CC BY
7SCENARIO-BASED DESIGN PARADIGM IN EVADING UNCERTAINTY IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
Jawdat Goussous
University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
Abstract
Scenario-based design techniques belong to this complementary approach. In scenario based design, descriptions of how people accomplish tasks are a primary working design representation.
The scenario describes a sequence of actions and events that lead to an outcome. These actions and events are related in a usage context that includes the goals, plans, and reactions of the people taking part in the episode.
The concepts underlying 'scenario-based' design are introduced. From the analysis of a number of structured interviews with practicing designers, key design scenarios are identified. These scenarios are then generalised and outline guidelines developed for structuring early stage design.
Keywords: scenario, architectural design, guidelines, uncertainty
ПАРАДИГМА СЦЕНАРНО-ОРИЕНТИРОВАННОГО ПРОЕКТИРОВАНИЯ КАК ИСКЛЮЧЕНИЕ НЕОПРЕДЕЛЕННОСТИ В РАБОТЕ АРХИТЕКТОРА
Jawdat Goussous
Иорданский Университет, Амман, Иордания Аннотация
Методы проектирования на основе сценариев являются еще одним дополнительным подходом в работе архитектора. Проект на основе сценария может быть построен на описании того, как люди выполняют те или иные задачи, последовательность их действий и событий, которые приводят к результату их деятельности и включают в себя цели, планы и реакции людей, являющихся потребителями разрабатываемого проекта.
Вводятся понятия, на основе сценария проектирования. Проанализировав ряд интервью с практикующими архитекторами, можно выделить ключевые сценарии проектирования. Эти сценарии затем обобщаются и выступают как руководящие принципы для структурирования проекта на ранней стадии его разработки.
Ключевые слова: сценарий, архитектурное проектирование, руководящие принципы, неопределенность
Introduction
Architects have, traditionally, made extensive use of sketching in early-stage design development. One of the key functions of hand drawing is to actively explore the translation of descriptive design ideas into depictive representations (and vice versa) as ideas and mental images are represented in different components of our working memory. Sketches act as a form of "aide memoir" or "holding structure" for design ideas and design images. Given that CAD systems lack the immediacy and quality of hand sketching in this context, there is a growing interest in "scenario" techniques as a way of providing computational support for this design exploration. This method-ology simulates possible future environments and then concentrates on developing paths from the present situation towards various possible futures. In following the different paths the complexity of the design problem is explored and any inter-relationship between alternative outcomes discovered. In this way many of the same key mental processes engaged in sketching are utilised al-though the representation is radically different.
What is Design?
Design may be defined as the activity of specifying an artefact, given requirements that indicate one or more functions to be fulfilled and/or objectives to be satisfied by that artefact. The activity of design consists of trans-forming representations, beginning with an initial outline representation and then developing more detailed representations. The initial representations can be very diverse - composed of elements at various levels, from different sources, made up of contradictory and/or incomplete constraints, or implying such elements. The final representation has to be very precise and detailed - composed of elements that are all at the same level of abstraction and sufficiently specific to enable the artefact to be constructed from that representation.
Schön (1988) was one of the first to question the then pervasive "Problem Solving" view of design, saying that, "in this paper, [he] will treat designing not primarily as a form of 'problem solving', 'information processing', or 'search', but as a kind of making. In this view, design knowledge and reasoning are expressed in designers' transactions with materials, artefacts made, conditions under which they are made, and manner of making". De-signing is "a kind of making.... What designers make... are representations of things to be built" (ibid). Schön emphasises that "problem solving" is generally considered as handling problems as "given", whereas the process of "problem setting" is neglected. "Problems of choice or decision are solved through the selection, from avail-able means, of the one best suited to established ends. But with this emphasis on problem solving, we ignore problem setting, the process by which we define the decision to be made, the ends to be achieved, and the means that may be chosen. In real-world practice, problems do not present themselves to the practitioner as givens. They must be constructed from the materials of problematic situations which are puzzling, troubling, and uncertain" (Schön, 1983).
It is now accepted that the "Rational Problem Solving" and "Reflective Practice" paradigms developed in the 1960's and 1970's do not adequately explain the design process. Current theories build upon the "situatedness" of the problem solving activity (Winograd and Flores 1986, Suchman 1987, Varela 1991). This has been comprehensively elaborated by Gero (1990) into his "situated function-behaviour-structure framework" (Gero, 2004).
