Liz Sanders has articulated from a design perspective the role of generative techniques. (Even if it is wildly unrepresentative of what does happen in the research world for a number of decades – the contrast is still useful). And this follows on from previous posts which explore the impact of consumer generated ideas.
“These different ways of accessing people’s experiences have evolved over time. Traditional design research methods were focused primarily on observational research (i.e., looking at what people do and use). Traditional market research methods, on the other hand, have been focused more on what people say and think (through focus groups, interviews, and questionnaires). The new tools are focused on what people make, i.e., what they create from the toolkits we provide for them to use in expressing their thoughts, feelings, dreams and new ideas. Make methods enable creative expression by giving people ambiguous visual stimuli to work with. Being ambiguous, these stimuli can be interpreted in different ways, and can activate different memories and feelings in different people. The visual nature liberates people’s creativity from the boundaries of what they can state in words. Together, the ambiguity and the visual nature of these tools allow people room for creativity, both in expressing their current experiences and feelings and in generating new ideas.”
Sanders, E.B.-N. (2001) Virtuosos of the experience domain. In Proceedings of the 2001 IDSA Education Conference.
The creation and enablement of generative research techniques within Communities is vital.