Abstract
We all use value speak in our everyday conversations. Within the field of design, the implications of value are even more integral: we expose and negotiate value in order to create “desirable” experiences and avoid “bad” products, and our respective ideas of value guide our actions and judgements of what is “worthwhile” or “important”. Yet despite its prevalence, our understanding of each respective value referent is often ambiguous and subjective. In this research, we examine three grand narratives of value and ascertain how each representation relates to design. We argue that the strengths and limitations inherent in theories of sociological, economic, and linguistic value are mirrored in their related design praxes. We propose that this holistic awareness enables a more critical and expansive assessment of design methods and practices.
Keywords
value theory; design critique; design theory
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2024.232
Citation
Gulbransen-Diaz, N., and Hepburn, L. (2024) Grand narratives of Value and their relationship with design, in Gray, C., Ciliotta Chehade, E., Hekkert, P., Forlano, L., Ciuccarelli, P., Lloyd, P. (eds.), DRS2024: Boston, 23–28 June, Boston, USA. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2024.232
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Conference Track
Research Paper
Included in
Grand narratives of Value and their relationship with design
We all use value speak in our everyday conversations. Within the field of design, the implications of value are even more integral: we expose and negotiate value in order to create “desirable” experiences and avoid “bad” products, and our respective ideas of value guide our actions and judgements of what is “worthwhile” or “important”. Yet despite its prevalence, our understanding of each respective value referent is often ambiguous and subjective. In this research, we examine three grand narratives of value and ascertain how each representation relates to design. We argue that the strengths and limitations inherent in theories of sociological, economic, and linguistic value are mirrored in their related design praxes. We propose that this holistic awareness enables a more critical and expansive assessment of design methods and practices.