Design Thinking - Science topic

Manu Thundathil Matthew Lievesley Cloe Benz Apologies, I'm only seeing your answers now. Thank you very much these are very useful

Thanks Balaji Mohan! Wondering why don't you modify off-the-shelf ML from Google, FaceBook, etc, to cut development times?

Is Coverge CFD 'black-box', or can you see the code? Can you still have a functional solver if the company deoesn't like what your doing and pulls the license? I'm definitely an open-source advocate, based on equity reasons.

Muhammad Muhaemin Muhammad, Design Thinking is more a form of managing the process of design, especially in a business setting than it is about people from every field of human endeavor, need, financial amd educational status working together with people. Unlabeled, un-named Design is ultimately about people.

Design Thinking has been widely adopted because it helps business. Its understandable to people unfamiliar with design and creative people. Its a social media wonder-child. Adding to its popularity. people who know little or nothing about design feel like they're part of the same idea. Its the first idea about design that's become part of popular and social culture.

Sadly thats its flaw. Its taught and interpreted with a sameness that carries over to its results. People speak baout and organize and evaluate design the same.

In the 1970's, in the US, a studio named IDEO (IDEO and its history is online) described a method & approach to the process of design built bringing an large variety of voices, races, genders, cultures and religions. And encouraging under and over educated people to be part of design activities, By its nature the studio had no describe methods. It did however promote wonder, intuitive and creative thinking. IDEO encourage the idea that design was a normal part of all professions. And indirectly inherent in people from making prehistoric tools to today. By plan it promoted the expectation of dumb and very bad ideas. Its underpinnings make it eminently adaptable to change, learning how to learn about evolving needs that we no little of nothing about. For example, AI is our latest design problem while simultaneously

I doubt you'll like or understand what I'm describing. In particular in writing, "Explain your reasoning !" and needing to add the exclamation mark to exclaim the seriousness of your demand you created the environment that talks at people versus supporting and open discussion.

P.J. White P.J, We consulted implementing design thinking for small and moderately large companies. In my experience it’s potential falls flat because its hard to describe what we want, imagine, and/or give one anther our “sensibilities” and “instincts”. Plus, in 20 years communicating behind digital tools has blunted that ability.

An unmentioned complaint, there’s a lack of joy, spirit and soul in the initial concepts, work and finished product. But because we’ve gotten better at reducing costs management remains in favor of design thinking.

Depending on your background in the arts and science or business and finance (typically) there’s a wide chasm of what design thinking means. The thought process and language in different fields plus the sense of what each field considers insightful and well thought out is different. That’s been known for a long time as are established work arounds. But today the speed of new (good or bad) ideas increases this kind of misunderstanding.

The prospect of becoming creative and discovering insights that lead to new ideas is very exciting. Introducing the concept via IDEO, Apple, Braun, the better fashion, graphic and architecture companies adds a passion and desire to be part of design thinking and creative work.

However, in my opinion, none of it matters. The people who can work and make things this way have qualities of wonder, play and knowing how to learn. Anyone used to experimenting, failing and having a sense of what to try next, who hasn’t forgotten how to play, and especially uses all their physical, emotional and intellectual senses tend to “get” design thinking. The best thing I know is to moderate a variety people of all ages cultures, genders working together and then get out of the way.

Yes, that’s what design thinking hopes to achieve. It doesn’t. Too often, like most modern teaching, it's told in only one of our senses, "verbally". As if we all think and imagine the same way. Like most teaching, that assumes the same thing it misses the nature of how we experience people and the world around ourselves.

The mode of designing education can be different, and evaluating good or bad may require analysis based on specific contexts. The online teaching mode can serve as a supplement to the offline mode, but it is probably impossible to replace it because the advantages and experiences of online and offline are different.

