Jun 9, 2015

Posted by in News | 0 Comments

Day-3: Highlights

-By Mansi Singh and Nirali Kansara

The lectures started first with Mr Chetan Patel explaining about the foundation of the Honey Bee Network, SRISTI and National Innovation Foundation; their ideology and the scouting they carry out. Giving various examples, such as the root bridge of Meghalaya, Professor Anil Gupta gave insights to the participants about the approach towards identifying a solution to a problem, which can lead to an innovation. Also, he explained about how culture, institutions and technology are interlinked and are instrumental in a sustainable solution to a problem. He also explained the role of sequential synergy, i.e., the same question when asked in a different sequence can lead to a different approach of problem solving. Later, Purvesh Dodhia, who won GYTI award in 2014, for his modification in sugarcane extractor machine, gave a presentation on his product. Also, we were shown the example of a simple innovation done by Akshay Bokare to prevent any accidents that could damage the hands of the operator of sugarcane extractor machine.

After tea, Professor Anil Gupta took a lecture on design thinking including socio-ecological/empathetic design and the autopoiesis model of self-designing process. He started by taking an example of one social unmet needs which needs to be corrected immediately. Considering availability of water, he designed a trade-off between the amount of scarcity and incentives for cooperation, concluding that incentives for cooperation are maximum when scarcity is moderate, and that optimal amount of scarcity should be reached. Then he described about the four factors to be considered while deciding a design, namely, product, process, system, service. Taking the example of “prisoner’s dilemma” of Game Theory, he explained that how through iterative procedures, people gain more trust on the community, and how assurance game (where interaction takes place) is a much popular model. He explained about the importance of systematically identifying the root cause of the problem. Taking an example of Mr Birendra Kumar from Motihari, he explained how our solutions could create an externality, which might either have a positive or a negative impact on the environment. As responsible designers, we have no right to burden the environment. Using Coase Theorem, he explained how designs create an externality and how they can vary in magnitudes and how should a problem be approached in each level. He also explained about the different types of transition costs involved in the process, ex-ante and ex-post being the broader categories. He explained the importance of circulatory framework and working from cradle to cradle. Also, self-discrediting helps to think clearly, and removes the existing biases in our minds. His lecture was very insightful to the students, and helped them look at the problem solving from a different angle.

After lunch, Professor Kate Bissett Johnson of Swinburne University, Australia gave a lecture on social responsibility for product design. She started by explaining that how a design of a solution should not only be good for the people, but good also for the environment. She also explained about the triple-bottom line- the interlinkage of people, profit and environment. With the current rates of consumption, it is necessary for us to come up with a sustainable solution. To understand people, it is important to understand their past, present and their dreams for future. She explained about the three dimensions of a design process; the Theism model; and the factors of a socially responsible design. After the lecture, she started an exercise, where she told each group that went for a field visit on 5th June to make a little drawing of the place they visited, along with the different activities that were happening there. Also, each group had to come up with one social innovation that the community there had come up with.

After tea, Professor Shashank Mehta from National Institute of India, Ahmedabad took an interactive session on problem mapping. Firstly, he explained the importance of humility while approaching the problem. Creativity demands removal of all biases. It is absolutely necessary to create that humility in order to find an inclusive innovation. After the lecture, each group that went to the field visit were provided with a chart paper and sticky notes. Prof Mehta told them to note down all the key words that come to their mind when they think of their site on the notes and stick them on the chart paper. On that was done, they had to categorize each keyword into various categories, such as education, sanitation, finance etc. After doing this, they had to map all the problems, linking them together as they map. This would help the students gain an understanding on how to categorize the problem; first looking at the bigger picture and then narrowing down to a smaller picture.

Below is the detailed report of each session.



