theorizing generates knowledge. One task knowledge creation cycle generates new of research is examining the ideas that arise knowledge through theorizing and reflection from the interplay of these different forms of both. knowledge. Research then helps to establish those forms of knowledge that offer the I’m going to end by proposing the kinds of greatest potential for further development. research that we need to build our field and the kinds of research that we must undertake This new knowledge moves into practice in to build the discipline that supports the field hundreds of ways. The field of innovation we build. studies examines the ways that new ideas are adopted in practice. [See endnote 2]. Not long ago, Tore Kristensen (1999: unpaged) raised an issue of stunning importance for Here, I’m going to cheat a little and offer a design research in addressing the notion of a very brief account of how this knowledge progressive research programme. The minute moves from research into practice. I heard him propose the idea, I realized that Fortunately, I also promise not to answer all this concept was so evident to those of us who these questions, so ending with a summation work in other fields that we had somehow will keep my promise and meet my guarantee overlooked the fact that no similar notion had to be done on time. yet been proposed in the field of design.
In a new field, the greatest need is to build a What is a progressive research programme? body of research – and to train a rich network Drawing on Kristensen (1999: unpaged), I of researchers and research-oriented have identified eight characteristics of a practitioners able to use the knowledge won progressive research program. These are: in research as a foundation for practice. 1 building a body of generalized knowledge, Research becomes the foundation of practice 2 improving problem solving capacity, in many ways. One is the foundation of 3 generalizing knowledge into new areas, concrete results. The other, perhaps even 4 identifying value creation and cost effects, more important, is in the development of 5 explaining differences in design strategies
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 23 Friedman
and their risks or benefits, In 1900, David Hilbert gave a famous speech 6 learning on the individual level, in which he outlined a progressive research 7 collective learning, programme for mathematical knowledge. In 8 meta-learning. the years after Hilbert proposed a progressive research programme, mathematicians solved Four areas of design research must be fundamental theoretical and philosophical considered in creating the foundation of problems. They contributed to rich progressive research programmes within and developments in physics and the natural across the fields of design: sciences. They even shaped applications that 1 Philosophy and theory of design make it possible for all of us to live a better 2 Research methods and research practices daily life. What I hope for in design research 3 Design education is many streams of work leading to new 4 Design practice. andimportant kinds of knowledge.
Each field of concern involves a range of These will serve the field of practice in concerns. (See Figure 3) manyways. Research serves the field through
Philosophy and theory of Research methods and Design education Design practice design research practices
Philosophy of design Research methods Philosophy of design Comprehensive practice Ontology of design Research issues education Profound knowledge Epistemology of design exploration Education based on Practice linked to solid Philosophy of design Progressive research research foundations in education science programs Education oriented to and research Theory construction Development from practice Professional develop- research to practice ment lifelong learning Knowledge creation Rethinking undergraduate education Undergraduate focus on intellectual skills for knowledge economy Undergraduate focus on practice skills for professional training Undergraduate focus on foundations for professional development Rethinking professional degrees Professional degrees oriented around intellectual skills Professional degrees oriented around practical skills Professional degrees oriented around professional development Research education Undergraduate and professional background for research education Research master’s degrees Doctoral education Postgraduate training Continuing education Lifelong learning Partnership with design firms Partnership with professional associations Partnership with industry Partnership with govt
Figure 3 A progressive research program for design knowledge
24 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman generating direct, concrete applications. of empirically distinguishable dimensions of Research serves the field by solving problems innovation and identify their associated that arise from the field itself. Research serves determinants (Damanpour 1991). the field by considering basic questions and issues that will help to shape disciplinary Much of the work on innovation has been in inquiry and fields of practice both. Research the context of organization theory. Given the serves the field by opening inquiry into basic fact that design is generally an organizational questions that we haven’t yet begun to ask. process, these studies can readily be adapted to understand how design research can lead All of these are part of the knowledge creation to improved practice in the context of design cycle. The important moment has come in firms and the industries they serve. While which research joins practice to build a some innovation studies examine community of design inquiry suited to the organizations well beyond the scope or scale challenges and demands of a knowledge of most design firms, the ideas they develop economy. can be fruitfully pursed in the context of design. Thank you. The propensity to innovate is a stable Endnotes characteristic of organizations over time (Miles (1) and Snow 1978; Miller and Friesen 1982; Mintzberg 1973). It depends on organizational A consideration of design knowledge is not size, structure and leadership (Burns and the forum for a detailed discussion of these Stalker 1966; Daft 1982; Damanpour 1992; issues. Nevertheless, design knowledge must Damanpour and Evan 1984; Hage and Dewar be considered against the background of the 1973; Kimberly and Evanisko 1981; Lawrence large cultural, social and economic trends and Lorsh 1967; Mohr 1969; Tushman and these issues define. Those who wish a richer Romanelli 1985; Wilson 1966). picture of my views on the social and cultural transformations of the past century will find a There are several kinds of innovation. These deeper discussion elsewhere (Friedman 1998; include technological innovation and Friedman and Olaisen 1999a). Those who wish administrative innovation (Daft 1978; to go deeper still will find a massive body of Kimberly and Evanisko 1981; Damanpour books and articles. Among these, a few stand 1987). Administrative and technical out, framing the issues of the new society in a innovations do not relate to the same comprehensive philosophical, scientific or predictor variables (Aiken, Bacharach and socioeconomic frame (f.ex., Bell 1976; Berg French 1981; Evan and Black 1967; Kimberly et al. 2000; Borgmann 1984, 1992; Castells and Evanisko 1981). In the “dual-core-model” 1996a, 1996b, 1996c; Castells and Hall 1994; of organizational innovation, low Drucker 1990, 1998; Flichy 1991, 1995; Innis professionalism, high formalization, and high 1950, 1951, 1995a, 1995b; Machlup 1962, 1979, centralization facilitate administrative 1983; Mitchell 1995; Nye and Owens 1996; innovation. Inverse conditions facilitate Olaisen et al. 1996; Paik 1974; Sassen 1991, technical innovation (Daft 1978: 206). The 1996) “ambidextrous model” of innovation suggests that high structural complexity, low (2) formalization, and low centralization facilitate Innovation studies comprise a broad field of the initiation of innovations while inverse inquiry (Damanpour 1991). Authors conditions facilitates their implementation distinguish between the “diffusion” and (Duncan 1976: 179). “adoption” of innovations (Kimberly 1981: 85) as well as between studies of “innovating” and There are a number of distinctions to be made “innovativeness” (Van de Ven and Rogers 1988: concerning the quality and character of 636). The primary purpose of most innovation innovation. Innovation can be either radical studies has been to demonstrate the existence or incremental (Dewar and Dutton 1986;
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 25 Friedman
Ettlie, Bridges, and O’Keefe 1984; Nord and declining performance if prompt realignment Tucker 1987). In addition, there are important of the fit between strategy and structure fails differences the govern the initiation and to occur (Burns and Stalker 1966; Chandler implementation stages of adopting of 1962; Lawrence and Lorsch 1969). Firms innovation (Marino 1982; Zmud 1982). There experiencing declining performance may are also different organizational levels involved therefore change strategies (Miles and in innovation (Aiken, Bacharach, and French Cameron 1982) and ultimately develop 1981). organizational structures to respond more effectively to new environmental Some investigators have found that contingencies. Indeed, one might argue that substandard performance causes the increase in “hybrid” organizations, dysfunctional behaviour and diminished strategic alliances and other novel cooperative innovation (Caldwell and O’Reilly 1982; arrangements between firms (Borys and Cameron, Kim and Whetten 1987; Hall 1976; Jemison 1989; Powell 1987) constitutes Manns and March 1978; McKinley 1987; Smart widespread organizational innovation in and Vertinsky 1977; Starbuck, Greve and response to declining performance stemming Hedberg 1978; Staw, Sanadelands and Dutton from environmental change. 1981). There is now a growing body of overview Others argue that poor performance is actually literature in the field, including conceptual necessary as a catalyst of the search for new articles and reviews Daft 1982; Damanpour practices in an organization (Argyris and Schon 1988; : Kimberly 1981; Tornatzky and Klein 1978; Bowman 1982; Chandler 1962; Cyert and 1982; Van de Ven 1986; Wolfe 1994. March 1963; Meyer 1982; McKinley 1987; Singh 1986; Wilson 1966;). Together with two colleagues (Friedman, Djupvik and Blindheim 1995) I reviewed these Organizations tend to act inconsistently. They issues at greater length in relation to can lead their industries with innovative professional education and in relation to the practices in one period, while lagging behind specific issues involved in innovation as a their peers as late-adopters at other times research field. (Mansfield 1968). References An alternative view claims that the propensity • Aida, S. et al. (1985), The science and to innovate will vary over time, following a praxis of complexity, United Nations company’s performance level (Bolton 1993; University, Tokyo. Mansfield 1968). • Aiken, M., Bacharach, S. B. and French, J. A growing body of literature (Tushman and L. (1981) ‘Organizational structure, work Romanelli 1985; Tushman and Anderson 1986) process, and proposal making in suggests that organizations evolve through administrative bureaucracies’. Academy of convergent periods punctuated by management journal, 23, 631-652. reorientation or major innovations which reconfigure the organization’s path into the • Anttila, Pirkko (1996), Tutkimisen taito ja next lengthy period of incremental adaptation tiedonhankinta. Taito-, taide-, ja and adjustment (Miller and Friesen 1984). muotoilualojen tutkimuksen tyoevaelineet, Aakatiimi Oy, Helsinki. Contingency theorists and strategy researchers also provide affirmative • Argyris, Chris (1961) ‘Puzzle and perplexity theoretical supportive for a positive in executive development’. Personnel relationship between substandard journal, 39, 463-466. organizational performance and innovation. One stream of contingency research asserts • Argyris, Chris (1968) ‘Conditions for that changing environments may lead to competence acquisition and therapy’.
