Reflections / Blog

I am now for the second-to-last time announcing a new website for my self and all the stuff I do. I will launch the new site by the end of this month - so stay tuned. The last announcement will include the new URL as well as my new company name. I have been doing a little undercover consulting, which I will also talk a little more about in the new site....

The new site will contain all the stuff that have been available here on MVL.dk. mvl.dk will stay in function, but mainly as a mail-box for all the good people who have an mvl.dk-mail. 

Participate: 0 Comments

The Danish newspaper 'Politiken' is today printing a letter from me in the Op-Ed or Debate section. The letter is about web2.0 and i have tried to explain some of the basic changes that web2.0 brings to the stage of Public Relations like openness, transparency as a way to public support and trust.

The background for the article is the story of Michael Rasmussen the Danish cyclist who was kicked out of the Tour de France last month by his own team Rabobank. if you followed the race you know what I am talking about, and I you didn't the short explanation is that Michael Rasmussen was not found to be using doping like some of his competitors but since he was unable to unquestionably account for where he had been before the Tour, there was no trust in the public that he was playing ‘clean' and there was no trust in the professional field or in his team-management. The result is that what looked like a certain win became a complete crash, maybe even for Rasmussen's career.

My suggestion was then to change the name of the game and use a web2.0 strategy to rebuild trust and support from the public. If Rasmussen would share everything about his everyday life with the public in e.g. a blog, then we would all know that he is a good guy competing without doping. A lot of the problems for professional cycling right now is that the public does not trust them to compete fairly - without doping - and there is a code of secrecy within the field that enhances this distrust. But the vicious cycle of distrust can easily be broken by an overly generous view into the world. The barrier of closeness should be broken down and replaced by total transparency.

This same strategy goes for a much wider industry too. In the old days it was important to guard your secrets since they could be seen a weapons in the fight with your opponents. Today it is important to share what you know with the entire field of business because this is the best way to participate at the top of the game - and show that you are able to participate at the top. Furthermore it is also the best way we can evolve and survive as a collective field. Sharing the most knowledge gets us closer to the best solutions!

Read the article in today's paper (Saturday 04 August 2007) or the translated version after the ‘read more'

Read more

Participate: 1 Comments

As I am starting as a designer at the design consultancy 3Part I have to redefine the role and function of MVL. And blogging is about openness, and openess is also about talking about complex stuff.

I am integrating as much as possible of my work in MVL into 3Part and all future projects and ongoing ideas that I have been developing in my network will be handled within the context of 3Part. 

So MVL becomes the base of my personal development of design thinking and the conceptual 'penthouse' or superstructure on top of my professional design work.

I have been asked to do lectures and maybe contribute to a few books on design thinking, and I am trying to get a publisher to go into a few books projects that I am proposing:

• A book on 'Designing Social Interaction' with the frameworks and experiences from my PhD research
• A book on Design Research and in particular 'research-through-design' which is a relatively new concept that could need a good, defining anthology for future reference or the developing field of design research
• Finally I am working on a book proposal on 'Integrating Design' - a perspective on how to see the different types of thinking in design as part of the same field

So MVL is now my personal think tank devoted to development of thoughts on design.

Following Buchanans four levels or placements of design you could say that I work in professional design a little with ‘symbols’ (graphic design) more with ‘things’ (product design) a lot with ‘actions’ (interaction design). And then in MVL I work with and develop ‘thought’ (systems design). This last placement is the most complex aspect of design and to me an integral part of how I explore and develop personally as a designer.

Participate: 0 Comments

I was amazed coming to the Reboot 9.0in Copenhagen. I was like when i first stumpeled upon a group of interaction designers, the same kind of kindred spirit that you just know is present when a lot of people how are deeply engaged in largely the same kind of mission.

And people at Reboot seemed to be on a mission. The focus was on Social web and web 2.0 and what the current revolution is doing to our basic concept of being HUMAN.

I was invited by George Pór to help him develop and give a talk on Boosting our collective intelligence - developed to its final form with Yann Mauchamp too. To us designing for 'boosting' our collective intelligence means to be very conscious of how we are creating and facilitating social interaction to reach a peak collaboration. Our points were pretty well received and we are working now to make them shaper for next time.

To me collective intelligence is really at the root of what I am doing with Social Design and User Experience. I think that we are drawn towards these situations of increased capacity through collaboration as a natural drive. Collective intelligence is a complex issue to unfold and explore, and George Pór has been a thought leader on the subject for a quarter of a century. It is incredibly interesting to be able to collaborate with him and Yann in moving the edge of the concept as best we can. 

Image by Holger

Participate: 0 Comments

As a member of the Danish Designer’s Organization I was invited to a workshop on innovation in the public sector hosted by The Innovation Council and the Think Tank House of Monday Morning . This was an interesting opportunity to take a look at how the ‘innovation business’ is working and to network.

However the way innovation was discussed was more like a tapable resource than an attitude or activity. Innovation was not seen as a scarce resource as people working in different public organizations deliver many different ideas for innovations at a many different levels. As a union representative stated ‘innovation on the floor can be a new ideas of where to place the buckets for cleaning the floor’ and surely this type of employee-oriented innovation is both relevant to focus on and able to save money in production costs. On the other end of the scale SKAT – our IRS – has created web-based services that make it so much easier to pay your taxes (with a smile). The newest example of IRS innovation is their new office in Second Life. (It would truly be a great innovation if the Danish IRS is able to get everyone in SL to pay our modest Danish taxes.)

So INNOVATION takes place at all levels. The problem seems to be managerial – how is the innovative process supported, encouraged, filtered, sustained etc.? .

Read more

Participate: 0 Comments