Designing is an activity during which the designers per-form actions in order to change the environment. By observing and interpreting the results of their actions, they then decide on new actions to be executed on the environment. This means that the designers' concepts may change according to what they are "seeing", which itself is a function of what they have done. We may speak of a recursive process, an "interaction of making and seeing" (Schön and Wiggins 1992). This interaction between the designer and the environment strongly determines the course of designing. In experimental studies of designers, some phenomena related to the use of sketches, which support this idea, have been reported. Schön and Wiggins found that
designers use their sketches not only as an external memory, but also as a means to reinterpret what they have drawn, thus leading the design in a new direction.
Adopting situated problem solving implies approaching design problems through the eyes of the designer in a particular design situation. This means confronting the vagueness and subjectivity that is involved in local design actions and decisions. However, inasmuch as a design project is a problem solving process for the outside world, it needs to be controlled and the design decisions justified to the stakeholders. In that case there is a need to objectify the goals and decisions in the design project, to effectively eliminate the implicitness and elements of "subjective interpretation" from the design activities. Any perception and problem interpretation must then be made explicit and becomes a subject of negotiation between the designer and the stakeholders. Through this process of negotiating, design becomes a more or less "objective" process, in which problem statements, programmes of requirements, ideas and design concepts are still made "subjectively" and implicitly, but in the end are presented explicitly and evaluated in order to settle them and thus make them real objects in the world. The "objectivity" of the steps in a design process and of the terms used to de-scribe it can thus be considered an artificial construction by the designer(s) for special purposes. This may be achieved through the use of "scenario" techniques. This methodology simulates possible future environments and then concentrates on developing paths from the present situation towards various possible futures. In following the different paths the complexity of the design problem is explored and any inter-relationship between alternative outcomes discovered.
Uncertainty in Design
The major cause of the uncertainty is that design has no special subject matter of its own apart from what the designer conceives it to be. The subject matter of design is potentially universal in scope (design thinking may be applied to any area of human experience) but, in the process of application, the designer must discover or invent a particular subject out of the problems and issues of the specific circumstances.
An architect begins with what might be called quasi-subject matter (Buchanan, 1992), tenuously existing within the problems and issues of specific circumstances. Out of the specific possibilities of a concrete situation, the architect must conceive a design that will lead to this or that particular building. A quasi-subject matter is not an undetermined subject waiting to be made determinate. It is an indeterminate subject waiting to be made specific and concrete. For example, a client's brief does not pre-sent a definition of the subject matter of a particular design. It presents a problem and a set of issues to be considered in resolving that problem.
This is where scenarios take on a special significance as tools of design thinking. They allow the architect to position and reposition the problems and issues at hand. Scenarios are the tools by which an architect intuitively or deliberately shapes a design situation, identifying the views of all participants, the issues which will concern them, and the intervention that will serve as a working hypothesis for exploration and development They are the quasi-subject matter of design thinking, from which the architect fashions a working hypothesis suited to particular circumstances.
This helps to explain how design functions as an integrative discipline. By using scenarios to discover or invent a working hypothesis, the architect establishes a principle of relevance for knowledge from both the arts and sciences, determining how such knowledge may be useful to design thinking in a particular circumstance without immediately reducing design to one or another of those disciplines. In effect, the working hypothesis that will lead to a particular design solution is the principle of relevance, guiding the efforts of the architect to gather all available knowledge bearing on how the building is finally planned.
But does the architect's working hypothesis or principle of relevance suggest that the building itself is a determinate subject matter? The answer involves a critical distinction between design thinking and the activity of production or making. Once a building is conceived, planned and
built, it may, indeed, become an object for study by any of the arts and sciences, but in such studies, the activities of design are easily forgotten. The problem for designers is to conceive and plan what does not yet exist.
