TU Delft psychology professor Petra Badke-Schaub introduces Industrial Design Engineering students to the joys of analysis through her course, ‘Methods & Methodology’, which helps students learn to think rationally and identify ways of thinking that can lead to better design ideas, as well as those that hamper creativity.
It was certainly strange how I first became aware of Professor Petra Badke-Schaub. Having told some friends I was looking for interesting TU people to write about, I received a rather enigmatic missive from one of Badke-Schaub’s former students, which read: “Professor Badke-Schaub teaches design methodology. She’s from Eastern Europe somewhere. She has a special character.” That, as they say, was all she wrote. And I was left to play detective.
My sleuthing then led to my housemate, an Industrial Design student who reacted to the news of my possible interview with Badke-Schaub with surprise: “Oh no! Her subject is so boring!” His testimony did make me think twice about taking the case. But I also knew he wasn’t to be trusted. In this business, you can’t trust anybody, so I took a drink from the bottle I keep in my desk drawer, filled my pipe, and began plotting my next move.
I tracked Badke-Schaub down to her office at the Design Theory & Methodology department, where I quickly got to the bottom of one mystery: she’s from Bamberg, Germany, not ‘Eastern Europe somewhere’. A trained psychologist, Badke-Schaub came to Delft in 2004 from Bamberg University’s Theoretical Institute of Psychology.
“My main interest is in analyzing human behavior, especially in dealing with complex problems,” she says of her academic pursuits. “As design always has to do with complex problem solving, it was clear that I would eventually do something with designers.”
Despite having been exposed to design processes through working with engineers over many years, the transition hasn’t been all plain sailing. “Some colleagues have problems with me teaching design without being a designer myself,” she concedes, “but if you look at design departments inside companies nowadays, you will always find multi-disciplinarity.”
Of all the design departments in all the world, why did she choose TU Delft? “This chair nicely connects theory and practice, linking psychology to real design applications,” Badke-Schaub says. “Also, ‘Methods and Methodology’ is a topic very close to my research.”
Human nature
As an expert in human behavior, Badke-Schaub identifies ways of thinking that can lead to better design ideas, as well as those that hamper creativity. One interesting example of this is that a ‘common sense’ approach isn’t really the best way to solve design problems.
The situations we encounter in our day-to-day lives usually have outcomes we can easily predict. However, when we encounter complex problems, simply using ‘common sense’ is likely to fail. Badke-Schaub explains: “Human nature dictates that you try to behave with the first set of actions that you think might be useful and that come easily to your mind. But often these complex problems aren’t as they seem. They might have some complications in terms of uncertainties or misinformation that you cannot predict.”
Put bluntly, our natural response to a complex problem is irrational. The rational mind would first analyze the problem in depth, trying to identify these complications before taking any irreversible action. However, it’s hardly surprising that such a reasoned approach doesn’t come naturally to us humans.
“In evolutionary terms, we had to react quickly when faced with dangerous predators, so we developed the fight or flight response,” Badke-Schaub says. “We have hard-wired behavioral patterns suited to our everyday problems, because if we had to analyze every single problem in detail, we wouldn’t be able to act.”
Badke-Schaub cites historical examples of successful designers, from DaVinci to the Wright Brothers, who were naturally able to properly analyze complex problems, yet lived in a time when design theory didn’t exist and simply had an innate talent to design well. So, perhaps great designers are born, not made? Badke-Schaub disagrees: “When you’re born, you can’t ride a bike, you learn it, so why shouldn’t you learn problem-solving? We learn many things during our lives. Our aim is to support designers in designing, so that they can use their abilities and capabilities to produce the best product.”
Make changes
There is however evidence of irrational approaches to problem solving all around us. Badke-Schaub is skeptical of the ‘change mentality’ that preoccupies many organizations. “There’s currently a big interest in changes at TU Delft,” she states. “Of course, changes are often necessary, but if there are too many changes at one time, this might cause uncertainty, which often leads to demotivation.”
Once again, considered rational analysis is the cure for this epidemic. “There’s an assumption that changes always bring progress and better results,” she continues. “So, if our output is dropping, make changes. But sometimes it’s better to find out what the reasons are and then think of possible appropriate changes.”
Badke-Schaub is philosophical about the allegation that ‘Methods and Methodology’ is a boring subject. “It’s ironic,” she says, laughing, “because we had one assignment in which students interviewed designers from different fields, and when these designers were asked if they used methods, most replied that they didn’t. But when our students had them describe exactly how they worked, it was clear that many designers followed pre-defined structures. The students therefore saw the relevance of the subject for themselves.”
Badke-Schaub admits that methodology isn’t a discipline welcomed by most students: “Designers want to be creative and seem to think that methods prevent them from being creative.” Using methodologies however is an integral part of designing. “It’s important that students open their minds to these ideas,” she continues. “Nothing in methodology prevents you from being creative; they can be brought together . and in fact they really need each other . but there’s still a ways to go to convince people of that!”
