[Open Design] OpenDesign Digest, Vol 14, Issue 7

Thu May 23 07:41:00 UTC 2013

Hi Cindy, Serena.
Just wanted to say it is really interesting to follow your conversation. At
this point I haven't got so much to add to this, accept I agree with your
point of views.

Adding to the part about the definition of success:
"It seems that one clear definition of success for the authors is
'game-changing innovation' or disruptive innovation. Amateurs 'doing
design', lead user innovation, and DIY bottom-up invention are only capable
of incremental innovation (at best), which is regarded as less desirable -
in my interpretation of their writing."

>Such a notion would actually rule out 90% of current professional
designers, since most are doing nothing more than that; incremental
innovations (which is fine by the way, we also need incremental
innovation). The biggest difference between them and amateurs at this point
might be that they have learned to build upon the existing design
discourse.

I'll keep following your chats!
Bram Geenen

Studio Geenen
0031616505090
info at studiogeenen.com
www.studiogeenen.com

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Kohtala Cindy <cindy.kohtala at aalto.fi>wrote:

> Hi Serena
>
> Thanks for your answer.
>
> > But how stable can be a diy open design comparing with a professional
> closed design is not one of the possible criticalities of Open Design...in
> my opinion.
> >
> > And the assumptions presented in the paper refer more or less to this
> point: Open Design cannot be taken into account when "serious things" have
> to be designed.
>
> Yes, I agree.
>
> Right in the beginning they write, "Using the case studies, we make the
> argument for a more nuanced view of the application of open design
> approaches that acknowledges the weaknesses of the approach in addition to
> celebrating its advantages." This seems to suggest that the 'open design
> practitioners' are completely unaware of their own practices, strengths and
> weaknesses, and promote only propaganda. Is this true?
> Secondly, they themselves - by whittling down their argument to 'open
> amateur design' vs 'professional design' - completely remove all the
> nuances in the discussion.
> (It reminds me of the discussions on 'design thinking' that go on in the
> PhD Design list - a phrase that people like Don Norman tend to dislike
> enormously - like only designers are capable of this type of creative
> action/strategy.)
>
> Then I see a conflict in their logic or argumentation. (Are Profs
> Cruickshank or Atkinson actually on this list? Then we could discuss with
> them directly….)
> It seems that one clear definition of success for the authors is
> 'game-changing innovation' or disruptive innovation. Amateurs 'doing
> design', lead user innovation, and DIY bottom-up invention are only capable
> of incremental innovation (at best), which is regarded as less desirable -
> in my interpretation of their writing.
> Since it seems these two activities cannot exist at the same table (for
> some reason), we need a clear boundary where amateurs play their games and
> pro designers do the real work. (I wonder what happens to the guy who had
> ten years of design training but then went off to do biology or tech
> writing or art. Guess he can't be at the table with the big boys because
> there may be some serious medical/safety/health consequences.) Meanwhile,
> pity all those people struggling away and making a better life for
> themselves and their local community with their pathetic little
> non-disruptive, non-game-changing, incremental, non-scale-up-able,
> localized solutions. <sarcasm>
>
> One point where I DO agree, and something we all have to keep in mind when
> we work in this p2p arena, is awareness of the 'reality': there is some
> kind of common mythology surrounding p2p, no hierarchies, everyone
> contributes equally according to their own motivations, etc., and the
> reality on the ground, e.g. how Wikipedia works in practice, is quite
> unlike this myth.
>
> Anyway, just wanted to chat about the paper. I'm a little surprised,
> considering one author's contribution to the PROUD project and the other's
> to the Open Design Now book etc.
>
> Cindy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenDesign mailing list
> OpenDesign at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/opendesign
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/opendesign
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/opendesign/attachments/20130523/16a95fde/attachment.html>