How To Break Anything

Innovation + experience-minded design strategy. The pieces of a working model for understanding culture + change in an increasingly complex world.

  • About
  • Weak Signals
  • nanotrends & links
    • 4
      1 Jun 2011

      Research that matters - observation, filtering, prototyping and iteration

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost

      Designers thrive when they have a working concept of what makes people tick, a context that allows them to shape their ideas by considering what people covet and use, and somewhere to focus all their creative energy. Research can provide the fuel for new ideas. To Ben's point, design research isn't a scientific endeavor aimed at finding truths. Our clients typically can't afford the large sample sets and extended time frames necessary for such a "scientific" process.

      And sometimes design teams don't have the patience to see the value in dragging out a study in an effort to make it scientifically or statistically significant. We're just not wired that way; we prefer to make and experiment and then analyze later. So what is research good for?

      1. Learning about people's behavior

      Behavior is fertile ground for design. Not just human behavior, but systems behavior: social, technical, environmental, political, and economic systems.

      2. Understanding and analyzing culture

      ...Culture is another important system when it comes to understanding design because it deals with the relationships we build between each other, our things, our routines, our view of the the world, and our beliefs. 

      3. Defining context

      Context includes the physical and virtual settings that behavior occurs in and that culture shapes and emerges from. Identifying touch points—the decisive moments where a customer and a business intersect—is an important part of defining context.

      4. Setting focus

      Ill-defined problems, short project schedules, and a lack of patience are common conditions in design, and these can often lead to poor solutions. Doing research demands being comfortable with ambiguity in the early stages of a project in order to attain eventual clarity.

      ...Even the legendary Charles Eames expressed a similar sentiment when asked about the boundaries of design. He responded, "What are the boundaries of problems?"

       

      Design research is not "a science" and is not necessarily "scientific." It gives designers and clients a much more nuanced understanding of the people for whom they design while providing knowledge that addresses some of the most fundamental questions we face throughout the process. What is the correct product or service to design? What characteristics should it have, and is it working as intended? "The research" won't necessarily provide cold hard answers. But it will generate some good and feasible ideas. 

      via designmind.frogdesign.com

      The above is taken from the longer full article The Art of Design Research (and Why It Matters). I think it's important to consider particularly while having the sentiment expressed by Faris in mind, in a piece called All Market Research Is Wrong. If you're interested in research both the above piece and Faris's thoughts are worth reading in full, because they both express the sentiment that research is of course valuable, but in a way that we often overlook.

      The phrase is "research is often used like a drunk uses a lamppost - not for illumination but for support." The idea at hand here requires a bit of long-term thinking - research that matters isn't the means to an end, rather it's a way to frame the beginning (#4 above). 

      Hence, the research that is important is often what takes place before and after you're actively researching. The first is something more like observation and filtering; the latter we call prototyping and iteration.  

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      11 Feb 2011

      Fluid architecture and "Monopoly Live: Is A Game That Controls Everything For You Really A Game?"

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost

      An updated version of Monopoly has been recently announced, set to hit stores this upcoming fall under the title Monopoly Live. The game features a central tower-like structure, a device that calculates all transactions based on the digital payment cards provided with the game, and simulates dice rolls for players as well. Because the tower constantly monitors the positions of specially fitted game pieces through infrared camera, the game can ensure that pieces have moved the proper amount of distance according to the simulated roll, and is aware of the status of each player’s property assets.

      Some of the initial reaction to the new system is what you might expect – the game is strikingly devoid of any actual human interaction. There are a number of human elements within games like Monopoly that might initially seem superfluous, that end up having a significant impact on what it means to play a game. One can imagine that a board game that moved all the pieces for you allows no room for the subtle tensions that arise from trying to avoid landing on another player’s coveted spot. A game that calculates all the transactions for you allows no room for the negotiation process. And a game that constantly calculates the actual value off all players’ assets – making it very accessible and tangible – takes away the sense of mastery that comes with being able to asses, manipulate, and trade otherwise intangible value with others.

      In short, from an interaction design perspective, the game is becoming very close to a purely random-event environment, which would be something like a game where players just roll dice against each other to see who gets the higher score. As you might imagine this doesn’t make for a very enjoyable experience for very long. An important lesson here is that games aren’t inherently fun just because you call them a game – a lesson that seems to be emerging as many begin to think about game mechanics and how to make them part of more and more experiences.

