for its stakeholders. For businesses, it means improved profits and more loyal customers; for nonprofits or governments, it means more effective ways to serve constituencies. We also believe that design should not operate in a black box: We are working to document design methods in order to make them more repeatable, predictable, and scalable.

We also teach that good design starts with a clear point of view, but it should be based on facts, not intuition. We also talk a lot about culture, but we think design should be based on an existing culture, not create new

ones. And finally, we challenge our students to experiment, but to do so like scientists (using hypotheses, building on past work), not like artists.

Q: What is the role of design
in innovation? Or innovation in
design?

Scott (Cranbrook): Innovation makes strategy. Design makes form. They are completely different methods, with different priorities. To exaggerate the difference, we could call it business innovation versus cultural innovation. Design at Cranbrook seeks cultural innovation to

offer emotional responses to modern change and manifest those positions, those values, with specific form. Business thinking serves our goals but does not drive them.

Design culture already practices some of the so-called “new” strategy that innovation culture is selling—mature designers analyze research from many disciplines, think strategically, and distill that knowledge into a POV with form. Innovation “D-schools” promise a new kind of designer, specifically trained in strategic business thinking without a deep foundation in form giving and communication