Melissa Rose

Creative meetings tend to be somewhat irritating for me. I’m the only creative. Besides kick off meetings, there is not normally a reason to mean at a set time or for formal reason. I came across this interesting article in 99u…Introducing the “Lean” Meeting. There were some very interesting take aways. There were no particular formal meetings scheduled, minimal discussion, and they were mostly a formality. This is how Toyota conducted “Lean” meetings. It is based on value adding or non value adding. Anything that does not bring value is a waste and should therefore be removed.  The 3 M’s are the mantra of a lean practitioner. Muri is defined as overload (stress, strain, or under capacity), Mura means inconsistency (irregularity, imbalance, or interruption), and Muda, which means over processing, waiting, unnecessary motion, etc. Most of us can take a look at our last meeting and find it dripping of all three. If you are the meeting leader, maybe think about becoming a lean creative practitioner.

May, Matthew. “Have More Meetings (But Keep Them Short)” 99U, n.d. http://99u.com/articles/15381/the-lean-meeting-how-to-keep-your-meetings-short-and-highly-productive.

For the most part, I believe the books where successful based on the audiences. Ideas were explored in progressive stages. In the first presented idea, I had a hard time understanding the end solutions. Great process and very detailed, but a little chaotic. It was very artsy. The second book was easier to follow and a bit more structured, which is a style I could understand better. She also conducted considerable research prior to diving into brainstorming and sketches. This book progressed nicely and at a reasonable rate. However, the book was a bit long. I was able to relate to this book the most.

My take away is that I need to create a more detailed creative process. It is my hope that I can eventually move into a position that allows me to create with a process. As I progress through my degree, I will pick up bits and pieces on how to do this exactly. This will happen through patient instructors and my peers.

Review the models covered in Hugh Dubberly’s “How Do You Design?”. Have you identified any steps that should be added to your own creative process? Please provide justification for your thoughts.

How do I design? Good question. I’ve been doing it for so long that putting it on paper requires some thought. Based on an evaluation of my methods, I would have to say that my process barrows from a number of process covered in “How Do You Design?” I would also suspect that a number of us at the graduate level have an evolved hybrid process. The steps I need to add back is to further develop creative ideas and not settle on the first or second idea. By doing so, I expand my knowledge creation. It is the steps in the “Design as Learning-or “Knowledge Creation”-the SECI Model that correlate best with this idea. This is where the “hybrid” process or learning comes in. Knowledge creates continuous innovation. There are four modes of “knowledge conversion that are created when tacit and explicit knowledge interact.” (Evenson and Dubberly, 1). The model cyclical and it is in the cycles that creativity/innovation resides. I will consider this to be my new model because it views the creative process because it is organic and continuous as opposed to static and one-off. This is the way I need to view creativity and stay away from settling in the status quo (Evenson and Dubberly, 6).

Evenson, Shelley, and Hugh Dubberly. “Design as Learning or ‘Knowledge Creation’ the SECI Model.” Interactions Magazine 28 (February 2011): 6.

Have you heard of the concept of flow before this course? If so, how did you learn about it?

I had never heard this term used in the creative process before. However, I’ve heard of flow in different contexts. For me, and I might be dating myself, but “flow” as defined in this unit, was call being in the “zone”.  The definition is the same, just the term is different. 

Have you ever experienced “flow,” even if you did not know what it was called? If so, describe the process. If not, what steps will you take to train yourself to achieve it? Where do you anticipate inserting these steps into your current methodology?

I experience flow often both in my profession and in my personal life…less so in my personal life. The process begins when something grand is manifesting in my mind and I begin to realize it on paper. Even if it’s preliminary, I roll with it. I am not aware of what is going on around me, even though it’s like a three-ring circus where I work. I don’t stop until my idea I out there and I’ve played around with it, or until someone taps me on the shoulder…then I snap out of it…how rude! I love being in the zone.

My creative process is strong in some areas and rather weak in others. Most are directly related to the environment or lack of truly creative opportunities. My process is simple and is a direct result of my role as a designer within the company.

Step one begins with a thorough understanding of the project objective through questions.

Step two involves research and the amount and type of research depends on the dynamics of the projects.

Step three usually means creating visual comps for consideration.

Step four is presenting options to stakeholders.

Step five is making corrections or adjustments based on feedback. This involves listening.

This process works for the position I have, but is not ideal. I’ve adapted to the status quo, which bothers me and I find it disheartening at times. Projects tend to be a little mundane. Also, I’m not given much time for idea exploration, so creativity usually involves rehashing or freshening up a current design. Honestly, I’m not sure how to change the status quo. How do I convince those who do not value the creative process and the solutions will yield better results? Now this is not to say that I’m not creative, but it seems to be more creative problem solving then any true creative process.

The part of the process that seems to be left out is drawing ideas on paper. Now, I do some, but most creative vision occurs in my mind and then I delve into research. My creative “flow” starts when stakeholders begin presenting the project.  As the individual speaks, my mind begins to form ideas based on passion for the project. This is hard to put into words, but it manifests based on how the individual “feels” about the project. The more excited they are about it, the more I am able to develop mental ideas quickly. I hit road blocks when the individual is vague or not enthusiastic about the project…weird.

I value my ability to extrapolate project objectives and direction from the stakeholders through listening. The part of the process that bothers me the most, and I’m not sure where it comes from (maybe it’s the design curse), is that I’m never fully satisfied with the outcome. For me the project continues to evolve in my mind even when the project is complete. So the next time it comes up for a redesign or an update, I incorporate my new ideas. I just wished once that I was completely satisfied upon project completion.  I think my solution is to find a position within a company that sees, respects, and values the contributions made by me as a designer. Just today, in a meeting, those working within the “hard number” positions were commended on their direct contribution to the company’s profit increase, but those who support the earning of those process were not recognized…it bothered me.

