Posted by Plish on October 26, 2009
Since the ancient Egyptians didn’t technically document their design process, I decided to do some reading and tease out the process that they used to design and construct the pyramids. What I came up with is diagrammed below.
Click to See Full Size
Their overarching concern was obvious: build a suitable eternal home for their ruler in a limited time.
These constraints (italicized in the above sentence) bounded their design/build process. If we agree with video game developer, Dino Dini, that the definition of a design process is, ‘the management of (negotiable and non-negotiable) constraints,” then in fact the Egyptians were indeed using a design process as they were accutely active in managing some very basic constraints:
3. Guiding Perspectives on the Afterlife (Providing for the needs of the dead)
4. Manufacturing/Construction/Artistic Techniques (Technology + Art)
Of the above 5 constraints, two constraints were non-negotiable: ‘Guiding Perspectives on the Afterlife’ and ‘Time’.
Their Perspectives on the Afterlife dictated what must be contained in the tomb from foodstuffs to boats, to how the tomb was constructed.
Time, or rather, time to the death of the ruler, was a powerful, non-negotiable constraint. The structure basically had to be completed in time for the entombment.
These two constraints impacted the other three constraints as is clear from the archeological record. The materials used, the technologies chosen for building aspects of the tomb, the abandonment of various aspects of the tomb and focus on other areas, the use of more or less workers, the change in architectural layout during the course of construction, all these were done in response to the non-negotiable constraints.
While managing these constraints they were basically following the User Centered Design process as spelled out in ISO 13407 and summarized below:
Courtesy of devx.com
Only they were doing it over 5000 years ago…
Posted in creativity, Design, Funding Innovation, imagination, invention, Life Stages, problem solving, The Human Person | Tagged: Design, design process, Egyptians and design, pyramids, user centered design | 1 Comment »
Posted by Plish on October 15, 2009
Inevitably when trying to come up with innovative ways of solving sticky problems we have those times when we say, “If only I had XYZ I could make ABC.”
Enter: Inventables -The Materials and Technology Marketplace.
Inventables is a free site (though a Premium service is also available) that allows someone to browse through or search for enabling materials and technologies. It’s as simple as typing in keywords or clicking in a cloud.
For example, the dissolving fabric pictured above is one of 146 technologies I found while doing a search on “fabric”. A particularly pleasing feature is that the results do not only tell you how the technologies are currently being used, but you will be given possible other uses, seductively getting those creative ideas flowing.
The contents of Inventables is a veritable symphony of technologies looking for a home; or in the words of Inventables’ long term mission statement: “(Inventables provides) a living showcase of what’s possible to deliver inspiration and innovation to the dreamers of the world.”
Prepare to dream…
Posted in Brain Stimulation Tools, Creative Thinking Techniques, Design, idea generation, Innovation Tools, invention, problem solving | Tagged: creativity tools, idea generation, Innovation Tools, inventables, materials, Technology | 1 Comment »
Posted by Plish on October 13, 2009
When trying to increase creative output and come up with ideas to solve sticky problems we often look for a cool tool or app that will help us make that obtuse connection, or spur an amazing insight. What may be more helpful is finding a video of your favorite comedy, kicking back and laughing your way to success!
There is an increasingly robust body of research that highlights the fact that laughter is not only good for the body and soul but good for business. People who laugh more are, in general, happier people as well. The benefits are astounding.
Courtesy of Helpguide.org
(It’s worth reading the entire article from which the above clip was taken.)
In fact, according to this article from Paul McGhee, PhD of LaughterRemedy.com,
“There has been research since the 1950s documenting the close relationship between humor/fun and creativity. For example, simply listening to a humorous recording increases scores on a subsequently given creativity test. People also perform more creatively on a task when it is framed as “play” than when it is framed as “work.” Simply watching comedy films is enough to improve creative problem solving, and the amount of improvement is greater than after watching a serious movie.”
This is illustrated in this tidbit from FastCompany in which it was noted that the founders of DNA, “… spent a lot of time lollygagging and goofing off, going to parties and (b.s.-ing) over coffee.”
