Design is situated within a diverse field of disciplines that influence it (Götz 2010, p. 55 f.): Engineering, natural sciences, sociology, anthropology, psychology, economics—to name just a few. At the same time, design is not an academic discipline, even if there have been efforts to establish it as such (which incidentally has given rise to some heated debate). The thesis of this book is that the frequently implicit knowledge of design must be made explicit. This will allow design to make connections to other disciplines (Milev 2011, p. 46; Schultheis 2005, p. 68). Articulating and reflecting upon design knowledge strengthens the position of design. Since design is still a practice, however, it cannot become a scientific discipline in a true sense. At issue, rather, is the fact that design is a discipline of exploration and inquiry. Design should understand its own generation of knowledge as “reflection in action” (Schön 1983, p. 76 ff.). This requires methods: a term that goes back to the ancient Greek word for “pursuit.” Methods such as ethnography are procedures that should not simply be applied dogmatically, but rather are meant to lead to reflection
about one’s own actions. It is only when these procedures are explicitly articulated that it becomes possible to consciouly adapt and transform them.