  • Philosophy and story of  the Honey Bee Network
  • Activities  of the Honey Bee Network and SRISTI:

o   Scouting and Documentation

o   Shodh Sankal

o   Shodhyatra

o   Dissemination

o   Award Functions

o   Educational Innovations

o   Village Knowledge Register

o   Sattvik

o   Research and Development

  • Root bridges, Meghalaya

o   What is the main criteria that led to the building the Root Bridge

  • To build something unique
  • Availability of resources
  • Suitable for every season
  • Durability and stability
  • Maintenance
  • Ease of making
  • Safety
  • Effect on environment
  • Skill and self-dependent
  • Time
  • Different sequence of questions can lead to different outcome.
  • Institutions are norms for regulatory behaviour required for proper functionality. It gives assurance and provides stability.
  • Three keywords essential for sustainable outcome; culture, technology and institutions
  • If technology is like words, institutions are like grammar then culture is like thesaurus.
  • Institutional Innovations- Study of chabutras.
  • Educational Innovations – Research of tribal medicinal practices , test it in laboratory and market it.
  • Presentation of sugarcane juice extractor modifications by Purvesh.
  • Shared the idea of safety wooden attachment for sugarcane juice extractor by Akshay Bokare.


  • Asked everyone one unmet need they wasn’t to acknowledge then.
  • One reply was – Lack of availability of water (By Vishal). But availability of water can be unsuitable in some conditions like:

o   Water quality not good i.e. presence of salty , arsenic in it.

o   More water resource can lead to more wastage.

  • So he explained that we use the resource well when there is optimal scarcity (through graph between scarcity and incentives for co-operation. In case of high and low scarcity, incentive for co-operation is low, only in case of moderate scarcity incentive for co-operation is maximum.
  • While designing solutions , following 4 points are important : PPSS (Product, Process, System, Service).
  • Type of goods:

o   Private Goods: owned privately

o   Common Goods: owned commonly( rules are decided by the community)

o   Toll Goods: for which we pay toll tax

o   Club Goods: affiliation related goods, i.e. available only for members.

o   Public Goods: where there is no rival consumption and is subtract able ( Pure, eg- air, sunlight: Quasi, eg- driving space for cycle on road is less if there are too many cars)

  • Advantage of shared life is shared responsibility.
  • Disadvantage can be explained through Prisoner’s Dilemma:

o   The most likely outcome in Prisoner’s dilemma is that both the prisoners will confess (as there is not much much)

o   Individual rationality can lead to collective irrationality.

o   If prisoners were allowed to communicate in prisoner’s dilemma, it would be an assure game.

  • Jugaad – Usually while designing solutions, we don’t follow proper system i.e. use jugaad. It lead to bad design. Eg During a conference a principal took the responsibility that his students will repair the pumps in different places. But the students got washers of different dimensions so they just filed it and applied it, thus resulting in washers being loosened again after sometime.
  • Example of bad system: almirah : Level of ground is not perfectly horizontal so if front phase of almirah was elevated a little , it would work smoothly for years.
  • Whenever we apply a problem, 3 types of variable are important w.r.t environment : Appreciate, Influence and Manipulate.
  • Externality: Some product can be positive for some while negative for others. For example, Vivek Kumar had an engine workshop , which made a lot of noise and it was close to a school so lot pollutants were released which was harmful for the kids. So he designed a pollution control and noise free device. So sometimes, solution must be designed to control externality.
  • Coase Theorem : If transaction costs are zero it does not matter who pays. If the transaction cost are not zero, devise an institution to make rules to regulate it.
  • Circular Framework: Design product that works from cradle to cradle ,i.e. have multiple life cycles.
  • While designing a product, take care of:

o   Duration for which we are designing.

o   Function for which we are designing.

o   If waste can be reused ( Nothing is waste. It’s a product for which use has been not designed yet.)

