Accretion theory of ideation: evaluation regimes for ideation stages

Abstract

This paper presents an exercise on theory building to characterise design ideation. It starts by examining how early ideas are defined and evaluated in the literature. An essentialist view is identified that explains the creativity of a final design solution by the creative qualities of early ideas attributed by external judges. Criteria for a theory of ideation that does not rely on the primacy of essence are enumerated. Advanced professional practice is examined to understand evaluation of early ideas ‘in the wild’. Accretion is then introduced as an analogical model to imaginatively drive definitions and conjectures about idea formation in the co-evolution of problem and design spaces. Vignettes from ideation episodes are used to illustrate an accretion theory of ideation. An accretion theory supports new ways to think about ideation as a complex formation process where creative solutions emerge from the synthesis of a multitude of fragmentary and partial ideas – or ‘ideasimals’. An accretion theory of ideation helps to explain the creative value of a final design solution without relying on early ideas having a creative essence, because the creativity of a solution is viewed as emergent rather than present in early versions. An accretion lens is used to suggest new ideation metrics to study the qualities of idea fragments and the process of idea formation. Definitions and relevant assessment regimes for different stages of ideation are discussed. The paper concludes with a discussion on entailments of an accretion theory and next steps for this theory building enterprise.

Virtual Reality design-build-test games with physics simulation: opportunities for researching design cognition

“…Case studies typically involve more naturalistic observations of designers engaging with their design activities, often in commercial projects. In these studies, researchers record the progress and development of design activities, by some combination of direct observation, document analysis and participant interviews (e.g., see Crilly, 2019a;Crilly & Moroşanu Firth, 2019;Cross, 2001;Jonson, 2005;Sosa, 2019;Yilmaz & Seifert, 2011).…”

Retrospective and Prospective of The study of Design Creativity: 80 Years into the Past and the Future

“…What counts is the final outcome of a design project, and not their first half-baked sketchy concept produced in a short ideation session and vaguely interpreted by a panel of judges. This suggests that portraying creative designing as a process of sampling a design space until one great idea is found may be ill-informed; instead, creative designing may better be conceived as an extended combinatorial process where multiple combinations of fragmentary ideas are "sceptically entertained" until a great idea is formed (Sosa, 2019). 4.…”

“…Studies of design creativity need to spell out a theoretically sound definition of design ideas and their genesis or formation process. Depending on the duration of the study, design ideas could be defined by their stage of development (Sosa, 2019). 7.…”

Nominal Groups? Ok Boomer! A future-oriented agenda for brainstorming studies

“…The choice of research methodologies can expand the current focus on average outcomes and representative samples in the pursuit of generalisation, to pay attention to exceptional conditions and extreme outcomes in the pursuit of qualitative insights and contextualised heuristics. • The ways in which ideas are defined and evaluated deserve closer attention, especially since they tend to be implicitly and ad-hoc designated across ideation studies (Sosa, 2018;Sosa, 2019a). The effects of evaluation on the nature of findings deserve more careful scrutiny (Weisskopf-Joelson and Eliseo, 1961;Linsey, Clauss et al, 2011).…”

“…Whilst widely used in design practice (Elsbach and Flynn, 2013;Shroyer, Lovins et al, 2018), some critics discredit brainstorming citing studies that claim that, compared to individuals generating ideas in isolation (called nominal groups), group brainstorming generates fewer ideas and of lower quality on average in the same length of time. Notwithstanding the conceptual and methodological complexities of defining and evaluating early ideas (Sosa, 2019a), we critically interrogate here the use of so-called nominal groups in studies of group ideation performance. In this paper we go back to the primary sources to critically examine the study of brainstorming and to sketch pedagogical and research paths for future work.…”