overcrowded verganti design

Don Norman: Overcrowded, by Roberto Verganti: In favor of criticism

Don Norman: Overcrowded, by Roberto Verganti: In favor of criticism

Don Norman: Overcrowded, by Roberto Verganti: In favor of criticism

I was just in Germany, in Herzogenaurach to be precise, at Adidas headquarters. (Hardly anyone knows where Herzogenaurach is — it’s a 20 minute taxi from Nuremberg.) I was at a conference organized by my old friend (and co-author) Roberto Verganti, from the business school at Politecnico di Milano. Years ago, he and I had a debate in Milan about the value of Human-Centered Design (HCD) and the way it is normally practiced. To the audience’s great surprise, we both agreed:

  1. HCD is a powerful tool for improving existing products. That is, it is a powerful tool for incremental innovation.
  2. HCD, by its very nature (hill-climbing plus a kind of design by committee), is a really bad tool for radical innovation.

In his book Overcrowded, Roberto expands his argument for methods of getting to radical innovation. He says that the standard IDEO rules for brainstorming by never criticizing is wrong. Great ideas come about when a small group of people continually criticize one another’s work. Note that the criticism has to be constructive and helpful. The word “critique” might be better.

This matches my long-stated personal views. For example, I when someone praises my work, that’s nice to hear, but I don’t learn anything. When someone criticizes it, if the criticism is intelligent and thoughtful, I learn. I might still think I was correct, but I have then learned that I have presented the ideas badly. Or I might determine that my ideas are wrong, or perhaps incomplete. That’s good to know.

So think about it: Criticism is good. Constructive criticism, that is. (Roberto gives numerous examples, from Claude Monet and the merry band of impressionist painters who revolutionized art to the Nest Thermostat (among others).

The book emphasizes the love over need. Design things people will love. Moreover, start with yourself: if you, the designer, don’t love the idea and the design, nobody else will. Take the thermostat; using HCD to make a better thermostat in the old days would make the complex programming easier to understand and do. But programming the thermostat was hated. Nest made one that eliminated the need for programming: it learned all by itself what your preferences were.  It was a thermostat that people loved.(I have problems with Nest, but that is a different story, namely that once the radical innovation is over, we still need HCD to improve it. Nest lost its way.)

– Don Norman

Verganti, R. (2016). Overcrowded: designing meaningful products in a world awash with ideas. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/overcrowded

Our earlier paper:

Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2014). Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs. Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78-96. doi:10.1162/DESI_a_00250
https://jnd.org/incremental_and_radical_innovation_design_research_versus_technology_and_meaning_change/

I was just in Germany, in Herzogenaurach to be precise, at Adidas headquarters. (Hardly anyone knows where Herzogenaurach is — it’s a 20 minute taxi from Nuremberg.) I was at a conference organized by my old friend (and co-author) Roberto Verganti, from the business school at Politecnico di Milano. Years ago, he and I had a debate in Milan about the value of Human-Centered Design (HCD) and the way it is normally practiced. To the audience’s great surprise, we both agreed:

  1. HCD is a powerful tool for improving existing products. That is, it is a powerful tool for incremental innovation.
  2. HCD, by its very nature (hill-climbing plus a kind of design by committee), is a really bad tool for radical innovation.

In his book Overcrowded, Roberto expands his argument for methods of getting to radical innovation. He says that the standard IDEO rules for brainstorming by never criticizing is wrong. Great ideas come about when a small group of people continually criticize one another’s work. Note that the criticism has to be constructive and helpful. The word “critique” might be better.

This matches my long-stated personal views. For example, I when someone praises my work, that’s nice to hear, but I don’t learn anything. When someone criticizes it, if the criticism is intelligent and thoughtful, I learn. I might still think I was correct, but I have then learned that I have presented the ideas badly. Or I might determine that my ideas are wrong, or perhaps incomplete. That’s good to know.

