Why Is Design Important?

An Introduction
Silke Konsorski-Lang and Michael Hampe

1.1 State-of-the-Art Design Research

Although design is as old as the human race itself, pervades our lives, and is fundamental to many different disciplines, the concept design is often vaguely dened, and the way in which it is understood and applied within these various disciplines diverges substantially. Design is a commonly shared key component for many diverse disciplines such as science, engineering, management and architecture to name just a few. For example, there is system design in engineering, algorithm design in computer science, process design in management, creative design in architecture, and self-organizational design in biology. However within these elds the way in which design is understood and utilized differs signicantly. Design research, including design science and design methodologies, is a wide and comprehensive eld based on both expertise and formulated terminologies that are specic to a discipline. Even though research on design can be traced back to the early 1960s, it currently needs extensive research, now more than ever. The design methods developed in the 1960s and research into articial intelligence in the 1980s provided some advances, but they did not have a signicant practical impact. The fundamentals and principles of design are relatively little understood. Surprisingly, little effort has been made to investigate either the fundamental issues or the foundations of design and to formulate specic criteria to establish

it as an extensive scientic concept and discipline in its own right. For instance, in some specic engineering disciplines, such as user interface design, handbooks with detailed design instructions do exist already. However, a holistic understanding of design would enable completely new perspectives of and approaches to diverse disciplines, including those of architecture, engineering, management, and natural science. Until now, the potential of merging knowledge from various disciplines has only rarely been investigated.

1.1.1 What is Design Science?

Design is typically concerned with creating things that people want. As the initial brainwork is normally unseen by those on the outside of the thought process, design is often seen as a procedure related to material things. According to S. A. Gregory, the fundamental idea behind design is building a structure, pattern, or system within a situation (Gregory 1966). And there are many examples of this. Engineering design is goal oriented and concerned with the process of making artifacts and complex systems for expert use. In natural science, design abides mainly by the laws of nature. However, engineers, technologists, and scientists, as well as architects, artists, and poets are all involved in design processes. These processes are relatively more or less creative, but all imply that thinking ahead is a signicant component of this process. Many authors and scientists have sought to dene the term design. The following list, which is certainly not exhaustive, summarizes some of the statements
3

S. Konsorski-Lang (*) tstrasse 6, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland ETH Zurich, Universita e-mail: lang@ inf.ethz.ch

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe (eds.), The Design of Material, Organism, and Minds, X.media.publishing, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-69002-3_1, # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

about design found in the literature. According to these, design is:             An art form An applied science A process with an input and an output A goal-directed problem-solving and decisionmaking activity A deliberately intended or produced pattern Creativity and imagination Satisfying needs Drawings, sketches, plans, calculations Foresight toward production, assembly, testing, and other processes Managing, learning, planning, and optimizing Collecting and processing data Transferring and transforming knowledge.

problem. For instance, research in cybernetics has inuenced design methodologists and theoreticians such as L. B. Archer and Gordan Pask. They draw similarities between designers design behavior and organisms self-control systems (Archer 1965; Pask 1963).

1.1.2 Design Science and its Origins

Design science is a systematic approach that seeks an appropriate design methodology. This design methodology is a pattern of work, which is independent of the discipline and offers a means of solving various problems.

Research on design may have originated when, in 1872, Viollet-le-Duc recognized that design problems are becoming so complex that the designers intuitive grasp is not sufcient to solve them (Heath 1984). Design research is concerned with the study, research, and investigation of man-made artifacts and systems. Within the manufacturing industry, design has been formally acknowledged as a separate discipline for the last 150 years. This is particularly true for the eld of engineering, where scientic developments, especially those that occurred in the early 1940s, made signicant contributions toward solving design problems. Multidisciplinary teams consisting of engineers, industrial designers, psychologists, and statisticians were set up. Initially, the focus of design research was on improving classical design by using systematic design methods. The Design Research Society was founded in London in 1966. In 1970, the Environmental Design Research Association was established. Their research involved evaluative studies of architecture and environmental planning. At the Portsmouth DRS Conference, L. Bruce Archer dened design research as systematic inquiry whose goal is knowledge of, or in, the embodiment of conguration, composition, structure, purpose, value, and meaning in man-made things and systems. (Archer 1981, pp. 3047). However, since the 1990s, the focus has shifted to automated design. This novel approach has transformed information about design problems into detailed specication of physical solutions that use computers in order to attempt to solve the particular

1.1.3 Related Work

Regarding design and science, there are two periods of special interest: the 1920s with their investigations of scientic design products and the 1960s with their research on scientic design processes. It is interesting to note that in the 1920s, Theo van Doesberg and Le Corbusier already had the desire to bring science and design together (van Doesberg 1923; Le Corbusier 1929). Both produced works based on the values of science: objectivity and rationality. The subsequent investigation of innovative design methods had its origins in the upcoming problems of the Second World War. Novel, scientic, and computational methods were then investigated and applied to new and pressing problems. In the 1960s, the disciplines of urban design, graphic and interior design, industrial design, and engineering recognized what nowadays is commonly understood as design, and it became a discipline in its own right. The vast number of initiatives during that decade testify to this quickly growing awareness: the Conference on Design Method in 1962 (Jones and Thornley 1963), Christopher Alexanders PhD on the use of information theory in design in 1964 (Alexander 1964), the Teaching of Design Design Methods in Architecture conference in Ulm at the Hochschule r Gestaltung in 1966, and in 1967 the creation of fu the Design Methods Group at the University of California, Berkeley, the International Conference on

Why Is Design Important?

Engineering Design by Hubka, as well as The Design Methods in Architecture Symposium in Portsmouth, which all took place in the same year (Broadbent and Ward 1969). Buckminster Fuller was probably the rst to coin the term Design Science. S. A. Gregory adopted it in 1965 at the conference on The Design Method (Gregory 1966). Gregory dened Design Science as the study of design in theory and in practice, in order to gain knowledge about design processes, about design procedures to create material objects, and about the behavior of its creators. According to his rather general description (which applies to digestion as well), design is a process that has an input and an output (Gregory 1966). In 1967, Hubka established the International Conference on Engineering Design where he introduced the scientic approach to engineering design methods as design science for the rst time. Design science was described as a system consisting of logically related knowledge. This system was intended to organize the knowledge gained about designing.