Dear friend S M Mohiuddin Khan Shiam:

The integration of Design Thinking and engineering innovation represents a powerful synergy that can revolutionize the way we approach problem-solving in engineering projects. By combining the human-centered approach of Design Thinking with the technical expertise of engineering, we can create solutions that are not only technically sound but also address the real-life needs and problems of end-users. Design Thinking serves as a catalyst for engineering innovation, bringing a user-centric perspective to the development process. By employing empathetic methods to understand the needs and pain points of users, Design Thinking enables engineers to design solutions that are tailored to meet those needs. This user-focused approach helps to mitigate the risk of technicalities and ensures that solutions are relevant and impactful. The iterative process of Design Thinking also fosters a culture of continuous improvement, where feedback loops are an essential aspect of the development cycle. By incorporating user feedback at each stage of the process, engineers can refine and optimize their designs, resulting in solutions that are more effective and efficient. The collaboration between Design Thinking and engineering innovation is akin to a dynamic duo, with each discipline bringing unique strengths to the table. Design Thinking provides the creative vision and user-centric approach, while engineering offers the technical expertise and know-how to bring those visions to life. Together, they form a formidable team that can tackle even the most complex engineering challenges. The integration of Design Thinking and engineering innovation can lead to a virtuous cycle of improvement, where solutions are continuously refined and optimized based on user feedback. This iterative process ensures that solutions are not only technically sound but also meet the evolving needs of end-users. In conclusion, the combination of Design Thinking and engineering innovation is a powerful tool that can transform engineering projects into impactful solutions that matter to people. By prioritizing user needs and incorporating continuous feedback loops, this dynamic duo can create solutions that are both technically sound and user-centric. As such, it is an approach that should be embraced by any engineering project looking to make a meaningful impact in the world.

There is no way of telling without more context. I would suppose that teaching design thinking principles and methods would result in more time spent exploring the problem space and perhaps more iterations. To the point of collaboration, design methods can function as a shared reference for a group when reflection-in and -on-action (see, e.g. ). The question becomes more complicated if we are talking about actual thinking and how thinking like a designer influences the learning outcomes of invention-based learning. Here, experience and the supporting mindset become important. Mindset has been shown to affect the experience of using design methods (see ). I am currently working on a paper that explores the relationship between some of the complex variables that influence learning outcomes in a context where design methodology is used for scaffolding in an innovation project.

Ok

Self-determination theory can be very well applicable in design thinking framework while designing for intellectual disabilities. This theory can be further very well applied when designing and developing management ways for children with intellectual and neurotypical disorders.

Its main implication can be in the brainstorming, concept generation, ideation and testing phases. Especially while noticing the impact of certain self determined variable on a child or an individual.

This, can rather be very useful while testing certain speculation and observations which can have a positive impact on such community of individual.

Thus, in short short determined theory application in design thinking can be helpful for designing the ways and artefacts for the community who can’t suggest and state ways for themself and where the speculations are on a high count.

the right design thinking mindset involves embracing failure, experimentation, empathy, optimism, collaboration, prototyping, continuous iteration, and a human-centered approach. It's a mindset that challenges assumptions, embraces ambiguity, and seeks innovative solutions to complex problems while keeping users' needs at the forefront.

the same way you do it with your children---practice what you preach

To create innovative and future-proof solutions, it's valuable to integrate design thinking and foresight methodologies. Here's how you can effectively combine these approaches: 1. Understanding User Needs and Trends: For instance, imagine you are designing a new smartphone. Apply design thinking to conduct in-depth interviews with potential users. Understand their pain points, desires, and how they envision using the device in the future. Simultaneously, use foresight to identify emerging technology trends, such as advancements in augmented reality and artificial intelligence, to anticipate what features might be essential for users in the coming years. 2. Embrace Human-Centric Approach: Consider a scenario where you are working on a smart home project. Use design thinking to empathize with users and explore how technology can improve their daily lives. At the same time, apply foresight to anticipate changes in home automation, energy efficiency, and user behavior to ensure your design remains relevant and desirable in the future. 3. Divergent and Convergent Thinking: Suppose you are developing a transportation solution. Engage in divergent thinking through design thinking workshops to generate a wide array of transportation concepts, ranging from electric cars to autonomous drones. Then, leverage foresight to assess how global trends, such as population growth and environmental concerns, might influence the future of transportation. Converge on the ideas that align with both user needs and plausible future scenarios. 4. Scenario Planning: Let's say you are designing a sustainable packaging solution for a food company. Use foresight to create different scenarios around environmental regulations and consumer attitudes towards sustainability. Then, apply design thinking to ideate and prototype packaging designs that cater to each scenario, ensuring your solution remains adaptable to changing market dynamics. 5. Prototyping Futures: In the field of healthcare, consider designing a telemedicine platform. Create prototypes of potential future scenarios where advanced artificial intelligence plays a significant role in diagnosis and personalized treatments. Test the platform's functionality and user experience within these simulated futures, allowing stakeholders to interact with the technology and provide feedback for further improvements. 6. Iterative Approach: Suppose you are part of a team developing wearable health devices. Continuously gather feedback from users and use design thinking iterations to enhance the devices' usability and comfort. Additionally, apply foresight to stay updated on medical research and technological advancements to integrate novel features and functionalities in future versions. 7. Collaboration and Interdisciplinarity: Imagine you are part of a research initiative focused on sustainable urban planning. Collaborate with urban planners, architects, and environmental experts, employing design thinking to understand the needs and desires of future city dwellers. Concurrently, utilize foresight to explore various scenarios for population growth, resource availability, and climate change, enabling the team to develop urban designs that are resilient and adaptable to diverse future possibilities. Combining design thinking and foresight methodologies is a potent recipe for driving innovation and crafting future-proof solutions. By empathizing with users, anticipating trends, and prototyping future scenarios, designers can create impactful products and services that address present challenges while staying adaptable to emerging needs. This collaborative and human-centric approach, blending creativity with forward-looking analysis, paves the way for a more inclusive, sustainable, and promising future.

