ideal and reality in Bruce Archer`s 1968 doctoral thesis

TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealand
realityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
StephenBoydDavis,a*SimoneGristwoodb
a
RoyalCollegeofArt,UK
MiddlesexUniversity,UK
*[email protected]
b
Abstract: The paper centres on a single document, the 1968 doctoral thesis of
LBruce Archer. It traces the author’s earlier publications and the sources that
informed and inspired his thinking, as a way of understanding the trajectory of his
ideas and the motivations for his work at the Royal College of Art from 1962.
Analysis of the thesis suggests that Archer’s ambition for a rigorous “science of
design” inspired by algorithmic approaches was increasingly threatened with
disruptionbyhisexperienceoflarge,complexdesignprojects.Hisattemptstodeal
with this problem are shown to involve a particular interpretation of cybernetics.
The paper ends with Archer’s own retrospective view and a brief account of his
dramatically changed opinions. Archer is located as both a theorist and someone
intenselyinterestedinthecommercialworldofindustrialdesign.
Keywords:systematicmethod;scienceofdesign;cybernetics;embodiment
1.Introduction
Thispaperiscentredonasingledocument,the1968doctoralthesisofLBruceArcher,
entitledTheStructureofDesignProcesses.AttheRoyalCollegeofArt(RCA)for27years,
ArcherwasakeyfigureinearlyDesignResearchandadrivingforcebehindtheattemptin
the1960stoberigorous,andinparticular“systematic”,aboutthenatureandpracticeof
designing.Hesoughttoestablishaphilosophyofdesign(Archer1981a:33),evena“science
ofdesign”(Archer1968:Foreword),aphraseoftenassociatedwithSimon’sSciencesofthe
Artificial(Simon1969)(Cross2001).EssentialtothissciencewasDesignResearch,
understoodnotonlyasthestudyofdesign’smethods,butalsoofitsontologyasadiscipline
andanactivity.Archer’sdesignphilosophyalsoaffectededucationinschools,throughthe
DesignEducationUnitlaunchedattheRCAin1977followingatwo-yearstudyfortheUK
ThisworkislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial4.0
InternationalLicense.
1
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
Government’sDepartmentofEducationandScience.1Archerwasavitalcontributortothe
workoftheDesignCouncil,asamemberofCouncilfortenyearsandofmanyofits
committees.PartlythroughhisworkwithMichaelFarr,adesignmanagemententrepreneur
andeditorformanyyearsofDesignmagazine,Archerengageddeeplywiththecommercial
world.2Helecturedextensivelytobusinessaudiences.Hisinfluenceextended
internationallythroughhisworkinGermany,theStates,Canada,Turkey,Indiaand
elsewhere.Archeracknowledgedthathelearnedmorefromsuchinteractionsthanhe
mighthaverealisedatthetime(Archer1981b).
Archerwantedtograspthenatureofdesignaswellasfindbetterwaysofdesigning.Of
thesetwoambitions,hefavouredthefirst.ChristopherFraylingrecallsArcherinsisting,“I
amnotdoingthistohelppractisingdesigners.Iamdoingthistocompletelyunderstandthe
designprocess”(Frayling2013).Hisdoctoralthesisexemplifiesatensionbetweentheory
andpracticethatisstillwithus.Subtlefeatureswithinitindicatethebeginningsofachange
inhisthinkingthatlaterledtoaradicalreformationofhisviews,derivedfromhisincreasing
real-worldexperience.JChristopherJones,inanarticleforDesign(Jones1966),complains
of“substantialbutnotalwaysverypracticalpublications”,“bothvagueanddogmatic,[with]
littlereferencetotheworkofpractisingdesigners.”Archer’sthinkingaboutdesignwas
increasinglyaffectedbypracticaldesignprojects.
Wewillnotrehearseherethemanycriticismsof“designmethods”thathavebeenmade
overtheyears,arebellioninitiatedearlyonbyJones(1969)andAlexander(1971).These
debateshavebeendiscussedbyCross(1993;2007),Glanville(1999),Dorst(2003),Bayazit
(2004),Margolin(2010),Pavitt(2012)andmanyothers.Ourtopicinsteadisthechanges
generatedwithinArcher’sownthinkingandhisattemptstomatchhistheoriestothemessy
realitiesheencountered.
WhenArchercompletedhisthesisin1968hewas46andhadworkedattheRCAsince1962,
firstintheSchoolofIndustrialDesignasaresearcherinvitedbyMishaBlack,thenrising
throughaseriesofpromotionstoResearchProfessorofthenewlynamed“Departmentof
DesignResearch”(DDR)in1972-73.PreviouslyhehadworkedbrieflyattheHochschulefür
GestaltungUlmwithHorstRittelamongothers(Krippendorff2008).3Hisowneducationhad
beeninmechanicalengineeringatwhatisnowCityUniversity.InanarticlefortheRCA’s
Arkmagazine(Archer1972a),Archersaid“hewasapainterbeforebeingdraftedinto
industrybythethenMinistryofLabour.”ServinginWorldWarIIfrom1941to1944,hewas
dischargedonmedicalgrounds.By1953hehadsetupanengineeringconsultancyandwas
teachingeveningsattheCentralSchoolofArtandDesign;hewasafull-timelecturerthere
by1957.HewaswritingarticlesforDesignmagazine,promotingwhathecalled“arational
1
Archerdescribeshimselfas“aleadingproponentoftheconceptofdesignstudiesasafundamentalcomponentoftheeducationofall
childrenatsecondarylevel”(Archer1974).
2
Intheacknowledgementsatthebeginningofhisthesis,ArcherthanksMichaelFarrwho“gavetheauthormanyopportunitiestoputhis
theoriestothetestwithintheframeworkoftheMichaelFarrdesignmanagementorganisation”(Archer1968).
3
TheUlmHochschuleischaracterizedbyWoodham(1997:180)asembracingamoveawayfromintuitiontomethod,fromcomponentto
system,fromproducttoprocess,andfromtheindividualtoaninterdisciplinarydesignteamasanappropriatemeansofsolvingproblems,
allfeaturesofArcher’slaterthinking.
2
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
approachtodesign”.ItwasfromtheCentralSchoolthathewasinvitedbyTomás
MaldonadotoworkatUlm.ThereArcherdiscoveredtwofactions,the“mathematician/
scientists”(includingtheoreticiansandappliedpsychologists)andthe“designers”.He
inclinedtothe“mathematicians”camp(Lawrence2001:43-44).
Figure1 Bedheightadjustmentmechanism–asimpleresolutionoftwoopposingrequirements.The
King’sFundHospitalBeddesignedbyKennethAgnewattheRoyalCollegeofArtunder
BruceArcher’sleadership1963-67.Photo:L.BruceArcherArchive,RCA.
