Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:35:43.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design Thinking: An Approach with Various Perceptions

Part of: Design Methods and Tools

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Sanne Bouwman ,
Jesper Voorendt ,
Boris Eisenbart  and
Seda McKilligan
Sanne Bouwman*
Affiliation:
Delft University of Technology;
Jesper Voorendt
Affiliation:
Delft University of Technology;
Boris Eisenbart
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology;
Seda McKilligan
Affiliation:
Iowa State University
*
Contact: Bouwman, Sanne, Delft University of Technology, Industrial Design Engineering, The Netherlands, sanne.bouwman@hotmail.com

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Design Thinking has become increasingly popular across different disciplines. However, what it exactly entails is becoming more and more vague, leading to the term being used for many different approaches and applications. This paper presents an interview study with experts on the application and training of Design Thinking in academia and industry. We find a divide with some seeing Design Thinking as a mere toolbox of methods, while others see it as an umbrella term for the mindset that determines how designers think and act. Subjects unanimously attest the approach large potential to support certain types of businesses, when applied under the leadership of trained designers, but see a lot of danger for the approach to become meaningless if it keeps being advertised as an all-purpose problem-solving tool. The interviewees further share extensive experiences on specific success factors and pitfalls in applying Design Thinking in practice.

Keywords

Design ThinkingDesign practiceDesign methodologyDesign methodsProblem-solving
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1443 - 1452
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Adams, R.S., Daly, S.R., Mann, L.M. and Dall'Alba, G. (2011), “Being a professional: Three lenses into design thinking, acting, and being”, Design Studies, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 588–607.Google Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P., Roozenburg, N. and Cardoso, C. (2010, October), “Design thinking: a paradigm on its way from dilution to meaninglessness”. In Proceedings of the 8th design thinking research symposium, pp. 19–20.Google Scholar
Bason, C. (2010), Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-creating for a Better Society, Policy Press, Bristol, 2010.Google Scholar
Boland, R. J. and Collopy, F. (2004), Design matters for management, Na., pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
Brown, T. (2009), Change By Design, HarperCollins Publishers, United States.Google Scholar
Buchanan, R. (1992), “Wicked problems in design thinking”, Design issues, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 5–21.Google Scholar
Buchanan, R. and Margolin, V. (1995), Discovering design: explorations in design studies, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carlgren, L., Rauth, I. and Elmquist, M. (2016), “Framing design thinking: The concept in idea and enactment”, Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 38–57.Google Scholar
De Lille, C. S. H., Roscam Abbing, E. and Kleinsmann, M. S. (2012), “A designerly approach to enable organizations to deliver product-service systems”, In International DMI Education Conference: Design Thinking: Challenges for Designers, managers and Organizations, 14-15 April 2008, DMI, Cergy-Pointoise, France.Google Scholar
Dorst, K. (2011), “The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application”, Design studies, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 521–532.Google Scholar
Garbuio, M., Dong, A., Lin, N., Tschang, T. and Lovallo, D. (2018), “Demystifying the Genius of Entrepreneurship: How Design Cognition Can Help Create the Next Generation of Entrepreneurs”, Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 17 No. 1.Google Scholar
Gericke, K., Maier, A. (2011), “Scenarios for Coupling Design Thinking with Systematic Engineering Design in NPD”, 1st Cambridge Academic Design Management Conference.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. and Badke-Schaub, P. (2009), “The Design-Psychology Indispensible Research Partnership”, In Proceedings of the 8th Design Thinking Research Symposium, Sydney.Google Scholar
Kimbell, L. (2011), “Rethinking design thinking: Part I”, Design and Culture, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 285–306.Google Scholar
Kolko, J. (2015), “Design thinking comes of age”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 93 No. 9, pp. 66–71.Google Scholar
Liedtka, J. and Ogilvie, T. (2011), Designing for growth: A design thinking toolkit for managers, Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lockwood, T. (2009), “Frameworks of design thinking”, Design Management Journal, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 3–3.Google Scholar
Martin, R.L. (2009), The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
McKilligan, S., Dhadphale, T. and Ringholz, D. (2017), “Speed dating with Design Thinking”, International Association of Societies of Design ResearchGoogle Scholar
Norman, D. (2010), “Why design education must change”, core77, Vol. 11, p. 26.Google Scholar
Rae, J. (2008), “P&G Changes its Game–How Procter&Gamble uses Design Thinking to Crack difficult business problems”, Businessweek vom, Vol. 28.Google Scholar
Reber, A.S. (1989), “Implicit learning and tacit knowledge”, Journal of experimental psychology: General, Vol. 118 No. 3, p. 219.Google Scholar
Schmiedgen, J., Rhinow, H., Köppen, E. and Meinel, C. (2015), Parts without a whole?Google Scholar
Schweitzer, J., Groeger, L. and Sobel, L. (2016), “The design thinking mindset: An assessment of what we know and what we see in practice”, Journal of Design, Business & Society, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 71–94.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994), “Grounded theory methodology”, Handbook of qualitative research, Vol. 17, pp. 273–285.Google Scholar
Verganti, R. (2009), Design driven innovation: changing the rules of competition by radically innovating what things mean. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar