The combination of the Danish design tradition and recent years’ development in the field of research gives Danish design research a good basis for gaining a strong international position.

By Pernille Stockmarr

Danish design research has much to offer. This was evident at the conference Emerging Trends in Design Research, which was held at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University on 12-15 November 2007. We are able to think ahead and challenge existing conditions. By drawing on these potentials we can gain a strong position.

The stairs mark the transition to the conference space: Above, a smog-yellow Hong Kong sky, below, the conference rooms below street level.

One distinct impression from the conference was that countries that have a rich design tradition also seem to have strong design research. This is the case, for example, with countries like the USA, the UK, The Netherlands, and Finland. From these countries we have traditions such as Design Methods, Design Studies and Material Culture. Denmark too has a proud design tradition, and even if our golden days are decades old, design is still one of Denmark’s strongest brands. We need to take more advantage of that fact.

Danish Design (Research) – Not an Old Chair But a Mentality

At the conference it was evident that design research and its implementation are capable of promoting good ideas and innovative solutions. In Denmark, we already have interesting design research to offer, and we are establishing a good platform for it, among other things by learning from other design research traditions.

By strengthening the link between our design tradition and the research that is currently being established, we can improve our position and achieve a more distinct profile. To achieve this, we should not only describe, determine and specify a profile for Danish design (research) but also a forward-looking strategy. This means not only making room for a wide diversity of varying approaches but also building and strengthening a profile to present an image of what we have done in the past, and what we are doing now.

In the 1990s the Dutch made a name for themselves on the international design scene by stating that design is ‘mentality instead of objects’. Maybe there is a lesson for us here. Instead of distancing ourselves from our design past, we should be proud of the ideals and the mentality behind the products and integrate them in a contemporary form in our current ideals and mentality. That will enable us to profile a specifically Danish design mindset. Key points include the Danish design tradition for aesthetic awareness, user-addressed functionality, resource consciousness and a reflective use of design, where design ultimately draws its strength from being rooted in a societal project. In the 1950s the focus was on establishing the welfare state – today, for example, design may contribute to added cultural value.

Why do I care? Because design research can point us in new directions!

From Made in China to Designed in China

That West and East have different traditions for working with design is also reflected in research. The conference in Hong Kong – a city that is historically seen as a communication hub and a link between East and West – offered an opportunity for a meeting of cultures, a point that was also evident in the presentations and in the different approaches to design research.

For decades, the East, and China in particular, has been all about manufacturing, while we in the West have developed ideas, gradually outsourcing more and more production to China and other countries. Currently, however, China is moving from manufacturing products that are Made in China to developing products that are Designed in China. Thus, while formerly a purely production-oriented society China is now placing increasing emphasis on knowledge and innovation, while we in the West focus more on sustainability and immaterial factors, in particular.

Eastern and Western Research Traditions

At the conference the Asian presenters focused mainly on product development, concrete product improvements, and maximising profits. Their research and methods are situated within existing theoretical frameworks and based on ‘best practice’ examples, which is not surprising, considering China’s current economic situation: After years of mainly manufacturing goods for the West, the Chinese are now looking at developing and manufacturing products for the country’s own rapidly growing and consuming population.

In the West we have able to stand on each other’s shoulders with regard to research traditions. We have been ahead in terms of developing innovative product solutions, and we are now able to focus on new areas as well. For example, we can do research into resources, solutions for less affluent groups, and the experiential and emotional factors that are in growing demand in affluent countries – a trend that is also emerging in the East. One of the strengths for us in the West, particularly in Denmark, is the ability (and the room) to reflect on what we are doing, for example by challenging established approaches.

Keynote speaker, Design Professor Kees Dorst of the University of Technology in Sydney: If design is going to lead to change, it won’t be through prescriptive methods but through a descriptive and reflective approach.

Innovation Through Reflection

Design Professor Kees Dorst of the University of Technology in Sydney delivered one of the most memorable contributions among the keynote speakers at the conference. Dorst comes from The Netherlands and has worked theoretically with design methods as well as designers’ concrete approaches to their work. He made a very appropriate proclamation to the world of international design research. His main point was that research into design methods cannot be seen as a new discipline, as it has already been in existence for decades. The new aspect lies in taking a different approach than before. We should get away from a prescriptive approach, where we dictate methods and processes, and move toward a more descriptive and reflective approach. Thus, we should look at how designers work in order to learn from the actual processes rather than lecturing and dictating the use of particular methods.

