What is Critical Design? — How it differs from Design Thinking and Speculative Design

1-1. Definition of Critical Design

If we were to describe Critical Design in one sentence, it would be “design that shakes our values and assumptions.” Rather than solving problems, it deliberately highlights them and gives people an opportunity to think — this attitude is at the very core of Critical Design.

This way of thinking was popularized by the British design duo Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. Since the 1990s, they have been based at the Royal College of Art, advocating the idea that “design can serve as a tool for social critique.”

In their book *Speculative Everything*, Dunne and Raby describe Critical Design as follows:

・Making everyday conventions and values visible
・Revealing the potential risks and contradictions embedded in technologies and systems
・Providing opportunities to consider alternative futures

It is also noteworthy that Dunne and Raby categorize design into two major types: affirmative design and critical design.

“Design can be divided into two broad categories: affirmative design and critical design. The former affirms how things are now and aligns with cultural, social, technological, and economic expectations. Most design falls into this category. The latter rejects how things currently are, using design to critique the status quo and offer alternative social, cultural, technological, and economic values. — Dunne & Raby”

They also write that they initially defined Critical Design as follows:

“Critical Design uses speculative design proposals to challenge narrow assumptions, preconceptions, and givens about the role products play in everyday life.” This is less a methodology than an “attitude” or “stance,” and its opposite is design that reinforces the status quo — namely, “affirmative design.” — Dunne & Raby

In other words, Critical Design aims to use the power of design to encourage people to view everyday life through a critical lens, prompting them to question what they take for granted.

1-2. Origins and Historical Context

The origins of Critical Design trace back to the 1990s in London, at the Royal College of Art (RCA). However, the intellectual backdrop of this movement is often linked to the Frankfurt School — thinkers such as Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno — who critiqued mass culture and consumer culture.

During the 1990s, the design world was largely focused on problem-solving approaches such as “human-centered design” and “design thinking.”

Yet, Dunne and Raby — while maintaining some distance from the Frankfurt School — argued that it is unhealthy for design to be constantly subordinated to corporate interests or consumer needs. Instead, they suggested that design could serve as a form of social critique. By doing so, they presented “critical design,” a mode of design that rejects “affirmative design,” which reinforces the status quo.

1-3. Design That Stimulates Thought Rather Than Practical Use

The characteristics of Critical Design can be summed up as follows:

・**Unusable design:** Deliberately inconvenient to provoke reflection.
・**Strange or uncanny design:** Creates discomfort in everyday life to prompt deeper thinking.
・**Futuristic design:** Presents unrealizable scenarios to encourage thought experiments.

Such designs may have little practical value in marketing contexts. However, in fields such as education, research, policy-making, and social initiatives, they carry immense significance.

2-1. What Is Design Thinking?

To understand Critical Design, many people compare it with “Design Thinking.” Design Thinking is a problem-solving methodology popularized by Stanford University’s d.school and IDEO. Originally, it systematized the intuitive processes designers followed during product development. A representative Design Thinking process includes the following steps:

Empathize: Understand the user
Define: Identify and frame the problem
Ideate: Generate ideas
Prototype: Build tangible representations
Test: Improve through iteration

For a more detailed explanation of Design Thinking and how to apply it, you may find TIPS181 helpful.

2-2. Similarities and Differences Between Critical Design and Design Thinking

Critical Design and Design Thinking share the idea of using design as a method of thinking, but their purposes and approaches differ significantly.

【Similarities Between Critical Design and Design Thinking】
・Both adopt a human-centered perspective
・Both begin by questioning the status quo—asking “Why?”
・Both use prototyping to make thinking tangible

【Differences Between Critical Design and Design Thinking】
Design Thinking: Aims at solving problems, focusing on creating new products or services.
Critical Design: Aims at raising questions rather than solving problems. The goal is not to produce answers but to stimulate debate and dialogue.

The following table summarizes the major differences between Critical Design and Design Thinking.

In short, the biggest difference lies in their objectives. While Design Thinking functions as a method for solving problems, Critical Design aims to surface issues that are not yet visible by questioning the assumptions underlying everyday life.

Furthermore, whereas Design Thinking is a practical method for creating a better world, Critical Design serves as a critical approach that asks, “Is this really the right direction?”

3-1. What Is Speculative Design?

Critical Design is often confused with Speculative Design. “Speculative” refers to something “contemplative,” “hypothetical,” or “imagined,” and Speculative Design is a method that envisions possible futures and presents them through design.

Speculative Design is primarily used to explore social, political, technological, and ethical issues in order to generate new ideas and potential solutions. Its purpose is to consider “What might the future look like?” from a design perspective, helping us better understand the present and make more informed decisions.

Speculative Design is also explained in detail in TIPS180, so reading it together will help deepen your understanding.