Alwielland, Introduce the goal to your group. Ask them to figure out how to combine design thinking and inventive thinking. Tell them to meet 2 hours three times a week. And make yourself available for their problems or question.

First- you need to create a stable environment that encourages people to ask questions, wonder and make many, many mistakes (an art studio is a good example). Tell the group failure is expected. People will be confused and have no idea what this is about. A background goal is for them to eventually ask one another what this is, what you mean…and over time…come up with some ideas. Expect normal good, bad and indifferent behavior and interaction. This is an impediment. People don’t easily become creative (see #2 below) around strangers. A social event might help.

With an unstructured and open environment set up, the next step is, please, get out of the way. And stay away. No opinions that imply what you want or examples of good solutions. In addition to a free and open environment you want to set in place two other items…(1)...tell them you expect them to challenge everything. That includes you, the university and Philippine culture…(2)…If I understand the Philippine word; “bayanihan”; you should encourage people to work and help one another as much as possible. If nothing here makes sense, is not practical or sounds dumb - then do

bayanihan. After 6 weeks give them a problem to solve. Do that each succeeding week.

Last, mention design, inventive, innovation or creativity as little as possible. Most people think they’re not creative. People are used to performing and thinking within school, business and social norms. None of this is the norm.

If you consider recursive versus discursive education, then yes, all learning starts from recursive. Bloom's taxonomy starts with knowledge--memorization. One cannot be discursive or critical about what one does not know. Now this does not mean both recursive and discursive must be one or the other. There should be an iterative, back and forth. Examine direct instruction and problems with minimalky-guided instruction.

Te recomiendo establecer tus objetivos de investigación y de esa forma plantear entrevistas con tópico diferentes dentro de los cuales estará los que interesan, hacer una evaluación seria con respecto a las pregunatas

Muhammad Taufiq Amir Muhammad, Yes, look at Richie Khoo's resources. Also I highly recommend study of IDEO's experience applying what they learned. - Others speak of ideas that sound the same but lack insight from the experience of applying the idea. And the insight to know how it applies and is modified to different needs. Also, searching ResearchGate itself you'll find many versions of your same question and the corresponding commentary.

La peor lucha es la que no se hace, El trabajo de niños se puede disminuir si se logra una adecuada constitución política.

Hi Juan Carlos, we have a number of research, education, and professional publications in Design Innovation, including Design Thinking. Here's a DOI link to our Design Innovation Methodology Handbook -- DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3860569 ( ). You can also find almost all our papers in my ResearchGate account. Please let me know if you would like to discuss. -Kris

Very well your topic for thesis Umur, I share this article to read, Kind regards.

This is a search for the same authors, but with a newer date

I think it is useful

Interesting question, I agree with Professor Faraed Salman. Bet regards.