So think about it: Criticism is good. Constructive criticism, that is. (Roberto gives numerous examples, from Claude Monet and the merry band of impressionist painters who revolutionized art to the Nest Thermostat (among others).

The book emphasizes the love over need. Design things people will love. Moreover, start with yourself: if you, the designer, don’t love the idea and the design, nobody else will. Take the thermostat; using HCD to make a better thermostat in the old days would make the complex programming easier to understand and do. But programming the thermostat was hated. Nest made one that eliminated the need for programming: it learned all by itself what your preferences were.  It was a thermostat that people loved.(I have problems with Nest, but that is a different story, namely that once the radical innovation is over, we still need HCD to improve it. Nest lost its way.)

– Don Norman

Verganti, R. (2016). Overcrowded: designing meaningful products in a world awash with ideas. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/overcrowded

Our earlier paper:

Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2014). Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs. Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78-96. doi:10.1162/DESI_a_00250
https://jnd.org/incremental_and_radical_innovation_design_research_versus_technology_and_meaning_change/

I was just in Germany, in Herzogenaurach to be precise, at Adidas headquarters. (Hardly anyone knows where Herzogenaurach is — it’s a 20 minute taxi from Nuremberg.) I was at a conference organized by my old friend (and co-author) Roberto Verganti, from the business school at Politecnico di Milano. Years ago, he and I had a debate in Milan about the value of Human-Centered Design (HCD) and the way it is normally practiced. To the audience’s great surprise, we both agreed:

  1. HCD is a powerful tool for improving existing products. That is, it is a powerful tool for incremental innovation.
  2. HCD, by its very nature (hill-climbing plus a kind of design by committee), is a really bad tool for radical innovation.

In his book Overcrowded, Roberto expands his argument for methods of getting to radical innovation. He says that the standard IDEO rules for brainstorming by never criticizing is wrong. Great ideas come about when a small group of people continually criticize one another’s work. Note that the criticism has to be constructive and helpful. The word “critique” might be better.

This matches my long-stated personal views. For example, I when someone praises my work, that’s nice to hear, but I don’t learn anything. When someone criticizes it, if the criticism is intelligent and thoughtful, I learn. I might still think I was correct, but I have then learned that I have presented the ideas badly. Or I might determine that my ideas are wrong, or perhaps incomplete. That’s good to know.

So think about it: Criticism is good. Constructive criticism, that is. (Roberto gives numerous examples, from Claude Monet and the merry band of impressionist painters who revolutionized art to the Nest Thermostat (among others).

The book emphasizes the love over need. Design things people will love. Moreover, start with yourself: if you, the designer, don’t love the idea and the design, nobody else will. Take the thermostat; using HCD to make a better thermostat in the old days would make the complex programming easier to understand and do. But programming the thermostat was hated. Nest made one that eliminated the need for programming: it learned all by itself what your preferences were.  It was a thermostat that people loved.(I have problems with Nest, but that is a different story, namely that once the radical innovation is over, we still need HCD to improve it. Nest lost its way.)

– Don Norman

Verganti, R. (2016). Overcrowded: designing meaningful products in a world awash with ideas. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/overcrowded

Our earlier paper:

Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2014). Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs. Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78-96. doi:10.1162/DESI_a_00250
https://jnd.org/incremental_and_radical_innovation_design_research_versus_technology_and_meaning_change/

Read Next

Waste Management

Waste is an enormous problem. But recycling is the wrong solution.

Part 2 of a FastCompany editorial on Recycling by Don Norman

I am proud to be one of the developers of what is today called human-centered design. That is design that always starts off understanding the needs, capabilities, and desires of people. It has four basic principles, all four of which are being violated by today’s recycling craze.

