CPH127

I’m throwing this provocative question out to our global audience on CPH127, whether establishing a national design council, creating a national design policy, or in general, bringing government support to the design industry has any benefit?

My reason for doing so is not out of any particular opinion on my part, instead, two recent issues in the news impelled this question out of curiousity. Especially since I know that our esteemed founders are closely connected to the Danish Design Council :).

The first article, from The Hindu, announces India’s imminent ratification of a National Design Policy, creation of an Indian Design Council, and most interesting, their intention to create a "mark" to qualify good design. This article states,

"The National Design Policy will be announced in January. Merely
coming out with a policy statement will not suffice, as it will have to
be followed up with implementation. Among other things, the `Designed
in India’ label will have to be linked with a certain quality
specification," Mr N.N. Prasad, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Commerce
and Industry, said.

The attempt would be to position `Designed in India’ as a
label that assures quality and utility. This could be in conjunction
with other labels - `Made in India’ and `Served from India’.

A mechanism will be worked out for creating a brand image for
Indian designs through the award of an `India Design Mark’ that satisfy
certain criteria such as appeal, centricity, ergonomic features, safety
and environment findings.

The EETimes, on the other hand, has an article titled "The politicization of Innovation" and covers the recently proposed bill submitted to the United States Congress, the "National Innovation Policy 2005" [.doc link] While I will not enter into the "is design equal to innovation" debate, an overly battered dead horse, methinks, I do however wonder if a national design policy or design council, along the lines of those established in Europe, (notably the UK, the DDC of course :), ANZAC and Asia (Japan, Taiwan, Korea - all leaders in consumer electronics) would benefit American industry. Indeed, this Innovation Policy, and it’s intention to create a President’s Council on Innovation, could possibly be the equivalent of a design council/policy, as per the other nations, I doubt though, that it is. These are it’s three key initiatives,

increasing investment in basic research;

improving science and technology talent;

and developing a robust innovation infrastructure.

and their terminology implies a) that innovation is inherently technology led and that b) design is not innovation.  On the other hand, for argument’s sake, if this were a design policy and the intention was to create a national design council, do you think that it would be of greater benefit? If so, how and why? While on this topic, I’d like to throw out a few more questions on design policies in general, are they useful to nations? Actually, what I’m asking is, Hans, do you do anything over at that Design Council? [just kidding]  Here’s a link to Ars Technica, which has a pessimistic view of this initiative by the US to give balance, and perhaps add fuel to this discussion.

Over at Fast Company the latest of Tom Peter’s statements to capture my attention goes like this:

Consider This:

Contrary to popular belief, confusion isn’t a bad thing. In fact, confusion can be a very good thing. It shows the gaps in your understanding. Don’t shy away from it. Get inquisitive. Ask questions. Use it to get smarter. Furthermore, realize that if you’re confused, it’s likely that others are as well. And sometimes sharing your confusion is an effective way to open powerful and productive conversations.

As someone who is regularly confused I feel reassured [err somewhat]

Thanks to Doug Sundheim for the post

It was when I threw out a reference to the movie, Rashomon, by Kurosawa, while talking to a young designer at work, only to have him blink at me in response, that I was moved to write this ‘rant’ or ‘view’ or, in my case, ‘informed opinion’. ‘The Rashomon Effect‘, has become a reference for contextual truth or subjective reality, i.e. shared experiences may be interpreted uniquely by each member of the group or team, and for a practicing professional designer, one who deals in the world of interpretation, to be unaware of this seminal piece of creative work, appalled me.

When I asked him what his educational background was, he said it was a BFA (Bachelor of Fine Arts) in Visual Communications from a better known school in the USA. This is a four year degree on a university campus, where one assumes, one is exposed to the great works of film, literature and the arts in near human history. How then, can one be ignorant of the influence of Francois Truffaut, Peter Brooks’ 10 hour long epic, The Mahabharata or even Leonardo’s use of The Golden Ratio?

My intention here, today, is to begin a conversation on design education, and to ask all you, a global audience, to share your own experiences in education. Is this issue one that is only faced in the United States, where I’ve met and interviewed hundreds of designers seeking graduate design education, or is it prevalent in Europe, Asia and Oceania? Ian, as an educator based out of Australia with significant Chinese experience, what is your opinion?

In my own experience, I’ve been educated in the British system until the O levels, followed by a year in an american high school, then undergraduate degree in Bangalore and of course, a year at the National Institute of Design, Ahmedabad. From an early age, my schooling was such that I was exposed to world literature and culture, culminating in an intense experience at NID. In the 10 months I was there, I was exposed to Bharata Natyam through the AISEC, French filmography, the Battleship Potemkin, The Caucasian Chalk Circle et al. Every weekend, there was a film festival or a dance recital or an art exhibition. All of these influences, states the philosophy of the design school, written by Charles and Ray Eames, converge to create design professionals who are able to manifest in tangible form, their enhanced aethestic sensibilities.

This post relates at least indirectly to two themes referred to on CPH127 previously – [1] the emergence of China and [2] culture and it’s role in innovation and creativity.