26 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman
Journal of applied behavioral science, 4, Press, Chicago. 147-177. • Borys, B. and Jemison, D. B. (1989) ‘Hybrid • Argyris, Chris (1982), Reasoning, learning, arrangements as strategic alliances: and action: individual and theoretical issues in organizational organizational, San Francisco: Jossey- combinations’. Academy of management Bass. review, 14, 234-249.
• Argyris, Chris and Donald A. Schon (1978), • Bowman, E. H. (1982) ‘Risk seeking by Organizational learning, Addison-Wesley, troubled firms’. Sloan management Reading, MA. review, 33-42.
• Argyris, Chris and Schon, Donald A. (1992), • Britannica Webster’s (1999), Encyclopedia Theory in practice: increasing Britannica Online, Merriam-Webster’s professional effectiveness, (Jossey-Bass Collegiate Dictionary, Encyclopedia Higher and Adult Education Series), Jossey- Britannica, Inc., Chicago. URL: http:// Bass Publishers, New York. search.eb.com/. Date accessed: 21 November 1999. • Barnes, Louis B., Christensen, Roland C. and Hansen, Abby J. (1987), Teaching and • Bunge, Mario (1996), Finding the the case method, Harvard Business School philosophy in social science, Yale Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. University Press, New Haven.
• Bateson, Gregory (1984:41), Scientific • Burke, James and Ornstein, Robert (1997), American, September 1984. The axemaker’s gift. Technology’s capture and control of our minds and culture, • Bell, Daniel (1976), The coming of post- Tarcher Putnam, New York. industrial society, Penguin, Harmondsworth. • Burns, T. and Stalker, G. (1966), The management of innovation, Tavistock, • Berg, Per Olof, Anders Linde-Laursen, and London. Orvar Lofgren (eds) (2000), Invoking a transnational metropolis. The making of the Oresund region, Studentlitteratur, • Caldwell, D. and O’Reilly, C. A. (1982) Lund. ‘Responses to failure: the effects of choice and responsibility on impression • Berger, Peter and Luckman, Thomas management’. Academy of management (1971), The social construction of reality: journal, 25, 121-136. a treatise in the sociology of knowledge, Penguin, Harmondsworth. • Cameron, K. S., Sutton, R. I. and Whetten, D. A. (1988) ‘Issues in Organizational • Bolton, Michele Kremen (1993) Decline’. In Cameron, K. S., Sutton, R. I. ‘Organizational innovation and and Whetten, D. A. (eds) Readings in substandard performance. When is organizational decline. Frameworks, necessity the mother of innovation?’ research and prescriptions, Ballinger Organization science, 4, 1, 57-75. Publishing Co., Cambridge, MA, 3-19.
• Borgmann, Albert (1984), Technology and • Campbell, John Paul, Daft, Richard L. and the character of contemporary life. A Hulin, Charles L. (1982), What to study: philosophical inquiry, University of generating and developing research Chicago Press, Chicago. questions, Sage, Beverly Hills.
• Borgmann, Albert (1992), Crossing the • Castells, Manuel (1996a), The information postmodern divide, University of Chicago age. Economy, society and culture.