With two questions, I think the best (and the simplest) option would be comparing means. It would be a simple bar graph of a mean for 1) design thinking studio and 2) normal school side by side. It would be also nice to add standard error bar; you can Google search bar graph with error bar with Excel.

If you are concerned about normal distribution (I do not think you need to), you can create a z-score and use that information instead. The unit of z-score is one standard deviation, whereas your raw score's unit would be one Likert order.

Yes, there are multiple options to present your score, but often times the simplest option works the best for the general audience. After all, we use statistics and visualization to communicate.

Please follow the links where the direct correlation of my proposal is described:

The process of applied drama/theatre is directly connected to the development of creativity, creative thinking, new solutions strategy, innovation.

It's simple: in the performing arts, it is the condition to have those skills incorporated in the body and mind (embodied mind).

The content of applied drama is providing exactly what is needed in the development of the five most important competencies (excellent communication/connectivity, relation/partnership, leadership, creative thinking, innovation)

Any article or the book under that title is of great help when discussing the benefits of the playfulness as the centre of applied theatre process.

More than 20 years ago I was started to develop the practical performative AV (Ars Vitae- art of living) method and training program on the basis of the "acting tools and rules" which equipped many of today's top managers. It was a kind of contrast to "team-building", it was titled team tunning/attunement. So I speak from the practical perspective too:)

Anyhow it is enriching to dive into that area, it is naturally connecting people and it definitely has the antistress as well:)

Hug, Alenka

interesting discussion

Kupp, M., Anderson, J., & Reckhenrich, J. (2017). Why design thinking in business needs a rethink. MIT sloan management review, 59(1), 42.

Maybe these contribution could be useful:

Hi dear Ashmika

Yes I do

Very interesting topic.

There several design areas that increase the revenues and shareholder returns: Your design should put you above your competitors and linked with your consumers: The merchandise design has to do with knowing the market and creating the goods and services that will grow your market segment. The production design can be developed to increase productivity and lower cost without compromising quality. The distribution/sales design include efficient ways of advertisement, supply, and pricing to get the product/service to the consumer

Is an explicit social mission a necessary condition for social value creation (design thinking

The flow of the supply chain depends on the social connection with the consumer to relate to their condition and needs for social value creation and develop the appropriate (design thinking and execution) that can sustain the merchandise, production, and distribution to the market/consumer.

Can business values augmented simultaneously and equally pursue social and economic goals? Customer-centered values augmented simultaneously and equally pursued for balanced business, would utilize corporate social responsibility to boost their community support; utilize return merchandise services and product improvement to sustain clientele loyalty, and deploy good employee remuneration to sustain productivity for a sustainable social system need for humane (not exploitative) symbiosis that supports economic growth for the trio of the employer, employee, and consumer.

"Design thinking" is a systematic approach to complex problems from all areas of life and the work world (including especially engineering). The approach goes far beyond classic design methods such as shaping and designing. In contrast to many approaches in science and practice, which approach the task from the technical solvability, user wishes and needs as well as user-oriented invention are at the center of the process. Design thinkers look at the problem through the user's lens and thus place themselves in the role of the user.

Design Thinking in the automotive industry

But why are agile methods, such as customer-oriented design thinking, so useful? The three most important advantages of this approach for the automotive industry:

(s. https://achtzig20.de/branchen-im-wandel-part-2-automobilbranche/)

1. Customer orientation: The Design Thinking method starts with the customer. This is exactly what is important for developing relevant innovations in the automotive industry. We need to ask ourselves the following questions: What are the needs of the customers? How can a better customer experience be created?

2. Iterative process: The iterative approach makes it possible to continuously obtain feedback during the design thinking process. This allows prototypes to be continually adjusted until they meet the needs of customers.

3. Wide range of applications: Design thinking can be used almost anywhere. From improving the customer experience to optimizing processes in production, anything is possible.

Thus:

With the right methods, the speed of innovation can be boosted in all companies. „Design Thinking“ is a agile working method to accompany us during transformation processes.

The Sugar Network is a global organisation of universities teaching design thinking. https://sugar-network.org/network/

The network is active on several social media. For your purposes perhaps their LinkedIn is handiest. https://www.linkedin.com/company/sugarnetwork/mycompany/

(but keep in mind that here they both list teachers and students)

A colleague who is associate editor with a journal has suggested "open reviews" as a means to improve publication speed and collaboration. this is probably the most "design thinking"-related proposal I've heard regarding the research process. If it were adopted, it would probably make significant changes in the sector.