TheArcherwhoarrivedattheRCAthereforehadalotofexperienceof“reallife”,though
lessexperienceoflarge,complexdesignprojects.Thatwouldsoonchange.Blackhad
invitedhimtoleadaresearchprojectonnon-surgicalhospitalequipmentfundedbythe
NuffieldFoundation(Archer2004).Archersawtheinitialtaskas“thedevelopmentofan
organisedbodyofknowledgethatwillassistmanufacturerstodesignandhospitalplanners
toselectfixedandmoveableequipment”(p.1).Fourproblemswerechosenasthefocusof
the“organisedbodyofknowledge”,includingtheneedforastandarddesignofhospital
beds.Therewereoverthreehundredbedtypesinuse,madeinpettynumbersbymany
companies.TheRoyalCollegeofNursinghadreportedthehighincidenceofpermanent
backinjuryamongnursesduetothepoordesignofbeds(p.2).
Probablybecausetheoutputsofthis“organisedbodyofknowledge”projectappearedtoo
theoreticalandproducednoprototypeproducts,thefirstyear’sreporttoNuffieldwas
rejectedandthefollow-onthreeyearsoffundingweredenied.4AsLawrence(2001:51)puts
it,“InthedesignmethodwhichArcherwasdevising,apreciseformulationofthedesign
problemwasessential,andthiswaswhat,inhisview,theReportrepresented.”This
insistenceonrequirementscapturepriortodesigningwouldbetestedtothefullasArcher
gainedmoreexperience.
4
Lawrence(2001)remarksthatthenotesofArcher’sandhisassistantButter’sdeliberations“werecouchedinabstracttermsand
exhibitedapreoccupationwithmethodology,withrigorous,oftenself-referential,definitionandwithstepwiseprogression.”
3
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
FollowingtherejectionoftheReport,Archerworkednightsinanicecreamfactoryandfor
nothingattheRCAduringtheday(Archer2004:3).Blackfoundwaysofkeepingtherestof
theteamtogether,andrecruited“oneofhisstargraduates”KennethAgnew.Eachofthe
fourhospitalprojectswasaddressed,includingtheKing’sFundhospitalbedwhich“turned
outtobeaverybigexercise”(ibid),andisexceptionallywelldocumentedbyLawrence
(2001).Preventedbyofficialpolicyfromcreatingasingledesign,theteamhadtocreatea
specificationthatmanufacturerscouldrespondtowiththeirownsolutions.5Nevertheless,
itwasclearthattheteamwouldneedtobuildrealprototypebedsandevaluatethem
againstmanycriteria.Thebedsneededtobehightominimiseinjurytonurses,butlowfor
thepatientstogetinandout:thesolutionwasanadjustable-heightbed.Butstraightforwardresolutionslikethiswereunusual.Duringtheproject,theteamhadtodealwith
intersectingissuesofmanufacturing,materials,healthcare,hands-onnursing,standards,
safety,hospitalmanagement,patientsatisfaction,industrialcommerce,externalrelations,
andinstitutionalcultureandpoliticsatanumberoflevels.Suchexperienceseemstohave
modifiedArcher’sthinkingandledhimtoquestionthesimplicityofhisoriginalmodelof
designing.
2.TheprehistoryoftheArcherthesis
Archer’sthesiswascompletedin1968(aremarkableyearworldwide)butmuchofithad
alreadyappearedinprintinaseriesofsevenarticles,“Systematicmethodfordesigners”,
roughly27,000words,publishedinDesignmagazinefromApril1963(Archer1963-64).6,7
Archerwasalong-termcontributortothemagazinefoundedbyAlecDavis,itsfirsteditor,in
1949andeditedfrom1952byMichaelFarr.“Systematicmethod”waspublishedunderthe
thirdeditorship,thatofJohnEBlake.ThetrajectoryofArcher’sthinkinginthesearticlesis
notasimpleone,butsomekeyideasemergethatlaterinformhisworkattheRCA.Hisfirst
Designarticle(Archer1954),publishedunderFarr,arguedtheimportanceofbothcreative
inventionandprofoundtechnicalknowledgeinanindustrialdesigner,athemerepriseda
yearlater(Archer1955).Hethencontributedadesignanalysisofanewtypewriter(Archer
1955),thistimehighlightingpoorBritishindustrialinnovationcomparedwithcompetitors,a
topicoftenrevisitedthathighlightshisinterestinthecommercialworld.Fourarticlesfrom
1956(Archer1956a)beganaseriesagainarguingagainstpurelytechnicalengineersworking
byruleofthumb:theindustrialdesignerneededtobeinformedbybothartandscience.At
thisstage,Archerclearlyseestheintuitivepartofdesigningasprecedingthescientificpart
(initalicshestates“Itisnecessarythatahypotheticaldesignshallfirstbelaiddownbefore
5
Lawrence2001p.32.In1967,aReportentitledTheDesignofHospitalBedsteadswaspublishedbytheKing’sFundinLondon.The
Report,whichcontainedaspecificationfor“abedsteadsuitableforgeneralpurposes”,wastheresultofafouryearprojectwhichhadcost
intheregionof£35,000.
6
Incurrentterminology,thethesisArcherpresentedmightbeconsideredasubmissionfordoctoratebypriorpublication.Thelevelof
previouslypublishedmaterialinitwassurelyunusualfortheexpectationsandregulationsofthetime.Todatenodocumentsdiscussing
thisquestionhavebeenfoundinthearchives.
7
“SystematicMethod”washighlyvaluedbythereadersofDesign.Anoteinissue38(1965)p.73states:“Theunprecedenteddemandfor
thisseriesofarticleshasmadeitnecessaryforDESIGNtopublishthemasaboundreprint,revisedandextendedbytheauthor.”
4
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
analysiscanbegin”p.14)andexplicitlysaysthatdesignisnotabout“theevolutionofforms
byscientificmethods”.
Inthesecondarticleoftheseries,Archercomplainsaboutthelowproportionof“trained
menengagedinscientificandtechnologicalwork”comparedtoothernations(Archer
1956b:32).DesignResearchisenvisagedasincludingthecalculationoftheboundingspace
ofoptimalsolutions,basedondataaboutrequirements,materialsandmanufacturing
methods–laterakeypartofArcher’sthesis.Archernoteshow“amateurismin
managementplaysaverybigpart”inBritain’sindustrialfailure(p.33).Inthethesisthiswill
leadhimtothinkaboutmanagement,gametheory,andbusinessdecisionprocesses.Still
disenchantedwithtechnicianswhoneitherthinkcreativelynorareuptospeedwiththe
stateoftheirart,heisincreasinglysanguineaboutscience:“Hereinliesthebrightesthope
forprogressindesignresearchandfortherecoveryoftheartofdesigningfromitspresent
intimidatedstate”(p.35).Thefinalseriesarticle(ArcherandZaczek1956)callsagainfor
morerigourindesigning–fromwhateverdiscipline.Archer’snextarticle(Archer1957a)
againcallsformorescienceindesign,butstilldoesnotnecessarilyrequireascienceof
design.
