In order to create the most elegant solution I prefer to take the latter definition of design. I describe my work as Behavioural Design. It is not a specific design discipline characterised by an end result. Instead my favoured process is driven by the fundamentals of people and their behaviour.
The objective of Behavioural Design is to look at how the lived environment impacts on people and then to use design to facilitate new behaviours and experiences. The solution to the problem may be a product, a service, or something else. It may involve a range of techniques and processes but the one constant is the behaviour of the person and the solution engendered by the design.
I am now experimenting with design that encourages environmentally friendly and socially responsible behaviour.
Writing:
Sustainable Through Behaviour: This is an argument that designing to change behaviour at every level of use is a more effective strategy sustainable design than to relying on technological innovation. Indeed implementing technology without a thorough understanding of peoples' behaviour only serves as a symbol of change and can even be counter efficient. This article includes a number case studies and interviews with Paul Priestman and Sprout Design.
The Structure of Design in Practice: There have been many attempts to define Design, but there is currently no consensus amongst practitioners or theorists. Just as many attempts have been made to create a formulaic design process to reduce the risk. However studies of how expert designers work in practice show that it is not possible to create a repeatable and infallible formula that science and math aspire to. Design instead deserves to be recognised as having its own distinct rigour, which inevitably includes a degree of risk.