A3NickHughesJoeMcCabe

A3NickHughesJoeMcCabe

To Do

1. try to explore the web to get an idea
   • who Herbert Simon was
   • what Simon's book is all about (one summary about this book can be found: http://www.cyberiapc.com/writings/almossawi_2005_2.pdf)
2. which was the most interesting idea/concept you learned from the article?
3. articulate what you did not understand in the article but it sounded interesting and you would like to know more about it
4. discuss what the following statement means to your group:
   • Simon discussed social plans and policies as designs. He considered the Marshall Plan and the U.S. Constitution as specifications for organizational designs. These designs are not mere blueprints, as are some of the key examples elsewhere in the book (clocks and houses), but starting points for living systems that grow and evolve over time- systems whose structure and consequences cannot be anticipated at the time of their design.
5. discuss what the following statement means to your group in relationship to the problems which we explored in the last few class meetings (Number Scrabble versus Tic-Tac-Toe; Mutilated 8x8 Matrix; Mutilated Chessboard):
   • Intelligibility of Design Representations - Meaningful user participation in design requires that the discourse constituting the design work be accessible to all stakeholders.

Group Members

Nick Hughes and Joe McCabe

1. Who was Herbert Simon

2. Most interesting idea/concept you learned from the article?

3. What did you not understand.

4. First Discussion

Design as a starting point for an ever evolving system is an interesting idea. This concept rejects the idea of "fixed goals" and anticipates social change which may or may not have a large impact on the design. Simon, the author of the book that the essay is focusing on states very clearly that it is not important whether or not the design turns out as originally intended, and that the end result should be arrived at by constantly adapting and being receptive to social needs and interests. On the other hand, he doesn't mention any trade off to having this freedom and unlimited ability to modify a design. It may be that the designer is unable to frame a problem because the scope is too large, or that the original problem remains unresolved as a result of several misguided tangents that happen during the design process. In other words, if a designer is commissioned to create a specific thing, they may think they are responding to the social needs of the people getting use out of that thing, when in the end their object does not even fulfill the main goal.

5. Second Discussion

My interpretation of that quote is that any meaningful discussion or communication regarding a design requires that all users are given equal access to the same information. When our class was given different problems to solve, most people came up with their own unique solutions to the problems, even though they were given the same information. Had one person been given a different set of criteria they would have had different variables to deal with and would arrive at a different conclusion. Through our conversation in class we were able to explore the idea of creativity and discuss as a group, which may or may not be considered a meaningful amount of participation. What I think Simon is arguing is that if meaningful participation is the goal, then all of the information related to the design has to be accessible to those involved.