Dear PJ White,

Participatory design (originally co-operative design, now often co-design) is an approach to design attempting to actively involve all stakeholders (e.g. employees, partners, customers, citizens, end users) in the design process to help ensure the result meets their needs and is usable.

Benefits of Participatory Design in Web Development

The most attractive benefit of the participatory design is bringing a fresh, unique set of eyes into the design process. Developers and engineers work daily to create web designs and interface models, but do not share the same perspectives of end-users

Co-design, design with users, not for them. Participatory design you design for users and get their input.

A human-centered, systems-minded, and strategy-aligned design approach for social sector leaders. ... Strategic planning is logical and ensures that an organization's activities actually lead to its intended outcome, rather than busy work. Human centered design is action-oriented, deeply human, and experimental

The design thinking process is broken up into five specific design thinking stages: empathy, definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing.

best wishes for your project

sandeep

Dear Dr. Horvath

I think that the main limitation of the current research on art is the usage of individualistic interpretations of art value or excluding the value form the unit of analysis. I'll try to show in conceptual/qualitative study that using the Theory of Social Practices interpretations and concepts can give a new way to study the art and art-related practices' transformations, which are the relevant research problems in studies on art. The research made this way is scarce along to my knowledge. One of the best research of this type I know is:

Ernst, D., Esche, Ch., Erbslöh, U. (2016). “The art museum as lab to re-calibrate values towards sustainable development.” Journal of Cleaner Production 135: 1446-1460.

RK

Dear Emmanuel Chigozie Ani thanks for the question. I think being a designer is relative, it depends on what your referring to. However, I consider myself to be a designer because my research activities include experimental work which require design of laboratory tasks.

"What is the best Fieldwork for Ideation process?" The iterative ideation process is related to what idea(s) or problems you’re focused on. It has wide application usage depending on which direction you want to go, for example, design fields of varying descriptions, etc. However, the specific fieldwork you need to embark on depends on what you are focusing on. At this initial stage, it seems to me to be a difficulty in prescribing the fieldwork without the specific focus or definition of the research problem. It could also create a stultification of great ideas you may have without defining your particular research problem. So in looking at the relationship between qualitative research (ethnography) and the ideation activity, what are you aiming at? Again, once you define that, you’re good to go. That is why @Abdullah Al-Beraidi attempts to help define specific problems you could look at. Thanks

International journal of design

Design Studies

She ji

Applied ergonomics

Ergonomics

Human factors

International journal of Industrial Ergonomics

Design issues

And many more ...

I've authored an article on DSR enriched with reflective practice (Schön) - - perhaps this will contribute to your discussion points.

Aside from the obvious knowledge of design theory, methodologies and practical application of design, they should understand design philosophy. The lecturer should also be able to argue about the ethics of design, how it is valued and measured. They should also be questioning design from a meta perspective - how it is used, why it is used and how it benefits society

Zhwan Dalshad: This is a paper we have published a few months back. Any comment will also be appreciated. Gnane

Thinking and doing on one's feet in dynamic situations where context changes dramatically, hour on hour is where design think's emergent process becomes valuable. Pretty much useless if only designers are part of the group.

Solutions that emerge usually are transferrable and adaptable.

Layering potential blank swan scenario's can help with preparations. Predictions have limited value. preparedness trumps.

Hi Kim, your questions have been pondered by academics since the age of Buckminster Fuller. Back then it was thought to be only a hype, but half a century later, we are still riding that wave, and there is no reason to think it will ever stop being relevant. Here is my argument:

We believe design thinking has been around since.... the age of computers, no, the age of Thomas Edison, wait, the age of Leonardo Da Vinci, hold on, since the invention of the wheel!

Actually, all those believes are wrong, we've being design thinking since we were primates. Researchers have found chimps that build sophisticated tools (which require design thinking) to be able to feed within challenging scenarios in the middle of the jungle. You can even argue that design thinking goes even farther back on our evolution chain.

We probably don't realize that design thinking comes as part of our basic survival kit.