Designers Approaches
Scenarios, as a process, work in a similar way, moving the design team away from their existing schemas to explore new territory. The scenario process enables designers to visit and experience the future ahead of time and to create "memories" of the future. This is a form of experiential learning which develops purposeful learning skills (Kolb 1984).
testing implications of concepts in new situations
V
Figure 1. Experiential Knowledge (after Kolb (1984))
To determine some of the characteristic processes, ten practicing architects were interviewed in a series of structured interviews which were recorded, subsequently transcribed and then analysed. The questions were open-ended in order to encourage discussion without leading to (or implying) particular answers. The discussion was structured as a mixture of general and specific questions, beginning by asking how the designers go about the conceptual design of a new project. For example, do they use generic volumetric forms or do they develop specific forms from, say, site influences. They are then asked about design constraints - are they self-imposed or de-rived from regulatory frameworks; do they support or limit the design development? How do they decide to adopt one particular idea in preference to another - for example, from previous experience, design precedents, or site/regulatory constraints. Is the approach the same for different building types or large or small scale projects? In conclusion they are asked to illustrate their approach by reference to one of their design projects.
The preliminary findings show a number of distinct approaches:
- A01 and A06 begin with technological issues and develop particular design details which then lead to specific forms.
- A02, A07 and A08 use pure forms to develop a 'geometry' in response to the site. A09 works in a similar way but with physical models.
- A03 tries to distil the essence of the site, taking inspiration from artefacts found on the site.
- A04 relates client requirements to specific functional architectural standards.
- A05 derives visual axes from the site.
- A10 works from design precedents.
These general approaches are summarised in Table 1.
Table 1. General Design Approaches
Designer Brief Function Client Site Context Scale Material Form Feelings
A01 • • • • •
A02 • • •
A03 • • •
A04 • • •
A05 • •
A06 • • •
A07 • • •
A08 • •
A09 • • • •
A10 • •
Further generalizing the detailed findings, two pairs of key axes emerged which structure the sample architects' approach to early stage design. One was on a 'structural - spatial' approach to layout and the other on a site - building typology/technology approach to constraints.
Frameworks for Understanding Conceptual Design
Macmillan et al. (2001), argue that conceptual design is too disorganized, with the result that collaboration suffers as team members become frustrated. As a remedy, they propose a "generic model" for supporting conceptual design that would be expressed as a series of steps for inter-action to give all participants a road map. Their research approaches design as a profession, and reports on observations of nine case studies of team interactions during the early phase of design. From these observations, they note several problem areas common to all the projects: confusion regarding direction or progress, team members rushing ahead of one another, expectations that all requirements can be equally satisfied, little user involvement during conceptual design, and wrong people involved in the initial briefing sessions (Macmillan et al., 2001). To address these problems, they propose a series of twelve sequential steps to enhance collaboration be-tween members. The authors make clear the framework is meant as a toolkit to enhance collaboration, not a prescription for how to make buildings. Continuing with their focus on practicing architects, they fine-tuned their model based on verification meetings with each of the teams to make sure the model reflected their experience.
Table 2. Framework for conceptual design (after Macmillan et al, 2001)
Conceptual Design Framework Tasks
Specify the need Assess the requirements Identify essential problems Develop the requirements Set key requirements Determine project characteristics
Search for solutions Transform and combine solutions Select suitable combinations Firm into concept variants Evaluate and develop a choice of alternatives Improve details and cost options
Figure 2. Cycle of analyse, propose and test
Scenario Development
Scenarios provide a powerful technique for analysing, communicating and organising requirements. Following Macmillan et al one of its main strengths is in communicating key ideas so that stakeholders share a sufficiently broad view to avoid missing vital aspects of the process. Scenarios are based on the idea of a sequence of actions carried out by intelligent agents. In the architectural de-sign context this intelligent agent may be the human de-signer or some computing support. It provides the focus for all modeling, design and communication, making use of narrative, sequence of events over time and for guessing and reasoning about alternative outcomes.
Three main techniques are used:
- Prototypes: these provide an interactive artefact that clients and design team members can react to.
- Scenarios: the designed artefact is situated in a con-text.
- Design rationale: the designers' reasoning is exposed to the rest of the team and the clients, thus encouraging participation in the design development.
The main objective of scenario building is to determine possible, probable or preferable futures (or futures to be avoided). Process of designing attempts to reduce uncertainty at different levels: individual/organisational/social. The methodology shifts the focus from the design object to the process of communication and interaction. Design decisions define possibilities; eliminate alternatives; absorb uncertainty; create novelty.
