Twinity photos ahead of Thursday Phonic look at This City's Centre / 5 minutes dreaming

Here are some stills from Twinity

Later in the week some stills from actual Exeter. I think some people from Blind Ditch will be guests on the Wild Show this Thursday. If they are late I will just talk about my own walk around the sites where the video was located and finding the window frame in Sidwell street near the Odeon. You get a cup of tea and five minutes to think. then a short interview.

You do sign a release form on your words and image rights. I am not sure art projects have changed that much in relation to the public but time will tell. There was no problem around me taking a photograph of them. The real test will be when the production versions are on display in a gallery.

Chris Norton casual video on Design Science DJ planning meet #designscience

After the Wild Show this morning JD and I were planning a possible future show continuing to look into design science. We may get back to the design envelope from Gibson Burrell. A 3D diagram could take up the whole studio. This is where Chris gets a bit worried. He thinks he will be away one week and when he returns the ceiling will be gone. So we have not got him completely into the design conversation. But he will be checking out health and safety. On radio we just have to describe things and label the walls, floor etc. Nobody will actually have to climb a ladder as it moves about.

IPEX, Digital Printer, more calm disruption #mtw3 #mosocoop #oldsmooc

This post is about IPEX, the print show next expected in 2014. I have tagged in the title as print disruption relates to the design of online teaching and how to promote MoSO. Management Theory at Work can relate to universities as media organisations.

There have been various announcements previously but this week I got a copy of Digital Printer in print. there is a page about IPEX based on a talk with Trevor Crawford explaining the changes. Fewer days but aligned with the Cross Media event that also continues on an annual basis. There has been a major shifty in focus. There is even competitive talk about drupa, suggesting that drupa will not make a similar shift because of the influence of "large offset manufacturers".

Digital Printer is available online but in a magazine format that prevents copying out of text.

So I have turned to the official website

The conference will be about  ‘Strategies & Practices of Outstanding Leadership in the Challenging Business of Offline and Online Marketing’, "where thought leaders from within and surrounding the print industry will come together to address the big issues and opportunities they face." But this cannot start too soon. There is no reason to wait till next year. 

I notice the sources for the quotes on this page include Canon, Ricoh, Fuji and Screen. there are others but I am getting the impression that it is Japanese companies still on the project. Of course there are USA offers that people will try to follow even if they reduce their face to face existence in the UK. Long ago there would be stands ( booths ) at IPEX and drupa for Apple and Adobe. Maybe as at BETT some supporters could organise a space on the edge of ExCel where they could sneak in an update. 

Revised slides and handout for Design Science meeting on Friday #mtw3 #mosocoop #oldsmooc

I have updated the slides. Following discussion the quote about design science is chosen for clarity and also I have got one with just the key words to explain how design science fits with other sciences. I have taken out most of the long quotes to a sheet of paper.
Also there is an alternative  diagram for soft systems as I'm not sure of the scale that will work from a distance.

There is probably too much content now but maybe Quality Function Deployment could sort this out during the afternoon.

Quality theory as explanation, could a university be a case in system failure? #mosocoop #mtw3 #oldsmooc

This is way off at a tangent but the news this week so far is raising the question - Could the finances of UK universities be such that some sort of problem will appear? Yesterday there was a report from the IPPR 

Today there is a Guardian report that Ucas numbers on applications are not being released because of "potential volatility in supply and demand" . The report mentions some named universities where there may be problems.

There may be a chance here for a look at universities as organisations. So far theory about quality has been seen as largely outside the scope that academics are interested in to study. I may be out of date about this but I think books such as "Making Quality Critical" are still influential, especially with people working on management learning.

If UK universities need to move out of crisis it could open up a debate.

A few things strike me about both reports and the comments on the Guardian site. 

Sir Michael Barber is chief education adviser of  Pearson so may have his own interests. But I think Pearson has been engaged with digital over a long time period. Online is sometimes dismissed as commercial, but I think universities need to work on it in their own way.

Matt Robb, a consultant at Parthenon, predicts that some universities will sell off assets such as business schools to cover the shortfall in fees. This is obviously speculation. But how are business schools regarded? 

It seems to be the big cities that are mentioned as in trouble. Universities may have lost a local base as they relate to a global market.

An absence of numbers is not going to help much in the long run, but things could be more clear in a year or two. 