We seek more “Asian voices” in our community perhaps motivated by observations of apparent opportunity. In order to assist in the facilitation of such involvement, do we need to foster awareness of the differences in Chinese thinking [for example] from what would be typical in Western/European/American ways of thinking? I’d suggest so…

The Shanghai Swiss Chamber of Commerce swisscham.org recently commissioned Birds & Fish Communications to work on the development of a quarterly magazine appropriately titled “The Bridge”. Designed to foster more awareness of Swiss Chinese business relations in Shanghai and China generally the publication’s March 2005 issue featured a wonderful article “10 differences between Western and Eastern Behaviour and Thinking” by Hans J.Roth, Consul General of Switzerland in Shanghai. The article describes the most significant differences between European and Chinese cultural environments. Although quite broad brushstrokes the observations can be considered a solid general guideline. I thought it would be positive to share the main points of difference highlighted in the article…Read on here

Much of what Mr roth writes certainly reflects my own perceptions about my experiences in working in China and more generally of Chinese friends and colleagues…intriguing I think.

Here is more useful insights by Hans J.Roth…

Ivy Ross is currently the Executive Vice President of Design and Development for Old Navy, Gap, Inc. Ross is responsible for all products, across all categories and customer segments. In addition Ross is a key member of the leadership team that is looking to constantly evolve the brand experience as well as future growth opportunities for the corporation. Ross’ education was in design and psychology and included time at The Harvard Business School.

Ross was a founding partner of two independent design firms and a retail store. She has a proven ability as a design leader and also possesses a strong sense of business management. She is a world-renowned artist. Ross’ innovative metal work in jewelry is in the permanent collection of 12 international museums, including the Smithsonian in Washington D.C., the Victorian Albert Museum in London and the Cooper Hewitt Museum in New York City, among others. A winner of the prestigious National Endowment for the Arts grant, Ross has also received the Women in Design Award and Diamond International award for her creative designs.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Ivy Ross on your right side.

Jørgen Rosted serves as director of FORA, an independent research unit under the Danish Ministry for Economic and Business Affairs. Jørgen Rosted has been one of the most influential policy advisors in Denmark over the last two decades. Mr. Rosted has served as Permanent Secretary in the Danish Ministry of Business Affairs and has held a number of leadership positions in the Danish Ministry of Finance, for three years as the Director of the Economic Department.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Jørgen Rosted on your right side.

Jørgen Vig Knudstorp has since 2004 been the CEO of the LEGO Group. LEGO play materials allow children of all ages to be creative in a systematic fashion that expands the boundaries of their imagination. Jørgen Vig has a Ph.D. in business economics concentrating on strategy and business development; topics that he has continued to work with as a consultant with McKinsey & Company, and since 2001 in LEGO Group.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Jørgen Vig Knudstorp on your right side.

The INDEX: Views Summit is over now, but we have got tons of interviews to digitalize and upload. We recently uploaded an interview I made with Idea Factory’s CEO and Managing Director Tony Lai.

Tony Lai is an emerging thought leader on business innovation and its changing systemic roles in corporate transformation, competitive strategy, strategic planning and organisational development.

Through a successful buy-out of the global company, Tony has been the Managing
Director/CEO and Senior Partner of The Idea Factory, an innovation business that was
founded in San Francisco in 1996. He set up the Asia Pacific HQ in Singapore in June
2001, which has since become the Global Headquarters. The Idea Factory consults and
facilitates businesses and government institutions on their strategies for innovation as a
critical component of competitiveness. Some of the organizations which Tony has
personally consulted, and facilitated are Levis Strauss & Co. Asia Pacific, Abacus Travel,
Pan Asia Paper, Accenture Singapore, Maybank Sdn Berhad, Microsoft, Media
Development Authority Singapore, National Arts Council and the Institute of Systems
Science.

Before The Idea Factory, Tony had accumulated extensive experience in the areas of
innovation and transformation at the national/country level in tourism and human
resources. Over a period of 6 years, Tony headed corporate development at the
Singapore Ministry of Manpower and was involved in corporate planning with the
Singapore Tourism Board.

Concurrently, he is a Board Member of the Singapore Human Resource Institute and the
Singapore International Foundation.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Tony Lai on your right side.

In 1997, Flemming Lindeloev was elected Chairman of Royal Scandinavia A/S, and from 2001 – 2005 he was CEO of same company. Today, Mr. Lindeloev is Chairman of Royal Scandinavia Retail A/S (Illums Bolighus) and he is a Member of the Board of Royal Copenhagen A/S.

Moreover, Mr. Lindeloev is Chairman of Business Forum of Greater Copenhagen Authority and H. Lundbeck A/S.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Flemming Lindeløv on your right side.

Latest interview is with Henrik Hautop Lund, professor, the Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Institute for Production Technology, University of Southern Denmark. His research group, the AdapTronics group, focuses on research in robotics and modern artificial intelligence. He is member of the Danish National Research Council, has published more than 100 peer-reviewed papers, and has initiated and coordinated numerous, big research projects such as HYDRA on self-assembling robots, Body Games, Intelligent Artefacts, Flexible robots for SMEs, VIKI Humanoid (RoboCup Humanoids Freestyle World Champions 2002), Playing with Ambient Intelligence, etc. He is co-inventor and co-founder of RoboCup Junior. His robot work has been presented to e.g. prime ministers, HM Queen of Denmark, and HM Emperor of Japan. He has collaborated with numerous companies such as LEGO, Bandai, Siemens, ABB and Microsoft.

Click here to see the interview. Just select the video by clicking the picture of Henrik Hautop Lund on your right side.