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 27 Friedman
Volume I: the rise of the network society, type, radicalness, and the adoption Blackwell, Oxford. process’. Communication research, 15, 545-567. • Castells, Manuel (1996b), The information age. Economy, society and culture. • Damanpour, Fariborz (1991) Volume II: the power of identity, Blackwell, ‘Organizational innovation. A meta-analysis Oxford. of effects of determinants and moderators’. Academy of management journal, 34, 555- • Castells, Manuel (1996c), The information 590. age. Economy, society and culture. Volume III: end of millennium, Blackwell, • Damanpour, Fariborz (1992) Oxford. ‘Organizational size and innovation’. Organization studies, 13, 3, 375-402. • Castells, Manuel and Hall, Peter (1994), Technopoles of the world. The making of • Damanpour, Fariborz and Evan, W. M. 21st century industrial complexes, (1984) ‘Organizational innovation and Routledge, London. performance: the problem of ‘organizational lag’. Administrative science • Casti, John L. (1995), Complexification. quarterly, 29, 392-409. Explaining a paradoxical world through the science of surprise, Abacus, London. • Deming, W. Edwards, 1986, Out of the Crisis. Quality, productivity and • Chandler, A. D. Jr. (1962), Strategy and pompetitive position, Cambridge structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. University Press, Cambridge.
• Christensen, Roland C., Garvin, David A. • Deming, W. Edwards (1993), The new and Sweet, Ann (1991), Education for economics for industry, government, judgement. The artistry of discussion education, Massachusetts Institute of leadership, Harvard Business School Press, Technology, Center for Advanced Cambridge, Massachusetts. Engineering Study, Cambridge, Massachusetts. • Cyert, R. and March, J. G. (1963), A behavioral theory of the firm, Prentice- • Dewar, Robert D. and Dutton, Jane E. Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. (1986) ‘The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical • Daft, R. L. (1978) ‘A dual-core model of analysis’. Management science, 32, 1422- organizational innovation’. Academy of 1433. management journal, 21, 193-210. • Drucker, Peter F. (1990), The new realities, • Daft, Richard L. (1982) ‘Bureaucratic versus Mandarin, London. nonbureaucratic structure and the process of innovation an change’. In Bacharach, S. • Drucker, Peter F. (1993), Post-capitalist B. (ed) Research in the sociology of society, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. organizations, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 129-166. • Drucker, Peter F. (1998), Managing in a time of great change, Truman Talley Books, • Damanpour, Fariborz (1987) ‘The adoption New York. of technological, administrative, and ancillary innovations: impact of • Duncan, R. B. (1976) ‘The ambidextrous organizational factors’. Journal of organization: designing dual structures for management, 13, 675-688. innovation’. In Kilman, R.H., Pondy, L. D. and Slevin, D.P. (eds) The management of • Damanpour, Fariborz (1988) ‘Innovation organization design, Elsevier, North-
28 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman
Holland, New York, NY. accessed: 1 July 2000.
• Ettlie, John E., Bridges, William P. and • Friedman, Ken and Olaisen, Johan (eds) O’Keefe, Robert D. (1984) ‘Organization (1999a),Underveis til fremtiden. strategy and structural differences for Kunnskapsledelse i teori og praksis. radical versus incremental innovation’. Fagbokforlaget, Bergen-Sandvika. Management science, 30, 682-695. • Friedman, Ken and Olaisen, Johan (1999b) • Evan, W. M. and Black, G. (1967) ‘Knowledge management’. In Friedman, ‘Innovation in business organizations: Ken and Olaisen, Johan (eds) Underveis til some factors associated with success or fremtiden. Kunnskapsledelse i teori og failure of staff proposals’. Journal of praksis, Fagbokforlaget, Bergen-Sandvika, business, 40, 519-530. 14-29.
• Flichy, Patrice (1991), Une histoire de la • Friedman, Ken, Djupvik, Olav and communication modern: Espace public et Blindheim, Trond (1995) ‘Teaching vie privee, Editions Decouverte, Paris. Innovation’. In Proceedings of the 13th Nordic conference on business studies, I, • Flichy, Patrice (1995), Dynamics of modern 173-188. communication. The shaping and impact of new communication technologies, Sage • Fuller, Buckminster (1969), Utopia or Publications, London. oblivion: the prospects for humanity, Bantam Books, New York. • Friedman, Ken (1992), Strategic design taxonomy, Oslo Business School, Oslo. • Garfinkel, Harold (1967), Studies in ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall, • Friedman, Ken (1993), Introducing Englewood Cliffs, NJ. strategic design, Oslo Marketing Symposium, Oslo, Norway. • Goldman, Alvin I. (1999), Knowledge in a social world, Oxford University Press, Oxford. • Friedman, Ken (1997) ‘Design science and design education’. In McGrory, Peter (ed) • Hage, Jerald, and Dewar, Robert (1973) The challenge of complexity, University of ‘Elite values versus organizational structure Art and Design Helsinki UIAH, Helsinki, 54- in predicting innovation’. Administrative 72. science quarterly, 18, 279-290.
