Search results

Researchers at the University of Virginia's Darden Business School and the Design Management Institute report on field research into how widely design thinking is being adopted in leading companies and how effectively is it being adapted in a variety of industries.

They interviewed boundary spanners – leaders who operated at the intersection of design and business – in a number of Fortune 100 organizations and focused on ten organizations where design thinking was having an impact on practice.

They found that design thinking was, in fact, also a problem solving process, not just an innovation process.

Examples are anecdotal.

Learning from design tools – such as, ethnographic interviewing, customer journey mapping and job-to-be-done analysis – encouraged team members to stay involved with the problem long enough to reframe the opportunity.

The highest payoff from adopting a design-thinking approach was not necessarily in identifying a solution, but rather in innovating how people worked together to envision and implement the new possibilities they discovered.

Citizen participation in urban governance has established itself as a paradigm, promising greater democracy, empowerment, and more cost-effective public service delivery against the backdrop of increased urban conflicts. The dominant focus on the “citizen” or even “smart citizen” in the context of smart cities and urban innovation is however a relatively recent phenomenon. A growing number of initiatives seek to revamp the smart city as a human smart city. Therein, design thinking and human-centered design have become the buzzwords of choice to describe “putting people first” approaches that promise to develop solutions tailored to citizens’ needs. What was previously known as user-centered design in the context of information and communication technology (ICT) product and service development now proliferates the urban through innovation labs or civic hackathons. But what are the implications of using design thinking in a smart city context? And moreover, how to unpack human-centered design and design thinking within urban scholarship? This chapter contextualizes the phenomenon of design thinking in cities and renders implicit design thinking processes more explicit. Drawing upon ongoing research in Manchester and Amsterdam since 2014, my work-in-progress suggests that governing through design thinking results in a designing of the social rather than for the social. This trend requires historically informed political analysis and alternative ways to govern if the “right to the smart city” is not to become yet another iteration of shape-shifting neoliberal strategies.

The paper aims to research the applications of topological geometry to the architectural concept design process and their combination with the modern digital technology to find novel architectural spaces and forms which are dynamic, easily adaptable to the context and surroundings.

The article uses the method of studying the existing literature on topological geometry and architectural design theory including design thinking, architectural design methods and architectural compositions to analyze and compare them with architectural practices and suggest new topological design tools and methods. Moreover, the paper tests the proposals with a number of preliminary design research experiments. In addition, graphic design software, parametric design, building information modeling (BIM) and digital development trends in architecture were explored and experienced to reveal the application potential of topological design thinking and methods in the trend of architectural digitization.

The paper has analyzed, synthesized and systematized the basic theories of topological geometry in order to clarify their applications in the architectural concept design process. On that basis, the paper proposes a novel topological design thinking and method for finding rich diversified architectural ideas and forms based on original invariant design constraints. Finally, the paper clarifies the combination as well as the mutual, motivating relationship between topological geometry and modern digital technologies when applied to architectural design.

The research contributes a novel design thinking and method based on topological geometry combined with modern digital technology to the architectural design theory. It will be a valuable tool capable of suggesting architects how to think and innovate in architecture in the era of industrial revolution 4.0.

This paper examines the potential of photography as a design thinking method to develop innovative food experiences that improve food well-being.

This paper is a critical review of research using photography to examine the complex physical, emotional, psychological and social relationships individuals have with food at personal and societal levels.

The conceptual legitimacy of photography is well-established in the social sciences but has been missing from design thinking practices. Photography is particularly well suited to understand the highly visual practice of food and to design innovative food experiences.

Practical and ethical issues in the use of photography are considered as a research tool. Future research should examine photography as an integrated tool in the entire design thinking process.

A table of photographic research methods for all stages of design thinking, from empathy to prototyping, is presented. Best practices for the successful implementation and interpretation of photography in food design thinking are discussed.

Photography is a uniquely inclusive and accessible research method for understanding the social problem of food well-being and designing innovative food experiences.

To the best of the authors knowledge, this paper provides the first conceptual foundation for the use of photography in design thinking. The paper identifies novel photographic methods that can be used to understand problems and generate solutions. It provides guidelines to successfully integrate photography in the design of innovative food experiences that improve food well-being.

Innovation is a key driver of growth in the twenty-first century economy. Organisations of all types are increasingly relying on innovators to create and deliver this key driver in a constantly changing, globally competitive business environment. We need to understand innovation – what it is, how to harness it, why it is important and what frameworks and tools are useful for product, service, experience design and beyond.

