-
這個早上我想要談一下從設計轉化為設計思考會如何,螢幕上這張舊照片是我受雇從事的第一個專案,大約是在25年前,這是一台木工機的一部份,我的任務是讓這個東西看起來摩登些,也更容易使用些,我當時認為自己幹得不錯,但不幸地,不久之後這間公司倒了,這是我做的第二個專案,一台傳真機,我在這新科技產品的周圍加上顯眼的外殼,但同樣地,18個月之後,這項產品遭到淘汰。
以現在的眼光來衡量,這整個「科技」都已落伍,其實我學的很慢,但最後我明瞭到也許有關設計的一切,並非全然如此重要,像是讓東西更具吸引力、更好用些或是更具賣相,專注於一項設計時,也許只是單一的產品,過去我總是想要為其增值,反而忽略其應有的影響,我想這個小小的設計觀點是一個比較近期的現象,事實上,可能出現在二十世紀的後半期,當設計變成一種消費主義的手段時。
所以,今日我們談到設計,特別是當我們在大眾媒體讀到相關報導時,我常常談到像這樣的產品,有趣嗎?是的;合意嗎?也許;重要嗎?不然,但並非總是如此,而我想要建議的是,如果我們採取不同的設計觀點,不要太過於注重在物件上,而多著重於設計思考的方式,我們可能會看到一個較大的影響。
這位紳士是Isambard Kingdom Brunel,十九世紀時,在他設計生涯中產出許多偉大的作品,包括布里斯托的Clifton吊橋,還有Rotherhithe的泰晤士河隧道,兩項都是很偉大的設計,也都深具創新力,而他最偉大的創造剛好貫穿牛津這裡,名為「大西部鐵道」,孩提時期,我住在非常靠近這裡的地方,而我最喜歡做的一件事情是沿著鐵道騎腳踏車,等待大型快車呼嘯而過,您可以在J.M.W. Turner的畫作中看出端倪,畫名為「雨濛、蒸氣與速度」。
Brunel當初的目標是讓乘客能體驗到飄浮過田野的感覺,那可是在十九世紀!為了達成這個目標,意味著他需要建造出最平坦的坡度,那是史無前例的,也必須建造許多橫跨河谷的長距高架橋,圖中是高架橋橫跨Maidenhead的泰晤士河,還有就像在Wiltshire Box一樣的長隧道,但他沒有就此滿足,他沒有停止對設計最佳鐵道旅程的夢想,他想像出一套整合的運輸系統,讓乘客可以從倫敦搭火車出發,再轉乘船舶在紐約上岸,一趟從倫敦到紐約的旅程,這是他建造的S.S. Great Western號,用以接駁上述的後半段旅程。
展開英文
收合英文
-
以下為系統擷取之英文原文
I'd like to talk a little bit this morning about what happens if we move from design to design thinking. Now this rather old photo up there is actually the first project I was ever hired to do. Something like 25 years ago. It's a woodworking machine, or at least a piece of one. And my task was to make this thing a little bit more modern, a little bit easier to use. I thought, at the time, I did a pretty good job. Unfortunately, not very long aftewards the company went out of business.
This is the second project that I did. It's a fax machine. I put an attractive shell around some new technology. Again, 18 months later, the product was obsolete. And now, of course, the whole technology is obsolete. Now I'm a fairly slow learner. But eventually it occurred to me that maybe what passed for design wasn't all that important -- making things more attractive, making them a bit easier to use, making them more marketable. By focusing on a design, maybe just a single product, I was being incremental and not having much of an impact.
But I think this small view of design is a relatively recent phenomena, and in fact really emerged in the latter half of the Twentieth Century as design became a tool of consumerism. So when we talk about design today, and particularly when we read about it in the popular press, we're often talking about products like these. Amusing? Yes. Desirable? Maybe. Important? Not so very.
But this wasn't always the way. And I'd like to suggest that if we take a different view of design, and focus less on the object and more on design thinking as an approach, that we actually might see the result in a bigger impact. Now this gentleman, Isambard Kingdom Brunel, designed many great things in his career in the Nineteenth Century, including the Clifton suspension bridge in Bristol and the Thames tunnel at Rotherhithe. Both great designs and actually very innovative too. His greatest creation runs actually right through here in Oxford. It's called the Great Western Railway.
And as a kid I grew up very close to here. And one of my favorite things to do was to cycle along by the side of the railway waiting for the great big express trains to roar past. You can see it represented here in J.M.W. Turner's painting, "Rain, Steam and Speed". Now what Brunel said that he wanted to achieve for his passengers was the experience of floating across the countryside.