AseriesofarticleswithJ.Beresford-Evans(lateravisitinglecturerunderBlackandakey
stylingdesignerwithhimofdiesellocomotivesforBritishRail(Jackson2013:63))8show
Beresford-EvansfocusingontheaestheticaspectswhileArchersubjectscookingpans
(Beresford-EvansandArcher1957a),handaxes(ArcherandBeresford-Evans1957),anda
free-standingfire(Beresford-EvansandArcher1957b)toaseriesoftests.Archercontinued
thesedesignanalysisarticlesintothenextdecade.The1957articlesemphasisetheneedto
combinesubjectiveandobjectiveevaluation.Thereisafocusonqualitiesthatmatterto
people,“almostatavistic”and“endowedwithlife”inthecaseofthedomestichearth(p.53).
In“ElectronicInstruments”Archer(1957b)railsattheassumptionthataproblemhasonly
onesolution(p.29).In“HonestStyling”(Archer1957c)Archermakesthetellingremarkthat
themanufacturerhasconsidered“notmerelyamachine,butaman/machine/worksystem”
andnoteswithapprovalthatitsdialhas“beenredesignedclosetoprinciplesenunciatedby
theAppliedPsychologyResearchUnit,Cambridge,andwasdevelopedwiththeaidofadvice
obtainedfromtheRAFInstituteofAviationMedicine,Farnborough.”
Onfirststudyingthethesis,wethoughtwesawasimpletransition:thatArcherasa
mechanicalengineerwasattemptingtoscientisedesign.Buttheprecedingmaterialhas
modifiedourview.Archer’soriginalemphasiswasontheneedforcreativedesignin
engineering.Hewasarguingforrigour,notconfinedtoscientificrigour,inindustrial
practice.Designdecisionsshouldbebasedwhereappropriateonobjectivedata,and
calculationusedtoidentifythelimitsonoptimaldesigns.Noprocesswouldprovideasingle
bestsolution.Heassumedthatthedesigner’svisionprecededanyapplicationoflogic.
8
ThebusinesswithinwhichBlackandBeresford-EvansworkedwastheDesignResearchUnit,acommercialconsultancyhavingsignificant
overlapwithRCAacademicstaffbutnottobeconfusedwithArcher’sDepartmentofDesignResearch.SeeCotton2010forahistoryof
theDesignResearchUnit1942-1972.
5
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
Thereisastrongemphasisonthecommercialworld,ofsurvivalandsuccessininternational
markets,andtheinadequacyofcurrentmanagement.
3.SomeinfluencesontheArcherthesis
BythetimeArcherwroteSystematicMethodandthethesis,hewasincreasinglyoptimistic
aboutascienceofdesign.Nowlittleissaidabouttheneedforcreativeinput–mostofit
emphasisesthepowerofarangeofscientificdisciplines.Whatledtothischange?Titlesin
hisbibliographyareilluminating,including:Scientificmethod;optimisingappliedresearch
decisions(Ackoff1962);Generalsystemstheory,skeletonofascience(Boulding1956);
Predictionandoptimaldecision(Churchman1961);Problemanalysisbylogicalapproach
(Latham1965);Newproductdecisions:ananalyticalapproach(Pessemier1966).Thiswasa
periodofhighoptimismaboutrationalmethods,systematicthinkingandcalculationin
decision-makingandexecution.OperationalResearch(OR)andOrganisationandMethods
(O&M)wereseentohaveyieldedsignificantbenefitsinwar(Kirby2003)andadministration.
Archerisunequivocal:“Alogicalmodelofthedesignprocessisdeveloped,anda
terminologyandnotationisadopted,whichisintendedtobecompatiblewiththe
neighbouringdisciplinesofmanagementscienceandoperationalresearch.Manyofthe
conceptsandtechniquespresentedare,indeed,derivedfromthosedisciplines”(Archer
1968:foreword).
Optimismaboutsystematisationwascloselyalliedtotheadoptionofcomputing.Agar
(2003:Chapter8)chartstherelationshipbetween“TreasuryO&M”andthecomputerisation
ofgovernmentwork,the“governmentmachine”metaphorinstantiatedinactual
computationalmachinery.In1968computingwasthekeyfeatureofCyberneticSerendipity
attheICAandin1969Event1,thefirstmajorpublicactivityoftheComputerArtsSociety,
washeldattheRCA(Mason2009).Manyexhibitorswereinfluencedbycybernetics,ORand
SystemsTheory(Bertalanffy’sarticle“GeneralSystemTheory”(1951)iscitedinArcher’s
thesisandBertalanffy”sbookofthatnamecameoutin1968).Onthecontinent,New
TendenciesinZagrebincluded“ComputerandVisualResearch”from1968,whilecomputing
featuredintheNurembergandVenicebiennalesfrom1969and1970.MaxBense,whose
pursuitof“rationalaesthetics”involvedhiminoneofthefirstcomputerartsexhibitionsin
Stuttgartin1965,taughtatUlminthe1950sand“wastheintellectualbackboneofthe
schoolatthattime”accordingtoKrippendorf(2008:57).
Forthe1962ConferenceonDesignMethods,Jonesopenedhispaperwiththewords,“A
trendtowardsmorelogicalandsystematicmethodsofdesignhasbeenevidentthroughout
the1950s.Inmanycasestheyhaveappearedastheresultofnewtechnicaldevelopments
suchascomputers,automaticcontrolsandsystems”(Jones1963).NextyearArcherwrote,
“thelogicbywhichcomputerswork,andtheclarityandfullnessofexpressionwhichis
necessarytoprepareareal-worldproblemforcomputing,arevaluableindicatorsofthesort
6
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
oflogicwhichmightworkevenwithoutacomputer”(Archer1963).9Areporton
governmentcomputingin1956hadexplainedthatallcomputingsystemsincludeinputof
dataandinstructions,storage,control,operationsforcalculationorprocessingofdata,and
output(NationalPhysicalLaboratory1956:3).Thislinearapproachwasinmanywaysjust
whatappealedtoArcher,Jonesandmanyothers.Theywerestimulatedbytheneedtobe
explicitabouttheproblemtheyweretryingtosolveandbytheneedfordataattheoutset.
ButalternativemodelswouldalsoclaimArcher’sattention,asdiscussedbelow.
Figure2 Figure2.4fromArcher’sdoctoralthesisillustratingthecasewhere“aproductmaybe
requiredtobeasprofitableaspossible,withalowlimitofprofitability,butnohighlimit”
(Archer1968:section2.10).
