What, if anything, can design bring to the solving of complex problems?

This is an open discussion for the community, based on a response to a Fast Company article (https://bit.ly/3lz8E9C) and a LinkedIn response thread (https://bit.ly/2YN59UA), to which there are two main characters of note: Don Norman and Charles L Mauro.

On the one hand, Don Norman argues for a change to design education, as few designers "are equipped to work in these problem spaces." He follows by stating that "a combination of a deep understanding of people, technology, world history, and business are all required." Given that design "training" is moving away from proper degrees into a more atomized skills-based model (learn UX design in 4 weeks), there is no question that the design, already previously unequipped to provide a more complete liberal arts education is far from moving in the direction of being able to provide the deep pan-disciplinary understanding required to equip designers.

On the other hand, Charles Mauro suggests "DESIGN as a professional discipline will have almost no positive impact on actual complex problem resolution without a major rethink of where DESIGN expertise actually fits in the problem space." And that fit, as Mr Mauro sees it is in effect that designers "are there to solve intuitive and comparatively simple problems using unstructured and mostly intuitive methods. In the process things actually (mostly) end up looking better visually. Sorry, that is your role."

In the end, we have two ominously similar views:

• Norman: Designers are of no use in the solving of complex problems until education improves;
• Mauro: Designers are of no use in the solving of complex problems and should just stick to making things pretty.

To summarize they agree: currently, (most) designers are of no use in the solving of complex problems.

Some questions for consideration (or not...):

1. Is there a misplaced conceit in the design world about the role and usefulness of designers in addressing complex problems?

2. If we think there is a role for designers in solving complex problems from which pole are we better to approach the question?

2.1. Do we need a specific type of designer? For example, do we need the role of "Strategic Designer" that is focused on systematic design particularly as applied to complex (social, political) processes, with the role of envisioning (and executing to achieve) alternate futures, or alternate courses of action.

2.2. Is there a notion of one or more design meta-skills (such as systems thinking) that is/are not discipline-based that should form the basis of all design education regardless of discipline? Or should design be taught as a generalist liberal arts education with medium-based skills being learned elsewhere, say through apprenticeship or short courses?

3. If a designer gains the knowledge that Norman is referring to and makes it into the boardroom are they still a designer, or are they instead an engineer or executive with a design background?

3.1. Should we be looking to design schools to be the place that we go to get that knowledge?

3.2. If not taught in design school where are they acquired?

4. What current skills, knowledge set, mental models or processes that designers have are useful in the solving of complex problems?

4.1. What do we bring that engineers and pseudo-scientists don't?

Thanks to Marc Baumgartner for the introduction. Find the full-text document here → https://fuschia-chips-55b.notion.site/Designers-in-Boardrooms-e38c0b41815e49118ea97cf602f7efb9