Action researcher to design innovation catalyst: Building design capability from within

Abstract

Design as a creative way of framing and solving problems is considered an essential business capability in an innovation era. Organizations with design capability can improve the lives of their customers, stakeholders and employees by creating valuable products, services and experiences. Design-led innovation is a framework that assists organizations to develop design capability for creating a better future as well as profitability. However, implementing design-led innovation requires support. This article presents insights from an action research extended to design innovation catalyst. The catalyst's aim was to facilitate implementation of design-led innovation in an Australian Airport Corporation to develop design capability. To date, this extended role of action researcher as design innovation catalyst has received limited attention. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present insights from the experience of the action researcher as a design innovation catalyst. This paper contributes conceptual and practical insight into the research design, action research cycles and critical reflection of an action researcher operating as design innovation catalyst.

The Use of Design Thinking in Transdisciplinary Research and Innovation Consortia: Challenges, Enablers, and Benefits

“…In line with the DT approach, action research (Guertler, Sick & Kriz, 2019, Guertler, Kriz, McGregor, Bankins & Bucolo, 2017 and engaged scholarship (Van de Ven, 2007) comprise similar benefits of better collaboration, capability building, increased relevance of the research methodology. The research was therefore carried out as action research where the researchers acted as boundary subject, process leader, change agent, and innovation catalyst (Huzzard, Ahlberg & Ekman, 2010, Price, Wrigley & Matthews, 2018, Wrigley, 2016. Our primary purpose was not only understanding how to implement DT in RIC but actively effect the desired changes and empower stakeholders.…”

“…Design driven vs. Data driven (Price et al, 2018) Scientists and engineers educated to trust and generate quantitative data, skepticism to qualitative, explorative and visual data.…”

“…Value of DT difficult to prove (Carlgren, 2016a) Not enough time/touchpoints in RIC to prove value of DT, bad experience with post it's DT Principles/Mindsets clash with org. Culture (Carlgren, 2016a, Price et al, 2018 Qualitative work, insecurity of the outcome and fun are not seen as serious research.…”

“…1. Experiential Learning -We used a "learning by doing" approach to implement DT to RIC as also described in other contexts (Price et al, 2018, Beckman & Barry, 2007, Rauth et al, 2015, Liedtka, 2018. Especially in early project phases it was crucial to have short DT lessons combined with practical workshops on the research topic of the RIC.…”

“…2. Change Agent / Design Innovation Catalyst -A process responsible who is actively driving DT engagement as also described by Price et al (2018) is a key enabler of DT not only in corporate context but also in RIC. We found that this Design Innovation Catalyst (DIC) needs to have high credibility in the research field to be accepted and successful.…”