This document discusses key concepts related to design expertise and design thinking. It begins by outlining different modes of thinking including abductive, deductive, and inductive reasoning. It then discusses the differences between experts and novices in design problem solving, noting that experts employ breadth-first, generative reasoning while novices use depth-first, deductive reasoning. The document also examines different levels of design expertise from novice to expert. Overall, the document provides an overview of design thinking and problem solving approaches used by designers at different stages of expertise.

1. Design Theory
Communication &
Multimedia Design
Bas Leurs (b.l.f.leurs@hr.nl)
March, 2014
Key concepts
Lecture 04: Design Expertise / Design Thinking /

2. what we discussed
last week...

3. Snow shovel case
Sensemaking Questioning
Prototyping
Sketching
UNITiD
Studio space

4. Today’s programme
Modes of thinking
Design expertise
Key concepts
Design Thinking

5. design thinking

7. Lucy Kimbell (2011)
Design Thinking as a
cognitive style
Design Thinking as a
business resource
Traditional design practice
(“studio life”)
Business and organizational
practice
Problem solving Innovation
Traditional design disciplines
(e.g. architecture, product design)
Any context from healthcare,
education to sustainability
Design schools MBA’s / Design schools
Purpose
Focus
Context
Training
Different discourses
Design Theory Innovation management

8. Business Design
Mindset Mindset
Maintaining the
status quo
Challenging the
status quo

9. Design is more than an agent of change, it is change...
While change is exciting
for some, it is positively
terrifying for others.
Scott Doorley & Scott Witthoft (2012)

10. BUSINESS DESIGN
Rationality, objectivity, reality is
fixed and quantifiable
Subjective experience, reality is
socially constructed
Analysis aimed at providing one
"best" answer
Experimentation aimed at
iterating toward a "better" answer
Planning Doing
Logic, numeric models
Emotional insight, experiential
models
Pursuit of control and stability,
discomfort with uncertainty
Pursuit of novelty, dislike of status
quo
Abstract or particular
Iterative movement between
abstract and particular
Liedtka & Ogilvie (2011)
Underlying assumptions
Method
Process
Decision drivers
Values
Levels of focus

11. Tim Brown (2008, 2009)
• Empathy
• Integrative thinking
• Optimism
• Experimentalism
• Collaboration

12. Tim Brown (2008, 2009)
harvard business review • june 2008 page 3
identify new directions that further proto-
types might take.
The design that emerged for shift changes
had nurses passing on information in front of
sign methodology, they were able to create a
relatively small process innovation that pro-
duced an outsize impact. The new shift
changes are being rolled out across the Kaiser
A Design Thinker’s Personality Profile
Contrary to popular opinion, you don’t need
weird shoes or a black turtleneck to be a de-
sign thinker. Nor are design thinkers neces-
sarily created only by design schools, even
though most professionals have had some
kind of design training. My experience is that
many people outside professional design
have a natural aptitude for design thinking,
which the right development and experi-
ences can unlock. Here, as a starting point,
are some of the characteristics to look for in
design thinkers:
Empathy. They can imagine the world
from multiple perspectives—those of col-
leagues, clients, end users, and customers
(current and prospective). By taking a “peo-
ple first” approach, design thinkers can imag-
ine solutions that are inherently desirable
and meet explicit or latent needs. Great de-
sign thinkers observe the world in minute de-
tail. They notice things that others do not and
use their insights to inspire innovation.
Integrative thinking. They not only rely on
analytical processes (those that produce either/
or choices) but also exhibit the ability to see all
of the salient—and sometimes contradictory—
aspects of a confounding problem and create
novel solutions that go beyond and dramatically
improve on existing alternatives. (See Roger
Martin’s The Opposable Mind: How Successful
Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking.)
Optimism. They assume that no matter
how challenging the constraints of a given
problem, at least one potential solution is
better than the existing alternatives.
Experimentalism. Significant innovations
don’t come from incremental tweaks. Design
thinkers pose questions and explore con-
straints in creative ways that proceed in en-
tirely new directions.
Collaboration. The increasing complexity
of products, services, and experiences has re-
placed the myth of the lone creative genius
with the reality of the enthusiastic interdisci-
plinary collaborator. The best design thinkers
don’t simply work alongside other disciplines;
many of them have significant experience in
more than one. At IDEO we employ people
who are engineers and marketers, anthropolo-
gists and industrial designers, architects and
psychologists.

