Innovation Methods Movement in Context

Innovation Methods Movement in Context

[Originally posted to the PhD Design list in July 2015]

Happy summer all: I have not dropped by this [PhD Design] list in a very long time. We do happily engage in numerous other discussion groups however the dominant dynamics here tends to be not really our cup of tea. Today I am happy in the direction of Victor Margolin's post referencing Nigel Cross to make this small contribution from our practice-based perspective.

All the best to Nigel Cross for his interesting view regarding how design research connects to the design methods movement as expressed in his 2007 editorial “Forty years of design research”. As practice leaders involved for years in the innovation methods movement we did notice a couple of cross-community hiccups there in Nigel’s depiction that are worthy of attention in the sense that left unnoted they tend to paint a false picture and leave a false impression among the readership of Design Studies.

Working across communities we often see applied creativity community developments misstated in design community writings and therefore widely misunderstood in that community.

Perhaps we should first acknowledge that the design community and the applied creativity community (also known as the CPS or Creative Problem Solving community) have historically been and remain two different entities with very different histories, timelines, milestones, knowledge, orientations, methods and heroes. Both remain very active today.

One hiccup in Nigel’s editorial was the distinction being drawn between “methodology books” and “creativity books” which is not accurate in the sense that the books he is referencing there are methodology oriented texts. Another Nigel misfire was the timeline depiction framed as “first” books appearing.

It might not be clear to everyone that the methods movement in the applied creativity community did not begin in parallel with the 1962 design methods movement in the design community but rather preceded it.

Applied Imagination 1953

The methodology oriented applied creativity book that Nigel makes reference to: Alex Osborn’s Applied Imagination was first published in 1953 and not 1963 as noted in Nigel’s editorial comments.

Applied Imagination was Osborn’s 4th book on the subject and all were methodology oriented.

Osborn’s How to Think Up was published in 1942.

Osborn’s Your Creative Power was published in 1948.

Osborn’s Wake Up Your Mind was published in 1952.

The book that Nigel was referencing: Osborn’s Applied Imagination was first published in 1953 and the revised edition was published in 1957. Nigel was apparently referencing the third revised edition of Applied Imagination which was published in 1963.

Creative Problem Solving Institute

The first annual methods oriented conference in the applied creativity (CPS) community was held in 1955, known as CPSI (Creative Problem Solving Institute). It has been held nearly every year since and in June of 2014 had its 60th anniversary.

By 1959-1960 Alex Osborn and Sid Parnes had already developed and codified an experiencial methodology learning program which continued to evolve over forthcoming decades. Interconnected was both research and specific method frameworks that remain influential among CPS methodologists still today.

Osborn died in 1966 and shortly there-after the third generation of applied creativity methodology books began to appear in the applied creativity community, the most well known being Creative Behavior Guidebook by Sid Parnes in 1967. That book represented 15 plus years of method related learnings by Osborn, Parnes and their numerous associates within the applied creativity community. It is considered a landmark publication (designed on an IBM typewriter) in the applied creativity community.

From a methodology and codified method knowledge perspective there is no equivalent in the design methods movement.

Journal of Creative Behavior

As part of third generation activities Parnes founded the Journal of Creative Behavior in 1967. Working with various associates, Parnes went on to tweak and conduct research around the Osborn Parnes methodology as well as publish numerous other method oriented books including Creative Actionbook, 1976 and Guide to Creative Action, 1977.

Not always understood in the design community, suffice it to say that enormous methodology knowledge exists in the applied creativity community today and has existed there for decades.

Not well acknowledged in design education, or design journals most leading design oriented practices today have already incorporated methodology knowledge from the applied creativity methods movement. Use of the invitation stem: How Might We? (Parnes 1967) during upstream challenge framing being among the most well known examples. Those design oriented firms working upstream from product/service or experience briefs would typically be integrating multiple aspects of methodology knowledge from the CPS community.

One other quick observation would be that today what we know as the innovation methods movement is different from and broader than the design methods movement that Nigel makes reference to in his “Forty years of design research” editorial.

Many involved in the innovation methods movement today don't come from design backgrounds and don't go to market as design professionals or design companies. (Designers are not the only folks in the innovation business.) The innovation methods movement now encompasses more then just design methods, which have historically been downstream in orientation.

Unlike the depiction that Nigel presents in his 2007 editorial we do not in the innovation methods movement today conflate design research with innovation methods development or with methods research. These are considered rather different subjects. Much of the methodology oriented research going on around innovation methods today is not being framed as design research.

Most innovation methodologies created after 2005 that are active in practice do incorporate some form of outbound innovation or design research as forms of human-centered, action-oriented insight generation.

