Page 1

DESIGN THINKING AUTHOR: NIGEL CROSS POINTS: 2 I was   willing   to   read   this   book   both   becouse   it   has   been   the   first   one   I’ve   read   about   Design   Thinking   and   because   it   has   been   the   first   book   in   my   life   I   bought   trough   the   Internet.   It   has   been   interesting   to   see   how   the   author   talks   about   different   Designing   examples,   interviewing   most   of   them.   It   also   made   a   2-­‐hour   experiment   with   similar   products,   differentiating   designers   on   one   side   and   designer  teams  from  the  other.  I  have  to  say  that  reading  this  book  has  been  great   and   fascinating,   the   English   hasn’t   been   a   problem;   the   only   bad   thing   from   my   point   of   view   is   that   I   was   expecting   more   theories   to   apply,   or   more   dynamics,   something  more.   First  of  all,  I’ve  liked  to  read  Schön’s  theory  about  education:   “Competent   practitioners   usually   know   more   than   they   can   say,   they   have   more   tacit   Knowledge.   They   have   intuitive   behavior   in   practical   contexts   of   thinking   and   acting”  This  embodies  the  “learning  by  doing”  spirit  of  Team  Academy.  You  have  to   be  in  a  situation  of  complexity  to  develop  yourself  to  the  limit.  That  is  something   similar   to   what   we   call   “the   panic   zone”,   were   more   learning   is   created.   He   also   mentions  the  question  “What  If?”,  which  always  carries  moves  if  you  act,  as  I  have   said   before.   This   is   the   base   of   Design.   Anyone   could   be   a   designer     by   asking   oneself   this   question   more   often.   I   think   people   just   make   the   question   for   themselves,  but  they  don’t  act.   I  would  like  to  highlight  the  importance  of  drawing  in  a  Design  process.  The  art  of   drawing   everything   seems   to   clarify   the   thoughts;   the   brain   is   not   able   to   work   with   all   information   it   gets.   These   drawings   are   interactions   between   internal   mental  processes  an  external  representation.  Here  I  have  read  a  dynamic  that  we   will   use   in   Futurama,   drawing   your   own   design   and   passing   the   draw   to   other   people.   What   can   we   get   from   there?   Who   knows.   I   think   I   have   to   return   to   an   habit  that  I  took  in  Ghana,  where  I  drew  everything.  It  will  be  more  useful  for  my   own  learning  diary.   Nigel   also   shares   with   us   how   a   Designing   process   is,   where   in   the   way   will   the   problems   appear   and   is   necessary   to   solve   them   and   find   new   solutions   constantly   (I  have  just  read  Who  move  my  cheese?  and  it  is  about  this  idea).  From  the  other   side,   it   divides   the   Design   Process   in   four   principal   phases:   1.   Analyze   fully   the   problem,  2.  Divide  it  in  sub  problems,  3.  Find  sub  solutions  and  4.  Combine  them  to   get   the   global   solution.   It   has   been   funny   to   read   this   because   one   or   two   weeks   ago  we  asked  Garazi  for  a  dynamic  about  how  to  improve  relationship  in  Chinese   and   Indian   companies   and   she   share   this   one   with   us   .   Serendipity.   From   other   side,   I   have   to   say   that   I   don’t   like   this   process   too   much,   because   as   I’ve   shared   before,   new   questions   and   moves   can   appear   in   the   way.   In   the   U.S.A   there   is   another   movement,   “Creative   conscience”,   growing   really   fast   defending   that   Design  Thinking  process  is  almost  outdated.  

Other positive  learning  I  get  from  the  book  is  the  need  of  having  a  Global  view  with   one   simple   objective,   the   final   win.   The   best   example   of   this   is   the   car   designer   Gordon   Murray.   He   detected   the   possibility   of   doing   a   pit   stop.   He   was   the   first   person  seeing  the  real  value  of  this  new  strategy  and  now  is  usual  in  all  the  races.   He  also  invented  a  concept  of  carrying  3  people  in  a  small  city  car.  He  was  a  genius.   In  this  case,  I  think  that  in  taZEBAez  people  don’t  have  this  common  view,  I  don’t   think  in  third  year  all  of  us  know  how  to  describe  taZEBAez  with  a  global  view.       It   also   defends   the   team   designing.   He   did   the   experiment   of   putting   together   3   designers   some   conclusions   where   taken.   The   first   one   was   that   the   innovative   designer  needs  to  work  in  a  small  team  of  committed  people  with  same  passions   and   dedication,   where   planned   and   unplanned   actions   take   place.   Yes,   same   commitments,   same   passions,   same   dedication,   same   global   view,   …   It   sounds   really   nice,   like   a   dream.   I   would   like   to   work   in   one   of   these   teams,   maybe   taZEBAez  will  soon  be  something  similar.  I  hope.    It  is  also  really  important  to  share  and  gather  information;  if  not,  there  could  be   too   much   misinterpretation   and   misunderstanding.   This   is   a   normal   mistake   of   taZEBAez.  This  year  there  are  many  cases  where  the  communications  has  not  been   very  good.  The  clearest  examples  are  Finland,  Brasil  and  Madrid  projects.  For  the   ones  in  the  office,  I  think  Monday  morning  meeting  should  be  more  important.     Finally   I   will   like   to   share   some   other   sentences   I   have   taken   from   the   book   and   made  me  think  about  them:   -­‐ -­‐

The best   way   to   know   what   a   designer   is   thinking   is   to   ask   him   “what   are   you   thinking?”.  I  will  like  to  put  this  in  practice  in  Shanghai.     It   is   a   cognitive   social   process   Design   is   not   hidden,   it   is   constructed   in   in   public,   so   other   people   can   read   it,   and   accepting   commentary   on   it   from   somebody  else  is  part  of  a  tradition  they  embody.  This  Idea  is  not  jet  in  every   bodies  mind,  people  don’t  believe  in  open  innovation  and  we  have  to  try  to   change  that.  


The solution  is  not  always  based  on  the  problem,  may  be  something  that  not   only   the   client,   but   also   the   designer   "never   dreamed   he   wanted".   NO   COMMENT  ON  THIS  ONE.  


Keep looping  back  at  fundamental  physical  principles.  How  many  times  has   JM  told  us  “back  to  the  basics”?     Is  important  to  have  in  mind  the  functional  viewpoint  of  the  designed  product   (   service   in   our   case)   it   has   to   be   a   pleasure   to   operate   with   it.   You   always   have  to  have  in  mind  the  users  experience  



Risk taking  is  the  difference  between  innovative  and  no  innovative  Designers.   We   can   find   the   same   difference   between   an   entrepreneur   and   an   innovative   entrepreneur,   and   between   a   normal   person   and   an   innovative   person.  Indirect….  

-­‐ -­‐

Sudden  illumination  is  a  frequent  element  in  creative  design  thinking.  When   you  get  the  idea  you  have  to  work  on  it  when  the  idea  is  hot.     People   who   prefer   the   certainly   of   structured,   well-­defined   problems   will   never  appreciate  the  delight  of  being  a  designer.      


Design Thinkin by Nigel Cross  

Ensayo del libro Design Thinking, practicidad de los productos o servicios basandose en las necesidades del usuario

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you