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