A design is a plan or specification for the construction of an object or system or for the

implementation of an activity or process, or the result of that plan or specification in the form of a
prototype, product or process. The verb to design expresses the process of developing a
design. In some cases, the direct construction of an object without an explicit prior plan (such as
in craftwork, some engineering, coding, and graphic design) may also be considered to be a
design activity. The design usually has to satisfy certain goals and constraints, may take into
account aesthetic, functional, economic, or socio-political considerations, and is expected to
interact with a certain environment. Major examples of designs include architectural blueprints,
engineering drawings, business processes, circuit diagrams, and sewing patterns.[1]

The person who produces a design is called a designer, which is a term generally used for
people who work professionally in one of the various design areas—usually specifying which
area is being dealt with (such as a fashion designer, product designer, web designer or interior
designer), but also others such as architects and engineers. A designer's sequence of activities
is called a design process, possibly using design methods. The process of creating a design
can be brief (a quick sketch) or lengthy and complicated, involving considerable research,
negotiation, reflection, modeling, interactive adjustment and re-design.

Contents
1 Design as a process
1.1 The rational model
1.1.1 Example sequence of stages
1.1.2 Criticism of the rational model
1.2 The action-centric model
1.2.1 Descriptions of design activities
2 Philosophies of design
2.1 Approaches to design
3 Types
3.1 Design and art
3.2 Design and engineering
3.3 Design and production
3.4 Process design
4 Design disciplines
5 See also
6 References
7 Bibliography
Design as a process
Substantial disagreement exists concerning how designers in many fields, whether amateur or
professional, alone or in teams, produce designs.[2] Kees Dorst and Judith Dijkhuis, both
designers themselves, argued that "there are many ways of describing design processes" and
discussed "two basic and fundamentally different ways",[3] both of which have several names.
The prevailing view has been called "the rational model",[4] "technical problem solving"[5] and
"the reason-centric perspective".[6] The alternative view has been called "reflection-in-action",[5]
"co-evolution",[7] and "the action-centric perspective".[6]

The rational model

The rational model was independently developed by Herbert A. Simon,[8][9] an American
scientist, and two German engineering design theorists, Gerhard Pahl and Wolfgang Beitz.[10]
It posits that:

Designers attempt to optimize a design candidate for known constraints and objectives.
The design process is plan-driven.
The design process is understood in terms of a discrete sequence of stages.
The rational model is based on a rationalist philosophy[4] and underlies the waterfall model,[11]
systems development life cycle,[12] and much of the engineering design literature.[13]
According to the rationalist philosophy, design is informed by research and knowledge in a
predictable and controlled manner.

Example sequence of stages

Typical stages consistent with the rational model include the following:

Pre-production design
Design brief or Parti pris – an early (often the beginning) statement of design goals
Analysis – analysis of current design goals
Research – investigating similar design solutions in the field or related topics
Specification – specifying requirements of a design solution for a product (product design
specification)[14] or service.
Problem solving – conceptualizing and documenting design solutions
Presentation – presenting design solutions
Design during production
Development – continuation and improvement of a designed solution
Testing – in situ testing of a designed solution
Post-production design feedback for future designs
Implementation – introducing the designed solution into the environment
Evaluation and conclusion – summary of process and results, including constructive criticism
and suggestions for future improvements
Redesign – any or all stages in the design process repeated (with corrections made) at any time
before, during, or after production.
Each stage has many associated best practices.[15]

Criticism of the rational model

The rational model has been widely criticized on two primary grounds:

Designers do not work this way – extensive empirical evidence has demonstrated that
designers do not act as the rational model suggests.[5][6][16]
Unrealistic assumptions – goals are often unknown when a design project begins, and the
requirements and constraints continue to change.[4][17]
The action-centric model
The action-centric perspective is a label given to a collection of interrelated concepts, which are
antithetical to the rational model.[6] It posits that:

Designers use creativity and emotion to generate design candidates.

The design process is improvised.
No universal sequence of stages is apparent – analysis, design and implementation are
contemporary and inextricably linked.[6]
The action-centric perspective is based on an empiricist philosophy and broadly consistent with
the agile approach[18] and a methodical development.[19] Substantial empirical evidence
supports the veracity of this perspective in describing the actions of real designers.[16] Like the
rational model, the action-centric model sees design as informed by research and knowledge.
However, research and knowledge are brought into the design process through the judgment
and common sense of designers – by designers "thinking on their feet" – more than through the
predictable and controlled process stipulated by the rational model.

Descriptions of design activities

At least two views of design activity are consistent with the action-centric perspective. Both
involve three basic activities.

