A common distinction in design separates theory and practice. However, in this paper the assumption is that design also draws heavily upon a component of theoretical thinking by assuming that theory and analysis are closely interrelated.
Research and design are to a wide extent taken care of by two different professional groups specializing in different ways. Subsequently a question of major importance for the researcher is to secure the knowledge flow from research to practice, and this paper deals with the question: which kinds of knowledge make practicing architects use of, and how can research produce knowledge which feed into and support practice?
In order to investigate which kinds of knowledge practicing architects use when actually designing twenty qualitative interview were carried out. It was made clear in the beginning of the interview that the meaning of ‘knowledge’ was to be taken in its broadest sense – covering hard fact knowledge, understanding and inspiration, and the questions were formulated so that the respondent took part in defining the content of the concept.
The results show that the designers primarily use context dependent knowledge, e.g. ‘good examples’.
It was from a researcher’s point of view disappointing, that the practitioners put very little emphasis upon research and research results. Rather they make use of knowledge based upon own experiences, things they have seen, or knowledge they have built up in teams doing actual building projects.
The results suggest that in the field of design there are (at least) two different circuits of knowledge – one among the practitioners and one among the researchers. And the weak point is the dialogue between.
However, in one respect the interviews show a thorough interest in theoretical thinking. They emphasize the importance of working analytical in all phases of a project, and the paper suggests that a common pivot for design research and design practice may be analysis and analytical tools.
The discussion of the research results draws upon theory among others by Bent Flyvbjerg, Oxford, and his idea of phronetic research. To map the field of design knowledge a model of analysis is introduced. The model distinguishes between context dependent knowledge and context independent knowledge on one hand and between knowledge of respectively researchers and practitioners on the other hand.
Finally the paper discusses by means of examples possible ways of producing analytical knowledge which may enhance the dialogue between researchers and practitioners.
Architectural Design; Design Practice; Research Methods; Communicatin