=============

Prof Paul O'Prey, vice-chancellor of Roehampton University, where home-student applications are up 27% this year after a dip in 2012, agrees that universities need to adapt to survive in the competitive new world of higher fees. "The ability to diversify and innovate is really important. We are widening our activities and developing new income streams. For example, we have gone into partnership with [private provider] Laureate to develop online courses, and partnered with a leading Swiss hospitality school to provide them with a London campus."

This is the only mention of "online" that I can find in the Guardian report.

Case for Design Science very clear in this article - Howard Davies Hong Kong #mtw3 #mosocoop #oldsmooc

I am still trying to find more through Google and blogs. Still almost nothing around the British Journal of Management, see previous post.

But I have found this

Improving the Relevance of Management Research: Evidence-Based Management: Design Science or Both?
Howard Davies
Faculty of Business, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

It is available for download and is very clear. It shows the background of concerns about relevance and the case for design science.

The starting point for the Design Science approach, which builds on Herbert Simon’s 1969 classic The Sciences of the Artificial, is the recognition that there are three different types of science. First, there are the Formal Sciences, Logic and Mathematics, which have no empirical content in themselves. Then come the Explanatory Sciences, whose purpose is to explain existing phenomena. In the physical sciences that includes Physics, Chemistry and Biology, and in the social sciences Economics, Sociology and Psychology. Then there are the Design Sciences, whose purpose is to design solutions to real world problems. These include Architecture, Engineering, Medicine, and Design itself, all of which are centrally concerned to produce artifacts which are new to the world and preferred to those currently in existence.
The distinction between Explanatory Science and Design Science has not generally been made clear in respect of management research, which has been based almost entirely on the explanatory social sciences.

This is slightly different to the distinction made by Hodgkinson and Starkey. They refer to "Simon’s differentiation of explanatory-based 
and prescriptive-based social sciences" (page 359) 

 I think this misses the scope of the danger for social science if design science is seen as defining the relevant from a practice point of view. There is a remark towards the end of the YouTube clip on Science 2 - the Design Science of Collaboration that implies social science is not always seen as contributing much.

I'm still looking for any blogs around the British Journal of Management articles. The publishing aspects are intriguing. If they do a freely available issue, why not do more publicity? If there is some comment, why wait three months to publish it? If the comments are behind a paywall, why not offer some clues or a shorter version somewhere else?

Now there is no university bookshop in Exeter I don't see any of the collections of readings that used to appear. On Design Science there could be a set of links for what can be found as open, and also what is only available through academic libraries. I suppose this could be on offer as a bundle with a specially costed day pass. Any suggestions welcome. 

QFD on slides for Deming, Sustainability, Design Science March 15th

I have been thinking about Quality Function Deployment as a tool to use in learning design and other situations. It could be an example of a link to make for people on the OLDS MOOC course and at the Deming SIG meeting next Friday.

I will be speaking after Alan Clark and Antony Upward have explained two approaches to sustainability. I think the links between Deming and design science will emerge during the afternoon. I will speak about design science in a bit more detail and hope to make a comparison with learning design.

So far I have two versions of slides, both improved by borrowing a couple of slides from Antony. So now there is a clear definition of design science and also a diagram of soft systems. I expect systems to be an aspect that interests the audience.

I don't have a full diagram but could start with four functions, two sets of conflict

The slides should include some definitive information
The slides should allow space for the group to develop a shared understanding
Not so many slides that it takes too much time, especially just before lunch
Enough slides to include as much info as might be asked for

So at this point I'd like some feedback. Any strong views on these four aspects?

I have two versions at the moment. The one with videos could work online for people who have time. I don't think there will be enough time next Friday.

 With video

<p  style=" margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block;">   Draft with video Design Science for Deming SIG by   </p>

without video

<p  style=" margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block;">   Draft updated Design Science for Deming SIG March 2013 (1) by   </p>

There are still some places available. Details on request. 

Free issue of British Journal of Management, relevance of design science #oldsmooc #mtw3 #mosocoop

I have been doing some more study of design science. I got so far online then realised I needed an academic library, and then discovered the main article was part of a special issue that is free online anyway. (It was worth the visit for the recent comments)

Not Simply Returning to the Same Answer Over and Over Again: Reframing Relevance (pages 355–369)
Gerard P. Hodgkinson and Ken Starkey
Article first published online: 19 AUG 2011

I found this through trying to find something on design science from a critique viewpoint. Hugh Wilmott has written a reply to this for the December 2012 issue and their is a reply to this also.

