Managing Change (Was: Iterative Change Management / Patriarchs of the Design Family)

24 Nov 2003 - 9:29am
10 years ago
1 reply
1026 reads
CD Evans
2004

Managing Change seems an appropriate title for this discussion.

Does you like commuting? Quite a few people feel the same about typing.

This defence of cars almost infuriates me, but I'll try to be
diplomatic. I can understand the value of an automobile. I can't
understand the cost. Especially in relation to the average global
income. The cost of a bicycle is much more reflective of what it
means to be human. Most people don't have cars or computers.

This added to the practical humility of a car not being designed
appropriately for city life makes me think a lot about urban
planning, but I should be thinking about the car design.
Unfortunately, the car is a stop gap design. It wasn't designed to
fit into an older city or to be distributed on a grand scale. A few
of them here and there, fine, but the populations have exploded and
we haven't changed the design. The same thing has happened with
computers, a few thousand programmers can work with them as is,
fine, but day care centers and shopping malls could do with better
system designs.

Both the car and the computer weren't designed to be comfortable for
more than 3 hours at a time. No amount of cushions is going to make
what is essentially a yogic meditational position healthy for
everyone. Funny but true. It took 40 years for television to have a
suggested health effect. But instead of reducing the amount of screen
time, we just put the giant light bulb closer to our eyes.

Add all this to the greenhouse effect or another research topic
looking at economic instability in your local university and it's
time to think about the responsibility designers have to the world.

Kindly
CD Evans

Ps: For Kannan, I don't always call myself a systems designer, my
clients choose my title. Hopefully this list and web site can help us
all with that problem.

At 11:33 am +0000 24/11/03, Narey, Kevin wrote:
>I agree Molly. It seems that CD Evans believes that the automobile design (I
>can only assume you refer to the interaction of it's form) needs to change
>because it is 'unsuccessful'. The form and interaction of an automobile has
>been globally accepted as a resounding 'success' if success can be defined
>as 'user acceptance' - a test often employed in the success (or indeed
>failure) of software applications. Indeed the form of a vehicle is now a
>written standard in many countries worldwide - why is that 'unsuccessful'?.
>
>IMO User feedback in terms of behaviour/interaction in the automobile
>industry is now much more of a focus than it has ever been and is really
>pushing the envelope in terms of a vehicle's form and function. There a many
>attempts to revisit the base form of many products; a healthy practice for
>design and for human benefit - change for the sake of change has
>historically proven to be misguided and costly.
>
>KN
>Web UI Developer
>VW Group
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: molly w. steenson [mailto:molly at girlwonder.com]
>
>Not true: major car manufacturers are indeed looking at interaction
>design and automobiles. Some of the innovations you'll see in the
>future will be service related (what happens in a future where a car
>is a shared commodity, and not an owned resource) and will directly
>affect the interactions the car has with the road (what if a car
>couldn't have accidents?). These are not industrial design shifts, or
>digital industrial design, but something much different.
>
>It's important to realize that car design happens on long timelines
>(you're designing for something 10 years out, for instance) -- and to
>make a short-term strategic design decision is to short-change the
>long-term viability of what you're designing.
>
>m.
>
>
> >Correct me if I'm wrong, but this may be an inheritance from a
>>by-product of product design, accepting the bare minimum of a
>>working model and very rarely revisiting the original thought.
> >
> >Meanwhile, people suffer.
>>
>>'Interactions' and 'Products' have failed to continue to evolve. I
>>say we should be designing 'Systems'.
>>
>>CD Evans
> >A Systems Designer

--
A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know
they shall never sit in.
- Greek proverb

Comments

24 Nov 2003 - 11:40am
Challis Hodge
2003

Kevin Narey wrote:
> The global adoption of the design of the automobile is a good
> example of this?

An interesting side note: The V8 engine is one of the most ineeficient ways
to turn fossil fuels into motion yet it dominates the automobile industry to
this day. The rotory engine is just one example of a morte efficient design.
Don't examples like this beg the question, what is driving the industry?

-challis

Syndicate content Get the feed