By reflecting on their experiences and putting them into words, designers contribute to theory development. That was one of the key points at a conference about the relationship between design practice and design research at the Danish Museum of Art and Design in Copenhagen.

By Hans Emborg Bünemann

On 4 November 2008, Ph.D. scholars and design researchers were gathered for a seminar entitled When Design Practice Becomes Research in order to exchange experiences about the possibilities and challenges inherent in practice-based design research. The initiative for the seminar came from Flemming Tvede Hansen, who is trained as a ceramist and is currently a Ph.D. scholar at The Danish Design School under the auspices of the Danish Centre for Design Research.

Design researcher Per Galle, associate professor at The Danish Design School, kicked off the debate by proposing definitions of key concepts such as research, theory and practice. In a comment on the title of the seminar Galle stated that practice cannot in itself become research:
“I would rather say that practice may have the potential for becoming a part of research, the same way a door is part of a house,” he said.

At the seminar, the presenters’ own experiments and artefacts formed the basis for a discussion about what turns practice into research. Photo: Flemming Tvede

The Practitioner’s Challenge

Several presentations at the seminar discussed what role the practitioner’s work, the artefact, might play in design research. In Per Galle’s view, specifying the role of the artefact in the research process may pose a challenge when a practitioner sets out to contribute to research. Here, the practitioner’s self-perception is a key issue:
“If one has mostly seen oneself as a designer on a mission of fighting ugliness in the world, one must realise that this mission will have to become secondary to the purpose of the research. The success criterion is no longer to create an aesthetic and functional product but rather to produce a product – or an artefact – that provides an insight that can be documented for one’s own and other researchers’ reflection and analysis. In return, a reward awaits the practitioner who chooses the research path. He or she will learn something new about their craft, gain self-insight and perhaps be able to answer questions that might be of importance to others as well. Therein lies the motivation for practice-based research,” he said.

Disseminating Practice-Based Knowledge

Disseminating the knowledge produced through experimentation presents a particular challenge, as this knowledge is embedded in the artefacts. In his Ph.D. project Flemming Tvede Hansen uses experiments with clay to study what artistic and qualitative contribution the digital media might make to the field of ceramics.

The artefacts in his research are not products in the common sense but should be seen as knowledge-generating instruments:
“I acknowledge written documentation as a criterion for good research. But at the same time, I would argue that the artefacts that are generated through experimentation should be included as part of the documentation and dissemination of knowledge in practice-based design research. We need a greater emphasis on visual communication,” says Flemming Tvede, who considers the visual aspect crucial both in practising and communicating research.

The Experimental Contribution to Research

Another Ph.D. scholar under the Danish Centre for Design Research is textile designer Kirsten Nissen from Designskolen Kolding, who studies the new approaches to textile design made possible by digital technology and the way in which the use of computers may enrich the design of textiles. In her research project she asks: What happens in the encounter between the capabilities of the loom and the computer? 

Kirsten Nissen agrees with Flemming Tvede Hansen that communicating the practitioner’s knowledge presents a big challenge. To some extent, the properties of the artefacts can be communicated through illustrations, accompanied by a text that clarifies one’s intentions with the illustrations, she says. But other insights that emerge as a result of the experimental work are harder to share with others.

In her experiments textile designer Kirsten Nissen uses the computational power of the computer to create new types of patterns on a digital loom. Photo: Vibeke Jerichau

“For me as a practitioner, research involves analyses and assessments of the outcomes of the experiments. In these assessments, I rely heavily on competencies concerning material properties that I have acquired through practical work. For example, there is a tactile sense of surfaces and consistency – in the professional terminology we talk about the hand and drape of the fabric. This represents a challenging communication task,” says Kirsten Nissen, drawing a parallel to the competencies concerning consistency and processes that are gradually acquired and refined by a baker or a pastry chef:
“The competencies in use in the kitchen reflect a combination of background knowledge, experience and a feel for the ingredients that isn’t written down in any cookbook.”

Kirsten Nissen emphasises that researchers with a practice background must remain aware that design, i.e. the creation of a new artefact, and research, i.e. the attempt to acquire and document new knowledge, represent two profoundly different endeavours. However, she also says that doing design work in connection with a research project offers unique opportunities for contributing empirically to research. She explains:
“When I carry out experiments, the purpose is not to perfect a design product but rather to extract knowledge from the experiment. I use my experiences from design practice to plan the experiments, and with the actual experiments I do a sort of reality check on a number of ‘what if’-scenarios in relation to my research issues.”

Design Process and Theory Development

If the experimental research is documented and disseminated in accordance with widely accepted criteria for good research, according to Per Galle it can both contribute to theory development and enable the generalisation of experiences and lead to instructions for practitioners.

At the seminar Per Galle presented a process diagram to illustrate this relationship between design theory and design process, all the way from task definition to distribution and usage. The diagram illustrates that theory might be generated by practice and, conversely, that theory is also included in practice. Research helps to consolidate existing theory as well as develop new theory.

Process diagram. With this diagram as his point of departure, Associate Professor Per Galle kicked off a debate about the relationship between design process (vertical axis) and design theory (horizontal axis). Illustration: Per Galle

In the subsequent debate, several participants stated that all the elements of the design process, expressed on the vertical axis of the diagram, can contribute to theory development. Per Galle agreed that it is possible in this way to shift the horizontal axis of the diagram up or down:
“One might speak of a dialectic relationship,” he pointed out. “The designer can use theory throughout the design process, and the individual processes each have their contribution to make to testing and developing theory.”

Scientific Development

According to Per Galle it is obvious to compare the practice-based design research with, for example, the development of medical science, which also originated from practice. Experiences concerning successful courses of treatment were preserved on paper, and thus a theory was formulated. In written form, these experiences or theories might benefit other practitioners, be tested and either rejected or found to be a sound basis for qualifying the fight against disease in practice or additional theory development. The latter half of the 1800’s saw the emergence of a medical research environment with the publication of articles in acknowledged, international journals.

Per Galle sees a similar development in design research:
“We are currently developing a theoretical base in interaction with the practice field. The practice-based Ph.D. projects are an important element in developing the research environment,” he says.

Presenters at the conference When Design Practice Becomes Research: Per Galle, associate professor, The Danish Design School, Copenhagen Flemming Tvede Hansen, Ph.D. scholar, The Danish Design School, Copenhagen Pia Staff, Ph.D. scholar, The University of Art and Design Helsinki, Finland Grethe Refsum, Ph.D., adjunct professor, Oslo National Academy of the Arts, Norway Hanna Landin, Ph.D. scholar, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden Kirsten Nissen, Ph.D. scholar, Designskolen Kolding

Article about  Flemming Tvede Hansen’s Ph.D. project in Mind Design # 10.
 

 

Mind Design #14, 2008