Connecting data to people
Dylan Tan speaks to MIT academic about how awards like Daita can support promising ideas at various stages of development
AS ONE of the judges for the Design AI and Tech Awards (Daita), Professor John A Ochsendorf was struck by the diversity and depth of entries exploring how AI can intersect with design to improve lives. The founding director of the MIT Morningside Academy for Design is also a renowned engineer, architect, and educator with expertise spanning structural mechanics and creative design. On the eve of the awards, the MIT academic shares his thoughts on emerging trends, the challenges of assessing innovation, and why awards such as Daita play a crucial role in shaping the future of design and technology.
Question: Could you share your overall impressions of the quality and diversity of the submissions?
Answer: I think we were all blown away by the breadth and depth of these ventures in AI and design. It was really a privilege to see how designers and innovators in different sectors are imagining many new possibilities. Overall, the submissions demonstrated optimism for ways that AI can help to advance human well-being. It was an honour to serve on the jury.
Q: Were there any particular trends or recurring themes that stood out in the entries?
A: Many of the projects focused on service design and on customer service. We saw a lot of new ideas to improve user experiences in various sectors, and the projects offered a range of strategies for improving people’s daily lives. These were not only about sifting through big data, but they were more about connecting the dots between data and people.
Q: Considering the six judging criteria, which aspects did you find most challenging to evaluate, and why?
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
A: There is always a debate between supporting bold, ambitious projects that could have big impact in the future, versus near-term practical applications that are more likely to become a reality. The fields of AI and design are changing every day, so it was sometimes difficult for us to assess how realistic or achievable the proposals were.
Q: Were there any specific projects or categories that particularly impressed you or sparked interesting discussions among the judging panel?
A: We often discussed ethics and data ownership, as well as the value added for society. In short, who would benefit from this team’s innovation? How many people could be helped by this innovation? So that led to some good discussions.
SEE ALSO
Q: Were there any surprising or unexpected applications of AI and technology in design that you encountered during the judging process?
A: Yes, there were several exceptionally creative projects, which I scored very highly in my own project rankings. You will no doubt see surprising applications in the winning projects. But I don’t want to give away our deliberations!
Q: Do you see any emerging roles or areas where this intersection is likely to have the most significant impact in the coming years?
A: In the coming decade, there are so many sectors that will be transformed by the intersection of design, AI, and technology. But I often think about my own area: higher education. In many ways, universities are still following educational models from the 19th century, and AI innovations are going to happen so quickly that we will struggle to keep pace.
For example, AI can now solve many analytical problems in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields and it is only going to get better, so where does that leave higher education? How will we train engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs to be leaders in the coming decades? I think this will require us to innovate more quickly than we would have otherwise.
Q: In your opinion, what role do awards like DAITA play in fostering innovation and raising awareness in these fields?
A: Awards like DAITA are massively important. We can’t predict where things are going, but we can support promising ideas at various stages of development. At MIT, we give out prizes to students and alums almost weekly and this fosters an ecosystem of risk-taking and entrepreneurship that is always invigorating.
Q: For students and professionals interested in exploring the intersection of design, AI, and technology, what key skills or mindsets do you believe are essential?
A: Curiosity and creativity. We must ask the right questions, synthesise unrelated disciplines, and propose creative solutions that work for society. And that is where the field of design can add tremendous value for AI and technology. This requires empathy and listening as well as creativity. I think we should encourage transparent experimentation with AI across many fields.
Q: What are your hopes for the future of the Design AI and Tech Awards and its impact on the design and technology landscape in Singapore and globally?
A: Singapore has long been a global leader in innovation and education, and I hope that the Design AI and Tech Awards will continue to foster this innovative spirit. While most of the entries came from Asia, I would love to see the applicant pool expand to become more global in the coming years.
Q: Were there any key takeaways from the judging process that you will carry forward in your own work or teaching?
So many! Above all, that there is great value in sponsoring awards like DAITA. Even if teams don’t win, just the act of getting organised and speculating a path forward is really valuable for them. So I will encourage my own students and colleagues to keep exploring their passions and proposing new ideas to incorporate AI. And if they don’t win at this stage, they should apply again. After all, they probably just got the wrong jury this time around!
Copyright SPH Media. All rights reserved.
