On Monoscope
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Annual Exhibit
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Emotionally Durable Design
Jonathan Chapman
Although the need for longer lasting products is widely recognized, practical working methods, design frameworks, and tools that facili- tate the development and integration of such emotionally durable characteristics within products are scarce. This may be a conse- quence of the apparently intangible, ethereal nature of considerations pertaining to psychological function, which cause confusion for the practicing product designer tasked with the design and development of greater emotional longevity in products.
An empirical study, conducted by the author, examined the relationship behaviors of 2,154 respondents with their DEPs during the use phase. Results of this study demonstrated that within the sample frame, value was perceived due to the presence of one of the following six experiential themes; narrative (24%), surface (23%), detachment (23%), attachment (16%), fiction (7%), and consciousness (7%). Of the six distilled experiential themes, narrative was the most common reason given by 526 respondents (24%). It is interesting to note that of the 526 respondents occupying this profile, 341 received their DEP as a gift. Furthermore, although 364 (16%) of the sample population do possess DEPs to which they are emotionally attached, a far greater proportion of the sample frame (84%) perceived value in DEPs for reasons other than emotional attachment.
From these results, a six-point experiential framework was distilled, providing product designers with distinct conceptual path- ways through which to initiate engagement with salient issues of emotional durability and design, and presenting a more expansive, holistic understanding of design for durability—in terms of both the paradigm and the language used to articulate it.
The six-point experiential framework (and supporting annotations) is as follows:
Narrative: Users share a unique personal history with the product; this often relates to when, how, and from whom the object was acquired.
Detachment: Users feel no emotional connection to the product, have low expectations, and thus perceive it in a favorable way due to a lack of emotional demand or expec- tation. (This also suggests that attachment may actually be counterproductive, as it elevates the level of expectation within the user to a point that is often unattainable.)
Surface: The product is physically aging well and develop- ing a tangible character through time and use (and some- times misuse).
Attachment: Users feel a strong emotional connection to the product, due to the service it provides, the information it contains, and the meaning it conveys.
Users are delighted or even enchanted by the product as they do not yet fully understood or know it, especially with a recently purchased product that is still being explored and discovered.
Consciousness: The product is perceived as autonomous and in possession of its own free will. It is quirky and often temperamental, and interaction is an acquired skill that can be fully acquired only with practice.
The six-point experiential framework presented here generates a grounded theoretical architecture that enables more effective engage- ment with complex issues of emotional durability and design. By framing specific points of intervention, the six defined pathways facilitate more structured, focused modes of exploration. As a collection of terms, an original territory of inquiry is delineated and defined, while each of the six terms begins to construct an original influence product longevity. The six-point experiential framework was presented as evidence at The House of Lords (on February 5, 2008) and examined by the Science and Technology Committee as a part of their “Enquiry into Waste Reduction.” The evidence was presented within the context of providing product designers with distinct conceptual pathways through which to initiate engagement with emotionally durable design and the WEEE Directive, and exam- ining ways in which products and production processes can be made more sustainable and therefore less wasteful.
Desire and Disappointment
The process of consumption is motivated by complex emotional drivers, and is about far more than just the purchasing of new and shinier things; it is a journey towards the ideal (or desired) self, that, through cyclical loops of desire and disappointment, becomes a seemingly endless process of serial destruction. Material artifacts may thus be described as illustrative of an individual’s aspirations and serve to define us existentially. As such, possessions are symbols of what we are, what we have been, and what we are attempting to become, and also provide an archaic means of possession by enabling the consumer to incorporate24 the meanings that are signified to them by a given object. Thus, consumers are drawn to objects in possession of that which they subconsciously yearn to become—the material you possess signifies the destiny you chase. In this way, it can be seen that products are not merely functional, but provide important signs and indicators in human relationships.
Consumer motivation, or the awakening of human need, is unstable—it continually evolves and adapts, whilst the DEPs deployed to both mediate and satisfy those desires remain relatively frozen in time, throughout the product’s use-career. We become familiar with their greatness and as a direct consequence, our expectation of greatness itself subsequently increases; adoration rapidly mutates into a resentment of a past that is now outdated and obsolete. This common phenomenon of an individual evolving and outgrowing a static product yields intensely destructive implications for the sustainability of consumerism. Furthermore, the dynamic nature of this desire requires a similar approach: the development of dynamic and flexible products.