I agree with Ricardo Lopez: "design thinking is difficult to be defined". That is probably why we state it as a "new" concept or a " temporary hype". But the fact that we struggle to describe it, does not mean it's new, or that its relevance has an expiration date.

Design Thinking will be relevant until the day we stop making decisions (design from Latin: designare).

What's good about design thinking? Everything! It allows us to be the only species that can take our survival from the harsh of the cave man, to the comfort of the penthouse and outside its own natural habitat: space.

What's missing? From my point of view, nothing, except, more of it. If most people realized the enormous potential they have within their mind, all the futuristic visions that Fuller, Edison and da Vinci had for humankind would have being realized by now.

The idea that Design Thinking would be irrelevant in the future is like the idea that "everything that could be invented has been invented".

For me, it's quite the opposite: "In my opinion, all previous advances in the various lines of invention will appear totally insignificant when compared with those which the present century will witness. I almost wish that I might live my life over again to see the wonders which are at the threshold"...Charles Holland Duell.

I have the same wish as Charles, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Hi Ulrika

Probably it's a bit early to say, but I think we achieved quite interesting results by applying design thinking tools, in a co-creation workshop. The workshop was aimed at developing new virtual reality applications to be used in municipal inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation facilities, and we invited a heterogeneous group of physiotherapists to participate in creating content.

The content based on the workshop results are currently being tested and evaluated both in Denmark and in Australia.

Paper:

Pardon the shameless self-promotion :)

Approaches to Measuring Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review

Snehal Nagarsheth thank you, will read up about it!

Aleksandr Sherstobitov great ideas and thank you for sharing them. The examples shared are spot on to coopetition yet to implement something similar in the public sector is different. If you have a utility company, an infrastructure company and an economic development company owned by the government, how can they all collaborate to give a single service to the public instead of having multiple channels (having the customer go to each individual company to get the same service)?

Christopher C Kelly Coopetition is a describe of cooperative competition. It is also a portmanteau of cooperation and competition.

The MGDR special issue on Design Thinking is now published and available here...

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/mgdr/vol4/iss2/

... As MGDR editors, Deniz Atik ... and I would be willing to consider follow-on commentary or successor articles and reviews.

Shian-Loong, what makes it more interesting is that even Sun Tzu in The Art of War refers to a systemic or holistic approach and I quote:

My problem lies in the validation of my work. It appears that I would need to analyse a number of diverse and divergent articles from the analytic world in order to validate the holistic models that I derive from the symbolic world. This as a direct result of the analytic world being very subject- and domain-specific.

I was wondering if there may be a less arduous approach to the validation.

In my opinion, the successful implementation of Design Thinking in primary school is determined mainly by the following factors: - properly implementing a new subject or topic into a specific course plan and curriculum, - the use of modern teaching instruments, including ICT information technologies, - improving the correlation of the new subject program or new issues included in the curriculum with current development trends in the field of Design Thinking.

Best wishes

I understand projectification as the process of developing a company from traditional to project-based organizational forms. How this process is structured depends on what the starting point for the process is. In his older, but widely quoted paper,

Christophe Midler described four phases of project identification:

- Functional organization and informal project coordination

- Centralized project coordination

- Empowerment and autonomy of the project management structure

- Transforming the permanent processes of the firm

In addition, Midler describes the need for change (e.g. changes in the relationship, changes in tools, changes in career management). In my opinion, these points can be a starting point for your design of the main components of a Projectification process model.

You can download the article from www.sciencedirect.com/science/

As highlighted above by Javier de la Fuente, “design thinking” is a combination of “analytic thinking” and “creative thinking”. (Brown et al). Implicitly or explicitly, "argumentative" approaches are essential to some design disciplines. Rittel and Webber (1973) characterized design and planning problems as 'wicked' problems, fundamentally un-amenable to the techniques of science and engineering, which dealt with 'tame' problems. Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but good-or-bad. Wicked problems have no definitive formulation, no trial-and-error. (Horst Rittel & Melvin Webber, 1973). Herbert Simon (1969) had introduced the notion of 'satisficing‘ and an 'argumentative', participatory process in which Designers are partners with clients, customers, users, the community. It is generally believe to be more relevant to Architecture & Planning. And I am bound to agree. Satisficing = Satisfy + Suffice.

