1. How did physically acting out help to explore ideas?
For the Airplane seating problem bodystorming was helpful for getting a sense of scale and considering the posture of the user. For the doctor’s waiting room problem I felt that even though we bodystormed this problem in more detail it failed to bring about insights for us. It was interesting to see the different approaches between the two problems, where the seating relied more on posing and space the waiting room relied more on acting. Perhaps having to act inhibited thinking about the solution and led to typical behaviour in the scenario.
2. Did you refine your ideas and solutions to the problem through bodystorming? In what way?
Most of our refinement happened after we bodystormed and started discussing the idea and sketching, for the airplane problem bodystorming was used more as a way of quickly visualising and testing our ideas in real space but it didn’t influence the direction of the idea.
3. What was difficult or challenging about bodystorming?
Making the most of limited resources and having to rely on our imagination. Having to balance acting and thinking about the problem and trying to think spontaneously and adapt to the scenario. I think there are certain people who would be better suited to certain kinds of bodystorming. The observer is important in these scenarios, to pick up details which those involved in the process may be too occupied to observe.
4. Does bodystorming lend itself to certain types of problems?
There are areas where I can see bodystorming as being a very useful approach, ones which involve physical space, movement and gestures.