1.1.4 Design Methodology

According to Cross (1984), design methodology refers to the study of principles and procedures of design in a broad and general sense. It is concerned with how design is carried out. In doing so it analyzes how designers work and how they think. The aim is to make rational decisions that adapt to the prevailing values. This is achieved by looking at rational methods of incorporating scientic techniques and knowledge into the design process. Design methodology became important as a research topic in its own right at the Conference on Design Method in 1962 (Hubka and Eder 1996). In 1964, Christopher Alexander published his PhD thesis Notes on the Synthesis of Form in design methods (Alexander 1964). His approach for solving problems was to split design problems into small patterns. In doing so, he applied information theory. In 1967, the Design Methods Group at the University of California, Berkeley, was founded. Over the next decades, design methodology gained in importance, especially in engineering and industrial design. During this time, design as a research topic became common in Europe and the US. In 1966, The Teaching of Design Design Methods in Architecture conference

r Gestaltung. The was held in Ulm at the Hochschule fu Design Methods in Architecture Symposium was held in 1967 in Portsmouth (Broadbent and Ward 1969). Design methods, together with articial intelligence, got another impetus in the 1980s. During that decade and also in the early 1990s a series of books on engineering design methods and methodologies and new journals on design research, theory, and methodology were released. To name just some of them: Design Studies (1979), Design Issues (1984), Journal of Engineering Design (1990), Languages of Design (1993), and Design Journal (1997). The most relevant and important design methodologists during this period were: Morris Asimow, John Christopher Jones, Nigel Cross, L. Bruce Acher, T.T. Woodson, Stuart Pugh, and David Ullman. The rst design methodologists were scientists and designers, and made their investigations to nd rational criteria for decision making with the aim of optimizing decisions. Design methodologies were also used to offer appropriate methods for supporting creativity. Horst Rittel, a second-generation methodologist, proposed problem identication methods that were inuenced by the philosopher Karl Popper. His approach differed from earlier attempts by incorporating user involvement in design decisions and the identication of user objectives.

1.2 Knowledge through Contemplation and Action

These developments took place in a context of art and technology, a context that was distinguished sharply from science. It is an ancient idea that those who can design and make things, those who have a techne, do not possess the right or the real knowledge or episteme about things compared to persons who can talk about things after they have contemplated them and gained insight into their essence (Aristotle 1924, 981a). Thus, a shoemaker who designs and makes a shoe has, according to Aristotle, not necessarily an insight into the essence of a shoe compared to a philosopher who contemplates about what shoes are made for, what their purpose is, and what makes a shoe a good shoe. This Aristotelian view of devaluating practical or technical knowledge and favoring contemplation as

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

real knowledge came under pressure with Deweys pragmatism (Dewey 1986). Dewey unmasked in his sociology of knowledge the epistemic difference between contemplation and doing as one that originated from the attempt to privilege the knowledge of priesthood and to devaluate the knowledge of craftsmen and workers in a society based on slavery. In this way it was possible to secure the privileges of a class of men that did not do any physical labor, but that was in fact in its material self-preservation dependent on a class of enslaved people. Dewey thought that the hierarchy of knowledge by contemplation and knowledge by doing survived not only the abolishment of slavery, but also the disappearance of essentialism. The distinction between the pure and the applied sciences, between universities and mere polytechnics, still pays tribute to this hierarchy of different forms of knowledge. But what happens if things have no essence to contemplate and if the people who are creating things are no longer socially dependent on those who merely contemplate? Deweys answer was clear: As soon has this becomes obvious, one sees that all knowledge is in fact gained by doing or designing things. Dewey thought that this insight should also have pedagogical consequences: learning should happen by doing things and not by telling pupils about things. According to Dewey, knowledge, including pure theory, is an instrument for action and problem-solving (Dewey 1986). Since then, a great variety of theories of knowledge have developed, which all consider knowledge as a product of construction and not of contemplation, as something that is actively crafted by man and not passively conceived by the mind. The varieties of constructivism not only made knowledge into something that human beings design with their minds but it led to a relativization of the distinction between pure and applied science. Especially the concentration on the technological foundations of experimental science, the insight that science is as much about representing as it is about intervening in the world (Hacking 1983), reshaped the view of the relation between theory and technology in the philosophy of science. If human beings are engaged in processes of design when they create theories, experiments, or machines, then in what sense is the knowledge that is necessary for developing a machine or a building subordinate to the one that is needed in order to create a theory? Is the complexity involved in the design of a

machine not much greater than the one involved in creating a pure theory? Why should the design of an experiment that is a stage in the design of a theory be considered as pure science, whereas the design of a material, a machine, or a building is only applied science according to the cascade model of knowledge that starts with theory on top (Bacon 1990)? Recent investigations into the nature of the relation between science and technology suggest that the design of a technical gadget is very often much more than an application of theoretically prefabricated knowledge and that even theoretical insights that are as pure as Einsteins relativity theory are not gained independently from technical problems (Gallison 2003, Carrier 2006, pp. 1531). A complex technical problem, such as the one Einstein was facing when he thought about the synchronization of the clocks in the railway system, can lead, if it is seen against the background of the general knowledge of the eld (in Einsteins case against the background of physics of moving bodies), to fundamental theoretical innovations. Thus, trying to solve a concrete technical problem or a problem of design can lead to very general new knowledge.