And, in my humble opinion, Design thinking and 'wicked' problems - may not always mutually agree nor are they mutually exclusive in all cases. So, Satisficing may be a good idea.

Dear Dr. Tungnung,

If I understood the essence of your question ("Why do we need research and design strategy or process?") correctly, then I think I have a simple answer to you. Actually, what we need are design and research methodologies. They advise us on proper and effective strategies based on their underpinning theories. They also advise us on the processes (procedures and activities), as well as on the methods, the instrumentation, and the criteria. Eventually, methodologies systematize research and design. In other words, they reduce the dependence on the hypothetical, intuitive, heuristic, incomplete, and intangible elements, but also make it possible to benefit from everything that these can offer for the benefit of research and design. One more issue: Setting up research always needs activities that belong to the domain of design, and design typically benefits from the knowledge and means produced by design.

Best regards,

I.H.

What is design thinking in the original question?

Dear Yanelis Pavón-González

Ver cómo el contexto organizacional externo e interno afecta la racionalidad de la toma de decisiones en el diseño de procesos organizacionales.

Primero necesitamos saber cómo medir el contexto organizacional dentro de áreas específicas (los ejemplos no son suficientes), luego medir la racionalidad en la toma de decisiones en el diseño de procesos organizacionales.

Aquí discuto en la racionalidad utilizada para tomar una decisión. Deben pasar por tres etapas distintas y complementarias:

- ¿Prefiere mencionar la medida del contexto organizacional (o dimensiones y ejes)?

Hi Maryam,

It depends on the type of packaging component being designed (material, manufacturing process, printing method, etc.) and the development phase (early concepts, refinement, control documentation, etc.). For example:

- Rhinoceros (for concept exploration and dielines)

- SolidWorks, Catia, Inventor (for assemblies and part design refinement)

- KeyShot (for rendering)

- Esko Suite

- ArtiosCAD (for dielines)

- Studio (for rendering)

- CAPE (for palletization, truck load, etc)

- Adobe CC (Illustrator, Photoshop) (for artwork and mapping)

Dear prof.

I found a design group that have a system-oriented approach, this maybe help:

Dear Ince,

A colleague of mine at Northumbria University Design School: David Parkinson, has published an article on this topic called "Engaging Design Pitches: Storytelling Approaches and their Impacts". It reports findings from an extensive study, conducted through his PhD, on how Designers use storytelling and narrative to describe new design propositions and their potential value to people.

It can be accessed here: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/31237/

I hope that helps.

Merve Sarışın Coşkun Azam Nemati Chermahini

Thanks so much for your thoughts. It was encouraging. I will keep researching further.

Regards

Hello, Omer Akin is not on ResearchGate, but you can find his email by searching for the paper on Google Scholar and clicking one of the links for the (terribly named) CumInCAD Cumulative Index website, which appears to have an email. An alternative paper is Akin's 1987 'Expertise of the architect' which is available from a Google Search leading to Carnegie Mellon.

Best wishes,

Richard

Maybe you can check peerwith.com to find a suitable person that can give you a specific advice regarding the language editing.

... Thanks for your explanation... I really appreciate...

I think successful designers must have the talent, mastery, professionalism and practical experience.

I would suggest focusing on the SDGs and trying to set the questionnaire based on them as the concept of sustainability is human-centered in its essence. Anything which is sustainable, is human-centered as well but the other way around is questionable.

Hello Mr Hany M. El-Said ,

it would be interresting for me to join your research as I am kind of excited to explore more about product design on the basis of design thinking approach. we may have a further discussion in order to do brainstorming, kindly contact me through this email adress ahmad.zarqan16@gmail.com or skype ; ahmed.zarqan

I am looking forward to hearing from you soon

Best regards,

Design philosophy is deemed to be the highest level speculative thinking about (i) the existence and manifestation of design, (ii) the role and position of design in the society, (iii) the historical evolution of the design discipline, and (iv) the foundational basis of design thinking (Yoshikawa, H., 1989). The related inquiries are the core of design philosophy. Philosophy of design is often equaled to a meta-theoretical framework for design theories by which epistemological and ontological clarity could be brought in (Love, T., 2000), and often to a philosophy of practice (Evboumwan, N. F. et al., 1996). Horvath, I., (2004) considered (i) design science, (ii) design history, (iii) design policy, (iv) design ethics and (v) design axiology as complementary domains of design philosophy research.