In the reflection-in-action paradigm, designers alternate between "framing", "making moves",

and "evaluating moves". "Framing" refers to conceptualizing the problem, i.e., defining goals
and objectives. A "move" is a tentative design decision. The evaluation process may lead to
further moves in the design.[5]

In the sensemaking–coevolution–implementation framework, designers alternate between its

three titular activities. Sensemaking includes both framing and evaluating moves.
Implementation is the process of constructing the design object. Coevolution is "the process
where the design agent simultaneously refines its mental picture of the design object based on
its mental picture of the context, and vice versa".[6]

The concept of the design cycle is understood as a circular time structure,[20] which may start
with the thinking of an idea, then expressing it by the use of visual or verbal means of
communication (design tools), the sharing and perceiving of the expressed idea, and finally
starting a new cycle with the critical rethinking of the perceived idea. Anderson points out that
this concept emphasizes the importance of the means of expression, which at the same time
are means of perception of any design ideas.[21]

Philosophies of design
Philosophy of design is the study of definitions of design, and the assumptions, foundations, and
implications of design. There are also countless informal or personal philosophies for guiding
design as design values and its accompanying aspects within modern design vary, both
between different schools of thought[which?] and among practicing designers.[22] Design
philosophies are usually for determining design goals. In this sense, design philosophies are
fundamental guiding principles that dictate how a designer approaches his/her practice.
Reflections on material culture and environmental concerns (sustainable design) can guide a
design philosophy. An example is the First Things First manifesto which was launched within
the graphic design community and states "We propose a reversal of priorities in favor of more
useful, lasting and democratic forms of communication – a mindshift away from product
marketing and toward the exploration and production of a new kind of meaning. The scope of
debate is shrinking; it must expand. Consumerism is running uncontested, and it must be
challenged by other perspectives expressed, in part, through the visual languages and
resources of design."[23]

Approaches to design
A design approach is a general philosophy that may or may not include a guide for specific
methods. Some are to guide the overall goal of the design. Other approaches are to guide the
tendencies of the designer.

Some of these approaches include:

Sociotechnical system design, a philosophy and tools for participative designing of work
arrangements and supporting processes – for organizational purpose, quality, safety,
economics and customer requirements in core work processes, the quality of peoples
experience at work and the needs of society
User-centered design, which focuses on the needs, wants, and limitations of the end user of the
designed artifact.
Critical design uses designed artifacts as an embodied critique or commentary on existing
values, morals, and practices in a culture.
Service design designing or organizing the experience around a product and the service
associated with a product's use.
Transgenerational design, the practice of making products and environments compatible with
those physical and sensory impairments associated with human aging and which limit major
activities of daily living.
Participatory Design (originally co-operative design, now often co-design) is the practice of
collective creativity to design, attempting to actively involve all stakeholders (e.g. employees,
partners, customers, citizens, end users) in the design process to help ensure the result meets
their needs and is usable. Participatory design is an approach which is focused on processes
and procedures of design and is not a design style[24]
Types
Design can broadly be applied to various fields such as art, engineering and production.

The new terminal at Barajas airport in Madrid, Spain

Design and art
Today, the term design is generally used for what was formerly called the applied arts. The new
term, for a very old thing, was perhaps initiated by Raymond Loewy and teachings at the
Bauhaus and Ulm School of Design in Germany during the 20th century.

The boundaries between art and design are blurred, largely due to a range of applications both
for the term 'art' and the term 'design'. Applied arts can include industrial design, graphic design,
fashion design, and the decorative arts which traditionally includes craft objects. In graphic arts
(2D image making that ranges from photography to illustration), the distinction is often made
between fine art and commercial art, based on the context within which the work is produced
and how it is traded.

Some methods for creating work, such as employing intuition, are shared across the disciplines
within the applied arts and fine art. Mark Getlein, writer, suggests the principles of design are
"almost instinctive", "built-in", "natural", and part of "our sense of 'rightness'."[25] However, the
intended application and context of the resulting works will vary greatly.

A drawing for a booster engine for steam locomotives. Engineering is applied to design, with
emphasis on function and the utilization of mathematics and science.
Design and engineering
In engineering, design is a component of the process. Many overlapping methods and
processes can be seen when comparing Product design, Industrial design and Engineering. The
American Heritage Dictionary defines design as: "To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent,"
and "To formulate a plan", and defines engineering as: "The application of scientific and
mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of
efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.".[26][27] Both are
forms of problem-solving with a defined distinction being the application of "scientific and
mathematical principles". The increasingly scientific focus of engineering in practice, however,
has raised the importance of more new "human-centered" fields of design.[28] How much
science is applied in a design is a question of what is considered "science". Along with the
question of what is considered science, there is social science versus natural science. Scientists
at Xerox PARC made the distinction of design versus engineering at "moving minds" versus
"moving atoms" (probably in contradiction to the origin of term "engineering – engineer" from
Latin "in genio" in meaning of a "genius" what assumes existence of a "mind" not of an "atom").

Jonathan Ive has received several awards for his design of Apple Inc. products like this
MacBook. In some design fields, personal computers are also used for both design and
production
Design and production