Now this was back in the Nineteenth Century. And to do that meant creating the flattest gradients that had ever yet been made, which meant building long viaducts across river valleys -- this is actually the viaduct across the Thames at Maidenhead -- and long tunnels such as the one at Box, in Wiltshire. But he didn't stop there. He didn't stop with just trying to design the best railway journey. He imagined an integrated transportation system in which it would be possible for a passenger to embark on a train in London and disembark from a ship in New York. One journey from London to New York. This is the S.S. Great Western that he built to take care of the second half of that journey.
-
Brunel 在100年前所做的工作是在專業設計浮現之前,但我想他是運用設計思考來解決問題,並創造出改變世界的發明,設計思考起源於Roger Martin,他是多倫多大學商學院教授,他稱其為整合思考,即探索對立想法的能力,以及對立約束的能力,以創造出新的解決方案,套用到設計上,即是平衡嚮往意念,即人類想要的事物與科技可行性,還有經濟效益,像「大西部」這樣的創舉,我們可以將平衡延伸到絕對極限。
因此,我們可以從這樣變成這樣,不斷重建世界的系統思考家,如教父般身著黑色高領毛衣及名牌眼鏡的人們,鑽研於小細節上,隨著我們工業社會的成熟,設計變成一項專業,而且聚焦於更為微小的輪廓中,直到達到絕對的美感、影像和時尚,我不是來這裡批評什麼的,我是教會中從事正職工作的良民,我這兒剛好有一付名牌眼鏡,你看,但我的確認為設計可能又再次朝向碩大的方向發展,而那都要歸功於,設計思考的運用,對新型態的問題來說,如:全球暖化、教育、保健、安全、乾淨飲水之類,就當設計思考重新浮現的此刻,我們也見到它開始應對新型態的問題,有些我們可以觀察到的有用基本概念。
我也想在接下來幾分鐘的時間內談談,首先是設計是以人為主,它或許整合了科技與經濟的考量,但一開始是以人類需求或其可能的需求為主,什麼讓生活更便利或更有趣?什麼讓科技更有用及可用?但那不僅是良好的人體工學,將按鍵設計到對的位置,通常是關於瞭解文化與其脈絡,然後我們才能知道從何處獲得新點子。
展開英文
收合英文
-
Now Brunel was working 100 years before the emergence of the design profession. But I think he was using design thinking to solve problems and to create world-changing innovations. Now design thinking begins with what Roger Martin, the business school professor at the University of Toronto, calls integrative thinking. And that's the ability to exploit opposing ideas and opposing constraints to create new solutions. In the case of design, that means balancing desirability, what humans need, with technical feasibility, and economic viability. With innovations like the Great Western, we can stretch that balance to the absolute limit.
So somehow, we went from this to this. Systems thinkers who were reinventing the world, to a priesthood of folks in black turtlenecks and designer glasses working on small things. As our industrial society matured, so design became a profession and it focused on an ever smaller canvas until it came to stand for aesthetics, image and fashion. Now I'm not trying to throw stones here. I'm a fully paid-up member of that priesthood. and somewhere in here I have my designer glasses. There we go. But I do think that perhaps design is getting big again. And that's happening through the application of design thinking to new kinds of problems -- to global warming, to education, healthcare, security, clean water, whatever.
And as we see this reemergence of design thinking and we see it beginning to tackle new kinds of problems, there are some basic ideas that I think we can observe that are useful. And I'd like to talk about some of those just for the next few minutes. The first of those is that design is human-centered. It may integrate technology and economics, but it starts with what humans need, or might need. What makes life easier, more enjoyable? What makes technology useful and usable? But that is more than simply good ergonomics, putting the buttons in the right place. It's often about understanding culture and context before we even know where to start to have ideas.
