Collective cretivity in design

Por: Liz Sanders

Design is not just about individual creativity and visualization anymore. The problems that designers are being invited to help solve cannot be addressed by individuals. The situation is far too complex. We face significant challenges in that the problems are wicked and the new landscapes of design are fuzzy. Wicked problem are difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize ^[1]. We can learn to address the challenges of wicked problems and fuzzy landscapes through collective forms of creativity and generative design thinking.

The design process is changing

The shape of the design development process has changed dramatically over the last ten years. The large front end that has emerged is often referred to as the “fuzzy front end” because of its messy and chaotic nature. It is here that generative activities take place to inform and inspire the exploration of open-ended questions. In the fuzzy front end, there are many divergent paths to explore before any patterns can be discerned. The fuzzy front end is a wicked design space. There, it is often not known whether the deliverable of the design process will be a product, a service, a system or a building. The goal of exploration in the fuzzy front end is to define fundamental problems, describe opportunities and to determine what could be (or should not be) designed.

The participatory prototyping cycle

The participatory prototyping cycle (PPC) is a framework for action in design. It starts in the fuzzy front end where prototyping unfolds as an iterative loop of making, telling and enacting. In making, we use our hands to embody ideas in the form of physical artifacts.  The nature of the artifact changes from early to later stages in the design process.  Artifacts made early in the process are likely to describe future experiences while artifacts made later in the process are more likely to resemble objects and/or spaces. Telling is a verbal description about future scenarios of use. We might tell a story about the future or describe a future artifact. But telling can be difficult for people who don’t have verbal access to their own tacit knowledge. Enacting refers to the use of the body in the environment to express ideas about future experience. We also call this pretending.  Acting and performance can also be considered forms of enactment that are particularly useful later in the design process.

he PPC is a model for co-creation in design. It invites all relevant stakeholders into the design process and supplies them with tools, methods and activities that they can use whether they have or do not have education or experience as designers. The PPC combines making, telling and enacting and uses each activity to fuel the next. By putting making together with telling and enacting, even people who are not skilled in making to externalize their ideation process can be empowered to express themselves creatively.

A unique characteristic of the PPC is its emphasis on the cyclic relationship between making, telling and enacting. You can enter the PPC at any point, i.e., by making things, or telling stories about the future or enacting future experiences. And from each entry point, you can move in any direction. You may find yourself going around several times. For example, you may tell a story about the future and then enact it. Then you could make stuff that people would need to live in the story, and enact it again. You may then find that you need to go back and rewrite the story or write a new story.

Envisioning experience through participatory prototyping

How does the PPC work in the design development process? Think of the PPC as a generative seed moving and tumbling across all phases of the design process over time. The leading activity, whether it is making, telling or enacting, will vary by phase, and is influenced by team composition and project type. The activities and artifacts of the PPC change along the process with envisionments of experience leading in the front end and more solid forms of embodiment leading in the second half. The chart below compares the activities and artifacts that emerge in the use of the participatory prototyping cycle over time.

In the fuzzy front end, enacting is the lead activity because the focus is on exploring and understanding experience (i.e., past, present and future experience). Enacting is the ideal medium for this. The earliest forms of enactment can be best described as ‘pretending’. Later forms of enactment might include improvisation and performance. Enacting can be done alone, but the results are far more evocative and provocative when done collaboratively. Enacting will be further synergized when followed by or preceded by making and telling activities.

The iterative use of the PPC throughout the process can help to bridge the gap between the fuzzy front end and the traditional design process. Making is the PPC mode that is in the lead across the gap. The purpose here is to explore and visualize ideas in order to figure out what the future situations of use might be. The various forms of making give shape to the future, with enacting and telling being ways to enrich, extend and extrapolate the future artifacts. The earliest forms of making include maps, timelines and collages. Later forms of making include props, Velcro-models and really rough prototypes. The traditional forms of prototyping such as sketching and model making typically appear later in the design development process.

Telling is the PPC mode that is in the lead later in the design process. The purpose of telling is to keep the idea alive and evolving. The earliest types of telling come in the form of stories. Later forms of telling include descriptions of the artifacts that are imagined. Even later forms of telling include presentations and selling events. If a participatory process has been used throughout the design process, the primary activities here will be telling or sharing, since buy-in to the idea by the stakeholders is likely to already have occurred. On the other hand, if a participatory process has not been used, the primary activity can be better be described as selling since the stakeholders who will be affected by the design may still need to be convinced that the idea is a good one.

Looking ahead

We face significant environmental, social and cultural challenges today. Design innovation can help, but only if we open up the design process to everyone. Most of us come to the table with our own disciplinary tools, methods and mindsets, yet participation from people across many disciplines is necessary. Co-designing puts tools for creativity and communication in the hands of the people who will be served through design. Collective creativity is the way to address wicked problems and uncover latent opportunities in the fuzzy front end.