Solving Complex Problems
Through Design
Steve Baty

Steve Baty | Meld Studios | [e-mail]

3. Handling ambiguity through multiplicity and the suspension of judgment;

4. Critique; and 5. Empathy.

[ 1] http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/ Wicked_prob-
lem/; See also
Buchanan, R. http://
research.informatics.
buffalo.edu/Faculty/
Scott/INF420/down-
loads/Readings/2-
What%20is%20HCI/
Wicked%20Problems_
excerpt.pdf/
September + October 2010

[ 2] Kolko, J. Method
of Design Synthesis.
Oxford University Press,
in press. http://www.
methodsofsynthesis.
com/
interactions

What is it about design that makes it so well suited to solving complex problems? Why is design thinking such a promising avenue for business and government tackling seemingly intractable problems?

Design is a broad arena of activity with a rich history, developed theory, and passionate practitioners. It encompasses a myriad of techniques, tools, philosophies, and craft. At least in part, design can be seen as an approach to solving problems and in that guise has several fundamental qualities— as a practice and as a mind-set—that make it effective in the face of complicated issues. Better suited, in fact, than analytical approaches grounded in a scientific mode of observe, hypothesize, test, iterate. While analytical approaches are excellent at driving operational improvements in efficiency and effectiveness—reducing waste, optimizing processes, and the like—they are poorly suited to bridging the chasms that open up in the face of disruptive technological, social, and political change.

A complex problem is typical-
ly characterized by a system of
causal relationships wherein the
effect of a change in one part of
the system may have long-term
and difficult-to-predict con-
sequences. Such problems are
often “chaotic” in the sense that
small changes can have large
impacts, and large changes may
have little or no impact at all.

Deconstructionism

Design is most notably associated with abductive thinking and synthesis—the leap of insight that pulls together two seemingly disconnected ideas and demonstrates a powerful connection. But equally valuable is the ability to look at the components of a problem space—the physical, financial, social, or systemic constraints—in isolation and critically examine them.

This quality is at the heart of the designer’s ability to set aside constraints, to think beyond the problem as it has been defined, and open up avenues for discovery and exploration that would otherwise remain closed. (Taking advantage of those avenues relies on the abductive thinking and synthesis skills we will discuss here.)

Deconstruction provides the framework for asking “what might be?” by isolating the components that make up what is. It is, in part, a process of asking whether something must necessarily be. It is the vehicle through which design challenges assumptions and tacit