Interest in the codification and application of design methods is rapidly growing as businesses increasingly utilize “design thinking” approaches. However, in this uptake of design methods that encourage designerly action, the ontological status of design methods is often diffuse, with contradictory messages from practitioners and academics about the purpose and desired use of methods within a designer’s process. In this paper, I explore the paradoxical nature of design methods, arguing for a nuanced view that includes the (often) conflicting qualities of prescription and performance. A prescriptive view of methods is drawn from the specification of methods and their “proper” use in the academic literature, while a performative view focuses on in situ use in practice, describing how practitioners use methods to support their everyday work. The ontological characteristics and practical outcomes of each view of design methods are considered, concluding with productive tensions that juxtapose academia and practice.

1. WHAT IS THE
NATURE AND
INTENDED USE
OF DESIGN METHODS?
COLIN M. GRAY | Purdue University

2. courtesy of Juhan Sonin: https://www.flickr.com/photos/juhansonin/7797009214
What are design methods in their essence?

3. courtesy of Juhan Sonin: https://www.flickr.com/photos/juhansonin/7797009214
what is the epistemology and ontology of methods?
how does this knowledge relate to design activity?
what knowledge does a design method contain?
What are design methods in their essence?

4. THE PROPOSITION
While methods themselves may act as reifications of explicit
design activities, expressed in an objective or objective-like
form, the objective description of a method is not
equivalent to the enactment of, use of, or cognitive
processing of that method in a performative sense. (p. 3)

5. ACADEMIA PRACTICE

6. ACADEMIA PRACTICE
methods are
attached to
assumptions of
holism and
scientific rigor
methods reflect
a desire for
generative and/
or instrumental
output

7. 1970 2010s

8. Jones, 1992, p. 48

9. Design
Activity
ACADEMIA
less rigorous than
prescribed method
PRACTICE
reduced complexity
for ease of
communication
(see Gray, Stolterman, & Siegel, 2014)

10. “ingredients” and
“meals,” not “recipes”
(Woolrych et al., 2011)
“designerly tools”
(Stolterman et al., 2008;
Stolterman & Pierce, 2012)
competence
(Gray, 2014)
Design
Activity
(see Gray, Stolterman, & Siegel, 2014)
ACADEMIA
less rigorous than
prescribed method
PRACTICE
reduced complexity
for ease of
communication

11. THE ARGUMENT:
IN THREE PARTS

12. THE ARGUMENT:
IN THREE PARTS
PERFORMANCE1 PRESCRIPTION2
PRODUCTIVE TENSION3

13. THE ARGUMENT:
IN THREE PARTS
PERFORMANCE1 PRESCRIPTION2
PRODUCTIVE TENSION3

14. PERFORMANCE1
1. In situ design activity
2. A next step is needed (e.g., a way to think differently, communicate,
extend, collaborate)
3. A method is selected, created, or adapted based on its perceived salience
to the design context (i.e., from a pastiche of lived experience and
available or known tools)
4. A method, set of methods, or appropriation of method(s) is enacted or
performed until its utility has been achieved or exhausted
5. The enactment or performance of a method (ideally) has some
perceptible impact on the design situation (e.g., a new insight, validation
of a previous hunch, raising consciousness of previously tacit ideas,
realization a concept in a new form)
6. In situ design activity continues
genericsequence

15. PERFORMANCE1
1. In situ design activity
2. A next step is needed (e.g., a way to think differently, communicate,
extend, collaborate)
3. A method is selected, created, or adapted based on its perceived salience
to the design context (i.e., from a pastiche of lived experience and
available or known tools)
4. A method, set of methods, or appropriation of method(s) is enacted or
performed until its utility has been achieved or exhausted
5. The enactment or performance of a method (ideally) has some
perceptible impact on the design situation (e.g., a new insight, validation
of a previous hunch, raising consciousness of previously tacit ideas,
realization a concept in a new form)
6. In situ design activity continues
genericsequence
which method?
how to apply the method in a unique context?
when does the method conclude?
and to what end?

16. METHOD = SHORTCUT
PERFORMANCE1
CONTROLLED BY A DESIGNER
SHAPED & DISTRIBUTED AMONG
STAKEHOLDERS

17. THE ARGUMENT:
IN THREE PARTS
PERFORMANCE1 PRESCRIPTION2
PRODUCTIVE TENSION3

18. PRESCRIPTION2
INPUT
from previous
design or research
METHOD NAME
OUTPUT
that feed into
future design
moves
PRESCRIBED
ACTIVITY
steps or actions to
be performed
representationalstructure

19. PRESCRIPTION2example
INPUT
filter previously
collected data
AFFINITY DIAGRAMMING will…
OUTPUT
elucidating themes
and generating
insights
PRESCRIBED
ACTIVITY
through clustering
or sorting

20. METHOD = BLUEPRINT
PRESCRIPTION2
WITH AN IMPLICIT OR EXPLICIT
GUARANTEE OF RIGOR OR
LEGITIMACY

21. THE ARGUMENT:
IN THREE PARTS
PERFORMANCE1 PRESCRIPTION2
PRODUCTIVE TENSION3

22. PERFORMANCE PRESCRIPTION
as blueprint
for activity
as shorthand
for more
complex activities

23. METHOD = SCRIPT
PRODUCTIVE TENSION3
DESIGNERLY TOOL FOR GETTING
WORK DONE, WITH AN IMPLIED
“CORE” OF DEFINED OR
POTENTIAL USE

24. THANK YOU
Portions of this work are supported by National Science
Foundation (NSF) Grant Award No. #1115532.
My sincere thanks to Erik Stolterman and Elizabeth Boling.
COLINGRAY.ME