• Friedman, Ken (ed) (1998), Built • Hall, R. (1976) ‘A system pathology of an environment, 24, 2/3, Alexandrine Press, organization: the rise and fall of the old Oxford. [Theme: Building Cyberspace: Saturday Evening Post’. Administrative Information, Place and Policy.] science quarterly, 21, 185-211.
• Friedman, Ken (2000) ‘Design knowledge: • Heidegger, Martin (1993), Being and time, context, content and continuity’. In Blackwell, Oxford. Durling, David and Friedman, Ken (eds) Doctoral education in design: • Innis, Harold (1950), Empire and foundations for the future, Staffordshire communications, Oxford University Press, University Press, Stoke-on-Trent. In press. Oxford.
• Friedman, Ken (2000) “Basic research, free • Innis, Harold (1951), The bias of inquiry and knowledge creation in design. communication, University of Toronto [Response to Luis Pereira].” DRS. Design Press, Toronto. Research Society. Date: 27 Jun 2000 07:48 BST. URL:
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 29 Friedman
communication, with an introduction by • Mansfield, E. (1968), Industrial research Heyer, Paul and Crowley, David, University and technological innovation, an of Toronto Press, Toronto. econometric analysis, Norton, New York.
• Innis, Harold (1995b), Staples, markets • Marino, K. E. (1982) ‘Structural correlations and cultural change, edited with an of affirmative action compliance’. Journal introduction by Drache, Daniel, McGill- of management, 8, 75-93. Queen’s University Press, Montreal and Kingston. • McKinley, W. (1987) ‘Organizational decline and innovation in manufacturing’. In • Jimenez Narvaez, Luz Maria (2000) Bozeman, B., Crow, M. and Link, A. (eds) ‘Design’s own knowledge’. Design issues, Strategic management of industrial 16, 1, 36-51. research and development, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 147-159. • Kimberly, John R. and Evanisko, Michael J. (1981) ‘Organizational innovation: the • Merriam-Webster, Inc. (1990), Webster’s influence of individual, organizational and ninth new collegiate dictionary, contextual factors on hospital adoption of Springfield, Massachusetts. technological and administrative innovations’. Academy of management • Merriam-Webster, Inc. (1993), Merriam- journal, 24, 689-713. Webster’s collegiate dictionary, tenth edition, Springfield, Massachusetts. • Kolb, David A. (1984), Experiential learning: experience as the source of • Meyer, A. D. (1982) ‘Adapting to learning and development, Prentice Hall, environmental jolts’. Administrative Englewood Cliffs, NJ. science quarterly, 27, 515-537.
• Lawrence, P. R. and Lorsch, J. (1967), • Miles, R. H. and Cameron, K. S. (1982), Organization and environment, Richard Coffin nails and corporate strategies, D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, IL. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. • Machlup, Fritz (1962), The production and • Miles, R. E. and Snow, C. C. (1978), distribution of knowledge in the United Organizational strategy, structure and States, Princeton University Press, process, McGraw-Hill, New York. Princeton.
• Machlup, Fritz (1979), Knowledge and • Miller, Danny and Friesen, Peter H. (1982) information, Princeton University Press, . ‘Innovation in conservative and Princeton. entrepreneurial firms: two models of strategic momentum’. Strategic • Machlup, Fritz (1983) ‘Semantic quirks in management journal, 3, 1-25. studies of information’. In Machlup, Fritz and Mansfield, U. (eds) The study of • Miller, Danny and Friesen, Peter H. (1984), information, Wiley, New York, 641-672. Organizations: a quantum view, Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. • Mackay, Alan L. (ed) (1991), A dictionary of scientific quotations, Institute of Physics • Mintzberg, Henry (1973), The nature of Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia. managerial work, Harper and Row, New York. • Manns, C. L. and March, J. G. (1978) ‘Financial adversity, internal competition, • Mitchell, W. J. (1995), City of bits. Space, and curriculum change in a university’. place and the Infobahn, MIT Press, Administrative science quarterly, 23, 541- Cambridge, Massachusetts. 552.