      Monopoly

      [via Gizmodo]

      originally posted on psfk.com

      A bit of commentary in retrospect:

      Monopoly Live probably won't be that terrible of a game; I suppose I painted the picture a bit grim. It is interesting to think though: what is it about _____ [a game, a service, a product, or otherwise] that makes it genuinely enjoyable? It's usually not perfection. I've started to think about something I might call "fluid architecture," which I'm picturing as something like "design for error." I suppose it's somewhat similar to the conversation around serendipity.

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • Search

    • Tags

      • perspective
      • value
      • metasocioculture
      • culture
      • long-term thinking
      • decisionmaking
      • offline inspiration
      • cognitive fallacies
      • future
      • time-orientation
      • limitation
      • perception
      • causality
      • definition
      • irrationality
      • art
      • behavioral economics
      • game mechanics
      • emergence
      • experience
      • exposure
      • observe everything
      • philosophy
      • programming
      • human insight
      • illusion
      • paradox
      • privacy
      • reactionary
      • want
      • worry
      • adaptation
      • advertising
      • behavior
      • design strategy
      • evolution
      • identity
      • metaphors
      • networks
      • optimization
      • shortsightedness
      • social interactions
      • weak signals
      • connections
      • counterintuitive
      • doomsday
      • feedback loops
      • indirect
      • meaning
      • tangible data
      • context
      • glanceable
      • memory
      • motivation
      • seeming
      • trends
      • utopia
      • chronological proportionality
      • cognitive environments
      • complexity
      • control
      • cyborg anthropology
      • gaming
      • happiness
      • human programming
      • information art
      • nostalgia
      • rationality
      • scarcity
      • technosocial
      • time
      • timeline
      • Entrepreneur
      • PSEA
      • asking the right questions
      • classification
      • cultural narratives
      • data
      • deception
      • filter theory
      • games
      • habitat media
      • historical context
      • information theory
      • intelligence
      • levels of abstraction
      • linguistic programming
      • metaphysics
      • nonlinear
      • optimaization
      • organization
      • patina
      • pattern recognition
      • reactive culture
      • serendipity filters
      • truth
      • wisdom
      • wonder
      • youth
    • Archive

      • 2012 (58)
        • May (9)
        • April (14)
        • March (9)
        • February (13)
        • January (13)
      • 2011 (188)
        • December (14)
        • November (6)
        • October (6)
        • September (9)
        • August (9)
        • July (26)
        • June (21)
        • May (12)
        • April (17)
        • March (21)
        • February (25)
        • January (22)
      • 2010 (214)
        • December (22)
        • November (14)
        • October (8)
        • September (7)
        • August (13)
        • July (17)
        • June (16)
        • May (16)
        • April (22)
        • March (36)
        • February (31)
        • January (12)
      • 2009 (95)
        • December (6)
        • November (9)
        • October (9)
        • September (8)
        • August (6)
        • July (2)
        • June (9)
        • May (17)
        • April (7)
        • March (8)
        • February (7)
        • January (7)
      • 2008 (47)
        • December (10)
        • November (12)
        • October (7)
        • September (7)
        • August (4)
        • July (3)
        • May (1)
        • April (1)
        • March (1)
        • January (1)
      • 2007 (4)
        • October (1)
        • September (3)
    • Contributors

      Kyle Cameron Studstill
    • Obox Design
  • How To Break Anything

    Hello friends and collaborators. I deal in innovation, working to build fantastic experiences enabled by the digital world. As part of this I track cultural change, primarily through observations guided by models and filters calibrated over years to sort out the cream.

    These pieces of thoughts here reflect concepts that are elements of those models: ecosystem thinking, long-term value, information filters, and pattern recognition.

    ("How to break anything" is an abstract notion that reflects my background in observation and analysis. Rules are meant to be broken, but only through understanding the rules - observing them with an empathetic eye - can they be broken constructively.

    So how to break anything? Observe everything.

    [You can't observe everything so how do you know what to observe? That's another project that I call Filter Theory - see the About link above.])

    267086 Views
  • Get Updates

    Follow this Space »
    You're following this Space (Edit)
    You're a contributor here (Edit)
    This is your Space (Edit)
    Follow by email »
    Get the latest updates in your email box automatically.
    Loading...
    Subscribe via RSS
    TwitterFacebook