So next time someone says that you’re spending too much time laughing and you need to get serious, point them to the above resources and this amazing paper from the American Psychological Association, and tell them that seriousness won’t necessarily solve problems – but happy, laughing people will.
Science backs you up.
Posted in Best Practices, Creative Environments, creativity, culture of innovation, Design, Health Concerns, idea generation, imagination, innovation, Play, problem solving, Research, Team-Building, The Human Person, Workplace Creativity | Tagged: creative problem solving, creativity, happiness, health, innovation, laughter | 1 Comment »
Posted by Plish on October 6, 2009
If anyone has ever been in an emergency room, hospital or had a medical procedure done, you no doubt have had a pulse oximeter placed on your finger (or perhaps earlobe). The device functions by shining certain wavelengths of light at your skin and reading the amount of light that comes back or through the tissue.
It’s a really cool device and quite simple in its operation – you could build one yourself if you wanted to. Yet, what is today a standard in medical monitoring, was once an annoying artifact.
In the early 1970’s, Japanese BioEngineer Takuo Aoyagi was studying ways of measuring cardiac output. At the time, the established method involved injecting dye into the blood, diverting this dyed blood from an artery through an external tube and then shining light through the tube and measuring the light that’s transmitted.
Although it was effective it was also pretty invasive. So, building upon this technique, researchers tried using the same technology on a person’s earlobe – shine a light through the earlobe and measure the transmitted light. While this was a step in the right direction, the readings were spoiled by the pulsatile nature of the signal.
Enter Aoyagi-San who developed a technique to filter out the pulsatile effect. Great, right?
Even after this adjustment it was difficult to obtain consistent values – something was creating noise in the system. Mr. Aoyagi correctly postulated the fluctuation was due to changing amounts of oxygen bound to hemoglobin in the blood. Rather than simply filter out the noise to obtain clean signals he focused his efforts on capturing the ‘noise’ of the fluctuations in a repeatable manner.
The non-invasive pulse oximeter was born.
What’s the takeaway?
When designing new products we have a tendency to focus on achieving certain goals while working around, ignoring or minimizing the noise. Instead, we should make friends with the noise and find out what it has to say to us. We then have to have enough fortitude to pursue the elusive at the expense of what was originally the goal!
Everyone hears the noise; only the innovative hear the symphony…
Click here to read the full story of pulse oximetry.
Posted in Case Studies, Design, Disruptive Innovation, Great Creative Minds, innovation, invention, patents, problem solving | Tagged: Design, innovation, problem solving, pulse oximetry, Takuo Aoyagi | 2 Comments »
Posted by Plish on October 3, 2009
I made the above sketch while listening to a panel discussion with David Armano, Dan Saffer, Jon Kolko and Ben Jacobson at the IIT Design Research Conference.
What are your thoughts on this representation of the beginnings of design/innovation?
How could it be improved?
Posted in Authenticity, creativity, Design, innovation, Nature of Creativity, problem solving, Sketching, The Human Person, The Senses | Tagged: ben jacobson, dan saffer, Design, empathy, IIT Design Research Conference, innovation, jon kolko | 2 Comments »
Posted by Plish on October 2, 2009
Today while I was at the Design Research Conferencein Chicago, I listened to the presentation of Jason Fried of 37 Signals. While primarily discussing his design process through the lens of software design, he touched upon one particular aspect that is true for all types of design. In short, he said that good software comes from people who are more like curators vs. designers.
What does he mean?
Software Designers (in this particular example) have a tendency to want to constantly add more and more features. Version 11.0 almost always has more features than Version 10.0 and Version 12.0 will have even more than Version 11.0 He built upon his illustration by saying that if you stick every painting in the world in a building you don’t have a museum, but a warehouse of art.
It’s when you pick certain paintings and put them in a room, when you play the rule of curator, now you have a museum, not a warehouse.
The point is a good one.
The best design is an embodiment of the essentials and not the result of Creeping Featuritis…
Posted in Best Practices, Customer Focus, Design, innovation, software | Tagged: 37 signals, Design, featuritis, IIT Design Research Conference, jason fried | Leave a Comment »