DIALOGUE

IDEO, Pro and Con
From Kevin Derrick:
I think the last paragraph captures IDEO perfectly: a big, ambitious redefinition of what it means to be a designer (“IDEO Takes on the Government,” by Peter Hall, June 2011, p. 100). Ultimately, having a good idea is nothing if you can’t share it, or produce it, or if it doesn’t solve a problem. IDEO seems to have found a sweet spot in not only fostering innovation in their own ranks, but also bringing about a similar enthusiasm in their clients. (And with the Social Security Administration, even. Wow!)

From Ann Paff:
“Design thinking” is a bad framing. The IDEO folks are coming from a Silicon Valley industrial-designer hive, where all believe that dashing, novel product design can solve anything (especially how to suck up venture capital, the holy grail of Silicon Valley). It’s still product over process. In reality, “process” is what all designers have to employ. This article doesn’t convince me that IDEO has a special grasp of the participatory process for achieving particular results. There are firms that specialize in this and have done it well for decades. Metropolis: stop publishing press releases.

The View from the Cubicles
From Sheila:
As someone who worked (or tried to) in the Corus Quay building, I disagree with the positive assessment of the interior space (“Interior Flash,” by Alex Bozikovic, June 2011, p. 28). The public areas are bright and airy, but once you get off the first floor, the cubicles themselves are small and dark—and the overall feel is not loftlike but banklike. The unfinished elements of the building (like the ceiling, with its exposed ductwork and insulation foam) add an element of visual noise that makes concentration difficult, and the emphasis on collaborative spaces rather than private ones results, strangely and perhaps counterintuitively, in an environment where people spend a lot of time murmuring and whispering in order to get what they need from their cubicled coworkers.