-
所以,當一支團隊在印度執行一項新的視力篩檢專案時,他們想要瞭解這些學童心中的渴望與動機,以瞭解他們如何扮演一定的角色,來協助篩檢他們父母的視力。Conversion Sound已發展出一種高品質、極低售價的數位助聽器,主打開發中國家,在西方,我們依賴訓練有素的技師來調整這些助聽器,但在像印度這些地方,這類技師壓根兒不存在,因此需要一支團隊到印度去幫助病人與社區衛生工作者,讓他們瞭解PDA及PDA上的一個應用程式如何能取代那些技師,進行調整與診斷的服務,該團隊並非從科技下手,而是先從人與文化開始,所以,如果人們需要的是一個起點,設計思考則是迅速推動了,從實際操作中學習並非思考要建立什麼,相反的,建立是為了思考,建立原型能加速創新的進程,因為不只是我們將創意導入這個世界,它同時也讓我們開始瞭解到其優缺點,我們越是加速其進程,創意越能加速進化。
很多人不斷地談論與報導位於印度Madurai的Aravind眼科醫院,他們在服務赤貧病人方面做出了極大的貢獻,他們將來自負擔得起醫療費用病人的收入交叉補助那些負擔不起的病人,他們十分有效率,也非常有創意,幾年前,當我到訪時,讓我印象最深刻的是他們的意願,很早以前就定出了創意的原型,這個生產設備是他們能大幅降低成本的主因之一,他們自行製造人工水晶體,這些水晶體能取代因白內障受損的水晶體,我想部份也是因為他們的思想原型,讓他們能真正地達到那樣的突破,因為他們將成本降低,從一付200美元,降到一付只要四美元,另一部份的原因是他們沒有建造漂亮的新工廠,而是使用其中一間醫院的地下室,沒有設置大型的機具,不採取西方製造商的作法,而是使用低成本的CAD/CAM原型技術,他們現在是開發中國家最大的水晶體製造商,最近也搬進了一間客製化工廠。
所以,如果人們需要的是起點及模範原型,即推動進程的載具,那我們就得問一些關於目的地的問題,並非將消費視為其基本目的,而是設計思考正開始探索參與的可能,從介於消費者與製造商之間的被動關係,轉為每個人主動加入體驗這些有意義、具生產性、且有利可圖的進程,我想借用Rory Sutherland談及的一個概念,「無形的事物也許比有形的事物更有價值」,如果稍作延伸,我認為參與性系統的設計,以其更多的價值形式來看,除了金錢以外,它是可以同時被創造與計量且將成為首要的主題,不只是對設計而言,對我們未來的經濟也是如此。
展開英文
收合英文
-
So when a team was working on a new vision screening program in India, they wanted to understand what the aspirations and motivations were of these school children to understand how they might play a role in screening their parents. Conversion Sound has developed a high quality, ultra-low-cost digital hearing aid for the developing world. Now in the West we rely on highly trained technicians to fit these hearing aids. In places like India those technicians simply don't exist. So it took a team working in India with patients and community health workers to understand how a PDA and an application on a PDA might replace those technicians in a fitting and diagnostic service.
Instead of starting with technology, the team started with people and culture. So if human need is the place to start, then design thinking rapidly moves on to learning by making. Instead of thinking about what to build, building in order to think. Now prototypes speed up the process of innovation. Because it is only when we put our ideas out into the world that we really start to understand their strengths and weaknesses. And the faster we do that, the faster our ideas evolve.
Now much has been said and written about the Aravind Eye Institute in Madurai, India. They do an incredible job of serving very poor patients by taking the revenues from those who can afford to pay to cross-subsidize those who can not. Now they are very efficient, but they are also very innovative. When I visited them a few years ago, what really impressed me was their willingness to prototype their ideas very early.
This is the manufacturing facility for one of their biggest cost breakthroughs. They make their own intraocular lenses. These are the lenses that replace those that are damaged by cataracts. And I think it's partly their prototyping mentality that really allowed them to achieve the breakthrough. Because they brought the cost down from 200 dollars a pair, down to just four dollars a pair. Partly they did this by instead of building a fancy new factory, they used the basement of one of their hospitals. And instead of installing the large-scale machines used by western producers, they used low cost CAD/CAM prototyping technology. They are now the biggest manufacture of lenses in the developing world and have recently moved into a custom factory.
So if human need is the place to start, and prototyping, a vehicle for progress, then there are also some questions to ask about the destination. Instead of seeing its primary objective as consumption, design thinking is beginning to explore the potential of participation. The shift from a passive relationship between consumer and producer to the active engagement of everyone in experiences that are meaningful, productive and profitable.
So I'd like to take the idea that Rory Sutherland talked about, this notion that intangible things are worth perhaps more than physical things, and take that a little bit further and say that I think the design of participatory systems, in which many more forms of value beyond simply cash are both created and measured, is going to be the major theme, not only for design, but also for our economy as we go forward.