Another key point that was raised in relation to this topic was that we need to abandon the celebration of ‘best practice’ cases that is so dominant right now. Instead we should look more at the smaller cases that are often preliminary and explorative but not always that successful. This is where interesting discoveries and solutions see the light of day, which may be quite illuminating. We should always strive to reflect on what we do. Otherwise, we will simply repeat what already exists rather than thinking in new and developing directions.

Hong Kong is an exciting and colourful metropolis that has acted as a link between the cultures of East and West.

Diversity

The most noticeable aspect of the conference was the great diversity of the many presentations. It was apparent that the organisers had chosen not to exclude but instead aimed to include all conceivable aspects. The 323 papers (selected among 688 submitted papers) were presented in the course of four days in seven parallel tracks, grouped under the headings of Collaboration, Creativity, Culture, Emotion, History, Interaction, Methods, Perception, Sustainability, Teaching, Technology, User Behavior and Philosophy.

Several of the categories included reflections on the emotional aspects in the development of design solutions; the discussion about the expanded concept of design was also mentioned frequently but not addressed in depth. Interestingly, the topic on design and philosophy, which was scheduled late in the afternoon on the final day of the conference, pulled a large crowd, despite the many demands on the conference participants’ time. Any conference on this scale is bound to be frustrating – at the very most, one will be able to attend one seventh of the presentations – but the overall impression was a lack of coherence among the many papers and a somewhat disappointing academic/professional level. Perhaps this is due to the very different agendas of the presenters and to the big difference between Eastern and Western approaches to design and research.

The presenters and keynote speakers fell into three categories. One group represented companies, and here it might have been really interesting to learn more about their experiences and hopes for design research. Regrettably, however, this perspective was absent. Instead they delivered something resembling a sales pitch. The next major group was presentations mainly by Ph.D. scholars, most of them from Asia, who talked about their studies and topics. Unfortunately, these papers included no reflection and seemed more like school presentations than a sharing of experiences that might point to future developments in design research.

Some members of the Danish delegation From the left: Troels Degn Johansson, Eva Brandt, Thomas Schødt Rasmussen, Nina Lynge and Anne Louise Bang.

Good Danish Contributions

Fortunately, the last category of presentations offered more relevant content in relation to the declared intent of the conference of addressing Emerging Trends in Design Research. Here, professors, associate professors and students from East and West presented their own research and considerations on research strategies from the universities they represented. The Danish contributions from Karen Lisa Salamon, Eva Brandt and Troels Degn Johansson, all from The Danish Design School, fell into this latter category. And considering the combined output of the conference, we have reason in Denmark to be proud of the research efforts that have taken place in recent years. Based on the content of the conference, Denmark obviously has much to offer in comparison with other countries’ design research, and we are ahead of the game in terms of doing forward-looking design research. But we also have much to learn. Among other things, we should get better at benefiting from our design tradition in relation to research.

About the Conference

The International Association of Societies of Design Research (IASDR) was behind the conference, which is held every two years with the purpose of promoting research in the many different fields of design and enhancing the cooperation among the design organisations worldwide. This year’s conference was organised by The Design Research Society, The Design Society and the Asian organisations The Chinese Institute of Design, The Japanese Society for the Science of Design and The Korean Society of Design Science.

The conference had a little over 500 participants, many of them Asians, particularly from Hong Kong, China and Korea, as well as a smaller group from the USA, Australia and Europe. Among the European nations, The Netherlands and Denmark had particularly large presence. From Denmark, there were researchers from The Danish Design School, Designskolen Kolding and the Danish Centre for Design Research.

References

Additional Information About the Conference
Dorst, Kees, Understanding Design – 175 Reflections on Being a Designer, 2006.
Ji, L., Zhang, Z., & Nisbett, R.E., Is it Culture or is it Language? Examination of Language Effects in Cross-Cultural Research on Categorization, in: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 2004, 57-65.
Ramakers, Renney, Less+More. Droog Design in Context, OIO Publishers, 2002.  

Mind Design #4, 2007