We have not done a specific document count but all considered it seems likely that much more methodology oriented research literature exists today in the applied creativity arena than does design research focused on design methods. You can find examples of such research in the previously mentioned Journal of Creative Behavior founded by Parnes in 1967. It is still published today.

Best of luck to all.

Note: Many authors contributed to the early Applied Creativity (CPS) Methods Movement not just Osborn and Parnes. An overview of early contributions can be found in the large 494 page volume entitled Source Book for Creative Problem Solving, edited by Sid Parnes and published in 1992 by Creative Education Foundation.

Osborn, AF (1942) How to Think Up, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co. London.

Osborn, AF (1948) Your Creative Power, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Osborn, AF (1952) Wake Up Your Mind, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Osborn, AF (1953) Applied Imagination, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. Revised edition, Scribner, 1957, 3rd edition, Scribner 1963.

Parnes, S, (1959) Instructors Manual for Semester Courses in Creative Problem Solving, Creative Education Foundation, Revised edition 1963, 3rd Revised Edition 1966.

Parnes, S, Noller, R, Biondi, A, (1967) Creative Behavior Guidebook, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Parnes, S, (1967) Creative Behavior Workbook, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Parnes, S, Noller, R, Biondi, A, (1976) Creative Actionbook, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

Parnes, S, Noller, R, Biondi, A, (1977) Guide to Creative Action, Creative Education Foundation, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.

The Journal of Creative Behavior (1967-2015)


Related:

 

Making Sense of “Building Better Brainstorms”

Humantific : Lost Stories in Applied Creativity


Making Sense of “Creative Intelligence”

Innovation Methods / De-Mystifying 80+ Years of Innovation Process Design


ReThinking Wicked Problems (Part 1)

Unpacking Paradigms, Bridging Universes

NextD Journal Issue 28, 2007.


Double Consciousness

Back to the future with John Chris Jones

NextD Journal, Issue 26, 2006.

Innovation Methods Mapping / Project Learnings Overview

Systemic Design Conference, Oslo, Norway, 2013.

Jeanette Sj?berg

Architect Practice Manager & Leader (EMEA) - Industry Solutions @Microsoft

7 年

This is a good post GKVP. I finally get the points you are making across all your posts/blogs. More to go. @Rachel - your post was also very helpful as a guideline/principle/input for all these discussion

Kevin Dye

Design, Facilitation, and Technologies for Inter-organizational Strategic Planning

8 年

Nice inter-field comparison.

GK VanPatter

SenseMaker, Author, KeyNote Speaker, Advisor, CoFounder, HUMANTIFIC, CoFounder: NextDesign Leadership Network

9 年

Hi Rachel: Good to see you here. You are articulating the ideal model which differs considerably from the present marketplace realities. I do agree that all scholars of this subject have a responsibility to be clear and we have certainly done out part in this direction. I would be happy to look at any writing that you have done yourself on this subject. Feel free to post a few links here. The picture becomes a little more complex when one recognizes that the applied creative community contains the creative problem solving (CPS) community which contains deep methods knowledge with reach into many aspects of cognition not yet integrated into the design methods movement. As the focus of practice moves from object making to capacity building, culture building and enabling this becomes key. Presently there is not widespread understanding of this in the design community. In addition the design education part of the scholarly community has often not only missed the opportunity to be communicating clearly but has, due to market shift and slow adaptation of programs, entangled itself in the now widespread respinning of Design 2.0 (product/service/experience creation) redepicting it as organizational and societal changemaking. This respinning continues not only to confuse many in the general public but has undermined the credibility of design education leadership in the marketplace. Their present position in this regard is a long way from the ideal model that you describe. In contrast we advocate clear communication regarding what design / design thinking is and is not. Whether we all like it or not, this is not the present state of design education marketing today. Due to the now widespread InflateGate dynamics design education is playing catch-up on multiple fronts including adaptability and credibility. There is considerable confusion out there regarding design thinking and design education has played a significant role in its creation. See: MAKING SENSE OF: “Why Design Thinking Will Fail.” https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/innovation-methods-movement-context-gk-vanpatter

回复
Marieka Easterley

Independent Research Investigator | Educator | Founding Director, GenLearning Research Initiative and the 'Blink-Thinking' Project

9 年

This is a really useful background genealogy for someone attempting to study the question of agency in the possible imagino-intuitive processes involved in each form of domain Many thanks for the clarity

Brian Hauch

Senior Interaction Designer @ Google

9 年

I appreciate the sense of rigor and knowing where we came from. That innovation/design thinking/brainstorming wasn't invented by the IDEO in the 1990s. IDEO is outstanding and foundational and historic. But we have a deeper legacy than that.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了