Design Research: Off the Rails or on the Right Track?

Abstract

If research findings remain unknown, they are unlikely to improve design processes and outcomes. While design scholars have lamented the lack of research utilization by practitioners, some designers have derided their efforts. While scholars have outlined strategies to decrease the research utilization gap, these are largely one‐sided suggestions and have lacked widespread implementation and testing. As such, a great deal of information likely remains out of the hands of those who could use it when making decisions that have real‐world implications. To determine a common understanding and collective direction surrounding design research utilization, this article synthesizes existing literature from social science, business, and information management, along with relevant findings from two national surveys. Using this evidence, this article proposes a model framed by economics and aimed at decreasing the research utilization gap prevalent in design. It calls for action on the part of both research producers and consumers and highlights specific issues, including topic selection, information translation, dissemination efforts, increasing awareness, value identification, and factors of action. The goal is for all parts of the design community to share in the responsibility for informing each other, thus growing our collective knowledge.

Exploring Interior Designers’ Research Utilization Strategies and Information–Seeking Behaviors

“…Given that the rate of change is seemingly more pronounced in recent years, problems surrounding the use of research may be even more prevalent today. While design discourse continues to emphasize the role of research and information in improving project outcomes (Bosch & Nanda, ; McCuskey Shepley & Danko, ; Whitemyer, ), promoting design innovation (Gensler, ; HKS, ; Perkins & Will, ), and enhancing a firm's competitive stance (Davis, ), evidence suggests a persistent and pervasive gap between scholarly research and the expectations of design practitioners (Huber, ; Martin, ; Sommer, ). Farbstein and Kantrowitz () suggested that this was due to traditional design research being “divorced (in time and persona)” from design decision‐making (p. 298).…”

“…While the design industry is not alone in facing the research utilization gap, it does face a particular set of regulatory and economic conditions that can make the rift particularly pervasive and persistent. First, interior environments are not patented, nor is a designer's process trademarked; thus, the design industry lacks many of the incentives and protections offered by intellectual property laws (Huber, ; Whitemyer, ). Second, research funding in both public and private sectors is relatively limited.…”

“…As postoccupancy evaluations inherently involve the study of contracted deliverables (i.e. design solutions that have been purchased by clients), the project's shortcomings or any other revealing findings may go unshared for fear of damaging a firm's reputation (Huber, ). So, while designers and their firms strive to promote their expertise and the value of their evidence‐based practices, these advantages often stem from proprietary, in‐house pursuits.…”

“…A case in point, Hill, Hedge, and Matthew's () survey of 130 interior designers found that designers were prone to levels of exhaustion and cynicism with rates similar to or above traditional burnout‐prone jobs such as nursing. Designers’ stressors may be a contributing factor to the findings of Martin (), who found that interior designers often had misconceptions surrounding research quality, and Huber (), who found that their research utilization practices were often cursory in nature. Consequently, studies suggest that interior designers rarely refer to scholarly journals, with Dickson and White () finding that 33% did so, and Huber's finding that only 12% would say the same two decades later ().…”

“…The premise of the demand‐sid e is to acknowledge the realities of current practitioners who “consume” research findings. It calls for more knowledge regarding how designers come to be aware of, value, and act upon scholarly research (Huber, ).…”