13. Exploration Exploitation
The invention of business The administration of business
Roger Martin (2009)
Preferences
Mysteries
Discovery
Long-term
High risk
Preferences
Algorithms
Efficiency
Short-term
Minimal risk
Inventor Manager
(Accountant)
Designer
Intuitive
Thinking
Analytical
Thinking
Design
Thinking

14. Helen Walters (2011) http://helenwalters.com/2011/03/21/design-thinking-wont-save-you/

15. modes of thinking

16. Nigel Cross (1990)
Abductive Thinking
Abduction is the
logic of conjecture.
“vermoeden”
“gissen”

17. Kees Dorst (2010)
??? + HOW leads to VALUE
tion-2
??? + ??? leads to VALUE
(thing) (scenario) (aspired)
WHAT + ??? leads to RESULT
productive professions? The basic reasoning pattern then is Abduction:
WHAT + HOW leads to VALUE
(thing) (scenario) (aspired)
Abduction comes in two forms—what they have in common is that we actually
Abduction-1, that is often associ
lem solving’, we also know the ‘how’, a ‘working principle’ and how that will h
??? + HOW leads to VALUE
Abductive Thinking
And why design is such a complicated act

18. Deductive
reasoning
• Deduction means
determining the conclusion
• Deductive reasoning moves
from the general rule to the
specific application
Inductive
reasoning
• Induction means
determining the rule
• Inductive reasoning
moves from the specific
to the general.
Taking your best shot!
Doing a best guess!
• Abduction means
determining the precondition.
• Abduction has been
described as the “logic of
what might be,” (Martin,
2009)
• Abduction can be thought of
as “the argument to the best
explanation”. (Kolko, 2009)
Conclusion merely likely!
Abductive
reasoning
Conclusion guaranteed!
design
natural sciencemathematics
Black Swan?
All of the swans that all living
beings have ever seen are white
Therefore, all swans are white.
Syllogism
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore, Socrates is mortal
Types of reasoning
See the paper of John Kolko (2009)
Aha Erlebnis
“The abductive suggestion comes
to us like a flash. It is an act of
insight, although extremely
fallible insight.” (Pierce, 1998)
Think of: Dr House, Sherlock Holmes
and other TV personas who solve
unsolvable puzzles.

19. A B C
B
Therefore, we are absolutely
certain that all the marbles in
the bag are red (because all
the marbles are from bucket B)
There are three buckets
A, B and C. We can see
and we know that all
the marbles in bucket B
are red.
It is the case that
someone has put some
marbles from bucket B in
the bag (but we cannot
see what’s in the bag).
All the marbles from
bucket B are red.
Rule
The marbles in the bag
are from bucket B.
Case
The marbles in the
bag are red.
Result
conclusion!
Deductive reasoning: conclusion guaranteed!
Deduction means determining the conclusion
Deductive reasoning moves from the general rule to the specific application

20. A B C
B
When we open bag, we
see that the marbles are
red.
So, all the marbles in bucket
B are red (although this might
not be true if there is blue
marble in bucket B, but we
cannot see if that is the case)
It is the case that
someone has put some
marbles from bucket B in
the bag.
All the marbles from
bucket B are red.
Rule
The marbles in the bag
are from bucket B.
Case
The marbles in the
bag are red.
Result
Inductive reasoning: conclusion merely likely!
Induction means determining the rule
Inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general.

21. A B C
B
We have a bag, when we
open it, we see that the
marbles are red.
There are three buckets A, B
and C. We see and we know
that all the marbles in bucket
B are red.
So, it is the case that
someone has put some
marbles from bucket B
into the bag.
All the marbles from
bucket B are red.
Rule
The marbles in the bag
are from bucket B.
Case
The marbles in the
bag are red.
Result
Abductive reasoning: taking your best shot! / best guess!
Abduction means determining the precondition.
Abduction has been described as the “logic of what might be,” (Martin)
Abduction can be thought of as the argument to the best explanation. (Kolko)

22. Henry Mintzberg & Frances Westley (2001)
“Thinking first” “Seeing first” “Doing first”
Decision making approaches
•Science
•planning / programming
•Verbal
•Facts
•Art
•Visioning / imagining
•Visual
•Ideas
•Craft
•Venturing / learning
•Visceral
•Experiences
Works best when:
• The issue is clear
• The data is reliable
• The context is structured
Works best when:
• Many elements have to be
combined into creative
solutions
• Commitment to those
solutions is key
• Communication across
boundaries is essential
Works best when:
• Situation is novel and
confusing
• Complicated specification
would get in the way
• A few simple relationship
rules can help people move
forward
established
production processes
new product
development
disruptive
technologies