Recycling is broken. There’s little clarity about what can and can’t be recycled, and the rules change from one city to the next, and sometimes even within the same city. According to the World Bank, we produce 1.4 billion tons of waste a year worldwide, a figure that’s expected to increase to 2.4 billion tons by 2025. Waste is an enormous problem that needs to be addressed if we’re going to prevent the worst effects of climate change. But recycling is the wrong solution.
Seda Evis

Designer in Residence: Seda Evis

While Seda Evis participates as a Designer-in-Residence at UC San Diego with The Design Lab, and is VP of Strategy & Growth at FreshForm Interactive—an experience design and innovation consultancy—she also claims to have what she refers to as a superpower: her hybrid mind, which she describes as the combination of two worlds: the business side and the design side.

As a Designer-in-Residence at The Design Lab,  Evis enjoys working in an interdisciplinary setting, which she says enhances her existing skillset. “Academia tends to be quite separate from how the practice is done,” she explains. “I find ways of doing interdisciplinary work, as well as cross industry work, very important for innovation because that’s how you actually get seeds from different places.” As of now, most of Evis’s work at The Design Lab has been working with the Community Team on the now winning bid for the World Design Capital 2024 (WDC) designation. Her work dovetails with her role on the Board of  Directors for the Design Forward Alliance–a non-profit organization started by the Lab in partnership with the regional design community and one of the partners co-leading the HOME 2024 WDC efforts alongside the Design Lab, Burnham Center for Community Advancement, the City of San Diego and the City of Tijuana.   The designation puts the San Diego-Tijuana region in a prestigious international cohort recognized for the “effective use of design to drive economic, social, cultural and environmental development.”  Even the proposal theme is significant, Evis says. “Home” not only refers to the immense and diverse communities of San Diego and Tijuana that form one, but also serves as an acronym for Human-centered, Open, Multi-disciplinary/Multi-cultural, and Experimental. For Evis, participating in HOME2024 signifies her career “coming full circle.” 

San Diego/Tijuana is finalist to become a World Design Capital

San Diego Union Tribune

The San Diego/Tijuana region is a finalist to become a World Design Capital that could mean a year-long promotion of the binational region.

Winners are chosen based on how each region effectively incorporates design across their economic, technological, social, cultural, political and environmental sectors . More than just having a fancy title, winning means a year of events to promote the region, including a street festival, a one-day celebration highlighting the winner’s designs and a design conference that should bring people from around the globe.

“This is an incredibly exciting opportunity to not only showcase our bi-national region as a longstanding design and innovation powerhouse,” she wrote, “but to also shape the narrative around what it means to be a 21st century metropolis, [says Michèle Morris, President of the Design Forward Alliance and Associate Director of UCSD Design Lab]."
UCSD Giving Day

Giving Day Begins Now. Support the Design Lab Today

Through the integration of education, research and community development, The Design Lab is committed to advancing the best practices needed to solve the world's complex problems through the lens of human-centered design.  One way we do this is through our thriving Design@Large speaker series.  Via conversations with distinguished academic, industry, and community design leaders, Design@Large showcases the ever-evolving, interdisciplinary nature of design as applied in real world contexts.  Today we are asking for your specific help to continue to build and grow this popular series which is open to all.
Design Lab Uc San Diego Don Norman Creative Education

“I’m Not Distractible…I’m Curious and Creative.” – Don Norman Interviewed by Triton Magazine

Over 90% of industrial and automobile accidents are blamed on human error, with distraction listed…

Ford People-centered Automation

Ford Gifts $50K to Design Lab People-Centered Automation

Colleen Emmenegger, Head of People-Centered Automation at The Design Lab, was recently the recipient of a $50,000 grant from Ford Motor Company. The grant was awarded for her work regarding how drivers can understand, negotiate, and manage shared autonomy with their vehicles in a way that is accessible and easily translatable.

“We're trying to figure out if you can build a contract with the driver and her automated vehicle co-pilot so the driver knows exactly what they need to do and what the system does," says Emmenegger. "We're trying to build something that explicitly and continuously communicates, and that doesn't act as an invisible ‘controlling entity’ of the car. A system that provides dynamic, yet constant feedback to the driver and not sudden, startling warnings." 
Back To Top