What’s the Best Method in Design? A Reflection on My Methods Notebook
For a class project, I created a compilation of the methods I have used to research, emphasize, and design. I picked 25 methods which I resonate with the most, but by no means is this an exhaustive list. It doesn’t cover everything I have done, and I am sure to add more methods to my notebook in the future.
While creating my notebook, I’ve come to reflect on the many design experiences I’ve been thankful to have. As always, I can’t help but try to figure out what they all mean? What’s the connection here?
I want to share three main takeaways from creating my methods notebook.
My first takeaway is that my methods are like ingredients in a soup.
Oftentimes, I used many design methods in unison with each other. For instance, when visiting the IU Surplus Store to learn more about e-waste, I ended up utilizing several types of methods all at once. Upon meeting Todd, the store’s manager, I did a semi-structured interview to learn more about what he does. To understand the store’s operations, we did a walking probe to explore the area’s where employees sorted and refurbished inventory. Along the way, we took photos and videos documenting the experience in a fashion similar to photo ethnography. In my notebook, I classified this as a contextual inquiry, because that summed up the experience as a whole. For any research, it’s likely that a variety of methods will be used in conjunction with each other. Together, my methods are like ingredients making up my skill set and knowledge as a designer. These ingredients are meant to blend together like a soup. As I grow as a designer and researcher, I will become more confident mixing these methods together to achieve a desired outcome.
My second takeaway is that the value from methods all depend on the context, myself, and the participants involved.
A fair criticism is that some of these methods don’t make practical sense in an organizational setting. While they can be great for research, they might not always be ideal for business. I just have to accept that some contexts may not be appropriate for some methods. The truth of the matter is, I don’t know which methods I will need to use one day. What’s important is that if I do have to deploy one of these methods, I have real, quality experience in doing so. Furthermore, I recognize that it’s the skills derived from the methods that are more important than the methods themselves. Each method comes with a unique way of generating ideas, eliciting people’s perspective, and analyzing separate data. Practicing different methods strengthens my repertoire of soft skills which will help in any job setting. My ability to communicate design goals, facilitate interviews, organize and plan activities, act with flexibility in the field, and connect with people have been shaped through the wide range of all the methods I have engaged with.
I’ve also come to develop my own sense of preferred methods. To me, the what-if scenarios and toolkits are both my favorite ways to involve participants and design with people because it’s fun and engaging. I hope to use these methods more in the future. I am also particularly interested in multi-species ethnography. Specifically, the study of biomimicry fascinates me and I would love to pursue more research opportunities in the area of sustainable design. Lastly, prototyping, affinity diagramming, and contextual inquiry are methods I find integral to the practice of design. I am happy to have already had the chance to practice all three in several different settings. I doubt it will be the last time I use these methods.
An important realization from all of my practice with these methods is the importance recruitment can have in research. Having the skills and experience doesn’t matter if the right people aren’t chosen. When I consider some of my most productive experiences, such as my contextual inquiry or walking probe, it’s because I took the time to recruit participants with experience and passion for the topic at hand. Similarly, before creating my what-if scenarios, I reached out to the Sustain IU Recycling and Resource intern because I knew my design concepts would resonate with his work. I ended up having over an hour long conversation with him just talking about our shared interests for sustainability, recycling, and the internship program. To me, research is not just a chore that needs to be checked off for designers. Research gives meaning to what we do because it grounds our work in the fabric of people’s everyday life. Every minute spent recruiting people whose stories can provide useful insight into their world is worth the investment. Taking the time to recruit good participants, no matter how boring it can be, can make all the difference because it only takes one story to motivate a life changing design. After spending over two hours hearing stories from Todd Reid at the IU Surplus Store, my teammates and I were truly inspired to design a solution for e-waste.
So which design method is the best? I actually do have an answer to this, but I warn that it is cheesy.
My final takeaway is that the best method in design is to allow people to have fun.
Designers are not scientists. We don’t use methods to conduct an impartial experiment. Designers use methods as a way to get at the core of our humanity. Seriously, it’s important to be human. At any given moment, there is no one correct method that’s going to solve every complicated problem. So how can I know which of these methods I should use? I have to trust my gut and just have fun with it. In design, the key to using methods effectively comes down to the rapport we can build with the people involved. There are endless possibilities that can happen when we engage with people authentically. I believe it’s a designer’s role to help people open up and share their stories. It takes sincerity, humility, and compassion. Design is about embracing the chaos together. All of the methods in my notebook can help me clean up some of the mess in the world in order to build richer and more fulfilling lives.