23. Henry Mintzberg & Frances Westley (2001)
“Thinking first” “Seeing first” “Doing first”
Decision making approaches
•Science
•planning / programming
•Verbal
•Facts
•Art
•Visioning / imagining
•Visual
•Ideas
•Craft
•venturing / learning
•Visceral
•Experiences
Works best when:
• The issue is clear
• The data is reliable
• The context is structured
Works best when:
• Many elements have to be
combined into creative
solutions
• Commitment to thos solutions
is key
• Communication accros
boundaries is essential
Works best when:
• Situation is novel and
confusing
• Complicated specification
would get in the way
• A few simple relationship
rules can help people move
forward
established production processes
new product development disruptive technologies
Design

24. design expertise

25. Unselfconscious culture Selfconscious culture
Form-making is learned informally, through
imitation and correction.
Form-making is taught academically,
according to explicit rules.
Christopher Alexander (1964)

26. Unselfconscious culture Selfconscious culture
Form-making is learned informally, through
imitation and correction.
Division of labour is limited, specialization of any
sort is rare (there are no architects).
Each man builds his own house.
The technology of communication is
underdeveloped (no written records or
architectural plans, “direct design”).
Form-making is taught academically, according to
explicit rules.
Division of labour is abundant, there are many
specializations (architects, bricklayers, carpenters)
Each man buys or rents his own house.
The technology of communication is well developed
(many written records, “indirect design”).
Christopher Alexander (1964)

27. Nigel Cross (1990)
Design ability
designers...
• produce novel, unexpected solutions
• tolerate uncertainty, working with incomplete information
• apply imagination and constructive forethought to practical problems
• use drawings and other modelling media as means of problem
solving.
• resolve ill-defined problems
• adopt solution-focussing strategies
• employ abductive/productive/appositional thinking
• use non-verbal, graphic/spatial modelling media.
The nature and nurture ofdesign ability
Nigel Cross
DesignDiscipline, Faculty of Technology, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7
6AA, UK
Understanding the nature of design ability can betterenable designeducatorsto nurture its development
in their students. Such understanding has beenpromoted by a wide variety of studies of design activity
and designer behaviour. From a review of these studies, design ability is summarised as comprising
resolving ill-defined problems, adopting solution-focussedcognitive strategies, employing abductive or
appositional thinking and using non-verbal modelling media. These abilities are highly developed in
skilled designers, but are alsopossessedin somedegreeby everyone.A caseis thereforemadefor design
ability as afundamentalform of human intelligence. The nurtureof this ability throughdesigneducation
is discussed, with particular reference to the problem of providing design education through the
distance-learningmedia of the Open University.Keywords: design education, design ability
I hope that the title of this paper makes clear that it really
has two parts. The first is concerned with the nature of
design ability - the particular ways of thinking and
behaving that designers, and all of us, adopt in tackling
certain kinds of problems in certain kinds of ways. The
second part is concerned with the nurture of design
ability - that is, with the development of that ability
through design education, and in particular with the
attempts made at the Open University to nurture design
ability through distance-learning media.
My view is that through better understanding the
nature of design ability, design educators may be better
able to nurture it. I therefore see these two - nature and
nurture - as complementary interests, and I do not
intend to venture into those corners of psychology where
fights go on over nature vs nurture in the context of
general intelligence. However, I shall try to make a claim
This paper is based on the author's Inaugural Lecture as
Professor of Design Studies, given 31 May 1989 at the Open
University.
that design ability is, in fact, one of the several forms or
fundamental aspects of human intelligence.
The appellation 'designer' has been helping to sell
products for some time now. I think it started with
'designer jeans' - trousdrs which, though derived from
workmen's garments, were clearly not meant for work-
ing in. A wide range of 'designer' products then
appeared, from designer cars to designer pens. However,
the appellation has now become virtually a term of abuse
-
ranging from the 'designer stubble' seen on the faces of
fashion victims to the 'designer socialism' seen in some
sections of the British Labour Party. I even saw a
magazine article about 'designer diseases' such as the
'Stendahl syndrome' which is supposed to afflict those
overcome by the beauty of Florence. 'Designer' products
are now recognizable by their dominance of form over
function.
'Designer' therefore currently seems to mean some-
thing trendy, fashionable and insubstantial. But fortu-
nately the idea that good design can actually be a selling
Vol 11 No 3 July 1990
0142-694X/90/03127-14/$3.00© 1990Butterworth-HeinemannLtd
127

28. Experts
Novices
Nigel Cross (2004)
Experts vs Novices
deductive reasoning
‘depth-first’ approach
to problem solving
‘generative’ reasoning
breadth-first approach
to problem solving
Experts have been exposed to
a large number of examples of
the problems and solutions
Experts are able to store and
access information in larger
cognitive ‘chunks’ than novices
can, and to recognise underlying
principles, rather than focussing
on the surface features of
problems
Expert designers move rapidly to
early solution conjectures, and use
these conjectures as a way of
exploring and defining problem-
and- solution together.

