Page 206 -
P. 206

6.3  Some practical issues  1 75


                            So although creativity and invention are often wrapped in mystique, we do un-
                        derstand something of  the process and of how creativity can be enhanced  or in-
                        spired.  We know, for instance, that  browsing a collection of  designs will inspire
                        designers to consider alternative perspectives, and hence alternative solutions. The
                        field of  case-based reasoning (Maher and Pu, 1997) emerged from the observation
                        that designers solve new problems by drawing on knowledge gained from solving
                        previous similar problems. As Schank (1982; p. 22) puts it, "An expert is someone
                        who gets reminded of  just the right prior experience to help him in processing his
                        current experiences." And while those experiences may be the designer's own, they
                        can equally well be others'.
                            A more pragmatic answer to this question, then, is that alternatives come from
                        looking at other, similar designs, and the process of  inspiration and creativity can
                        be enhanced by prompting a designer's own experience and by looking at others'
                        ideas and  solutions. Deliberately  seeking out suitable sources of  inspiration is a
                        valuable step in  any design process. These sources may  be very close to the in-
                        tended new product, such as competitors' products, or they may be earlier versions
                        of similar systems, or something completely different.



                          nsider again the calendar system introduced  at the beginning of  the chapter. Reflecting
                           the process again, what do you think inspired your outline design? See if you can identify
                        any elements within it that you believe are truly innovative.

          Comment       For my design, I haven't  seen an electronic calendar, although I have seen plenty of  other
                        software-based systems. My main sources of inspiration were my current paper-based books.
                          Some of  the things you might have been thinking of include  your existing paper-based
                        calendar, and other pieces of software you commonly use and find helpful or easy to use in
                        some way. Maybe you already have access to an electronic calendar, which will have given
                        you some ideas, too. However, there are probably other aspects that make the design some-
                        how unique to you and may be innovative to a greater or lesser degree.

                        All this having been said, under some circumstances the scope to consider alterna-
                        tive designs may be limited. Design is a process of  balancing constraints and con-
                        stantly trading off one set of  requirements with another, and the constraints may be
                        such that there are very few viable alternatives available. As another example, if
                        you are designing a software system to run under the Windows operating system,
                        then elements of  the design will be prescribed because you must conform to the
                        Windows "look and feel," and to other constraints intended to make Windows pro-
                        grams consistent for  the  user. We shall  return  to style guides and standards in
                        Chapter 8.
                            If  you are producing an upgrade to an existing system, then you may face other
                        constraints, such as wanting to keep the familiar elements of it and retain the same
                        "look and feel." However, this is not necessarily a rigid rule. Kent Sullivan reports
                        that when designing the Windows 95 operating system to replace the Windows 3.1
                        and Windows for  Workgroups 3.11 operating systems, they initially focused too
                        much on consistency with the earlier versions (Sullivan, 1996).
   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211