I coined the term "Scientific Creative Method" as a way to describe my experimental approach to graphic design. There is a similarity to iterative design process, but at the time I was trying to emphasize how my approach to graphic design was based more on constructing experiments as the driver rather than just saying that we had iterative cycles. I think it would be accurate to say today that this is just iterative design or design thinking. Those terms just don't paint quite the same joyful picture in my mind, though.
I briefly used this term on my old David Seah Communication Artist for Hire website, describing it as follows:
You might be familiar with The Scientific Method from school. This is when you form a hypothesis about how something works (that is, you make an "informed guess") and then design an experiment that tests your hypothesis (in other words, "you make a bet"). If your hypothesis/guess was right, you have confirmed your understanding/won some money based on your powers of reasoning. If, however, you guessed wrong, you have to form a NEW hypothesis that explains what happened, and test again. This is how real understanding is built, experience by experience.
The Scientific Creative Method (a term I've made up) works in a similar way, except our goal is to make change, not just observe. Our change-making experiments are built on the the insights gained from you in the first two steps, and are further informed by my experience with design, engineering, and business. The goal is to be able to explain how it all works so you can engineer a sure path toward your goals. It's very doable, and concrete.