Comments on: Interpretive Management http://kipthinks.com/2008/04/interpretive-management/ a place of reflection and inquiry during my doctoral studies Sat, 08 Jan 2011 16:55:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Notes To Myself | kipum lee | kipthinks.com http://kipthinks.com/2008/04/interpretive-management/comment-page-1/#comment-220 Notes To Myself | kipum lee | kipthinks.com Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:43:28 +0000 http://kipthinks.com/?p=12#comment-220 [...] 2. “Participatory Design” and “Experience Prototyping” are attitudinal rather than procedural/prescriptive methods [by Forlizzi]. Probably the same way “attitude” is used by Boland & Collopy when they describe design attitude v. decision attitude in Managing as Designing [see previous post] [...] [...] 2. “Participatory Design” and “Experience Prototyping” are attitudinal rather than procedural/prescriptive methods [by Forlizzi]. Probably the same way “attitude” is used by Boland & Collopy when they describe design attitude v. decision attitude in Managing as Designing [see previous post] [...]

]]> By: Kyle http://kipthinks.com/2008/04/interpretive-management/comment-page-1/#comment-22 Kyle Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:02:53 +0000 http://kipthinks.com/?p=12#comment-22 I'd say that the nature of conversation is one of productive tension. As such, this can occur within your head if you are wrestling with the tension of two ideas, but it is more likely to occur between two or more individuals with different viewpoints. Many exchanges that we consider conversations actually present no conflict or disagreement between the parties involved. But when a conversation begins with a disagreement and works through that tension to a resolution which includes aspects of both sides in a new relationship it feels like magic. I think we experience this a lot in design grad school. People with strong but different opinions are placed on a team and asked to solve some sort of ambiguous and huge wicked problem, in a semester. There are so many points of tension in that situation resulting in the long crazy discussions. I think maintaining a team and an environment which can support this type of stuff in the business world is incredibly difficult, but doable if you can get people to trust you when things are super-fuzzy and vague on the front end. I’d say that the nature of conversation is one of productive tension. As such, this can occur within your head if you are wrestling with the tension of two ideas, but it is more likely to occur between two or more individuals with different viewpoints.

Many exchanges that we consider conversations actually present no conflict or disagreement between the parties involved. But when a conversation begins with a disagreement and works through that tension to a resolution which includes aspects of both sides in a new relationship it feels like magic.

I think we experience this a lot in design grad school. People with strong but different opinions are placed on a team and asked to solve some sort of ambiguous and huge wicked problem, in a semester. There are so many points of tension in that situation resulting in the long crazy discussions. I think maintaining a team and an environment which can support this type of stuff in the business world is incredibly difficult, but doable if you can get people to trust you when things are super-fuzzy and vague on the front end.

]]>