-
William Beveridge於1942年撰寫其第一份著名的報告,企圖將大不列顛打造成福利國時,他所希望的是,每位公民都是主動的參與者,也都能照看自己的福利,但在他撰寫第三份報告時,他承認自己的理想破滅,他所創造的是一個福利消費者的社會,Hillary Cottam、Charlie Ledbetter,和Hugo Manassei都來自Participle,他們將這個參與的概念放入標題為Beveridge 4.0的宣言之中,他們建議了一個架構,讓福利國的概念重新出發,他們的其中一個方案叫作Southwark Circle,合作對象是南倫敦Southwark的居民和一小支設計團隊,目的是要開發一個新的會員制機構,協助年長者解決日常問題,設計經過改善與研發,150位年長者及其家人參與其中,隨後才於今年初實施這項服務。
我們也許可以將這個參與的概念導入其邏輯的結論,我們可以說,設計有產生最大影響的可能性,如果將它從設計師們手中抽離,讓每個人都參與其中的話,美國醫療體系中的護士與醫師,Kaiser Permanente,研究改善病人體驗的主題,特別著重於他們交換資訊及換班的方式,藉由一個觀察式的研究計劃,腦力激盪出新作法和快速原型,而發展了一套全新的換班方式,一改先前要回到護理站,以討論病人形形色色的狀態與需要,而發展出一套能在病房中進行的系統,就在病人面前,使用簡單的軟體工具,藉此,他們把交接病人狀況的時間,從40分鐘降到平均12分鐘,增進了病人的信心與護士的快樂,如果以之乘上所有系統裡40所醫院病房中的護士人數,事實上會產生非常巨大的影響,而這僅是醫療體系,數以千計的轉機之一,也只是一些環繞著,設計思考的基本概念及一些應用了設計思考的新專案型態。
但我要回頭來談談Brunel,並提出一個也許能解釋現況發生原因的關聯性,及為何設計思考也許是一項有用的工具,這個關聯性就是「改變」,改變發生時,我們需要新的選擇與新的創意。
展開英文
收合英文
-
So William Beveridge, when he wrote the first of his famous reports in 1942, created what became Britain's welfare state in which he hoped that every citizen would be an active participant in their own social well-being. By the time he wrote his third report, he confessed that he had failed and instead had created a society of welfare consumers.
Hillary Cottam, Charlie Ledbetter, and Hugo Manassei of Participle have taken this idea of participation, and in their manifesto entitled Beveridge 4.0, they are suggesting a framework for reinventing the welfare state. So in one of their projects called Southwark Circle, they worked with residents in Southwark, south London and a small team of designers to develop a new membership organization to help the elderly with household tasks. Designs were refined and developed with 150 older people and their families before the service was launched earlier this year.
We can take this idea of participation perhaps to its logical conclusion and say that design may have its greatest impact when it's taken out of the hands of designers and put into the hands of everyone. Nurses and practitioners at U.S. healthcare system Kaiser Permanente study the topic of improving the patient experience. And particularly focused on the way that they exchange knowledge and change shift. Through a program of observational research, brainstorming new solutions and rapid prototyping, they've developed a completely new way to change shift.
They went from retreating to the nurse's station to discuss the various states and needs of patients, to developing a system that happened on the ward in front of patients, using a simple software tool. By doing this they brought the time that they were away from patients down from 40 minutes to 12 minutes, on average. They increased patient confidence and nurse happiness. When you multiply that by all the nurses in all the wards in 40 hospitals in the system, it resulted, actually, in a pretty big impact.
And this is just one of thousands of opportunities in healthcare alone. So these are just some of the kind of basic ideas around design thinking and some of the new kinds of projects that they're being applied to. But I'd like to go back to Brunel here, and suggest a connection that might explain why this is happening now, and maybe why design thinking is a useful tool. And that connection is change. In times of change we need new alternatives, new ideas.
-
Brunel的作品發表於工業革命的高峰期,當時整個生活與我們的經濟都正被重建中,現在Brunel時期的工業系統已成定局,亦成為現今問題的一部份,但我們仍然處於巨大的改變中,而那改變迫使我們要問我們社會中一些相當基本層面的問題:我們如何保有健康?如何管理自己?如何教育自己?如何保護自己的安全?在這些改變之中,我們需要新的選擇,因為現存的作法已經落伍了。
為何需要設計思考?因為它給我們一個應付問題的新方法,而非陷於一向保守性的作為,那使我們僅能在有限的選項中做最佳的決定,設計思考鼓勵我們跳脫窠臼,探索新選擇與作法,還有前所未有的新創意,但在我們討論跳脫窠臼的進程之前,有個很重要的第一步,就是,我們試圖回答的問題是什麼?什麼是設計概要?
