Design Thinking= Design for Science

 

The first thoughts that comes to my mind when I hear Design Thinking are people skilled in Information Technology and business leaders collaborating to design more swift, precise technology to cater to the demands of the constantly evolving society. For me, design and thinking seem juxtapose because one cannot create anything without a thought. In other words designers first had to have the idea in order to design anything.

Design thinking according to ted.com is, “The mission of fusing design, business and social studies to come up with deeply researched, deeply understood designs and ideas — they call it “design thinking.” Tim Brown’s IDEO company started out as a conference in 1984 and invited people from three worlds- Technology, Entertainment and Design. Since then the company has broadened its scope with 2 annual world conferences.
With the three careers working in conjunction many ideas such as the portable defibrillator have emerged. As stated by aiga.org  “Design brings empathy and creativity to social challenges. Empathy helps in understanding the human-centered solutions that can make a real difference in real people’s lives; creativity can defeat habits with innovative approaches to making a measurable difference.” Both Aiga and Tim Brown has captured the critical components of empathy, creativity, design and education that is the foundation of Design Thinking.

 

After perusing the following websites ted.com and aiga.org, I formed my own definition of design thinking. My definition of design think is fearless independent thinking people form various careers that are sensitive to the silent issues that people aren’t courageous enough and/or lack the research time to attack head first. These people live by the quote, “When people are silent that is when people get hurt.” – Unknown. No, this isn’t meant to be negative in any manner. However, IDEO is aware that just the thoughts that they have grappled with or issues that they have encountered can be solved with the help of other curious, design oriented people like themselves. For instance, women for a long time in the ’60s and ’70’s adhered to the advice of their physicians that smoking cigarettes were harmless to their unborn child. Now day Design Thinkers such as endocrinologists, and pediatricians would contemplate that if the affects of smoking cause lung cancer, and depressed appetite, how could cigarette smoking in any way be healthy for pregnant women?”

In conclusion, design thinking corresponds to design for science by capturing various facets of science, its unique design and how scientific methods/ experiments, conundrums, etc, can be delineated in a practical simple way for people affected by these changes to obtain a more feasible explanation of what they were confused about. In other words design thinkers fuse to eradicate the confusion. Make sense?

Resources:

http://www.ted.com/pages/about. Cited September 27, 2012

http://www.aiga.org/why-design/ Designers.  Cited September 27, 2012

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s