The purpose of this chapter to introduce the principles of design thinking and its role in creativity and marketing as well as some of the organisations that are using it in order to spur innovation and how they are using it effectively. The chapter examines some of the results and best practices for how organisations, and their creative leaders, can use design thinking effectively. Last, the chapter provides some insight into the future trends of design thinking.

Challenge-based learning (CBL) has gained acceptance as a contemporary and progressive teaching pedagogy that provides a holistic and inclusive experience to learners in higher education (HE) institutions. However, its lack of appeal to non-STEM subjects and the need for further development, particularly concerning improved approaches, have been recognized. It seems that CBL runs the risk of becoming a portmanteau pedagogy that blends aspects of problem-based learning, project-based learning, and situated learning, as opposed to its development as an effective pedagogy tool. This points to a lack of a formal implementation framework, code of practice, and standard procedures for its delivery. We argue that blending a design thinking (DT) pedagogy with CBL can potentially provide the stability that CBL currently lacks. At the same time, it also presents a more inclusive proposition to potential non-STEM audiences. Thus, in this chapter, we seek to interrogate the intersectionality between CBL and DT literature in the context of HE teaching and learning with a view of establishing CBL as a pedagogy in its own right. We attempt to achieve this by systematically analyzing the separate literature to reveal the synergies and common touchpoints.

This article explains how design thinking and practices can identify unexplored opportunities for strategic growth. Increasingly practitioners are learning about powerful ways they can work together, with design mindsets and practices improving the strategy development process in multiple ways.

By integrating design practices into strategy development, practitioners can produce both incremental improvement in the performance of today’s business model and open opportunities to completely transform it.

Using design thinking, to understand the job customers are trying to do and the problem they have doing it allows strategists to craft a new potential offering and shape a value proposition that creates greater value than existing alternatives.”

The first design practice worth integrating into strategy development is human-centered design (HCD), with its tools that explore multiple pathways for growth through the experience of customers, the perspectives of “uncommon” partners, and the untapped local intelligence of employees.

The capability set design thinking offers – the focus on customers’ job-to-be-done, the ability to prototype and experiment, to manage a portfolio of bets, and to foster engagement and alignment – can provide what successful growth, whether incremental or disruptive, demands.

Organizations facing issues related to growth, innovation, and strategy are embracing design thinking, a problem-solving process. This study explores 40 design thinking initiatives and identifies operational practices emerge and empirical categories across various contexts. Quantitative analyses of the initiatives and qualitative interview data are used to distinguish four configurations of action analogous to races: training, emphasizing learning-by-doing; marathons, capturing personal reflection over a long project; relays, highlighting team collaboration; and sprints, reflecting fast-paced product innovation. The initiatives are differentiated as designer-led versus team-driven and, low-urgency versus high-urgency. Implications of practicing design thinking in Organization Development and Change are discussed.

Participatory design involves users and other key stakeholders in processes that aim to ensure solutions generated meet their needs. This paper compares the processes and outcomes of two participatory design approaches (design thinking and co-design) to examine their utility in co-creating innovative service solutions for reducing household energy demand.

Design thinking and co-design were implemented in two independent convenience samples of household energy users in Queensland, Australia. Workshops were conducted online using Zoom and Padlet technology. Informed by the capability-practice-ability (CPA) portfolio, a critical analysis based on the research team's experiences with implementing the two participatory design approaches is presented.

The key distinguishing features that set design thinking apart from co-design is extent of user involvement, solution diversity and resource requirements. With a shorter duration and less intensive user involvement, co-design offers a more resource efficient means of solution generation. In contrast, design thinking expands the solution space by allowing for human-centred problem framing and in so doing gives rise to greater diversity in solutions generated.

Mapping the six constellations of service design outlined in the CPA portfolio to the research team's experiences implementing two different participatory design approaches within the same context reconciles theoretical understanding of how capabilities, practices and abilities may differ or converge in an applied setting.

Understanding the benefits and expected outcomes across the two participatory design approaches will guide practitioners and funding agencies in the selection of an appropriate method to achieve desired outcomes.

This paper compares two forms of participatory design (design thinking and co-design) for service innovation in the context of household energy demand offering theoretical and practical insights into the utility of each as categorised within the CPA portfolio.