Conclusions
It is clear that the design for durability paradigm has important implications beyond its conventional interpretation, in which product longevity is considered solely in terms of an object’s physical endurance, whether cherished or discarded. Perhaps due to the normalcy of innovation, the made world has adopted an expendable and sacrificial persona, rendering its offspring fleeting, transient, and replaceable orphans of circumstance. In the majority of cases, the durability of DEPs is characterized simply by specifying resilient materials, fixable technologies, and the application of product optimization methodologies that reduce the likelihood of blown circuits, stress fractures, and other physical failures. Is this durable product design, or simply the designing of durable waste? Cynically, waste fromDEPs can be seen as an essential means for us to make way for the new. Neither broken nor dysfunctional, these orphans have been cast aside before their time to make way for newer, younger models in an adulterous swing we call consumerism. Though this may be described as nothing more than a Darwinian process of progress- driven obsolescence, the ecological implications of this practice are grave.
The majority of the products that make up today’s electronic waste (e-waste) still perform their tasks perfectly in a utilitarian sense. In an emotive sense, however, these unwanted electronics bear an immaterial form of defect, manifest within the relational space occupied by both subject and object. It is this incapacity for evolution and growth that renders most products incapable of establishing and sustaining relationships with users. The waste this inconsistency generates is substantial, coming at increasing cost to manufacturers facing the policy-driven demands of the EU’s WEEE Directive and, perhaps more importantly, the natural world. We must therefore begin to consider the emergent paradigm of emotionally durable design to propose new and alternative genres of DEPs that reduce the consumption and waste of resources by increasing the resilience of relationships between consumer and product, presenting a more expansive, holistic approach to design for durability, and more broadly, the lived-experience of sustainability.
Design Issues: Volume 25, Number 4 Autumn 2009
Jonathan Chapman
Although the need for longer lasting products is widely recognized, practical working methods, design frameworks, and tools that facili- tate the development and integration of such emotionally durable characteristics within products are scarce. This may be a conse- quence of the apparently intangible, ethereal nature of considerations pertaining to psychological function, which cause confusion for the practicing product designer tasked with the design and development of greater emotional longevity in products.
An empirical study, conducted by the author, examined the relationship behaviors of 2,154 respondents with their DEPs during the use phase. Results of this study demonstrated that within the sample frame, value was perceived due to the presence of one of the following six experiential themes; narrative (24%), surface (23%), detachment (23%), attachment (16%), fiction (7%), and consciousness (7%). Of the six distilled experiential themes, narrative was the most common reason given by 526 respondents (24%). It is interesting to note that of the 526 respondents occupying this profile, 341 received their DEP as a gift. Furthermore, although 364 (16%) of the sample population do possess DEPs to which they are emotionally attached, a far greater proportion of the sample frame (84%) perceived value in DEPs for reasons other than emotional attachment.
From these results, a six-point experiential framework was distilled, providing product designers with distinct conceptual path- ways through which to initiate engagement with salient issues of emotional durability and design, and presenting a more expansive, holistic understanding of design for durability—in terms of both the paradigm and the language used to articulate it.
The six-point experiential framework (and supporting annotations) is as follows:
Narrative: Users share a unique personal history with the product; this often relates to when, how, and from whom the object was acquired.
Detachment: Users feel no emotional connection to the product, have low expectations, and thus perceive it in a favorable way due to a lack of emotional demand or expec- tation. (This also suggests that attachment may actually be counterproductive, as it elevates the level of expectation within the user to a point that is often unattainable.)
Surface: The product is physically aging well and develop- ing a tangible character through time and use (and some- times misuse).
Attachment: Users feel a strong emotional connection to the product, due to the service it provides, the information it contains, and the meaning it conveys.
Users are delighted or even enchanted by the product as they do not yet fully understood or know it, especially with a recently purchased product that is still being explored and discovered.
Consciousness: The product is perceived as autonomous and in possession of its own free will. It is quirky and often temperamental, and interaction is an acquired skill that can be fully acquired only with practice.
The six-point experiential framework presented here generates a grounded theoretical architecture that enables more effective engage- ment with complex issues of emotional durability and design. By framing specific points of intervention, the six defined pathways facilitate more structured, focused modes of exploration. As a collection of terms, an original territory of inquiry is delineated and defined, while each of the six terms begins to construct an original influence product longevity. The six-point experiential framework was presented as evidence at The House of Lords (on February 5, 2008) and examined by the Science and Technology Committee as a part of their “Enquiry into Waste Reduction.” The evidence was presented within the context of providing product designers with distinct conceptual pathways through which to initiate engagement with emotionally durable design and the WEEE Directive, and exam- ining ways in which products and production processes can be made more sustainable and therefore less wasteful.