1.3 Design of Languages and Worlds

Theories are often considered as structures in a language. As long as languages were considered as naturally given, constructing a theory was working in something that was not designed. This must not necessarily mean that one does not consider theories as products of design. For a machine is designed in a material, such as metal, that need not itself be designed. But since the mathematization of science, the picture has changed. It was Newton who invented or designed his own mathematics for his physics of accelerated bodies, the innitesimal calculus. Since then physics has been dominated by the articial, man-designed languages of mathematics. The natural language or ordinary language plays only a pedagogical role in physics. Since the development of computers, the design of languages and machines for solving scientic problems has become even more prominent. The printed circuit copied on a silicone board transforms the representation of a machine into a real machine that can solve problems in a language that is man-made, the

Why Is Design Important?

Boolean algebra. Designing a language for programming a computer, designing a computer as a material machine, and solving a theoretical problem of science can become very tightly connected tasks in those areas that use computer simulations. Insofar as we consider systems that solve problems by using symbolic representations as minds, the design of articial languages and articial symbolic problem solvers is the design of articial minds. But the design of minds and languages is not a specialty of the epoch of articial intelligence. Although every person is born into a natural language, there is hardly anybody who does not react to this language by deviating from it. In most people this will not lead to intentional design of languages. But for any poet the natural language is a material that is to be changed into something else: a designed language that serves different purposes and shows different things in a different light than the undesigned natural language. At the very beginning of European ction, in Homers epics, this design is obvious. As the stories of these epics were conveyed orally for a long time, the language in which they were told had to support the memory of the singer. In order not to mix up events and characters, a verse was produced as well as phrases to t this verse that could not be exchanged easily. Thus, Odysseus is always the sly one and Achilles the fast runner. It has been suggested that this design of a verse and mode of description that serves memory was also inuencing the way the people who were telling these stories and were listening to them perceived their world (Feyerabend 2009, pp. 107156). Thus, the design of a language forms the minds of the user of this language as much as the minds of the user (e.g., their capacity to memorize things) form the language they design. If we consider experienced worlds as the result of the way the minds shape languages to describe the world and the way languages shape minds to experience the world, then we can say that the process of designing languages and minds is a process of designing worlds. If a new way of speaking spreads, it will affect the mental life and the perception, and man nds himself in a new environment, perceives new objects, he is living in a new world (Feyerabend 2009, p. 169). One famous version of constructivism, the one developed by the American philosopher Nelson Goodman, says exactly this: worlds of experience (and these are the only ones we know of) are made,

and making languages is a way of making a world (Goodman 1981; Steinbrenner et al. 2005). Critics of this view may say that the world we experience is the product of a natural development, whereas the world man is able to create by designing languages is articial worlds. This is true under the presupposition of a supercial understanding of the natural and the articial, an understanding that is challenged by recent developments in design and simulation.

1.4 The Natural and the Articial

Creating intentionally articial worlds is an activity in which humans were probably always engaged. Plays, paintings, and epics are articial, man-made worlds. The programming of the articial worlds in computer games is just the latest version of this creative activity. When we look, on the other hand, at the ways human beings thought the world they did not create themselves came about, we have three fundamental models: The world did not originate at all, but was from eternity and will be in eternity the Aristotelian Model (1), the world developed in a process of evolution that involved elements of chance the Democritean Model (2), and the world was designed intentionally by a designer the Platonic Model (3). Today, models (2) and (3) are favored: physical cosmology and biological evolutionary theory develop modern versions of model (2), and Judaism, Christianity, and Islam favor model (3). Therefore, we consider model (2) to be a naturalistic one in which the world came about by a natural process without any intentions involved, whereas the religious views are considered supernaturalistic, because they involve a non-human, divine intention as responsible for the design of the structures of the world we consider to be natural. The fact that the world seems to have an order and that it contains many things useful to man was long in the so-called argument from design considered to be an indication (or even a proof) of the intelligent creator who designed the world in such a way that man can live in it (since Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century till Robert Payley in the nineteenth). David Hume criticized this argument in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion from 1779. Do we not know as many or even more principles of creating order besides intelligent design, like growth or instinct

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

or generation? Hume asked (1948, p. 49). And if we suppose that a divine mind designed the world by planning it, how did he produce an order of ideas in his intellect? Since Darwins theory of evolution and the theories of natural self-organization, design has disappeared entirely as a principle of explaining natural order. What happened is that evolutionary principles became tools for intentional design. For if we now look at modern design processes and at modern epistemology, the picture about the relation between the natural as the unintentionally and the articial as the intentionally created becomes much more complicated. Some modern methods of designing and simulating things use evolutionary algorithms. The computer applies in these algorithms evolutionary strategies like the reproduction, variation (mutation), recombination, and selection onto structures in order to simulate and design things like materials, markets, organisms, pharmaceutics, biological populations, states, and much more (Ashlock 2006). These strategies are at the same time believed to be the most fundamental mechanisms behind biological evolution, i.e., behind the natural production of organisms. Darwin found his theory of evolution originally by applying observations about the social development of human populations from Malthus and about the methods of breeding on farms onto wild nature (Bowler 2003). His term natural selection already indicates that the process of selection was rst considered a cultural one: the intentional selection of plants and animals for breeding by the farmer. By implementing evolutionary algorithms in a computer selection as a method of design that was theoretically rst intentional (at the farm), then discovered to happen also nonintentionally in wild nature, design becomes semi-intentional: the designer, e.g., in search of a material for constructing an airplane, intentionally installs an intentionally developed algorithm that searches unintentionally for the best mix of components for a material in a computer. The autonomy of the transformation processes of algorithms in computers makes computer-aided design a semi-intentional process: natural processes are intentionally simulated in order to optimize design processes. If we now take into account that our view of natural processes is increasingly shaped by the processes of simulation and design in computers, we see that the border between the natural and the articial becomes increasingly blurred: nature, originally seen as a product of