Brunel可能會問這樣的問題,「我如何從倫敦搭火車前往紐約」?而我們今日又可能會提出何種問題呢?這些是我們最近常被要求思考的問題,其中比較特別的,是來自於我們所合作的Acumen基金,在由比爾與美琳達蓋茲基金會所資助的專案中,我們如何改善安全飲水的獲取,以造福世界上最貧窮的人們,同時還要刺激,當地的飲水供應者改革創新。
展開英文
收合英文
-
Now Brunel worked at the height of the Industrial Revolution when all of life and our economy was being reinvented. Now the industrial systems of Brunel's time have run their course, and indeed they are part of the problem today. But, again, we are in the midst of massive change. And that change is forcing us to question quite fundamental aspects of our society -- how we keep ourselves healthy, how we govern ourselves, how we educate ourselves, how we keep ourselves secure. And in these times of change, we need these new choices because our existing solutions are simply becoming obsolete.
So why design thinking? Because it gives us a new way of tackling problems. Instead of defaulting to our normal convergent approach where we make the best choice out of available alternatives, it encourages us to take a divergent approach, to explore new alternatives, new solutions, new ideas that have not existed before. But before we go through that process of divergence, there is actually quite an important first step. And that is, what is the question that we're trying to answer? What's the design brief? Now Brunel may have asked a question like this, "How do I take a train from London to New York?" But what are the kinds of questions that we might ask today?
So these are some that we've been asked to think about recently. And one in particular, is one that we're working on with the Acumen Fund, in a project that's been funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. How might we improve access to safe drinking water for the world's poorest people, and at the same time stimulate innovation amongst local water providers?
-
我們不找一大群美國設計師來提供可能合適也可能不合適的新點子,而是採取一種比較開放、合作及參與的方式,我們將設計師和投資專家與11個印度國內的供水機構組織起來,藉由座談研討,他們發展出創新的產品、服務與商業模式,我們主辦了一場競賽,資助其中五個機構來發展他們的創意,他們因此能研發並反覆思考這些想法之後,IDEO和Acumen再花幾星期與他們共事,協助他們設計出新的社會行銷活動、社區擴大服務策略、商業模式、儲水的新水管及運水的推車,其中一些創意已經上市,同樣的流程也正與東非的NGO合作進行中。
對我而言,這個專案顯示我們能延伸出多大的影響,就從這小小的一步開始,也就是那些我曾做過的事,在我設計生涯開始的時候,藉由關注人類的需求與使用模範原型來快速地啟動創意,讓進程跳脫設計師之手,讓社區主動參與,我們就能應付更大、更有趣的問題,就像Brunel,只要專注於系統上,我們就能創造出更大的影響力,這就是我們正努力不懈的事。
事實上,我相當感興趣,或說非常有興趣的,就是瞭解這個社區認為我們能做什麼,我們認為什麼樣的問題是可以用設計思考來解決的?如果您有任何點子,歡迎您貼到Twitter上,記得加上帶井字號的#CBDQ,這是不久前的版面,當然你可以搜尋自己感興趣的問題,只要使用相同的井字代號。
我相信設計思考,事實上可以帶來改變,幫助我們想出新的點子及新的創意,比最流行的主街商品更棒,為此,我想我們必需採取較昂貴的設計觀點,要像Brunel一樣,不要侷限在專業的牢籠中,第一步就是開始提出適切的問題,感謝聆聽。
(掌聲)
展開英文
收合英文
-
So instead of having a bunch of American designers come up with new ideas that may or may not have been appropriate, we took a sort of more open, collaborative and participative approach. We teamed designers and investment experts up with 11 water organizations across India. And through workshops they developed innovative new products, services, and business models.
We hosted a competition and then funded five of those organizations to develop their ideas. So they developed and iterated these ideas. And then IDEO and Acumen spent several weeks working with them to help design new social marketing campaigns, community outreach strategies, business models, new water vessels for storing water and carts for delivering water. Some of those ideas are just getting launched into the market. And the same process is just getting underway with NGOs in east Africa.
So for me, this project shows kind of how far we can go from some of those sort of small things that I was working on at the beginning of my career. That by focusing on the needs of humans and by using prototypes to move ideas along quickly, by getting the process out of the hands of designers, and by getting the active participation of the community, we can tackle bigger and more interesting questions. And just like Brunel, by focusing on systems, we can have a bigger impact. So that's one thing that we've been working on.
I'm actually really quite interested, and perhaps more interested to know what this community thinks we could work on. What kinds of questions do we think design thinking could be used to tackle? And if you've got any ideas then feel free, you can post them to Twitter. There is a hash tag there that you can use, #CBDQ. And the list looked something like this a little while ago. And of course you can search to find the questions that you're interested in by using the same hash code.
So I'd like to believe that design thinking actually can make a difference, that it can help create new ideas, and new innovations, beyond the latest High Street products. To do that I think we have to take a more expansive view of design, more like Brunel, less a domain of a professional priesthood. And the first step is to start asking the right questions. Thank you very much. (Applause)