30 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University Friedman
• Mohr, L. (1969) ‘Determinants of practitioner-researchers, Blackwell, Oxford. innovation in organizations’. American political science review, 63, March, 111- • Sassen, Saskia (1991), The global city, 126. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
• Nelson, Harold and Stolterman, Erik (2000) • Sassen, Saskia (1996), Losing control. ‘Design as being in service’. In Durling, Sovereignty in an age of globalization, David and Friedman, Ken (eds) Doctoral Columbia University Press, New York. education in design: foundations for the future, University Press, Stoke-on-Trent: • Schon, Donald A. (1983), The reflective Staffordshire. In press. practitioner: how professionals think in action, Basic Books, New York. • Nord, W. R. and Tucker, S. (1987), Implementing routine and radical • Schon, Donald A. (1990), Educating the innovations, D.C. Heath and Company, Reflective Practitioner, Jossey-Bass Inc, Lexington Books, Lexington. Publishers, New York.
• Nye, Joseph S., Jr., and Owens, William • Simon, Herbert (1982), The sciences of the (1996) ‘America’s information edge’. artificial, 2nd ed, MIT Press, Cambridge, Foreign affairs, March-April, 20-36. Massachusetts.
• Nonaka, Ikujiro and Takeuchi, Hirotaka • Singh, J. V. (1986) ‘Performance, slack, and (1995), The knowledge-creating company: risk taking in organizational decision how Japanese companies create the making’. Academy of management dynamics of innovation, Oxford University journal, 29, 562-585. Press, New York. • Smart, C. and Vertinsky, I. (1977) ‘Designs • Ochoa, George and Corey, Melinda (1995), for crisis decision making’. Administrative The timeline book of science, Ballantine, science quarterly, 22, 640-657. New York. • Starbuck, W. H., Greve, A. and Hedberg, L. • Olaisen, Johan, Munch-Pedersen, Erland T. (1978) ‘Responding to crisis’. Journal of and Wilson, Patrick (eds) (1996), business administration, 9, 2111-2137. Information science. From the development of the discipline to social • Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E. and Dutton, interaction, Scandinavian University Press, J. E. (1981) ‘Threat-rigidity effects in Oslo. organizational behavior: a multilevel analysis’. Administrative science quarterly, • Paik, Nam June (1974) ‘Media planning for 26, 501-524. the postindustrial society’. Reprinted in Paik, Nam June and Moffett, Kenworth W. • Tornatzky, L. G. and Klein, K. J. (1982) (eds) (1995) The electronic superhighway, ‘Innovation characteristics and innovation Holly Solomon Gallery, Hyundai Gallery adoption-implementation: a meta-analysis and the Fort Lauderdale Museum of Art, of findings’. IEEE Transactions on New York, Seoul and Fort Lauderdale, 39- engineering management, 29, 28-45. 47. • Tushman, M. L. and Andersson, P. (1986) • Powell, W. W. (1987) ‘Hybrid organizational ‘Technological discontinuities and arrangements’. California management organizational environments’. review, 30, 67-88. Administrative science quarterly, 31, 439- 465. • Robson, Colin (1993), Real world research, A resource for social scientists and • Tushman, M. and Romanelli, E. (1985)
IDATER 2000 Loughborough University 31 Friedman
‘Organizational evolution: a • Waldrop, M. Mitchell (1992), Complexity. metamorphosis model of convergence and The emerging science at the edge of order reorientation’. In Staw, B. M. and and chaos, Simon and Schuster, New York. Cummings, L. L. (eds) Research in organizational behavior, JAI Press, • Wilson, J. Q. (1966) ‘Innovation in Greenwich, Conn. organization: notes toward a theory’. In Thompson, J. D. (ed) Approaches to • Vakkari, Pertti (1996) ‘Library and organizational design, University of information science. Content and scope’. Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 193-218. In Olaisen, Johan, Munch-Pedersen, Erland and Wilson, Patrick (eds) Information • Wolfe, Richard A. (1994) ‘Organizational science. From the development of the innovation: review, critique and suggested discipline to social interaction, research directions’. Journal of Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, 169- management studies, 31 3., 405-431. 231. • Zaltman, G., Duncan, R. and Holbek, J. • Van de Ven, A. H. (1986) ‘Central problems (1973), Innovations and organizations, in the management of innovation’. Wiley, New York. Management Science, 32, 590-607. • Zmud, Robert W. (1982) ‘Diffusion of • Van de Ven, A. H. and Rogers, E. M. (1988) modern software practices: influence of ‘Innovations and organizations: critical centralization and formalization’. perspectives’. Communication research, Management science, 28, 1421-1431. 15 5., 632-651.
32 IDATER 2000 Loughborough University