design (in Model 3) and now seen as a product of evolution, is imitated in its creative potential in evolutionary algorithms that are installed in articial brains that shape our view of nature. Perhaps the distinction between the natural and the articial that dominated western thought in a normative way for many centuries will disappear or at least become a supercial one if we develop a deeper understanding of the processes of design and creativity in general. If we take into account that the most advanced computers, those that use evolutionary algorithms, are also able to learn, i.e., to develop their own minds, once they have been set up by man, we get an even more complicated picture. Mans mind has been developed by biological and cultural evolution in such a way that human beings were able to design articial minds intentionally. These articial minds were considered most efcient if they ran evolutionary strategies and were able to undergo developments that are not planned intentionally. The way these articial minds develop will, the more they are used in science, shape the way man sees the world. Thus, the human mind of the future and the future human view of the world will be developed in part by the articial minds man designed himself in such a way that they can develop in a quasi natural fashion. This blurring of the distinction between the natural and the articial has led theoreticians like Bruno Latour to the idea that the whole concept of purely natural and purely articial things is a ction to be replaced by the idea of hybrids (Latour 2000). The vision of a man who is using glasses is as much a hybrid as the thinking of a scientist about the world that is aided by a computer.

1.5 Pursuit of Perfection 1.5.1 What is Design?

In English the term design is used as both a noun and a verb. As a noun, a design mostly refers to the nal product or the result of a design process. As a verb, to design refers to the process of creating the product. Designing includes the consideration of esthetic and functional aspects. In English and French, the terms for design translate more to Gestaltung and Entwurf, whereas in

Why Is Design Important?

o relate more to an Italian disegno and Spanish disen approved activity. Translating design into German results in a broad range of meanings. In the German language, the term design relates to things and is targeted at their formal and artistic aspects, whereas in Anglo-Saxon design also involves technical and constructional aspects. Design itself is an iterative, creative, but controlled process. It needs clear denitions and controlled aims. In all disciplines the role of the designer involves specifying the principles of: need, describing the vision, and producing the result. So far within design there has been a strong differentiation between theory and practice. Research on design theory didnt have much impact on practice until now. Designers in practice have, therefore, operated free from any design theory. But for all that designers use empirical insights, concepts, and logical systems, and their gained experience, all of which is in practice used for making decisions, these are often misinterpreted as intuition. Design theory, however, deals with design on a different level than design in practice. Research on design investigates models to explain and to assemble design experience in practice. The goal is to gain insights that can be used in practice in the future. The proposed theories, however, necessarily have to be generalized and border on at the limitation of descriptiveness.

1.5.2 Perfection by Design

It is noticeable that designers work towards an improvement and a perfection of their products beyond disciplinary boundaries. Admittedly, the design itself will never be perfect, only the imperfection will be minimized. Since design conforms to constraints, requires choices, and involves compromise, it will never be perfect. Design nowadays is in most areas used to increase the user satisfaction, the brand identity, as well as the competitiveness in the sense of being better, quicker, cheaper, etc., than others. Armstrong dened design as the essential part of the creative process of engineering that makes it distinct from science (Armstrong 2008). The design process in engineering involves: imagination, creativity, knowledge, technical and scientic skills, and the use of materials. Creativity requires the ability to think

laterally, to anticipate the unexpected, to delight in problem solving, and to enjoy the beauties of the mind as well as of the physical world. But what makes a design good? Are there parameters or models that dene whether a design is good or poor? In many disciplines evaluation criteria exist to assist in achieving high quality results. Principles exist that are fundamental to the discipline and that have to be fullled. In engineering, for example, it is possible to identify basic principles that can be applied to any other discipline when it comes to the initiation of work or the testing of design decisions. These principles in engineering should not be confused with postulates, denitions, hypotheses, standards, or rules. However, design is related to art; therefore, it is difcult to quantify and model it completely. No checklist of rules or xed set of questions exists that can be applied or answered to determine that a design is good. Fundamental principles are generally well known to experienced designers, but may not have been clearly formulated. Principles in design are intended to provide assistance to the context of the design. They are not scientic hypothetical principles and are not necessarily rooted in physics and mathematics. But because man has always applied technologies onto himself, processes of design have led to ideals of human perfection as well. Perhaps the concept of perfection is most intimately linked with human selfunderstanding. Sportsmen have shaped or designed their bodies since ancient times according to certain ideals, and the design of drugs that will enhance our mental capacities and emotional makeup is already under way, i.e., man has started to design himself mentally and physically according to ideals of physical and mental perfection. In the mosaic of religions man, is designed by God according to his image, and he has no right to shape himself according to other images, which would be unnatural or a violation of piety in this view. But in pagan Greece and in modern times, when man sees himself as a product of evolution, this is different. Knowing the rules of evolution and considering himself at the same time as a free being (which is considered by some philosophers as a contradiction), human beings may take every liberty to improve themselves, e.g., their genetic material by genetic engineering or design. Perhaps in the future ideals for the genetic design of man will develop, such as already exist for the so-called lower organisms.

10

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

It could well be that the industries that develop a means of designing oneself physically and mentally will also develop ideals of perfection in order to make their products successful on the market. By such means, at least in capitalist societies, the ideals of perfection in design will probably always be connected with marketing strategies.

1.6 Design Parameters

Unlike with recognized scientic disciplines, which study what already exits, the eld of activity in design, and respectively, the discipline of design can hardly be reduced to a common denominator. Scientic methods, that obtain and test knowledge that is covering general truths of the operation of general laws underlie science (Websters New Collegiate Dictionary). In science, something can be proven either by observation or by measurement. This means if design is a science, we have to investigate a model that describes design in terms of a logical representation. If we assume that man-made design is a production process and its objectives are not simply the creation of physical objects but also all sorts of processes, services, interactions, entertainment, and ways of communicating and collaborating, we can recognize that design is one process step to optimize the product, bring it to perfection, and create value. The processes therefore determine the quality of the products. The improvement of the products calls accordingly for the improvement of the processes. Consequently, not only the products have to be redesigned, but so does the way we design. In order to improve our designs we therefore have to understand what we do and how we do it. Designing as a process is more or less creative. This usually includes the: intuitive, iterative, recursive, opportunistic, innovative, ingenious, unpredictable, rened, striking, novel, reective, and also a search for elegance and beauty (Schoen 1983). The design process could be seen as the management of negotiable and non-negotiable constraints. Design as a process has many different forms depending on the resulting product and the discipline. Each design group developed a method for solving problems that evolved over time. Depending on the school of thought, different groups look at the problem from different perspectives. The results differ and so do their goals, as well as the

scales of the projects and the methods they use. Even the actions appear to be different. However, looking at different design processes, we can notice that general similarities often appear in their approaches. That is to say that every process can be structured with the same few laws. Therefore, fundamental patterns exist within the process they follow. So if design is a process, the design process is the transformation process (method) between an input and an output. Assuming that design is a process, it fullls the usual process denition. Processes can be dened as the way taken to achieve an end, and accordingly, the individual steps can be described as process skills. If the end is the response to a dened need, it can be called the design process. The design process contains three basic elements: inputs, outputs, and, in between, the method used. This may seem obvious, but identifying these three basic elements within design helps to improve the operation. Furthermore, once these elements are made clear, and roles are dened in advance, the probability of success is increased, and the risks are reduced. Uncertainties and fears can be narrowed down, and results can easily be improved, repeated, and modied by identifying and xing broken processes. Therefore, design can be quantitatively measurable and could be evaluated and optimized. Nevertheless, it is important not to restrict creativity.

1.6.1 The Design Process

People often think that the designer has an idea, does some not describable things (creativity), and suddenly the result appears (see Fig. 1.1) From this assumed course of action the following simplied process can be derived (Fig. 1.2). There is an input and an output, and in between a process, a transformation. This simplication neatens a complex approach and may suggest the illusion of linearity. A basic abstraction of the design process is shown in Fig. 1.3. First there is an input, a clearly dened need or desire. The output is the response of the need or desire, for example, a product, system, project, product description, or the use of something. To arrive from the input to the output, we need a method, the design process. The design process transforms the need into the result. The process consists of two

Why Is Design Important?

11

Fig. 1.1 Creative design process: Some not describable things result suddenly in a solution

Fig. 1.2 Simplied design process. There is a stated need, and between the need and the result there is the process

Fig. 1.3 Basic abstraction of the design process

basic parts: activities and resources. The overall process is convergent, but within the process there are periods of deliberate divergence.

1.7 Design and Evaluation

If things are designed because of human needs and if human needs change because humans are confronted with new things or live in changing worlds, then there can be no eternal standards for evaluating designs. A design is good or bad relative to a xed system of desires in a xed world. But the constant use of a new design will change the needs of those using it, and the world from which the design originated. For

instance, the desires for people to communicate with each other were changed by inventions like the telegraph and the telephone; these led to developments like the Internet and e-mail, which will again change the ways people communicate and the desires they have. The history of design is often described as a progressive process: the telephone is progress in communication over the letter, the Internet progress over the telegraph, and e-mail progress over the telephone, and so on. But the mere fact that letters, telephones, and e-mail all exist side by side shows that the development of designed things is not necessarily one of linear improvement. If the design of things is a more or less intentional or unintentional design that is derived from human desires and of experienced worlds then it is also a design of principles of evaluation.

12 Fig. 1.4 Evolution of the automobile: From the ox cart to the horse-drawn carriage to the motor carriage to the automobile

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

Having said this, the evaluation criteria of design emerge and change over time. They depend on the values, desires, needs, possibilities, etc., of the respective society. This is briey illustrated using the example of automotive design (see Fig. 1.4). The development of the automobile is a good example of how technological evolution is sometimes based upon major design and technology shifts. In 1769, Nicolas Joseph Cugnot built the rst recognizable automobile for transportation of people and used a steam engine to power it. In 1888, Benz and Daimler invented the four-stroke internal combustion engine, which is still used in most modern automobiles. In 1924, when the American automobile market started reaching saturation, General Motors pursued the strategy of annual model-year design changes with the goal of persuading car owners to buy a new replacement each year. This strategy was intended to maintain unit sales. Henry Ford, on the contrary, adhered to notions of simplicity, economics of scale, and design integrity. GM surpassed Fords sales and became the leading player in the automotive industry in the US. The yearly restyling inuenced the design and made further changes necessary. Therefore, the lighter but less exible monocoque design was changed to a body-onframe. Another change came in 1935 when designs became driven by consumer expectations rather than by engineering improvements. Automobile design emerged after World War II with the introduction of high-compression V8 engines and modern bodies. Throughout the 1950s, engine power, vehicle speed, and design gained in importance. Another shift came in the 1960s with the international competition among the US, Europe, and Japan. This era was affected by the use of independent suspensions, wider application of fuel injection, and an increasing focus on safety. The modern era is characterized by increasing standardization, platform sharing, and computer-aided design. Today aerodynamics, safety, and mainly environmental aspects such as fuel efciency, engine output, carbon dioxide (CO2) emission, and gas consumption inuence car designs.

Another phenomenon that can be observed is that some car models like the Isetta, Volkswagen, VW fer, Fiat Cinquecento, and Citroe n 2CV became Ka archetypes of modern spirit. The Isetta was built for the man on the street in a time when cheap, shortdistance transportation was needed after World War II. In 2009, the Mini celebrated its 50th anniversary: in 1959 the British Motor Corporation (BMC) gave Alec Issigonis clear instructions to construct a car with a spacious passenger compartment, but with short external dimensions, space for four passengers, and amazing handling characteristics. In 1974, the rst VW Golf rolled from the assembly line. The VW Golf is one of the most successful cars built in Germany in the last three decades and also stands for a part of cultural history for a whole generation. In the mid 1970s, the VW Golf was considered as sporty, even with the smallest available engine capacity. Its design criteria were economical engines and being affordable for the masses. But not only cars gain cult status. One of the newest examples of good marketing and promotion is the clogs from Crocs shoes, imitated from other manufacturer and sold worldwide. These beach and camping shoes became fashionable as normal street shoes. You can even buy shoedoodles (Jibbitz), stickers that t into the holes of crocs shoes, to individualize them (Fig. 1.5). So why do people wear plastic shoes in goofy looking colors with normal clothes?