  • Adjust , Adapt and learn to live with – Reasons why women tend to overlook their drudgery .
  • Subsidiarity Principle: Taking decision as close to  a point of action as possible.
  • 2 types of truncation cost:

o   Ex Ante:

  • Search information
  • Supply
  • Negotiation
  • Contract

o   Ex Pose:

  • Enforcement
  • Cost of conflict resolution
  • Side payment
  • Redraw
  • While designing a product :

o   Work as a team

o   Think of multi approach to solve

o   Questioning one’s solution( self discrediting)

o   Design product that have multiple life cycle

o   Inclusive Innovations


  • Sustainable Design Movement:

o   Sustainable Design Movement has been pushing for a new vision of design that responds to “triple bottom line”.

o   Design professional think of “ design for business”, but rarely think of “ design for society”.

  • Society is depleting its stock ‘natural capital’ at unsustainable rate.
  • In case of industrial design, 80% of environmental impact is determined at design stage.
  • Design is the past was on the idea ‘ producing, selling and consuming’.
  • Design can serve the needs to business and treat society and environment clients too.
  • Socially Responsible Design Model:

o   Problem & artefact

o   Socio Cultural

o   Techno sphere

o   Economic

o   Environment

o   Locale : Localization of problem

  • Socio Cultural: The desired co-design model includes

o   Individual Well Being-

  • Physical
  • Mental
  • Social Network
  • Spiritual
  • Emotional
  • Local Environment
  • Personal Income

o   Economic Well Being

o   Social Well Being

o   Environmental Well Neing

  • Understanding People:

o   Understand their past ( memories)

o    Understand their present ( the moment)

o    Understand their future ( dreams)

  • User Centered Design:

o   Surveys and interviews – It doesn’t always give the clear picture .

o   Observations of what people do not just say.

o   Looking at market research (visual research)

o   By developing empathy with user

o   Understanding and incorporating scenarios

o   What people:

  • Say , think
  • Do , use
  • Know, feel , dream

o   Techniques:

  • Interviews
  • Observations
  • Generative Sessions

o   Knowledge:

  • Explicit
  • Observable
  • Tacit
  • Latent
  • User Centered Design Tool Kit:

o   Desirability: what do people desire

o   Feasibility: what is technically and organizationally feasible

o   Viability: what can be financially viable

  • Techno sphere:

o   Appropriate technologies aimed to achieve low capital costs, natural labor and materials.

o    Natural renewable raw materials are present in abundant with poor.

  • Behavior ( Individual, Social, Material) : how can one get people to change their behavior to use their product.
  • Social Impact and Behavior Change: It includes – Barriers, Triggers and Motivator.

o   Make it understand

o   Make it easy

o   Make it desirable

o   Make it rewarding

o   Make it a habit


  • Social Impact: What are you trying to change? How do you measure this? Who are all the people impacted by the change? Do people want to change?
  • Social Innovations: Ezio Manzini proposes that designers should look for innovations that are already happening in communities.
  • Look for innovations that communities already have made you can then use the design to make them better.
  • Activity :

o    Draw geographic map of area

o    People interacted with

o    Activities observed

o    What innovations are already happening there?



  • Asked why we chose far off areas for field visit:

Ÿ   Find solutions and help less privileged

Ÿ   Use their and our knowledge to find solutions

Ÿ   Enrich our knowledge

  • There is nothing like more privileged and less privileged .  Creativity demands that we remove all biases.
  • Even limited resources can lead to creativity.
  • To understand the available opportunities, a day of field visit is not enough, be a part of their life and try to understand the root cause of the problems ( as impression can be completely opposite from reality)
  • Exposure and Experience– important to enrich our knowledge.
  • Questioning is important aspect of designing.
  • Try to make miniature painitngs- get all information one 1 sheet of paper to get a clear idea.
  • Activity:

Ÿ   Write all the words that comes to mind regarding the field visit

Ÿ   Categorize the words.

Ÿ   Try to connect the words to understand the root of the situation.

  • He asked to display the work so that everyone can learn unique aspect of others. Emphasized that while working in a team everyone must have a unique role to play to work effectively. Design must be user centric.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *