We have been interested in three distinct areas of scientific research for integration and testing using design practices:

• idea generation
• team science/collaboration practice
• problem solving and reframing

IDEA GENERATION

Where do new and innovative research ideas come from?  

This marks a critical junction that determines whether a research agenda will be radical or incremental.  What can be learned by comparing the way designers and scientists come up with new ideas?  We are interested in prototyping how Design Thinking Paradigms (DTPs) can be used by scientific research teams during Project Ideation.  Our aim is to identify and test science scenarios that integrate design approaches and to analyze how scientific directions and outcomes are impacted as a result.

Team Collaboration

How do we build stronger capacity for sharing and integrating deep expertise across scientific and other disciplines? 

Translational research requires an interdisciplinary, team-based
approach – this is not only limited to combining data and
knowledge, but also requires a careful integration of
expertise, methodology, practice, culture, and ultimately
team cohesion.  A recent report by the National Academy of Sciences outlined the unique challenges associated with developing and managing scientific research teams. Reference

At the Center for Design Research, there is recognition that design is a team sport and is socio-technical process.  Socio-technical process means that behavioral interactions amongst team members are one of the strongest predictors of team performance as measured by technical innovation and outcomes. A similar study done at Google on its product design teams drew similar conclusions. Reference

In science teams, I've often observed that we are very good at putting interdisciplinary teams together on paper to meet the scientific needs of a question, but we often find that the outcomes are less than realized.  The reasons for this vary, and many of the special challenges related to team science have been articulated by the science of team science academic community.  

A socio-technical lense can be a useful perspective for building and evaluating scientific teams and I believe that design practices and tools can also be part of the solution in team science.  

Approaches to Solving Complex Research Problems

What research challenges require radically different ways of thinking?

By definition, these are long-standing challenges where existing approaches are not yielding enough impact.  

In creating new discoveries, scientific research builds off of existing knowledge (conventionality).  In doing so, we also inherit the biases and assumptions that come with accepting that knowledge as foundational.  In that way, science can be prone to idea fixation, or relying too heavily on tools and disciplinary approaches that have worked in the past but might not be the best approach when moving forward. When should we challenge these biases? And how do we overcome them?

One of the features of design practice that I’m really intrigued by is Framing.  Framing and Reframing are fundamental concepts used in design (more on Framing in a separate post) and has been particularly useful in tackling complex social problems. These are problems where existing solutions have failed because the problem is seen as "fixed".  What’s fascinating to me is that designers have structured ways of approaching the Reframing process like Kees Dorst's work on Frame Innovation.  We are exploring how this approach can be used for the toughest challenges in science like the drug discovery pipeline.

By the way:  yes, Reframing does happen in scientific research including basic science.  An elegant example of this is FoldIt.  More on that in another post.