1.8 Contents of this Book

Since design is so broadly dened, there is no universal or unifying institution of all disciplines. Therefore, many differing philosophies of and approaches to design exist. What they all have in common is that they are designing. Their goals, actions, and, therefore, their results differ, but they are all also similar as they all follow processes. Serious research on design demands focusing on the design process.

Why Is Design Important?

13

Fig. 1.5 (a) Crocs Shoes Beach Color Variety (retrieved July 20, 2009 from http://www.sporthaus-ratingen.de/Crocs/crocs.html). (b) Crocs with Jibbitz (retrieved July 20, 2009 from ickr # jespahjoy)

Within this book we present how design is used in different disciplines and point out uniform as well as diverse principles within different design processes. In the rst place, we are not asking What is design? We are asking How do you design? In their articles the authors give answers to the following questions: 1. How is design used in the discipline and what is designed? 2. Why is it designed? 3. Are there uniform as well as diverse principles within the respective design processes? Essentially, the book is organized to follow three main design classications (see Fig. 1.6): Design of Objects and Materials, Design of Living Environments, and Design of Minds. Chapter 1 acquaints the reader with how objects and materials are designed as exemplied by Product Design, Automotive Design, Game Design, Drug Design, and Material Design. Fritz Frenkler, in his article The Design of the Environment and the Surroundings, focuses on product design, which not only refers to products, but also to the conguration of complete environments and surroundings. By means of examples, this generally very diverse eld and accompanying diverse design approaches are described. Design is based on perception of the environment/surroundings as well as the social developments or trends resulting from an accountable perspective. Design is not the honed application of guidelines and rules, and design criteria are not static rules. Furthermore, they must be regulated and adapted to social changes. The goals of good design are to improve the quality of life and to create comfort

and user friendliness. In product design, design is a process that cannot be packed into reusable, general rules or principles. Product designers initially scrutinize the actual task, develop several methods of resolution, compare quality levels, and provide a recommendation. A subsequent article follows a disquisition on a specic product: the brand MINI. Here, Gerhard Hildebrand points out the importance of empathy for design. The principles of empathetic design are explained using the example of automobile design. So that design does not become random, social and ecological progressions have to be taken into account. Nowadays, good design is strongly related to economic success. Hildebrand explains how this factor of success is integrated into the structure of a company. Indeed in comparison to other factors, design is low cost. For example, at MINI the design costs are low, less than 10%, but are 80% of the reason for the purchase. Therefore, the most signicant factor for design at MINI is the client. The focus of the designer is not to realize his own dream, but to create a product that ts the brand and the target group. One basic principle for the MINI design is form follows function, and another is the human body archetype. A good product is able to address all senses. Away from the automotive area, Markus Gross, Robert Sumner, and Nils Thuerey address the young and evolving eld of game design in their article. Within a graduate course at the ETH, the Game Programming Laboratory, concerning the fundamentals of game design, the various stages of the design process are thought out and realized within prototype game developments. The most important and persistent principles in game design are, for example: iteration, peer review, prototyping, evolution, testing and evaluation, consistency,

14

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

Fig. 1.6 Organization of the book

logical correctness, and simplicity. In the rst part of the article, the authors give a brief overview of the history of game design before going deeper into the stages of game design: the concept phase, preproduction phase, production phase, and quality assurance. Besides formal elements, technology also plays a crucial part in game design. Information technology and computer science, for example, not only have a significant impact on the production costs, but also on the feasibility of the project. Conceptualization, prototyping, and play testing are also major stages in the design of a game. Moving on from the design of computer games, Folkers, Kut, and Boyer show that the design of drugs has changed since 3D models of molecules can now be handled computationally in such a way that in Computer Assisted Drug Design (CAAD), the machine will create a set of structural proposals for molecules that should have a certain effect in a living

body. They also show the limits of this design method, since it works on the (false) hypotheses of a one-to-one correlation between an articially created molecule and a target structure in a living body with which it interacts. Despite the enormous amount of structural knowledge about complex molecules, nobody has been able to predict the most exciting new drugs as the molecular interaction between proteins is more complex than the computer-assisted drug design method presupposes. They also discuss the dark side of drug design: drugs that are similar to pharmacological substances but have effects that cannot be controlled and that were designed for drug abuse. They show that the culture of neurological enhancement, which may lead to the ability to design moods and minds, is possibly the meeting point of the dark and the medical sides of drug design. This chapter ends with an article by Paolo Ermanni on the design of materials and shapes for airplanes, cars, and other

Why Is Design Important?

15

technologies, which shows that modern design is no longer purely a process of intuitions by inventive individuals, but a collective process. Intuitions still play a role, but the more the development of a structure proceeds, the more the freedom to make changes on the structure decreases, or the more knowledge about an ideal solution for a certain function is gathered, the less freedom is left for intuitions. There are several criteria one might use to evaluate for designed products. The number of alternative solutions developed is as important for an evaluation as the amount of time and costs that have gone into a design process. The competition between alternative designs as a solution for the same problem within a market can, in a certain sense, be simulated by evolutionary algorithms in which a computational search for structural optimization takes place. Chapter 2 is devoted to the design of environments for living. The rst part addresses the design of cities. The article by the architect Meinrad von Gerkan presents dialogical design in architecture. In the rst part of this article, Gerkan describes the use of design and summarizes analytical reections arising from his own work. The architect is an expert on design and architecture as a social commodity. Designing our environment requires dialogue and the ability to react to changing conditions. The key principles, which are simplicity, variety and unity, structural order, and unmistakable individuality, are identied and explained. The second part of the article strengthens the theory presented in the rst part, using the city Lingang as an example. Lingang is a newly planned satellite city close to Shanghai and is being designed and developed from scratch based on the ideals of a traditional European city. Within their article City Design Designing Process for Planning Future Cities, Halatsch, Kunze, Burkhard, and Schmitt investigate the design process using the example of future cities. They discuss how computer-based technology has changed the way architects and urban planners think, plan, and communicate. They have also developed a framework that allows simulating and evaluating urban environments to manage projects using GIS information and to collaborate over large distances. This framework contributes to solving urban planning issues and to establishing participatory planning processes. The last article in this chapter addresses the issue of landscape design. Interactive Landscapes by Christophe Girot, James Melsom, and Alexandre Kapellos points

