Introduction

Let's say that you were sitting around one day and had a flash of inspiration: "I like being naked!" And let's say you were so passionate about this idea that you wanted to design a new way of walking down the street naked without anyone noticing – a novel concept, to be sure. I can only imagine the inherent complexities of the problem, altering the vision of countless individuals so as to retain the freedom of your birthday suit. But then let's say that you decide to try out your new method of public nudity one brisk morning on Main Street, USA, without having asked anyone what they thought about it, or even testing whether your concept worked. Crazy, right? Of course it's crazy!

Every day, designs born from passionate moments of inspiration are unleashed upon the world without the proper consideration of their effects. Think about it: how would a naked man walking down the street affect you? This is not to say it can't be done. There is always a solution, even for naked dreamers. But finding it requires careful analysis – and in many cases, the research conducted is too narrow in scope, too late in coming. The naked man has already strolled. The process of creation has ended; the thing lives.

The design of things is too often conducted by such isolated dreamers. In The Design of Everyday Things, Donald Norman describes creation as the work of a select group: advertisers, designers, engineers, and manufacturers, an et cetera of aggressiv-ers who unleash a Pandora's box of products and experiences into the world. Their isolation can leave the needs of many unaddressed. As Norman tells us, these aggressiv-ers fall easily into the trap of believing that their individual relationships to the world are representative of a larger population of consumers or end-users (passiv-ers). He refers to this as "naïve psychology." Although Norman is referring to the usability of everyday things and a designer’s assumption that they can clearly understand a user’s mental model of any situation, I would like to broaden the scope of this concept to encompass a more general assumption of need. When the aggressiv-ers' assumptions are rooted in the needs and desires of others – rather than a naïve psychology – their designs can be made to better suit the world in which they operate. The naked dreamer is free to roam.

Only design that takes into account the larger society in which it functions can succeed beyond that first walk down Main Street. This essay outlines one methodology to support this goal: concept testing. One that does not ask questions too late, but at the beginning, and the middle, and the end. In pursuing this greater understanding of design, we become the new ers: we collaborate as dream-ers.