4.Archer’sthesisdocument
TheArcherthesisisdividedintochaptersondefinitionofdesign,thenatureoftheactof
designing,thesystematicmodel,theoperationalmodel,thedesignprogramme,thelogicof
designprocedure,designfactors,theproblemofaesthetics,theproblemofimperfect
information,techniquesinproblemsolving,andfinallyasummaryandconclusions.It
comprisesabout36,000typewrittenwords,80pagesofdiagramsand90endnotes.The
argumentproceedsbyintroducingasimplemodelofthedesignprocessandrefiningit
chapterbychapter.Thediagramsaresignificant.Manyaregraphs(Figure2).Many
resemblealgorithmicflowcharts(Figure3).Othersshowtherelationbetweensuchmodels
9
AtapracticallevelaswellasmetaphoricallytheDDRunderArcherpioneeredtheusesofcomputingindesign.In1964itwasstatedthat,
“InrecentyearsMrArcherhasdevotedhimselftothedevelopmentofasystemoflogicforthesolutionofdesignproblemsandhas
becomedeeplyinvolvedintheapplicationofcomputertechniques.Atthemomentheisengagedinapplyingthesetechniques”(Granada
Television1964:6).GeorgeMallenandPatrickPurcellwerekeyfigureswithintheDDRinthisdevelopment,aswasJohnLansdownfrom
hispositionintheScienceResearchCouncil.SeeGristwoodandBoydDavis(2014);BoydDavisandGristwood(2015;2016).
7
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
andtherealworld(Figure4),illustratingArcher’sinterestinconnectinghisschematato
reality.
Figure3 Figure4.5fromArcher’sdoctoralthesisillustratingthecasewhere“asystemofsystems
mayformaclosedloop,witheverysubsystemdependingoninputsfromanother
subsystem”(Archer1968:section4.9).
Figure4 Figure4.6fromArcher’sdoctoralthesisillustratinghow“thedesignprocessisthusa
dialoguebetweenthereal-worldandtheoperationalmodel”(Archer1968:section4.10).
8
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
Figure5 Figure2.18fromArcher’sdoctoralthesisillustratinghow“theinterdependenceofthe
curvesoffeasiblemutualstateswillconstituteann-dimensionalhypersurfaceorrealmof
feasibility.Animportantpre-requisiteforanultimatesolutionisthatatleastaportionof
therealmoffeasibilityshouldintersectthedomainofacceptability,producinganarena
withinwhichasolutionmustbefound”(Archer1968:section2.27).
Animportantfeatureisthecalculationofthesolutionspacewithinwhichthefinaldesign
mustlie(Figure5).Tocalculatethis,clearlytherequirementsandconstraintsmustbe
knowninadvance.Archertendedtobelieveatthisstagethatthedesignprocessbeganwith
definingthebrief,establishingtherequirementsandgivingthemappropriateweights,
securingthenecessarydataandthenactuallydesigning.Therequirementsstandoutside
theiterativecycle.Hisdiagram(Figure6),appearinginsimilarforminseveralworksinthe
1960s,clearlyshowsthebriefasoutsideandprecedingthedesignprocessproper.Data
analysis,synthesisanddevelopmentareallallowedtoretrospectivelyalterdatacollection
(presumablyastheneedfornewfactsbecomesapparent)butnoneofthesealtersthebrief
andthereforetherequirements.
Figure6 “Simplifiedchecklist”fromArcher’shandwrittennotesentitled“LectureforLondonCollege
ofFurniture25Feb1965Systematicmethod1–Introduction”fromLBruceArcherArchives,
RCA,London:box2.1.2.Thebriefprecedesandliesoutsidethedesigncycle.
Archerhadaveryparticularviewofdesigningasbeingpriortomaking:“Akeyelementin
theactofdesigningistheformationofaprescriptionormodelforafinishedworkin
advanceofitsembodiment.”Thusasculptorworkingdirectlywithhisorhermaterialisnot
designing,but“whenasculptorproducesacartoonforhisproposedwork,onlythenhecan
9
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
besaidtobedesigningit”(Archer1963PartTwo:70).10Butthisidealmodel,inwhich
requirementsarefinalisedpriortodesigning,whichthenproceedsinanorderlymanner,
showssubtlesignsofdisturbanceinthethesis.SurelythefactthatArcherhadmanagedand
studiedthehorriblycomplexHospitalBedandotherliveprojects,ratherthansimply
observingdesigningatadistance,musthavemadehimmoreawareofthemessiness–and
theembodiednature–ofrealworlddesign?
5.Themodeldisrupted
Thereareanumberofdisturbancestothesystematicmodel.Theseincludecomplexity,the
needtorevisitthebriefandrequirements,andtheproblemofsecuringgooddata.
5.1Complexity
Archeralwaysacknowledgedthattherearemultiplesolutionstodesignproblems.Figure5
anditsassociatedthesistext(Archer1968:section2.27)makeclearthatmultiplesolutions
mayoccupythespacesbetweentheboundingsurfacesoffeasibilityandacceptability.Yet
onekeyreasontobepessimisticaboutanysystematicmethodistheinterdependenceof
factors.Fixingoneproblemopensanother,andtypicallyunforeseenconsequencesoccur,
problemsofcomplexitycharacteristicofsocio-technicalsystems(Johnson2010:120)–such
ashospitalbeds.Evenexhaustivecomputationmaynotdothetrick:“toderiveatrend
whichwouldpointtoanidealsolution,isonlyjustbecomingfeasibleandyetmightneverbe
attainablebecauseofthelargenumberofvariablefactorswhicharenotalways
interdependent”(Archer1956a:14).11Archer’scolleagueatUlm,HorstRittel,memorably
characterisedtheseas“wickedproblems”indialoguewithCWestChurchmanatjustthe
timeArcherwasfinalisinghisthesis.Bothauthorsfeatureinthethesis(Churchman1961;
Rittel1965),andheexplicitlynotesthesignificanceofdependence(Archer1968:endnote
60).AcharacteristicpassageintheRittelchaptercitedbyArchercouldbeadescriptionof
problemslikethehospitalbed:“...itcanbeexpectedthattheexchangeofassociations
betweenseveralpersonsislikelytoraisethisthresholdsinceeachassociationactsasanew
stimulusontheotherpersons.InthismannernotonlyCisincreasedbutalsothediversity
oftheassociationsproduced.Thisdiversityisgreatestwhentheindividualreservoirsof
associationsoverlapleast(i.e.theyarespecialistsfromwidelydifferentfields)”(Rittel1965:
209-210).
