Design of environment is one example from which
debates can emerge. Such public debates can
influence public opinions and subsequently influe
nce political debates and bureaucratic processes.
Studies have shown that there is more difficulty achieving successful radical innovations if
organisations have entrenched structures and burea
ucratic processes. Design debates that influence
bureaucratic processes are important to discuss in ge
neral, and in design education especially, because
they can tell us something about how visual expressions
are read and what kind of impact they have.
Therefore, the present study investigated ways to
overcome bureaucratic and commercial resistance to
implementing visual changes in public spaces.
To explore these processes and gain a deeper
understanding of the different ways to deal with
a range of opinions, a case study method was used
involving participants from different types of organisa
tions and fields of interest. The empirical data
was gathered from the design of a public memorial pr
oject that created a fierce debate in Norway and
even abroad, called
Smash Nazism
, a monument of a resistance group acting during World War II. The
conclusion of the study explains
how a confrontational process was handled in the permanent change
of a public space and how aspects of such transfor
mation process can be linked to radical innovation.
This is essential knowledge in design education pr
eparing students for how visual transformation
processes can contribute to corporate social responsibility