out the inuence of new technology in the design of large-scale environmental design. New technologies used as tools inserted into the design process provide new methods of verication and visualization that cannot be easily attained using traditional processes. However, in landscape design it is also essential to work with models. Computer numerical controlled (CNC) machines and CAAD-CAM technologies provide greater exibility than traditional models, and the information obtained through the traditional modeling process feeds back into the design process, creating a synergy. Chapter 3 presents the design of minds such as Text Design and Synesthetic Design. This chapter begins with a discussion of theory and design. Focus hlmann ing on the concept of virtuality, Vera Bu investigates, from a philosophical point of view, the conceptual and epistemological consequences of design becoming increasingly important in various sciences and for all relations of humans with the world in general. Starting from the problem of locality, as stated by the French philosopher and historian hlmann shows that of science, Michel Serres, Vera Bu since antiquity an external stance to human knowledge has blurred conceptual contrasts like the natural and the volitional, the given and the made, the created and the evolved. With digital design and simulation becoming one of the most important methodologies of handling the world, this external stance becomes the standard one. Thus, the idea that science solves naturally given problems by applying adequate rules to it becomes more and more obsolete. The whole idea of a t between the natural and external to the hlmann mental and internal is going to disappear. Bu shows that even material, organism, and mind are terms that might need recategorization once the distinction between the natural and the articial is gone. Wibke Weber points to the fact that texts consist of sentences that have been built. Not only can buildings be interpreted as texts, but texts and their sentences also have an architecture that is designed. Her article gives rules for designing good texts. It proposes a technique for visualizing the design of a text by using different colors for the different grammatical constituents. Keeping in mind that texts may be seen as graphical structures, are read as semantic structures, and were originally heard as acoustic phenomena, Weber proposes different criteria in order to design an optically, semantically, and acoustically

16

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe

good text. By means of the project Sound-ColorSpace, Natalia Sidler discusses the synesthetic design of music visualization. The rst part of her article gives insights into the phenomena of synesthesia and denes synesthetic design. Inspired by the eld of Color-Light-Music, and the Color Light Organ, the research project Sound-Color-Space emerged. The transfer of synesthetic phenomena and characteristics from neuropsychological research into artisticesthetics studies provides the basis for the design of the unique Color Light Organ as well as for various visualization software developed for this instrument. The nal section of this article illustrates the design criteria for the development and construction of this new instrument. After the instruments completion, three visualization programs were written with the goal of reproducing the sounds generated by the Color Light Organ into two- and three-dimensional geometries, structures, animations, and color arrangements to couple sound and color.

 Architectural Design evolves from a dialogue between the existing conditions and the ideals and models of the architect involved.  Design is an iterative process.  Design is a creative process, based on knowledge and intuition.  Landscape Design is a very tangible exercise.  Text Design begins with an idea to shape words, to form phrases, to build sentences and then paragraphs, etc.  Technology is a tool within the design process.  Constructions designed by peoples are driven by the environment.  Synesthetic Design coordinates sensory impressions.  In engineering the design process has four main phases: (1) planning and clarifying, (2) conceptual design, (3) embodiment design and, (4) detail design.  In engineering the design process is motivated by an idea or need for improvement.

1.9 Quintessence
At this point we are able to present the ways in which design is used in the elds described in Sect. 1.8 and point out that both uniform and diverse principles coexist within different design processes. The key discoveries looking at all articles are:

1.9.2 Designing
 Designing moved away from art and became a technical discipline.  Product Designers are exible and able to deal with an exceptionally wide range of different themes in a very short time.  Product Designers recognize and analyze decits and deciencies.  Product Designers scrutinize the actual task, develop several methods of resolution, compare quality levels, and provide a recommendation.  Product Designers require the ability to think in a conceptual and holistic manner.  Product Designers must look ahead to the future and create today what they expect to be fashionable in 5 years.

1.9.1 Design and Design Process

 Product Design is based on perception of the environment and the surrounding.  Product Design is a process that cannot be packed into reusable, general rules or principles.  In Product Design social aspects are crucial.  Product Design is self-sustainable and a serious force.  Design is the development and creation of industrial products that are produced in series and as such takes into account the following parameters: technology, ergonomics, sociology, and market relevance.  Design produces a physical (material) object.

1.9.3 Design Criteria

 Design Criteria must be regularly examined, evaluated, and adapted to social changes. They cannot be static rules.

Why Is Design Important?

17

 The constants of design are ergonomic criteria and safety guidelines.  Form follows function.  Technology follows function.  One MINI design principle is the Human Body Archetype Intuition.  Design principles in game design are: iteration, peer review, prototyping, evolution, testing and evaluation, consistency, logical correctness, and simplicity.  Key principles in architecture are: simplicity, variety and unity, structural order, and unmistakable individuality.  Gestalt laws like proximity, similarity, closure, symmetry, law of continuity, and law of proximity as well as writing style can be considered as design principles for texts.  Synesthetic phenomena and characteristics can be transferred into artistic-esthetic studies and works to visualize music.

1.9.4 Design Evaluation

 The design process is measured in terms of time, costs, and quality of the nal design.  Good Design makes a considerable improvement in everyones quality of life.  Successful design is empathetic design.  Successful design is self-explanatory.  Successful design creates a need.  Fun is crucial in game design. Design is not a topic that can be investigated by an axiomatic science that starts from general principles that are universally applicable.