The key stages of scenario development are summarised in Table 3 and Figure 3. Table 3. Stages in scenario development
Task Analysis
- Identify Design Problems
- User situations/evaluation structures
- Review present situation; define goals; discuss strategies
- Analyse strengths and weaknesses of alternatives
- Incorporate into scenario descriptions
Influence Analysis and Problem Description
- Define problem domain and identify key elements
- Context in which project is set
- Decompose complex situations into chunks
- Structure chunks
- Represent interconnections as aspect models
- Network relationships between influence areas
- Recognise trade-offs and dependencies_
Future prediction
- Work out and justify alternative paths towards possible design goals as a way of dealing
with uncertainties_
Concept generation
- Determine which alternatives are a good match for the desired future and evaluate compatibility between alternatives
Scenarios need evaluation mechanisms. It is necessary to test potential solutions. In the past design evaluation tended to be summative - positioning a solution relative to other alternatives on various scales (cost, energy use). More usefully, scenario evaluation attempts to be formative - seeking to identify aspects of the design which might be improved. Feedback cycles are one way of achieving this, utilising theory (backward feedback) and practice (forward looking).
Analysis - Problem modelling Projection - Dealing with uncertainty Proposal User scenarios
What is the problem? Scenarios/possible futures Possible solutions
How do we want to be? What do we need to do to achieve that?
-•
-•
-•
-•
Recognition Aspects of Problem Future Possible
of need problem definition context solutions
Figure 3. Scenario Development
Conclusion
Scenarios provide a realistic new approach to constructing early-stage design support systems. Our application of these ideas in architecture is in two areas. The main focus is on agent-based design evaluation. The second is pedagogical: if experienced designers' scenarios can be de -fined then, we believe, these could become valuable mechanisms in the teaching of design.
At the end, scenarios promote work-oriented communication among stakeholders, helping to make design activities more accessible to the great variety of expertise that can contribute to design, and addressing the challenge that external constraints designers and clients face often distract attention from the needs and concerns of the people who will use the technology.
References
1. Al-Azhari, W. (2008), Scenarios as a Design Method in Architectural Practice and Architectural Education, PhD Dissertation, the University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom.
2. Arnheim, R. (1969), Visual Thinking, Berkeley, University of California Press.
3. Buchanan, Richard (1992), Wicked Problems in Design Thinking, Design Issues volume 8, number 2, pp. 5-22.
4. Frankenberger, E. and P. Badke-Schaub (1996) Modelling design processes in industry -empirical investigations of design work in practice, In: Akin, O. and G. Saglamer, (Eds) (1996), Proceedings of DMD"96, Istanbul.
5. Gero, J. S. (1990) Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design, AI Magazine Vol 11 No 4 (1990), pp. 26-36.
6. Gero, J. S. and U. Kannengiesser (2004) The situated function-behaviour-structure framework Design Studies 25 (2004), pp. 373-391.
7. Goldschmidt, G. (1991), The Dialectics of Sketching, Creativity Research Journal 4, pp. 123-143.
8. Kolb, D. (1984), Experiential Learning as a Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall.
9. Macmillan, S., J. Steele, S. Austin, P. Kirby, and R. Spence (2001), Development and verification of a generic frame-work for conceptual design. Design Studies 22 (2001), pp. 169-191.
10. Newman, M. W., and J. A. Landay, (2000). Sitemaps, story-boards, and specifications: A sketch of web site design practice. In DIS'00 (pp. 263-274).
11. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books (reprinted in 1995).
12. Schön, D. A. (1988).Designing: Rules, types and worlds. Design Studies, 9(3), pp. 181-190.
13. Schön, D. A. (1992), Designing as a reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5(1), pp. 3-14.
14. Schön, D. A. and G. Wiggins (1992) Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing, Design Studies 13 (1992), pp. 135-156.
15. Suchman, L. A. (1987) Plans and situated actions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.
16. Winograd, T. and F. Flores (1986) Understanding computers and cognition, Ablex, Norwood NJ.
DATA ABOUT THE AUTHOR Jawdat Goussous
PhD Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering & Technology, University
of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
e-mail: jawdatgoussous@hotnmail.com