29. Bryan Lawson (2004)
Gambits
Experts have studied a substantial body of precedent in order to have
developed schemata that enable them to recognise underlying structures in
design situations that allow them to employ and adapt gambits.
tricks to solve
recognisable problems
Chess masters rarely analyse a board
situation, rather they recognised it.

30. Herbert Dreyfus (2003), Kees Dorst and Isabelle Reymen (2004)
Expertise levels
Novice ... will follow strict rules to deal with the problem
Advanced beginner ... is sensitive to exceptions to the ‘hard’ rules of the novice.
Competent ... selects the elements in a situation that are relevant, and chooses a plan
to achieve the goals.
Proficient ... immediately sees the most important issues and appropriate plan, and
then reasons out what to do.
Expert ... responds to specific situation intuitively, and performs the appropriate
action, straightaway.
Master ... sees the standard ways of working that experienced professionals use
not as natural but as something they rely on. A master displays a deeper
involvement into the professional field as a whole
Visionary ... consciously strives to extend the domain in which he/she works. The
world discloser develops new ways things could be, defines the issues,
opens new worlds and creates new domains.
Rule
based thinking
Situation
based thinking
Strategybased thinking

31. Bachelor level
Skills
novice
advanced
beginner
competent
expert
visionary
(Lawson & Dorst, 2009)
master
Expertise levels
Rule
based thinking
Situation
based thinking
Strategybased thinking

32. 10,000 hour rule

33. Ericsson (2001)
Expertise levels
Many thousands of hours of deliberate practice and training
are necessary to reach the highest levels of performance.
P1: JzG
052184097Xc38 CB1040B/Ericsson 0 521 84087 X February 28, 2006 6:17
694 the cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance
Figure 38.4. Estimated amount of time for solitary practice as a function of age
for the middle-aged professional violinists (triangles), the best expert violinists
(squares), the good expert violinists (empty circles), the least accomplished expert
violinists (filled circles), and amateur pianists (diamonds). (From “The role of
deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance,” by K. A. Ericsson,
R. Th. Krampe, and C. Tesch-R¨omer, 1993, Psychological Review, 100(3), p. 379
and p. 384. Copyright 1993 by American Psychological Association. Adapted
with permission.)
musicians had spent over 10,000 hours prac-
ticing, which averages 2,500 and 5,000 hours
back. Hence, the requirement for concentra-
tion sets deliberate practice apart from both

34. key concepts of
design theory

35. DESIGN = . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36. such as building new hospitals, or creating an after-school program
Traditional Performance Measures
OutputsProcesses
(Activities)
Inputs
Resources used to
deliver the products
and services of a
program or
organization
Series of actions
or operations
conducted to
achieve an end
goal
The final products,
goods or services
produced by a
program or
organization
Outcomes
Initial Intermediate Long-term
The impacts, benefits or consequences for
stakeholders resulting from the outputs of
a program or organization
Public Service Value
Measures Outcome
FIGURE 2.1
Inputs, Processes and Outputs versus Outcomes
DESIGN = CHANGE
Design is more than just a product (output), it is about the change (effect) it initiates

37. transformation function
DESIGN = FUTURE ORIENTED
Design is about how things ought to be, and making it happen.
state 1 process state 2
initial state future state

38. DESIGN = ENVISIONING POSSIBILITIES
Making stuff... envisioning posibilities and possible futures through sketching, prototyping, enacting, storytelling etc...

39. learning
designing
taking an action that transforms
the internal (knowledge, beliefs)
doing an intervention
that transforms the
external (world, context)
DESIGN = LEARNING PROCESS

40. DESIGN = SENSEMAKING
Understanding reality in a specific way, identifying patterns that have been overlooked by others

41. DESIGN = ABOUT FIT
ProductProblem
User
Business
fitFIT
fit
FIT
fitFIT
Coordinating the alignment of discourses; resolving conflicts of interest

42. DESIGN = TO IMPROVE THE HUMAN CONDITION
Product
User
T
fit
FIT
fit

43. Salut!