Towards a new disciplinary framework for contemporary creative design practice

This paper argues for a consistent and new design-specific disciplinary framework that will provide a better understanding of emergent design practice. Design today is characterised by a blurring of traditional design domains (Sanders 2006) and design activities that are backed by other subject specialist areas such as computing, electronics or bioengineering. In order to understand and facilitate collaborative working, a consistent disciplinary framework is required. Furthermore, in understanding complex disciplinary influences this framework provides a method of delineating and analysing emergent practice. To derive the framework this paper explores the existing literature on disciplinary terms. Contemporary creative design practice is then analysed via this taxonomy. To this end, the paper argues that through consistent use of the terms, ‘multidisciplinary design’, ‘crossdisciplinary design’, ‘interdisciplinary design’ and ‘transdisciplinary design’, distinctions can be made within the increasingly complex domain of contemporary design practice.

[1]  Christopher Hight,et al.  Collective Intelligence in Design , 2006 .

[2]  S Harfield,et al.  On the Roots of Undiscipline , 2009 .

[3]  Charlotte Fiell,et al.  Industrial Design A-Z , 2000 .

[4]  John Marshall An exploration of hybrid art and design practice using computer-based design and fabrication tools. , 2008 .

[5]  Stanley Bailis,et al.  Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity: A Constant Challenge to the Sciences , 1999 .

[6]  Bruce Bowerman,et al.  Heads or tails: cell polarity and axis formation in the early Caenorhabditis elegans embryo. , 2002, Developmental cell.

[7]  E. Jantsch,et al.  Towards Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity in Education and Innovation , 1972 .

[8]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[9]  Angelique Chettiparamb,et al.  Interdisciplinarity: a literature review , 2007 .

[10]  C. Prestowitz Trading places : how America is surrendering its future to Japan and how to win it back , 1988 .

[11]  S. Turner What are Disciplines? And How is Interdisciplinary Different? , 2000 .

[12]  Jeremy Myerson IDEO: Masters of Innovation , 2001 .

[13]  Peter Hall,et al.  Design and the Elastic Mind , 2008 .

[14]  Jonathan Littman,et al.  The Ten Faces of Innovation , 2005 .

[15]  Zachary Stein,et al.  Modeling the Demands of Interdisciplinarity: Toward a Framework for Evaluating Interdisciplinary Endeavors , 2007 .

[16]  Bryan Lawson,et al.  What designers know , 2018, The Design Student’s Journey.

[17]  C. Dorst Design research: a revolution-waiting-to-happen☆ , 2008 .

[18]  Martí Guixé,et al.  1:1 Martí Guixé , 2002 .

[19]  Renate Fruchter,et al.  FRAMEWORK FOR A CROSS-BORDER TRANSDISCIPLINARY DESIGN STUDIO EDUCATION , 2007 .

[20]  B. Nicolescu,et al.  Towards transdisciplinary education , 2005 .

[21]  Paola Antonelli Design and the elastic mind , 2008 .

[22]  Declan Butler,et al.  Power to the people , 2004, Nature.

[23]  Richard Buchanan,et al.  Design Research and the New Learning , 2001, Design Issues.

[24]  Kathy Battista,et al.  Art and Architecture: A Place Between , 2009 .

[25]  Eduardo Corte-Real,et al.  Design Research in 2006 , 2006 .