Design thinking is a kernel concept in design philosophy. It is seen as a creative mindset and strategy to generate solutions for design, business and/or societal challenges in a 'designerly' manner (i.e. by collecting as many ideas as possible, generating multiple solutions by involving stakeholders, converting the ideas into concrete implementations, and testing them in practical contexts). Sometimes design thinking and participatory design are presented as equivalent, which is a rather questionable. User-centered design starts out from the end-users needs, whishes and characters, and ends at the end user with optimized product/service solutions which do not force the users to change their behavior to accommodate the product, but which creates (even unexpected) positive experiences. Though user-centered design assumes design thinking, and design thinking may manifest in user-centered design, the two concepts are not identical (but the mentioned interrelationships can be recognized among the concepts based on both epistemological and methodological investigations).

The following project could illustrate how DT is currently used to improve education in genera:

D-Think: Design Thinking Applied to Education and Training is an initiative of 7 partners from 6 different European countries that has the support of the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Commission.

in short i would say you are looking to match the competencies of the candidate with that of the vacancy.

it may only suggest the best candidate based on competency. competency may not be the only criterion for selection.

what about competencies that are difficult to measure?

check this out too: https://designthinkingforeducators.com

I would be interested to see the final result. This could be of interest to my students.

Please let me have it!

it is an interesting case. its seems you would need buy in from architects as well. that is why qualitative research may help. the research too would form a platform others can build on.

Speaking from a chemical engineering perspective (spread out to chemistry and engineering) I think that creativity is claimed vastly more than it is delivered, and that innovation is rare, and largely should not be encouraged.

An important duty of the engineer is to be safe. Thus using proven techniques, materials and methods of design (especially design standards) means that the engineer is not relying on their own limited knowledge and experience, but that of others, generally largely experts in the field.

Something innovative is by definition untried and not well understood (though the innovators may kid themselves they do). Companies and individuals should only do so when they are sure they can cope with failure. Individual inventors commonly fail many times for every success. Many small and innovative companies go out of business for every successful rise you read about.

In chemical engineering degrees we run design projects as the capstone of the degree courses. We can encourage students to attempt a new process or market, safe in the knowledge that the plant will not actually built, so any errors of safe design or economic evaluation will not have consequences other than the loss of a few marks.

The fundamental safety feature of engineering is getting the sums right, and this should be the service that universities can deliver to industry, along with an awareness of some proven technology and techniques. The average graduate is not expected to come up with something totally new, and in my personal experience companies are very wary of novelty.

Many papers I have seen claiming to teach creativity in engineering give examples of the occasional group where one bright student (possibly with the help of a relative in the field) has come up with what sounds like a good idea, but offer no evidence of getting all graduates to produce even one good idea. Others talk about taking a holistic view. This I am happy with. We can teach ways to explore more options and consider wider aspects, which will sometimes suggest a different way of going about things. The example I give is this:

A factory is being doubled in size, so the effluent treatment is also being doubled, using the same design as before at a cost of say £5 million. Consider if you could spend some of that sum to improve the process to produce less effluent and/or to improve the current effluent plant.

Dear Leandro,

You are welcome.

Lars

Dear Chauncey,

Thank you for addressing context, and how to approach one's surrounding. The redesign of behaviour and action is inevitable. Understanding past as a consequence for shifting behavior and action become critical, yes. Yet, for many this shift is overwhelmingly big due to the fact that process redesign (org/team/ind) do take time... still no one has said that it would be easy.

In the field of Product Development and Project Management (where I work), descriptive models should be as the name implies: A "model" that tries to "describe" with a certain accuracy a given phenomenon.

As such, IMHO, it should be tested against:

1- The related acceptable and proved concepts in the body of knowledge

2- The practice. In this case it should be understood as "a reasonable description of the phenomenon " by a relevant group of practitioners. It could be done by interviews or by questionnaires.

and, if possible, tried out.

Claudiano

Thank you!

if you can, please share it privately with me.