Desire and Disappointment
The process of consumption is motivated by complex emotional drivers, and is about far more than just the purchasing of new and shinier things; it is a journey towards the ideal (or desired) self, that, through cyclical loops of desire and disappointment, becomes a seemingly endless process of serial destruction. Material artifacts may thus be described as illustrative of an individual’s aspirations and serve to define us existentially. As such, possessions are symbols of what we are, what we have been, and what we are attempting to become, and also provide an archaic means of possession by enabling the consumer to incorporate24 the meanings that are signified to them by a given object. Thus, consumers are drawn to objects in possession of that which they subconsciously yearn to become—the material you possess signifies the destiny you chase. In this way, it can be seen that products are not merely functional, but provide important signs and indicators in human relationships.
Consumer motivation, or the awakening of human need, is unstable—it continually evolves and adapts, whilst the DEPs deployed to both mediate and satisfy those desires remain relatively frozen in time, throughout the product’s use-career. We become familiar with their greatness and as a direct consequence, our expectation of greatness itself subsequently increases; adoration rapidly mutates into a resentment of a past that is now outdated and obsolete. This common phenomenon of an individual evolving and outgrowing a static product yields intensely destructive implications for the sustainability of consumerism. Furthermore, the dynamic nature of this desire requires a similar approach: the development of dynamic and flexible products.
Conclusions
It is clear that the design for durability paradigm has important implications beyond its conventional interpretation, in which product longevity is considered solely in terms of an object’s physical endurance, whether cherished or discarded. Perhaps due to the normalcy of innovation, the made world has adopted an expendable and sacrificial persona, rendering its offspring fleeting, transient, and replaceable orphans of circumstance. In the majority of cases, the durability of DEPs is characterized simply by specifying resilient materials, fixable technologies, and the application of product optimization methodologies that reduce the likelihood of blown circuits, stress fractures, and other physical failures. Is this durable product design, or simply the designing of durable waste? Cynically, waste fromDEPs can be seen as an essential means for us to make way for the new. Neither broken nor dysfunctional, these orphans have been cast aside before their time to make way for newer, younger models in an adulterous swing we call consumerism. Though this may be described as nothing more than a Darwinian process of progress- driven obsolescence, the ecological implications of this practice are grave.
The majority of the products that make up today’s electronic waste (e-waste) still perform their tasks perfectly in a utilitarian sense. In an emotive sense, however, these unwanted electronics bear an immaterial form of defect, manifest within the relational space occupied by both subject and object. It is this incapacity for evolution and growth that renders most products incapable of establishing and sustaining relationships with users. The waste this inconsistency generates is substantial, coming at increasing cost to manufacturers facing the policy-driven demands of the EU’s WEEE Directive and, perhaps more importantly, the natural world. We must therefore begin to consider the emergent paradigm of emotionally durable design to propose new and alternative genres of DEPs that reduce the consumption and waste of resources by increasing the resilience of relationships between consumer and product, presenting a more expansive, holistic approach to design for durability, and more broadly, the lived-experience of sustainability.
Design Issues: Volume 25, Number 4 Autumn 2009
Jonathan Chapman
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Dr. Kristina Niedderer
Performative Objects: designing mediating mindful interaction through artefacts
One of Kristina's strongest interests is the exploration of design as a means for mediating mindful interaction through the use of objects in social contexts. This means, not just to facilitate interaction, which is common to interactive objects and technology such as email, mobile phones, etc. where the immediate interaction between the caller and the receiever is designed, but to create awareness and responsibility of all social interaction implicated in the exchange as well as opportunities and new ways of dealing with interaction.
At the core of Kristina's research into mindful interaction was the identification of a new category of products, termed performative objects. The identification of the performative object as a new category made the inquiry a classification study within the field of design. The inquiry was conducted on both theoretical and practical levels, and the understanding of the relationship of the practical and theoretical components of the research became key to the development of the inquiry.
http://niedderer.org/
INTERESTING!
One of Kristina's strongest interests is the exploration of design as a means for mediating mindful interaction through the use of objects in social contexts. This means, not just to facilitate interaction, which is common to interactive objects and technology such as email, mobile phones, etc. where the immediate interaction between the caller and the receiever is designed, but to create awareness and responsibility of all social interaction implicated in the exchange as well as opportunities and new ways of dealing with interaction.
At the core of Kristina's research into mindful interaction was the identification of a new category of products, termed performative objects. The identification of the performative object as a new category made the inquiry a classification study within the field of design. The inquiry was conducted on both theoretical and practical levels, and the understanding of the relationship of the practical and theoretical components of the research became key to the development of the inquiry.
http://niedderer.org/
INTERESTING!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