5.2Requirementsincontention
DespitediagramslikeFigure6thatappeartoshowthebrieflyingoutsideandpriortothe
designprocess,Archeractuallyacknowledgesatseveralpointsthattherequirementswhich
thedesignersthoughttheywereworkingtomaybesubjecttorevisionatalmostanypoint.
10
ThisleadsArchertotheoddcontentionthatacouturierisdesigningevenwhenmakingagarmentonthestand–butonlyprovidedthis
isnotthefinisheditembutaprototypeforagarmentthatisgoingtobemadesubsequently(Archer1963PartTwo:70).
11
Giventhecontextandflowofargumentatthispoint,itseemspossiblethatArchermeanttoendthissentence“arenotalways
independent”.Inanycaseitisclearthathebelievesthereissignificantinterdependencebetweenfactors.
10
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
AsRittelputitlater:“...theirritatingthingisthat,dependingonthestateofsolution,the
nextquestionforadditionalinformationisuniqueanddependentonthestateofsolution
youhavealreadyreached”(Rittel1972:392).InArcher’swords,“Duringthecourseofthe
problemsolvingactivitynewobjectivesmaytendtoformandreform”(Archer1968:2.29);
“Thecompletesetofobjectivesisonlyrarelydefinableatthebeginningoftheproject.Most
ofthememergebymutualconsentastheprojectprogresses”(Archer1968:6:15).He
seemscomfortablewiththis,eventhoughwemightconsiderthatitunderminessomekey
aspectsofhissystem:“Itisopentothearbiterorarbitersinaproblemtomanipulatethe
importanceratingsinanywaytheywish,andtorevisetheirratingsatanystagetheywish,
soastorepresenttheirtrueaimsandinterestsastheconsequencesoftheirdecisions
emerge,orfreshinformationbecomesavailable.”(Archer1968:3.30).Andthesearenot
justminorrefinements:“anyeffectivedesignproceduremustthereforepermitradical
reappraisaloftheproblematanystage.”(Archer1968:6:17emphasisadded).Againthe
real-worldcomplexitiesofdesignprojectsseemtohavehadaprogressiveinfluenceon
Archer’sthinking,butwithoutyetundermininghisfaithinthesystem.
5.3Lackofgooddata
ForArcher,thedesignerorengineermustworkwiththebestpossibleinformationrather
thanrelyingonintuitionorcustomandpractice.ORandO&Mhadbothpromotedthe
provisionofadequatedatainordertobeeffective.Inergonomics,Joneshadbeen
advocatingtheuseofstrongdataformorethanadecade(Jones1954).Dreyfuss’influential
anthropometricfileshadbeenpublishedrepeatedlyintheprecedingtenyears(Dreyfuss
1959).YetinkeyareasthatArcherconsideredessentialtodesign,includingaesthetics,he
acknowledgesthelackofgooddata.Aworkcitedfrequentlyinthethesisconfrontsthetwin
problemsofinterdependenceanduncertainty(TavistockInstitute1966).Archerbemoans
thelackof“acorpusofknowledgeorasetoftechniquescapableofprovidingrational
aestheticdecisions”(Archer1968:8:17).Thisforhimisalackofgoodinformation,nota
fundamentaldifficultyinprocessingandusingqualitativedata:“itshouldbepossibleto
collectdataandtocarryoutanalysesoftrendsandprobabilities,usingtechniqueswell
developedinthenaturalandsocialsciences”(Archer1968:8:16);“Theprincipaldistinction
betweenphenomenafromtheoperationalpointofviewisthereforenotintheir‘qualitative
v.quantitative’characterbutintheir‘knownv.notknown’character(Archer1968:9.4).
Thereareproblemsofbothavailabilityandquality:“thedataisdifficulttofind,andwhen
founditveryoftencontainsredundancies,errorsandomissions”(Archer1968:9.9).This
arisesfromtheverynatureofdesignproblems,dealingastheydowithsomanykindsof
criteria(Archer1968:9.10).Later,Archerwouldpresentanimportantpaperpreciselyon
computingwithqualitativedata(Archer1972b.SeeGristwoodandBoydDavis2014:622).
6.Gamesandcybernetics
WehavediscussedArcher’sinspirationinOR,O&M,computationandsystematicdecision
making.Howdidhedealwiththekindsofproblemswehavejusthighlighted,which
11
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
threatenedtodisruptsuchmodels?Twokeyareasofhisbibliographyareconcernedwith
gametheoryandwithcybernetics,disciplinesthatbothdealwithongoing,unpredictable,
dynamicsystemsandwithemergentproperties.Theyarethusquitedistinctfromthe
pipelinemodelthatatfirstsightseemsfundamentaltoArcher’ssystemandisthebasisof
simpleORandO&M.12AsPickering(2002)putsit,“cyberneticsgrabsontotheworld
differentlyfromtheclassicalsciences.Whilethelatterseektopintheworlddownin
timelessrepresentations,cyberneticsdirectlythematizestheunpredictablelivelinessofthe
world,andprocessesofopen-endedbecoming.”Pickeringdistinguishescerebral,
representationalAmericancyberneticsfromtheembeddedandembodiedUKcybernetics
createdbyAshby,BeerandPask,allofwhoseworksappearintheArcherbibliography
(Ashby1957;Beer1959;Pask1961).Cyberneticsattemptstobreakthedistinctionbetween
biologicalandartificialsystems,betweenbrainsandbodies,entitiesandtheirenvironments,
and“cutsacrosstheentrencheddepartmentsofnaturalscience”(Pask1961:11).
CyberneticsoffersArcherawaytoenvisagehow“thedesignprocessisthusadialogue
betweenthereal-worldandtheoperationalmodel”(Archer1968:4:10)(Figure4).
Twocyberneticiansinparticulararerelevanttotheproblemsofcomplexityanduncertainty
–AshbyandPask.Ashbynoteshowcomplexityhadbeenavoidedtraditionally:notuntilthe
1920s“diditbecomeclearlyrecognisedthattherearecomplexsystemsthatjustdonot
allowthevaryingofonlyonefactoratatime—theyaresodynamicandinterconnectedthat
thealterationofonefactorimmediatelyactsascausetoevokealterationsinothers,
perhapsinagreatmanyothers”(Ashby1957:5).AshbyandPaskcanoftenbereadas
thoughdescribingcomplexmulti-stakeholderdesignprojects:“Thereisfirstasetof
disturbancesD,thatstartintheworldoutsidetheorganism,oftenfarfromit,andthat
threaten,iftheregulatorRdoesnothing,todrivetheessentialvariablesEoutsidetheir
properrangeofvalues”(Ashby1957:209).Ashbyonemergentproperties:“Often,however,
theknowledgeisnot,forwhateverreason,complete.Thenthepredictionhastobe
undertakenonincompleteknowledge,andmayprovemistaken”(Ashby1957:111).Pask
alsotoyswithsituations“wheretheobjectiveisnotobviousattheoutsetandonlybecomes
sowhensometentativeknowledgehasbeengained”(Pask1961:19).“Uncertaintystems
fromourselvesandourcontactwiththeWorld”(p.21).PerhapsthisremarkofPask’s
appealedtoArcherafterallthetribulationsofcomplexpracticalprojects:“Cybernetics
offersascientificapproachtothecussednessoforganisms,suggestshowtheirbehaviours
canbecatalysedandthemystiqueandruleofthumbbanished”(p.110).
