The research papers we read for this theme were already quite interesting because I had never read any design study before. It was, however, only the lectures that I fully understood what it really is about and how to do design research. From Haibo Li's lecture I mainly took away how important it is to dedicate time to the preparation and the precise phrasing of the research question to address the real problem which needs to be investigated. 90% of the time should go into this definition phase and the remaining 10% should be spent on solving the problem. He also introduced us to the five criteria Cisco used in their innovation competition to define the next big idea (cf. Harvard Business Review):
- Does it address a real pain point?
- Will it appeal to a big enough market?
- Is the timing right?
- If we pursue the idea, will we be good at it?
- Can we exploit the opportunity for the long term, or would this market commoditize so quickly that we wouldn’t be able to stay profitable?
I think these criteria are quite important to keep in mind when conducting design research or when trying to come up with a new idea or solution in general.
The other lecture by Anders Lundström was really eye-opening for me and my understanding of research as a broad field in general. I understood the purpose and nature of design research much better through his lecture. For example, in my pre-post I had a false understanding of what the empirical data was because I was thinking too much in the framework of traditional quantitative/qualitative research. Now I understand that design research is a completely different field and that it is not at all as developed as the other research fields but it is rather in its beginnings as a discipline. I looked for some more information about design research after the seminar and found the Swedish Design Research Journal which is a available for free and they have very interesting articles for those who also became more interested in this field!
It is very interesting for me that you felt like you learned a lot in last weeks theme, because I do not feel the same way. I think the five criteria from Cisco summarize all the important thoughts you need to work out when designing research. The fourth point where it comes to the question if our work will be good is very important. What I've learned so far about research is that a research can only be good when there is an actual need to do it and when you can use the results to solve further problems. Realizing that design research is a completely different field of research also helped me to understand it better. Thank you for the tip about the Swedish Design Research Journal, I'll definitely have a look at it!
SvaraRaderaSounds great that you managed to learn so much from this theme. Indeed design research is a completely different field that has many unique advantages and implications. I agree that the realisations of what design research actually is were educative, even though I myself thought I had an idea of what it was before. The Cisco points are interesting as well and they sound sensible even though they're just the opinions of one particular company.
SvaraRaderaHi there,
SvaraRaderagreat that you feel that you've learned a lot during this week! The five Cisco criteria to define "the next big idea" really sums up the things you need to think about when working with design research. It would've been interesting to read more about prototyping and its role in design research and the strengths/weaknesses of prototyping.
Hi!
SvaraRaderaAnd thanks for your post. I agree with you that this theme was a really intresting one. I think that is was good to get lectures that differed in viewpoint: business and research. I find it intresting that often we think of thprototypes as described in Haibos lecture and with Ciscos five criterias, when it could be used for more. Before the theme I thought that prototypes mainly could use knowledge already known, but now I understand that we can use prototypes and design to contribute to knowledge.
Seems like we didn’t go to the same lectures at all for this theme. I do like your reflections and what you’ve learned from this theme. Especially the point about that research design is kind of a new practice. Will check out that journal.
SvaraRaderaHello.
SvaraRaderaI felt exactly the same as you when we started this theme, that I did not know how much there was to know about design research, it was really interesting. Regarding the thing about defining the problem for 90% of the time and solve it during the remaining 10%. For me, defining the problem is also solving it. The remaining 10% is just picking out the and finding the answer from your really well defined and already solved problem. If that makes any sense...