3-2. Differences Between Critical Design and Speculative Design

Critical Design and Speculative Design share many similarities in that both aim to “raise questions.” In fact, it can often be difficult to clearly distinguish between the two. In many cases, Critical Design overlaps with Speculative Design by grounding itself in “critique of the present” while simultaneously presenting “future scenarios.”

However, there are also distinct differences. For example, Speculative Design places emphasis on creating scenarios that explore future possibilities, whereas Critical Design focuses more on critiquing the assumptions and systems of the present.

There are also differences in the goals and methods of the outcomes produced by each approach, as shown in the table below.

4-1. Methodology of Critical Design

As mentioned earlier, the approach of Critical Design differs from Design Thinking in that its primary purpose is to formulate questions. To make this easier to understand, let’s consider an example in which the theme is “urban infrastructure.”

If we approached this through Design Thinking, the question might become: “How can we arrange utility poles so that local residents and other infrastructure users can use them comfortably?” In contrast, Critical Design would ask questions such as: “What would happen if all urban infrastructure were managed by private companies?” or “What if we removed all power lines and utility poles altogether?” These questions are more specific, hypothetical, and disruptive to existing assumptions.

① Formulate the question: Ask, “What are we taking for granted?”
② Construct a speculative scenario: Imagine, “What if things were different?”
③ Prototype: Give form through objects, visuals, or exhibition pieces
④ Create a space for dialogue: Encourage discussion

In other words, Critical Design develops speculative scenarios by posing more fundamental and value-challenging questions, and then uses those scenarios to stimulate dialogue.

4-2. Four Practical Steps of Critical Design (Beginner-Friendly)

Based on the methodology of Critical Design introduced in the previous section, here are four concrete steps presented in an easy-to-understand way for beginners.

Step 1: Formulate the Question (Problem Awareness & Theme Setting)

Begin by questioning the “norms” that exist in society and everyday life. For example, if you select AI technology as your theme, you might ask, “What if AI could completely replicate human emotions?” The goal here is not to search for the “correct” answer, but rather to formulate a question—even if it seems unconventional or unrealistic.

From here, use research findings to uncover existing values and assumptions and examine them critically. Ask yourself, “Why has this become the norm in the first place?”

(Example) Theme: Social media → “Is a society where we are constantly evaluated through social media truly a happy one?”

Step 2: Create Fiction (Building a Hypothetical Scenario & Worldview)

Based on your research, intentionally imagine an extreme future or an abnormal state. From there, create assumptions such as, “What if ○○ advanced further?” or “What if ×× were banned?” The key is to design a setting that is entirely different from everyday life so it can be clearly contrasted with reality.

Turning this into a fictional scenario or short story deepens the worldview and brings your idea to life.

(Example) After researching how the “Like” culture of social media affects people’s self-esteem and mental health → Create a future scenario where “a person’s value is determined solely by the number of Likes they receive.”

Step 3: Give It Form (Creating Prototypes and Artifacts)

Create a tangible artifact that visualizes and materializes the hypothetical scenario developed in the previous step. Common formats include mockups, illustrations, and videos, but the form is entirely flexible. What matters is not the level of completion but the creation of imagery that stimulates thought or evokes a sense of discomfort.

(Example) Producing a piece of clothing based on the concept: “The more Likes you receive, the lighter the clothing becomes.”

Step 4: Generate Dialogue (Exhibit, Share, and Spark Discussion)

Show your prototype or artifact to audiences or users through exhibitions or workshops to generate reactions and discussions. Beyond exhibitions and workshops, platforms such as social media or academic papers can also be used. The goal is to prompt people to think: “Is this really a good thing?”

Finally, reflect on the discussions and reactions that emerged from your exhibition or sharing session. Revisit the original questions and perspectives you set at the beginning. If new questions or viewpoints arise, connect them to your next Critical Design exploration.

(Example) Ask exhibition visitors to discuss what kind of future would be desirable → Realize that instead of simply rejecting Like culture, we need to consider how to coexist with it → Leads to the next question.

Critical Design differs from product-oriented design in that its purpose is not to sell something, but rather to “pose questions to society.” While Design Thinking aims at “problem-solving” and Speculative Design aims at “envisioning possible futures,” Critical Design is an approach focused on “critique and dialogue.”

Although each design approach has different objectives, they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, when combined complementarily, they allow us to explore the future and society from deeper and broader perspectives, ultimately leading to new insights.

References:
・Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). *Speculative Everything*
・Jeffrey Bardzell & Shaowen Bardzell: *What is “Critical” about Critical Design?*
・“The Difference Between Design Thinking and Critical Design” by Mamiko Yamazaki
・Deer Ozkaramanli & Pieter M.A. Desmet: *Provocative Design for Unprovocative Designers: Strategies for Triggering Personal Dilemmas*