Reframing Relevance as ‘Social Usefulness’: A Comment on Hodgkinson and Starkey's ‘Not Simply Returning to the Same Answer Over and Over Again’ (pages 598–604)
Hugh Willmott
Article first published online: 10 AUG 2012

Extending the Foundations and Reach of Design Science: Further Reflections on the Role of Critical Realism (pages 605–610)
Gerard P. Hodgkinson and Ken Starkey
Article first published online: 31 OCT 2012 |

Hodgkinson and Starkey start with a summary of some history on relevance in previous articles. It turns out that "design science" is the latest description for making a link between theory and practice. More below on why I find it surprising it took me so long to find this.

Since you can find the original online anyway I am not going to repeat much from my notes. They refer to Pandza and Thorpe (2010) and a distinction between "explanatory based and prescriptive based social sciences". I think I come across a distinction between social science and design science, maybe this is from people more convinced about design science. This could be an issue for social science, if it is defined as not relevant to practice.

They accept much of the critique of business school content so far, remembering that Sir Fred Goodwin of the Royal Bank of Scotland was once presented as a "model of leadership". But they accept Senge being cited by AACSB as an example of well presented research. There is also a UK line on Senge as a fad for managers.

There are some remarks about journal publishing thatI'm not sure what to make of. Do French academics really have to publish in the USA "to prove they are world class"?

--------------

Hugh Wilmott approves the original article for proposing that business schools " become stronger schools of social science rather than pursuing a professional school idea." I'm not sure this was actually their balance but I will read it again later.

Wilmott points out that some design science is based on empirical realism, not critical realism as supported by Hodgkinson and Starkey. There are so many links for this to other articles that I can't get into this anytime soon. Comment welcome.

His concerns come across in this quote-
"It is high time to raise the sights of business schools beyond a myopic notion of 'relevance' fixated upon a narrow range of topics and perspectives that are considered important to (existing or aspiring) executives, or at least pose no threat to their worldview, to business school beneficiaries or to the students who aspire to become tomorrow's business leaders"

I don't think you have to get rid of relevance as part of this. Design might be part of making the case.

Wilmott also references Chris Grey who responded to an earlier article on relevance. Grey spoke at the first Management Theory at Work conference wher I first became aware of this discussion. As memory serves he argued that universities had a more secure role as critics rather than claiming to offer anything useful in practice. This went down well with the academics and the practice issues remain unresolved.

--------------

The reply from Hodgkinson and Starkey indicates where design science ideas could be refined since Simon's The Sciences of the Artificial in 1969. Simons early work could be seen as "narrowly positivist" and "we could have been more critical of Romme". They come back to Pandza and Thorpe and their description of design that is not determinist in intention. Path dependent and path creation approaches are possible. But from a quick look at their article these are derived from reading Simon's later work.I did not have enough time in the library to get into any detail. Pandza and Thorpe introduce a fair anmount of critique of design science even though Hodgkinson and Starkey credit them as a source. So again, comments and clues are welcome. There may be comparisons with Learning Design as discussed in the OLDS MOOC #oldsmooc

There is one remark -
"We remain concerned that too much critical management scholarship is preoccupied with deconstruction and critique."

Their conclusion is still supportive of design science, concentrating on the general "engineering problem of design - how to create organisations and systems of management and economy that are better fit for purpose than those we have currently."

Part of my interest is to understand quality management so "fit for purpose" suggests some common ground. #mosocoop

----------------

Whether the concern is critique or relevance or social usefulness I still find it starnge that I took so long to find this free issue of the British Journal of Management. I have been looking for anything about design science since reading Teaching as a design Science by Diana Laurillard, probably about six months ago. I search Google and Google blogsearch quite often. Is it possible that there are blog posts about the original article? If not, what is going on? Do the people who read this just naturally wait three months for the next issue to arrive? And if Wiley agrees there can be a free issue every so often, what is done to promote this? There may be some relevant content, but journal publishing is an issue in itself. 

Thanks of course to the librarians who helped me find the walk in PC and cope with the two sets of id and password.

---------------------

Here is a video found through the Leicester website as suggested by Hugh Wilmott. I am not suggesting this is a style he would approve. 33 views is not a lot over six months. Woulkd it be an idea to look at other ways to raise these issues on YouTube or would this be a dangerous turn to "performativity"?