DESIGN THINKING MODELS IN DESIGN RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

Andra Irbīte; Aina Strode

doi:10.17770/sie2016vol4.1584

Authors

Andra Irbīte University of Latvia (LV)
Aina Strode Rezekne Academy of Tehchnologies (LV)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2016vol4.1584

Keywords:

design thinking, design education, challenges, Latvia

Abstract

Design thinking has become a paradigm that is considered to be useful in solving many problems in different areas: both in development of design projects and outside of traditional design practice. It raises the question - is design thinking understood as a universal methodology in all cases? How it is interpreted in design education? The analysis of theoretical and design related literature indicates different basic and contextual challenges facing design today: increasing scale of social, economic and industrial borders; complexity of environment and systems; requirements in all levels. As specialists and researchers in the field of design have concluded, here are multiple disconnects betweenwhat the graduate design schools are teaching at the level of methods and what skills is already needed. The problems have been found also in interdisciplinary cooperation and research.

In the context of design thinking models and problem solving methods, the analysis shows that design education implementers in public higher education institutions in Latvia are ready for local and global challenges.

References

Aaalto University. (2016). Executive programs. Design Thinking for Business. Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from http://www.aaltoee.com/program/design-thinking-business-innovation/general-info.

Asimow, M. (1962). Introduction to Design. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001512094.

Bridges, A. H. (1986). Any progress in systematic design? CAAD Futures digital proceedings (pp.8-9). Retrieved 21 December, 2015, from http://cumincad.scix.net/data/works/att/a6f1.content.pdf.

Brown, T. (2016). The Next Big Thing in Design. Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from https://medium.com/ideo-stories/the-next-big-thing-in-design-513522543a6f#.h2lu74oan..

Compton, M., & Barrett, S. (2015). Grounded Theory in Art and Design. Proceedings in International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Volume 3, pp.1164.

Conklin, J. (2006). Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from http://www.ideapartnership.org/documents/wickedproblems.pdf.

Design Council (n.d.). A study of the design process. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/ElevenLessons_Design_Council%20(2).pdf

Double diamond. (n.d.). Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from https://innovationenglish.blogs.ku.dk/model/double-diamond-2/.

Dunne, D. & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management education: an interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 512-523.

Cumulus (2015). First Cumulus Think Tank – Designer: Careers and Professionalization. Retrieved 25 November, 2015, from http://www.cumulusassociation.org/academics/page/2/.

Friedman, K. (2003). Theory construction in design research: criteria: approaches, and methods. Design Studies, 24(6), 500-519. Retrieved 13 January, 2016, from https://www.academia.edu/2508830/Friedman._2003._Theory_Construction_in_Design_Research_Criteria_Approaches_and_Methods.

Friedman, K. (2011). Interdisciplinary Research: The Challenge. Retrieved 10 December, 2015, from https://www.academia.edu/3727725/Friedman._2013._The_Challenge_of_Interdisciplinary_Research.

Grocott, L., & Kobori, M. (2015). The Affordances of Designing for the Learning Sciences. Proceedinggs in International Conference for Design Education Researchers (Volume 3) (pp.1181-1182). Retrieved 10 January, 2016, from https://www.academia.edu/13300472/International_Conference_for_Design_Education_Researchers_volume_3 .

Guellerin, C., Minvielle, N., De Jacquelot, M. (2010). Designer: Careers and Professionalization. De Boeck. ISBN: 978-2-8041-6015-9.

Hassi, L., & Laakso, M. (2011). Design Thinking in the Management discourse; defining the elements of the concept. Retrieved 24 November, 2015, from http://www.mindspace.fi/wpcontent/uploads/2013/12/HassiLaakso_2011_IPDMC.pdf .

IDEO (2016). Expertise. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from https://www.ideo.com/about/.

Kuy (2016). Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from http://kyu.com/#overview .

Le Masson P., Dorst, K., Subrahamanian, E. (2013). Special Issue on Design Theory: history, state of the arts and advancements. Research in Engineering Design, 24(2), 223-243. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00870323/document.

Mattessich, R. (1982). The systems approach: Its variety of aspects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 33(6), 383-394.

Menial, C., & Leifer, L. (2011). Design Thinking Understand – Improve – Apply. Heidelberg

Norman (2014). Why Design Education Must Change. Retrieved 10 January, 2016, from http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/why_design_education.html.

One million signs (n.d.). Double Diamond. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from http://www. onemillionsigns.com

Pastor, E. (2013). The OTHER Design Thinking. Retrieved 12 January, 2016, from http://www.humantific.com/the-other-design-thinking/

Pourdehnad, J., Wexler, E.R., Wilson, D.V. (2011). Systems and Design Thinking: A Conceptual Framework for Their Integration. Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=od_working_papers.

Quartz & Co, the Danish Enterprise and Construction Authority; the Danish Ministry of Culture (2011). Mapping of International Design Policies and Strategies for leading design schools and research institutions, pp.23. Retrieved 17 February, 2015, from http://erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/file/163743/mapping_international_design_policies_strategies .pdf.

Project Europe 2030. Challenges and Opporunities. (2010). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved 15 December, 2015, from https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/librairie/PDF/QC3210249ENC.pdf

Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169.

Singapore Polytechnic (2016). SP’s Design Thinking Framework. Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from http://ejuz.lv/7f3.

Stanford University, Design Institute (2016). The Design Thinking Process. Retrieved 21 January, 2016, from http://dschool.stanford.edu/our-point-of-view/#design-thinking.

Van Patter, G. V. (2015a). Making sense of: "Why Design Thinking Will Fail". Retrieved 15 December, 2015, from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/making-sense-why-design-thinking-fail-gk-vanpatter.

Van Patter, G.K., & Friedman, K. (2003). New Design Research: Leading or Following? Next D Journal, 2, 9. https://www.academia.edu/3728316/NextD_Journal_2_New_Design_Research_Leading_or_Following_GK_VanPatter_and_Ken_Friedman.

Van Patter, G. K. (2015b). Talking about Sensemaking, Part 2, Origins of NextDesign Geographies. Retrieved 15 December, 2015, from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/origins-nextdesign-geographies-gk-vanpatter?forceNoSplash=true

Wieland, H., Kaartemo, V. (2011). Complexity by Design. Retrieved 15 December, 2015, from http://www.naplesforumonservice.it/uploads//files/Wieland,%20Kaartemo%20Complexity%20by%20Design.pdf