My definition and understanding of graphic design has expanded a greatly. The field of graphic design has become or both holistic and organic, expanding and contracting as societies needs and wants evolve. Customers are no longer passive spectators. They are engaged and participatory. Like the field of graphic design, the definition has evolved as well. Though not everyone can agree on a solid definition as a collective whole, we can all at least agree that it has changed.  Following is my first definition of graphic design:

Graphic design is the direct visual result, in a collaborative environment, of a marriage between marketing goals, client needs and expectations, customer needs and wants, and market conditions. The result is design that has created a profit drive action that has satisfied marketing goals.

I would have to say that this definition is too rigid and does not reflect the current nature of the profession. After doing a little research, AIGA’s definition/explanation seems to resonate more and I would venture to combine the following definition with the one above.  Graphic design is a visual based communication vehicle. To expand upon this simple definition, we can say that “Graphic design is a creative process that combines art and technology to communicate ideas” and uses a variety of tools to create those ideas in a variety of mediums.

http://www.aiga.org/guide-whatisgraphicdesign

I am getting in the habit of expanding my design thinking by reading a variety of materials. However, most seem to be in a digital format and short. I not convinced this is the only way to learn. I wished that I had time to read more books as I am a touchy, feely reader. Digital does not always cut it for me, which leads me to my next rant. I seem to find myself stealing or sneaking time to read materials that will help my professional practice as it pertains to the company I work for. I often feel as though others in the department would consider this non-productive because there is no upfront or tangible result. As an in-house designer, as it applies to on-the-job reality, I find that others within the department do not understand the value associated with taking the time to grow and learn through on the job reading. This could be my thinking and not necessarily the case at all. If other do feel this way, it is imperative to change this mind set in order produce work that is fresh, up-to-date, and technologically relevant. I will admit, I am lagging in these areas because of my solitary existence without any real creatives to bounce ideas off of. I will work on changing this mindset and refrain from sneaking my professional growth. This sounds a bit noble, but I am going to give it a try.

One of the key areas that I am interest is brainstorming. In Bootcamp Bootleg, they detail the importance of brainstorming (the why of brainstorming), proper ways of facilitating through energy (how), and implement parameters and constraints. These are important components to a productive session that will yield results. Brainstorming is not the definitive answer to a particular design question from  my perspective. However, it is the starting point that will eventually yield an answer. In my professional work, I begin by first understanding the objective of the project and ask questions until I am very clear. I then conduct the research (I try to focus externally if possible to help generate fresh work) to get ideas to flow. From there I will generate some ideas to present.

Another method I try to use when possible is brainstorm facilitation. Though most of my brainstorming is solitary, I will always try to create a brainstorming session between project stakeholders. I do this because they are the subject matter experts and understand the objectives better and they can continue to enlighten throughout the session so that the brainstorming does not deviate far from the objectives. To engage participates, I try to hold the session away from the desk in an environment free of distractions, which is in line with Bootleg brainstorm facilitation method. I do not typically put constraints on our stakeholders as it hard to get them in the mode of brainstorming. However, I do provide “what if ” constraints to get them to think from a different perspective. Energy is something that I always have because I love my profession and it seems to be contagious.

For my open blogs, I’ve decided to read articles and listen to interviews to find out what’s going on out in the world of design and report back. I’m not much of a writer and I seem to never have quiet time. So, this is my opportunity to interact with others through my thoughts about the outside world.

It is safe to say that I’m not that far off in my ideas about what is good design practice. I recently listened to an interview featuring Cheryl Heller on the observermedia.com that further confirmed my thoughts. (http://observermedia.designobserver.com/audio/cheryl-heller/30348/). After listening, I felt as though I was not alone in the universe. Here are some key take -a-ways that seems to stand out for me.

1. Creativity will come if you listen and do your homework (research). This is the key to creativity in a money driven organization that requires on demand creativity.

2. Groups are not necessarily conducive to creativity. They can actually stifle and scatter ideas. However, collaboration is required, so it’s important to collaborate strategic way.

3. And my favorite…it is not graphic design, but communication design. I believe that this title better fits the profession as it has evolved since it came to power.

I would encourage you to listen to the interview…it’s enlightening.

I think I’m more progressive than most senior designers. I don’t mean senior in the sense of organizational hierarchy. I mean it in the literal sense. The fact is…I’m an older designer. Nothing wrong with that; we’ll all be there someday. I recently read an article titled, Why Baby Boomers and Millennials Make Great Teams. The premise of this article is that it is important that design teams have some of both. The reasoning is that one possess the energy of potential and the other the energy of experience. If the team is framed properly the opportunities for creative solutions are endless. I have always held the belief, yes, even when I was a younger designer, that each side had much to learn from each other. This article states that there are some rules to be followed if these groups are to work successfully together.

1. Communication is key

2. Keep the context related to project goals (keep it simple)

3. Set the team dynamic as flat, not hierarchal

4. Assure a two-way teaching and learning environment

I found this article refreshing because this issue will come up more and more as older designers stay on longer. We can’t fight it, so we need to find a way to work together. Personally, I believe that I have much to offer a team and I can clearly see value in having younger talent on board. After reading responses to this article, it seems as though this is a bigger issue, with younger designers wanting the older ones to die off or retire and the older ones demanding respect for the ground work old designers have laid. Humm, maybe it’s the liberal in me, but why does it have to be one way or the other? I live and create in the here in now, because that’s what it takes to be successful. We, as designers, must continually evolve and mess well with all of the players.