1.9.5 Design Science versus Design Engineering

Regarding design and science, we distinguish among three different areas: Scientic Design, Science of Design, and Design Science. The term Scientic Design goes back to the time when industrial design became more complex and intuitive methods no longer worked. Scientic design merges intuitive and

rational design methods, and is simply an indication of the reality of modern design practice. Herbert Simon dened Science of Design as a body of intellectually thorough, analytic, partly formalizable, partly empirical, teachable doctrines about the design process. In 1969, he also postulated the development of a science of design. Natural science describes existing things according to natural laws. In contrast, design deals with how things ought to be. In our understanding, design is used in devising artifacts to attain dened goals. According to Simon, everybody who changes existing situations into preferred ones designs. In order to improve the understanding of design, the logic designers use has to be considered. Science of design can be considered as the proper study of mankind (Simon 1996). Abstracted, the science of design is concerned with the study of design with the aim of dening a design methodology. So, as previously described, Design Science is, in contrast to Science of Design, a systematical approach with the aim of dening rules and laws that lead to the design method. In further contrast, design in engineering is a feedback process engaging the following engineering activities: understanding the problem, concept generation, analysis and optimization, testing, and construction. Engineering design, therefore, refers to the chain from research and development, to manufacturing, construction, and on to marketing, and is based on scientic principles, technical information, mathematics, practical experience, and imagination. The focus is on the development of mechanical structures, machines, or structures based on predened functions with the maximum of economy and efciency (McCrory 1966, pp. 1118, Eder 1966, pp. 1931). Nowadays, engineers increasingly realize technical functions by immaterial and software technologies. The outcomes of these developments are the design, the production, and the process. Hubka and Eder (1996) dened the process of designing as the transformation of information derived from the condition of needs, demands, requirements, and constraints into the description of a structure. This structure is capable of fullling these demands, which include the wishes of the customer, the stages and requirements of the life cycle, and all the in-between states the products must run through. Petroski (1997) describes engineering as the art of rearranging materials and the forces of nature based on the constraints given by the immutable laws

18

S. Konsorski-Lang and M. Hampe Bowler PJ (2003) Evolution: the history of an idea, Berkeley, 3rd edn. Los Angeles, London Broadbent C, Ward A (Eds.) (1969) Design Methods in Architecture. Lund Humphries, London Carrier M (2006) The challenge of practice: Einstein, technological development and conceptual innovation. In: Ehlers J, mmerzahl C (Eds.) Special relativity: will it survive the La next 101 years. Springer, Heidelberg Cross N (1984) Developments in design methodology. Umi Research Pr, New York Dewey J (1986) Logic: the theory of inquiry, In: Boydston JA (Ed.): John Dewey the later works, 19251953, Vol. 12: 1938, Carbondale Eder WE (1966) Denitions and Methodologies. In: Gregory SA (Ed.) The Design Method. Butterworths, London Feyerabend P (2009) Naturphilosophie. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main Gallison P (2003) Einsteins clocks, Poincares maps the empire of time. New York Goodman N (1981) Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis Gregory SA (1966) The Design Method. Butterworths, London Hacking I (1983) Representing and intervening: introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. ISBN-10: 0521282462, Cambridge Heath T (1984) Method in architecture. Wiley, New York Hubka V, Eder WE (1996) Design Science, ISBN 3540199977, Springer Hume D (1948) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Indianapolis Jones JC, Thornley DG (1963) Conference on Design Methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford Latour B (2000) Die Hoffnung der Pandora. Untersuchungen zur Wirklichkeit der Wissenschaft, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main Le Corbusier (1929) CIAM 2nd Congress, Frankfurt McCrory RJ (1966) The design method in practice, In: Gregory SA (Ed.) The Design Method. Butterworths, London Pask G (1963) The conception of a shape and the evolution of a design. In: Jones JC, Thornley DG (eds) Conference on design methods. Pregamon Press, Oxford Petroski H (1997) Invention by Design, ISBN 0674463676, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA Schoen DA (1983) The reective practitioner: how professionals think in action, Maurice Temple Smith Ltd, New York Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the articial, ISBN 0262193744. The MIT Press, Cambridge Steinbrenner J, Scholz OR, Ernst G (2005) Symbole, Systeme, Welten, Studien zur Philosoph Nelson Goodmans, Synchron Wissenschaftsverlag der Autoren, Heidelberg van Doesberg T (1923) Towards a Collective Construction. De Stijle

of nature. Engineering itself is seen as a fundamental human process. To recap, the most important differentiation between science and engineering in this context is that scientists search for understanding. While scientists do not aim at rigidly specied goals, engineers work toward very concrete objectives requiring criteria and specications. Design can therefore be considered as a hybrid. Design is part of ne art with its esthetic and artistic aspect, and is part of the engineering disciplines as well as part of the science disciplines. To a large extent, designers, architects, business managers, engineers, software developers, etc., are unaware of the practices and processes in other disciplines. They are not thinking about overlaps and do not bring together work from different areas. However, it is ultimately people who create things and environments to improve their situation, and the situation in turn alters the world view of those who live within it. This, then, subsequently shapes the persons who are born into this new situation. In this way, people design their worlds, and in so doing they also design future human beings. So can design be a scientic discipline? Or can the combination of Design Science and Design Engineering seen as Applied Science? Or is it something else?

References
Alexander C (1964) Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard University Press, UK, Cambridge Archer LB (1965) Systematic methods for designers. The Design Council, London Archer LB (1981) A view of the nature of the design research. In: Jacques R, Powell JA (eds) Design science: method. Surrey: IPC Business Press Ltd, Guilford, USA Aristotle (1924) Metaphysics. Ross WD (Transl. and Ed.), 2 vols. Oxford Armstrong J (2008) Design matters. Springer, London Ashlock D (2006) Evolutionary computation for modelling and optimization, Springer, Heidelberg Bacon F (1990) Novum Orgnanum/Neues Organon, Philosophische Bibliothek, Hamburg