7.Lookingback
SeveraloftheworksthatArchercitesexploitthenotionofablackbox(Ashby1957,Beer
1959,Duckworth1962,Pask1961),thecyberneticiansinparticularcelebratingtheidea.
Archerdoesnotechotheiradmiration,perhapsannoyedthatdesignersthemselvesareso
12
OneoftheinformationmanagementsourcesinArcher’sbibliographyisunusualinofferingtheremark“Asophisticatedtotalsystem
wouldevenincludeitsownarrangementsforadjusting(redesigning)itselftomeettheneedsofachangingenvironment”(McDonough
1963:242).
12
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
unfathomable:“meanwhile,theonlyeffective‘blackbox’isthesensibilityofadiscerning
andcreativedesigner.”Hewantedtoopentheblackboxofdesigninganddiscoverwhatwas
inside.Thoughhis“structure”andhis“systematicmethod”lookverylikealgorithmsfor
designing,intheendhewas,aboveall,interestedtounderstandwhatdesigningis.
McIntyre(1995)suggeststhatArcher’sthinkingcontinuedunchanged,yetthisisclearlynot
thecase.Yearslaterhefeltthathehad“wastedalotoftimetryingtobendthemethodsof
operationalresearchandmanagementtechniquestodesignpurposes”(Archer1979).He
nowofferedadramaticallydifferentapproach:humanities,scienceanddesignasequal
pointsofatriadofdisciplines.Archerannouncedthat“thereexistsanunder-recognisedbut
definablethirdareaofhumanknowing,additionaltonumeracyandliteracy”(1978:
foreword,emphasisadded).Tenyearsafter1968,the“yearofrevolutions”,itwas“Timefor
aRevolutioninArtandDesignEducation”(Archer1978:title),andArcher,throughthe
DesignEducationUnitledbyKenBaynes,wouldsetaboutcreatingit(GreenandSteers
2006).
GivenArcher’sownnegativere-assessmentofhissystematicmethod,thereisariskof
underestimatingwhatArcherachieved.Theyearbeforehedied(Archer2004),hehimself
feltthat“wehadatleastestablishedthatworkstudy,systemsanalysisandergonomicswere
propertoolsfortheindustrialdesigner’strade.”Hewassurelyrightabouttheneedfor
designtobeinformedbythelatestknowledgeandforcustomandpracticetobealways
challengeablebynewdata.Hechampionedresearchintohowprototypeproductswere
actuallyusedinrealcontexts.Howmanyobjectsandsystemswouldbebetterdesignedif
onlyhisrigorousquestioningapproachweremorecommon,evennow?Thoughhedidnot
foreseejusthowbadthedeclineinUKindustrialinnovationwouldbecome,hediagnosedits
causes.
WhenJocelynStevensbecameRectorattheRCAin1984,heclosedtheDepartmentof
DesignResearch.ForGeorgeMallen(2011),theeffectwasto“almostannihilateany
intellectualactivityintheCollege.”StevenskeptArcheronwhilesackingallhisstaff.“It
brokeBruce’sheart”intheopinionofChristopherFrayling(2013).Archer’sinsistencethat
hewasnottryingtohelppractisingdesignersalmostcertainlytoldagainsthim–hepaidthe
priceforsuchhonesty.TheotherdepartmentsstoodbyandwatchedtheDepartmentclose.
AtSenate,“nobodysaidaword.Theywerejustrelieveditwasn’tthem”(Frayling2013).
13
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
Figure6AnexamplepagefromArcher’sdoctoralthesis.Section6introduces“Thelogicofdesign
procedure”andbeginsbyhighlightingtwotopics:1.thepiecewiseproceduralapproachof
“decomposition”(anapproachalsofundamentaltocomputeralgorithmdesign);2.the
theoryofgames–indicatingArcher’sincreasingacknowledgementofthecomplexand
emergentnatureoflargerdesignprojects.
14
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
8.Anoteonthethesisdocument
Thethesiswaspublishedinphotocopiedformin1969bytheU.S.DepartmentofCommerce
NationalTechnicalInformationService,andwasrepublished,accordingtoArcher(1971),in
Japanesein1970andinFrenchbytheMinistèredesAffairesCulturellesin1971.The
photocopyisfromanoriginalbearingmanyhand-writtencorrectionsandamendments.Not
least,thetitlehasbeenaltered,from“TheStructureoftheDesignProcess”to“The
StructureofDesignProcesses”.Thechaptertitle“Theproblemofaesthetics”hasadded
underliningandaquestionmark–thecorrespondingsectionof“SystematicMethod”in
Designissue172wascalled“Themeaningofaesthetics”–andtherearemanyother
alterations.Intriguingly,theverylastpagehasanacknowledgementtothebookdesigner
BrianGrimbly,whichsuggeststhatthethesiswasatthesametimeabookmanuscript.A
laterarchivedletterfromTerryBishop(1980),editoratDesignCouncilBooks,begins:
“DearProfessorArcher
APHILOSOPHYFORDESIGN
I’msureyourememberourjointintentiontoproduceabookbasedonyourRCA
lecturesunderthistitle.
Asyourtextisnowlongoverdue,however,Iwonderwhetheryouwanttoproceed
withthisproject.”
Wecanassumethatthisisnotabookbasedonthethesis,givenhowmuchArcher’sthinking
hadchangedinthetwelveyearssinceitscompletion,yetitisintriguingtowonderatthe
contentsofthebookthatneverappearedandhowitwouldhavereflectedtheprofound
shiftsinArcher’sthinking.
Acknowledgements:Theauthorsaredeeplygratefulforinterviews,providingessential
insights,withKennethAgnew,MirandaArcher,KenBaynes,SirChristopherFrayling,
GhislaineLawrence,GeorgeMallen,PhilRobertsandDougTomkin;alsotoNeil
Parkinson,RCAarchivist,andtothestaffoftheDesignArchiveatUniversityofBrighton
andtheDDRArchiveattheV&A.Theyalsogratefullyacknowledgethevaluableadvice
oftheanonymousDRSreviewers.DrSimoneGristwood’sresearchhasbeenpartly
fundedbythePaulMellonCentreforStudiesinBritishArtandtheRCA.
