METHODS MAPPING LAB
INNOVATION METHODS MAPPING: Book 2:
DESIGN FOR COMPLEXITY / Coming Soon!
In-Progress Book 2 of Innovation Methods Mapping, will be focused on DESIGN FOR COMPLEXITY, including 10 - 20 examples of changemaking methods geared for complex contexts beyond the upfront assumptions of product, service, experience.
We are inviting suggestions for which DESIGN FOR COMPLEXITY methods might be included in the book. As per Book 1 in this series, we are interested in and looking at the architectural design of process, rather than evaluating effectiveness.
In Book 1 we included 60+ innovation processes, from multiple communities, spanning an 80+ year period. These Humantific books are of particular interest to R&D folks, methodologists and others interested in innovation process history.
If you have a suggestion for a DESIGN FOR COMPLEXITY process that should be considered for inclusion in the book please feel free to send us an email: kickitup (at) humantific (dot) com. (Please place "Innovation Book 2" as the subject.)
More information regarding DESIGN FOR COMPLEXITY can be found on the NextD Journal site.
If you are interested in this subject and would like to be notified when the book is published send us an email.
ONGOING METHODS RESEARCH
In addition, we continue to gather historical innovation method examples, some of which we post here in the LAB section of this site.
PROCESS 64
Universal Traveler Journey,1972
Today we are adding the Universal Traveler process from the original 1972 book by authors Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall. This process design evolved forward in subsequent editions of the book and we will be looking at that evolution in upcoming posts.
Overview Analysis
-
This is a seven-step process that is a relatively early example of combining awareness of Creative Problem Solving, Design, Cybernetics and Systems Thinking as communities as well as methods.
-
Begins with Accept and ends with an early version of Measure stated as Evaluate.
-
Rare early example that mentions “gathering feelings” which reflects design orientation.
-
Ideate (diverge) and Select (converge) depicted as two separate steps unlike CPS.
-
Unlike many design methods, it assumes no product, service or experience challenge or outcome.
-
There are no behavior signals in this version of this process.
PROCESS 65
OODA Loop,1976
Today we are adding the OODA Loop 1974 by John Boyd, sometimes referred to as the Boyd Decision Cycle. Created in the context of the US military, this process continues to spark interest, conversation and application particularly in the military community.
Overview Analysis
-
Created for the context of military applications, this is a 4 step process focused by the author on the decision-making aspects of what goes on inside the process.
-
In this process, all actions within (synthesizing, analyzing, etc,) are subordinate to and serve to feed/inform/shape decision-making.
-
Purpose of the process described as “to improve our capacity for independent action.” and “needed to cope” with a continuously changing environment.
-
Reflects recognition of need for ongoing incoming loops of information and insights.
-
Accompanying literature references Osborn 1963 and de Bono 1971 but no recognition of divergence here. (See Preference Projection Theory.) The hypothesis described as the decided course of action.
PROCESS 66
Frame Creation Process, 2015
Today we are adding the Frame Creation Process from the 2015 book, Frame Innovation, Create New Thinking by Design by author Kees Dorst. What we found most interesting about this process was the super aggressive attempts at differenciating via scorching criticism of what the author depicts as "old methods of problem-solving”, "dysfunctional problem-solving" and "conventional problem-solving" the architectural description of which map to no process that we know of.
Overview Analysis
This is a nine step design process intended for problem situations described as open, complex, dynamic and networked. It's accompanying text, conveys a startling barrage of scorching and ill-informed criticisms of an approach described as “conventional, rational, creative, problem solving” depicting it as “always starting with Definition of the problem“, “curiously static”, “Frozen in Time,” ”solution fixated“ and lone wolfs creating “one-off solutions” outside of cocreation. None of those odd depictions map to known historical or current versions of Creative Problem Solving (CPS) methods. Highly critical, this design process exhibits no awareness of 60+ years of CPS evolution including open framing constellation creation and inclusion enabling that already exist in CPS methodology and have for decades.