Petra Badke-Schaub. (Photo: Sam Rentmeester/FMAX)
It was certainly strange how I first became aware of Professor Petra Badke-Schaub. Having told some friends I was looking for interesting TU people to write about, I received a rather enigmatic missive from one of Badke-Schaub’s former students, which read: “Professor Badke-Schaub teaches design methodology. She’s from Eastern Europe somewhere. She has a special character.” That, as they say, was all she wrote. And I was left to play detective.
My sleuthing then led to my housemate, an Industrial Design student who reacted to the news of my possible interview with Badke-Schaub with surprise: “Oh no! Her subject is so boring!” His testimony did make me think twice about taking the case. But I also knew he wasn’t to be trusted. In this business, you can’t trust anybody, so I took a drink from the bottle I keep in my desk drawer, filled my pipe, and began plotting my next move.
I tracked Badke-Schaub down to her office at the Design Theory & Methodology department, where I quickly got to the bottom of one mystery: she’s from Bamberg, Germany, not ‘Eastern Europe somewhere’. A trained psychologist, Badke-Schaub came to Delft in 2004 from Bamberg University’s Theoretical Institute of Psychology.
“My main interest is in analyzing human behavior, especially in dealing with complex problems,” she says of her academic pursuits. “As design always has to do with complex problem solving, it was clear that I would eventually do something with designers.”
Despite having been exposed to design processes through working with engineers over many years, the transition hasn’t been all plain sailing. “Some colleagues have problems with me teaching design without being a designer myself,” she concedes, “but if you look at design departments inside companies nowadays, you will always find multi-disciplinarity.”
Of all the design departments in all the world, why did she choose TU Delft? “This chair nicely connects theory and practice, linking psychology to real design applications,” Badke-Schaub says. “Also, ‘Methods and Methodology’ is a topic very close to my research.”
Human nature
As an expert in human behavior, Badke-Schaub identifies ways of thinking that can lead to better design ideas, as well as those that hamper creativity. One interesting example of this is that a ‘common sense’ approach isn’t really the best way to solve design problems.
The situations we encounter in our day-to-day lives usually have outcomes we can easily predict. However, when we encounter complex problems, simply using ‘common sense’ is likely to fail. Badke-Schaub explains: “Human nature dictates that you try to behave with the first set of actions that you think might be useful and that come easily to your mind. But often these complex problems aren’t as they seem. They might have some complications in terms of uncertainties or misinformation that you cannot predict.”
Put bluntly, our natural response to a complex problem is irrational. The rational mind would first analyze the problem in depth, trying to identify these complications before taking any irreversible action. However, it’s hardly surprising that such a reasoned approach doesn’t come naturally to us humans.
“In evolutionary terms, we had to react quickly when faced with dangerous predators, so we developed the fight or flight response,” Badke-Schaub says. “We have hard-wired behavioral patterns suited to our everyday problems, because if we had to analyze every single problem in detail, we wouldn’t be able to act.”
Badke-Schaub cites historical examples of successful designers, from DaVinci to the Wright Brothers, who were naturally able to properly analyze complex problems, yet lived in a time when design theory didn’t exist and simply had an innate talent to design well. So, perhaps great designers are born, not made? Badke-Schaub disagrees: “When you’re born, you can’t ride a bike, you learn it, so why shouldn’t you learn problem-solving? We learn many things during our lives. Our aim is to support designers in designing, so that they can use their abilities and capabilities to produce the best product.”
Make changes
There is however evidence of irrational approaches to problem solving all around us. Badke-Schaub is skeptical of the ‘change mentality’ that preoccupies many organizations. “There’s currently a big interest in changes at TU Delft,” she states. “Of course, changes are often necessary, but if there are too many changes at one time, this might cause uncertainty, which often leads to demotivation.”
Once again, considered rational analysis is the cure for this epidemic. “There’s an assumption that changes always bring progress and better results,” she continues. “So, if our output is dropping, make changes. But sometimes it’s better to find out what the reasons are and then think of possible appropriate changes.”
Badke-Schaub is philosophical about the allegation that ‘Methods and Methodology’ is a boring subject. “It’s ironic,” she says, laughing, “because we had one assignment in which students interviewed designers from different fields, and when these designers were asked if they used methods, most replied that they didn’t. But when our students had them describe exactly how they worked, it was clear that many designers followed pre-defined structures. The students therefore saw the relevance of the subject for themselves.”
Badke-Schaub admits that methodology isn’t a discipline welcomed by most students: “Designers want to be creative and seem to think that methods prevent them from being creative.” Using methodologies however is an integral part of designing. “It’s important that students open their minds to these ideas,” she continues. “Nothing in methodology prevents you from being creative; they can be brought together . and in fact they really need each other . but there’s still a ways to go to convince people of that!”
Petra Badke-Schaub. (Photo: Sam Rentmeester/FMAX)
Comments are closed.