9.References
Ackoff,RussellL.(1962)ScientificMethod;optimisingappliedresearchdecisions.Wiley.
Agar,Jon.(2003)TheGovernmentMachine:arevolutionaryhistoryofthecomputer.MITPress
CambridgeMA.
Alexander,Christopher.(1971)StateoftheArtinDesignMethodology:InterviewwithC.Alexander
DMG[DesignMethodsGroup]Newsletter5(3)(March1971):3-7.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1954)ArtistVersusEngineer.Design67.July1954.13-16.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1954)ArtTrainingforEngineeringDraughtsmen.Design78.June1955.14-17.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1955)ANewBritishTypewriter.Design79.July1955.26-29.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1956a)IntuitionversusMathematics.Design90.June1956.12-19.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1956b)DesignResearch:designandstressanalysis2.Design91.July1956.
15
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
Archer,L.Bruce.(1956c)AnalyticalMethodsforProductDesigning[designandstressanalysis3.
Design93.September1956.29-33.
Archer,L.BruceandBohdanJ.Zaczek.(1956)Design96.December195642-46Photo-Elasticityfor
theProductDesigner:designandstressanalysis4.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1957a)TheoryintoPractice.Design101.May1957.18-23.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1957b)ElectronicInstruments.Design107.November1957.29-33.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1957c)HonestStyling.Design108.December.36-39.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1963)LecturetoArchitecturalAssociationSchoolofArchitecture.Unpublished
typewrittennotes.LBruceArcherArchive,RoyalCollegeofArt.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1963-64)Systematicmethodfordesigners:Partone:Aestheticsandlogic(Design
172.April1963.46-49);Parttwo:Designandsystem(Design174.June1963.70-74);Partthree:
gettingthebrief(Design176.August1963.52-57);Partfour:Examiningtheevidence(Design179.
November1963.68-72);Partfive:thecreativeleap(Design181.January1964.50-52);Partsix:
Thedonkeywork(Design185.May1964.60-63);Partseven:Thefinalsteps(Design188.August
1964.56-59).AlltheseissuesofthemagazinewereeditedbyJohnE.Blake.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1965)Handwrittennotesentitled‘LectureforLondonCollegeofFurniture25Feb
1965Systematicmethod1–Introduction’fromLBruceArcherArchives,RCA,London:box2.1.2.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1968)Thestructureofdesignprocesses.Thesis(Ph.D.)RoyalCollegeofArt,London,
1968.Shelfmark:DocumentSupplyDRT484530.AvailableonEthos:
http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.484530
Archer,L.Bruce.(1971)Technologicalinnovation-amethodology.Frimley,Surrey:InforlinkLtdfor
SciencePolicyFoundationLtd.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1972a)‘WhydoIgoonworkinginthisplace?’ArkNo.50.London:RoyalCollegeof
Art.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1972b)Computers,designtheoryandthehandlingofthequalitative.Proc.
InternationalConferenceonComputersinArchitecture,UniversityofYork,20-22September1972.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1974)LettertoProfessorCharlesWallschlaegerofOhioStateUniversity,including
adraftrecommendationforWallschlaegertowriteinsupportofArcher’sdistinguishedvisiting
professorship.L.BruceArcherArchive,RoyalCollegeofArt.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1974)Designawarenessandplannedcreativityinindustry.Jointlypublishedbythe
OfficeofDesignoftheDepartmentofIndustry,TradeandCommerce,Ottawa,Canada,andthe
DesignCouncilofGreatBritain,London.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1978)TimeforaRevolutioninArtandDesignEducation.RCAPapersNo.6.Royal
CollegeofArt,London.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1979)WhateverbecameofDesignMethodology?DesignStudies1(1).July1979.
17-20.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1981a)Aviewofthenatureofdesignresearch.In:RJacquesandJPowell(eds.)
Design:Science:Method.Guildford,UK:WestburyHouse/IPCScienceandTechnologyPress.3047.
Archer,L.Bruce.(1981b)PersonalletterfromArchertoProf.GeorgeLSmithJnr,Departmentof
IndustrialSystemsandEngineering,OhioStateUniversity.LBruceArcherArchive,RoyalCollegeof
Art,box1.3.1.
Archer,L.Bruce.(2004)‘AutobiographyofresearchattheRoyalCollegeofArt1961-1986’,notes
writtenfortheRector,ProfessorSirChristopherFrayling,athisrequestinMarch2004.LBruce
ArcherArchive,RoyalCollegeofArt.
16
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
Archer,L.BruceandJ.Beresford-Evans.(1957)DesignAnalysis4-generalpurposeaxeDesign103.
July1957.20-25.
Ashby,W.Ross.(1957)Introductiontocybernetics.ChapmanandHall.
Bayazit,Nigan.(2004)InvestigatingDesign:AReviewofFortyYearsofDesignResearch.DesignIssues
20(1).16-29.
Beer,Stafford.(1959)Cyberneticsandmanagement.EnglishUniversitiesPress.
Beresford-EvansJ.andL.BruceArcher.(1957a)DesignAnalysis3-stainlesssteelcookingpans.
Design102.June1957.26-30
Beresford-EvansJ.andL.BruceArcher.(1957b)DesignAnalysis5-free-standingfire.Design106.
October1957.52-56.
Bertalanffy,Ludwigvon.(1951)GeneralSystemTheory.HumanBiology23,Dec1951.303-361.
Bishop,Terry.(1980)LettertoBruceArcher.Box1.8‘DesignCouncil(c.1979-84)’.LBruceArcher
Archive,RoyalCollegeofArt.
Boulding,KennethE.(1956)Generalsystemstheory,skeletonofascience.ManagementScience.
April1956.
BoydDavis,StephenandGristwood,Simone.(2015)Computing,Design,Art:Reflectionsonan
InnovativeMomentinHistory.In:PreliminaryProceedingsoftheThirdInternationalConferenceon
theHistoryandPhilosophyofComputing(HaPoC2015),Pisa,Italy,8-11Oct2015.PisaUniversity
Press.23-25.
BoydDavis,StephenandGristwood,Simone.(2016-inpress)Computing,Design,Art:Reflectionson
anInnovativeMomentinHistory.In:ProceedingsoftheThirdInternationalConferenceonthe
HistoryandPhilosophyofComputing(HaPoC2015),Pisa,Italy,8-11Oct2015.Springer.
Churchman,C.West.(1961)Predictionandoptimaldecision.PrenticeHall.
Cotton,Michelle.(2010)DesignResearchUnit1942-72.KoenigBooks.
Cross,Nigel.(1993)AHistoryofDesignMethodology.InM.J.deVriesetaL(eds.),Design
MethcdologyandRelationshipswithScience.KluwerAcademicPublishers.15-27.
