A recent article in the Financial Times about George Soros’ belief in and use of reflexivity as a guiding functional principle piqued my interest in the philosophy. Briefly, reflexivity refers to a bi-directional relationship between cause and effect, such that they affect each other, rendering them both causes and effects. In other words: the cause creates and effect, with affects the cause, which creates another effect, etc.
The practice of reflexivity occurs naturally in design practice. The most simple example of this is illustrated by the common occurrence of design iterations. The designer creates (the cause) an object (the effect), which inevitably affects the designer, which causes her to create another version of the design. The act of design iteration is one of the most essential and basic of design practices, but is often overlooked.
After creating the object, the designer should take a step back and observe the design, question their thinking behind the design, and the relationships between the elements within the design. Does the design solve the problems in a clear and meaningful manner? Does it sing, or is it tone-deaf. Are there other design models that might better solve the problem? Of course feedback and questioning should come from other sources - peers and users especially.
If practiced correctly by an experienced designer, reflexive design is a quick way to divine a path to a more correct design solution*. It also provides landmarks - discarded ideas, points of user feedback and perception, design logic - that can be used to map a path towards the better design. Such maps tell the story behind the design’s development, and are invaluable when sharing the design with those outside the design team, or new to it.
* No design solution is perfect.
You are mostly talking about iterative design, not reflexive.
“Of course feedback and questioning should come from other sources - peers and users especially.” - that’s how it should be, not reflexive
Comment by pedro — February 2, 2009 @ 1:51 am
Both reflexive and iterative design practices should occur. In my experience, reflexive design practice helps the designer mold the design solution into something better, faster. By being reflexive, the designer is able to take a step back from the design, and respond to it with improvements or variations, even before presenting it to peers or users.
So in a sense, reflexive is a design process within iterative.
Comment by Ethan Eismann — February 2, 2009 @ 10:30 am
I think you’re putting far too much emphasis on the design as the result of one persons process. That one person does something, presents it as a solution, the world reacts and ‘the’ designer alone makes changes to what he hears and sees. This seems incredibly simplistic and overlooks that designers work in teams, they rarely ‘commission’ the design, almost never own the business case, and overlooks the likelihood that someone else probably realizes the ‘object’ — an engineer, a printer, a manufacturing plant. You seem to be suggesting that design is an indeterminate process that is an endeavor making and presenting solution after solution after solution — one which may be right sooner rather than later, or later rather soon. Isn’t this an art process not design? Given that fact that designs are more often than not way bigger than one person, aren’t you over looking a fundamental need to break design problems down by sketching out pieces, build models and try things out.
Thinking about the later, I find it ironic that you state that iteration is often overlooked. By who? The designer, the greater team, or the world at large? I think no designer overlooks iteration (if they do I would contest they are not a designer.) The problem arises when the greater team and the world at large doesn’t allow for iteration and ignores design process of sketching, modeling and trying things out. Something you seem to be overlooking by suggesting designers solely create final designs, present them as such and then observe they’re not.
Comment by Andrew Hobson — February 5, 2009 @ 11:07 am
It’s true, my post analyzes an individual designer’s process and practice. Furthermore, it’s doesn’t comment on the greater team processes related to design (that wasn’t the point of the post).
In my experience, I have worked with designers who create no less than 4 alternatives per each design problem, and iterate on each to develop their recommendation. I have also worked with designers who create only one solution and don’t iterate at all. The former is obviously the preferred practice.
One final note, the reflexive process should be a part of every stage in the design practice, the sketching, the modeling, the concept-mapping, etc. In a sense, it’s being reflexive that defines - to a certain extent - one as a designer.
Comment by Ethan Eismann — February 5, 2009 @ 12:43 pm
Hello Ethan:
I enjoyed reading your article entitled “Reflexivity in Design Practice.”
I agree that the practice of reflexivity occurs naturally in design practice.
Though there may be many people involved in creating an object design, everyone involved affects the object design and the object design, in turn, affects everyone involved.
One may be wondering “Okay, it’s obvious that everyone involved affects an object design; but how does the object design affect everyone involved?”
The answer is simple.
Any defects or negative attributes of an object design will cause everyone involved to try to eliminate these defects or negative attributes. And any advantages or positive attributes of an object design will cause everyone involved to try to enhance these advantages or positive attributes.
Reflexivity isn’t turned on or off at will. Instead, it’s a natural part of the human condition!
Comment by Al Gammate — March 31, 2009 @ 6:35 pm