The Structure of Design Revolutions: Kuhnian Paradigm Shifts in Creative Problem Solving

Abstract

Introduction Researchers interested in understanding creative design have studied the genesis, development, and implementation of new ideas in design projects. The findings from such studies can be divided into those that emphasize the sudden emergence of new ideas, and those that emphasize how new ideas are gradually built upon those that precede them. In this article, a unification of these different perspectives is proposed by describing a general structure of creative design progress that accounts for both cumulative and disruptive episodes. This description is based on Thomas S. Kuhn’s book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,2 an historically informed account of scientific progress in which we can find many parallels with observed phenomena in creative design.3 It is argued that viewing creative design episodes through a Kuhnian lens yields two distinct benefits: first, it can sensitize researchers to the existence of phenomena that are not emphasized by existing accounts; and second, it can sensitize designers to the nature and dynamics of creative progress, and thereby aid reflective practice. Creativity and design are topics that are studied from a variety of perspectives, and before proceeding further it is worth clarifying our particular frame of reference and the scope of the arguments we will explore. First, because our interest is in design rather than technology, emphasis is placed on the activities that occur within particular design projects rather than historical design developments across different product generations.4 We are also only interested here in the structure of creative progress, and not in assessing the degree of creativity attained or in the efficacy of creative methods.5 It follows that our focus is on descriptive accounts of creative design as it occurs, rather than normative models of design as it should be.6 Finally, we shall be restricted to considering the production and acceptance of ideas that are somehow new to the individuals and groups involved in a design project; we are unconcerned with whether such ideas are also new to the world because it is psychological rather than historical phenomena that are Acknowledgment The author wishes to thank Professor Simon Schaffer from the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge for his guidance on matters of Kuhn scholarship.