Cross,Nigel.(2001)DesignerlyWaysofKnowing:designdisciplineversusdesignscience.Design
Issues17(3).49-55.
Cross,Nigel.(2007)Editorial:FortyYearsofDesignResearch.DesignStudies28(1).1-4
Dorst,C.H.(Kees).(2003)Theproblemofdesignproblems.In:E.Edmonds&N.G.Cross(Eds.),
ExpertiseinDesign,DesignThinkingResearchSymposium6.Sydney,Australia:Creativityand
CognitionStudiosPress.
Dreyfuss,Henry.(1959)TheMeasureofMan:humanfactorsindesign.WhitneyLibraryofDesign,
NewYork.
Duckworth,Eric.(1962)AGuidetoOperationalResearch.Methuen.
Frayling,Christopher.(2013)SirChristopherFraylinginterviewedbyStephenBoydDavisattheRoyal
CollegeofArt,21March2013.
Glanville,Ranulph.(1999)ResearchingDesignandDesigningResearch.DesignIssues15(2).80-91.
GranadaTelevision.(1964)IndependentTelevisionProgrammesforSchools:Design.SummerTerm
1964.GranadaTVNetwork,Manchester.
Green,RichardandJohnSteers.(2006)DesignEducation–nowyouseeit;nowyoudon’t.Position
Paper.D&TAssociationandNSEAD.
http://www.nsead.org/downloads/Design_Education_position_paper.pdf(accessed7November
2015)
17
BOYDDAVIS&GRISTWOOD
Gristwood,SimoneandBoydDavis,Stephen.(2014)TheReappearingComputer:thepastandfuture
ofcomputingindesignresearch.In:Proc.DRS2014:Design’sBigDebates.Biennialconferenceof
theDesignResearchSociety,Umeå,16-19June2014.http://drs2014.org/en/publications/
(accessed5November2015).618-632.
Jackson,Tanya.(2013)BritishRail:TheNation’sRailway.TheHistoryPress.
Johnson,Jeffrey.(2010)Thefutureofthesocialsciencesandhumanitiesinthescienceofcomplex
systems.Innovation:TheEuropeanJournalofSocialScienceResearch23(2).115-134.
Jones,JohnChristopher.(1954)Ergonomics:humandatafordesign.Design66.June1954.13-17.
Jones,JohnChristopher.(1963)AMethodofSystematicDesign.In:Jones,ChristopherJ.andD.G.
Thornley(eds.)ConferenceonDesignMethods.PergamonPress,Oxford.53-73.
Jones,JohnChristopher.(1966)Designmethodscompared1:Strategies.Design212.32-35.
Jones,JohnChristopher.(1969)TheState-of-the-artinDesignMethods.In:Broadbent,G.,&Ward,
A.(Eds.).(1969).Designmethodsinarchitecture(No.6).London:LundHumphries.
Jones,JohnChristopher.(1991)DesigningDesigning.London:Architecture,DesignandTechnology
Press,p.174.
Kirby,MauriceW.(2003)OperationalResearchinWarandPeace:TheBritishExperiencefromthe
1930sto1970.London:ImperialCollegePress.
Krippendorff,Klaus.(2008)DesigninginUlmandoffUlm.In:K.-A.Czemper(Ed.),HfG,Ulm;Die
AbteilungProduktgestaltung;39Rückblicke.Dortmund,Germany:VerlagDorotheaRohn.55-72.
Latham,R.L.(1965)Problemanalysisbylogicalapproach.AtomicWeaponsResearchEstablishment.
Lawrence,Ghislaine.(2001)Hospitalbedsbydesign:asocio-historicalaccountofthe‘King’sFund
Bed’,1960-1975.PhDthesisoftheUniversityofLondon.AvailableontheBritishLibraryEthos
service,ID:uk.bl.ethos.271734.
NationalPhysicalLaboratory.(1956)WageAccountingbyElectronicComputer.HerMajesty’s
StationeryOffice.
Mallen,George.(2011)InterviewedbyJoStockhamandBronacFerranatSystemSimulationLimited,
16December2011.
Margolin,Victor.(2010)Designresearch:Towardsahistory.InProc.DesignandComplexity-Design
ResearchSocietyConference,July7-9,2010atSchoolofIndustrialDesign,UniversitédeMontréal
Montreal,Canada.
Mason,Catherine.(2009)TheFortiethAnniversaryofEventOneattheRoyalCollegeofArt.Proc.
EVA2009,internationalconferenceonElectronicVisualisationandtheArts.BritishComputer
Society,London,6-8July2009.117-128.
McDonough,A.M.(1963)Informationeconomicsandmanagementsystems.McGrawHill.
McIntyre,Jean.(1995)TheDepartmentofDesignResearchattheRoyalCollegeofArt:itsoriginsand
legacy1959-1988.In:Frayling,C.andCatterall,C.(eds.)DesignoftheTimes:onehundredyearsof
theRoyalCollegeofArt.58-62.RichardDennisPublications/RoyalCollegeofArt.
Pavitt,Jane.(2012)Input-Output:DesignResearchandSystemsThinking.In:McCarthy,F.(ed.)The
PerfectPlacetoGrow:175yearsoftheRoyalCollegeofArt.129-139
Pask,Gordon.(1961)Anapproachtocybernetics.Hutchinson.
Pessemier,EdgarA.(1966)Newproductdecisions:ananalyticalapproach.McGrawHill.
Pickering,Andrew.(2002)CyberneticsandtheMangle:Ashby,BeerandPask.SocialStudiesof
Science32(3).413-437.
Rittel,Horst.(1965)Hierarchyorteam?In:RichardA.Tybou(ed.)EconomicsofResearchand
Development.OhioStateUniversityPress.174-218
18
TheStructureofDesignProcesses:idealandrealityinBruceArcher’s1968doctoralthesis
Rittel,Horst.(1972)OnthePlanningCrisis:SystemsAnalysisofthe‘FirstandSecondGenerations’
Bedriftsøkonomen8.390-396.
Simon,HerbertA.(1969)TheSciencesoftheArtificial.MITPress,Cambridge,Mass.
TavistockInstitute.(1966)Interdependenceanduncertainty:digestofareportfromtheTavistock
Institute.TavistockPublications.1966.
Woodham,JonathanM.(1997)TwentiethCenturyDesign.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
AbouttheAuthors:
Stephen Boyd Davis is Professor of Design Research at the RCA,
London, where he leads staff research in the School of Design. His
research focuses on the representation of knowledge through
computation, depiction and diagramming, with an emphasis on
chronographics.
Dr Simone Gristwood is Lansdown Research Curator at Middlesex
University. Her research focuses on uncovering the histories of the
use of computing in the arts and design from the 1960s onwards,
primarilythroughinvestigatingthearchivesofpioneers.
19