Design participation(-s)

Binder, Thomas; Brandt, Eva; Gregory, Judith

doi:10.1080/15710880801905807

Cited by 50 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2.2 Human-Centered Design Vs. Participatory Design HCD and participatory design [5,6] share a fundamental emphasis on people, i.e., getting close to people and observing and analyzing their needs, but diverge at the point where the idea of "user" is delimited. For traditional HCD, users are treated as either the object or the context of design, and then absorbed into the design process as the passive information carriers for designers to dig out opportunities, collecting data, recruiting feedback to evaluate the proposed solution prototypes [7].…”

Section: Anthropocentric Worldview Vs Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

When Human-Centered Design Meets Social Innovation: The Idea of Meaning Making Revisited

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Facing the challenges of sustainability, while design is seeking to play an important role in social innovation, human-centered design (HCD)-one of the most important philosophies of design-somehow appears to be fading out of the major research agenda. Based on a review of the limitations of HCD, this paper looks into the capability of the theoretical underpinning of HCD to support its potential development in social innovation from two aspects: (1) the connection between human-centeredness and the social dimension; (2) emancipating HCD from the asserted limitation of its role in innovation. The phenomenological perspective is used to support and broaden the worldview of HCD. Built upon this, the idea of meaning making is revisited to account for both questions. In addition, a preliminary framework of meaning making is proposed as a HCD tool that aims to facilitate the complex interaction in social innovation. It is argued that design as meaning making with a combined interest in exploring human experience will open up new opportunities for HCD.

show abstract

Section: Anthropocentric Worldview Vs Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

When Human-Centered Design Meets Social Innovation: The Idea of Meaning Making Revisited

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bannon & Ehn, 2012) and co-design (e.g. Andersen, Halse, & Moll, 2011;Binder et al, 2011;Brandt & Gregory, 2008). The interest in STS has also led to an orientation to the related actor-network theory (ANT) in descriptive analyses of relations among objects, technologies, people and systems and in mapping the conditions for the creation of design.…”

Section: When Design Takes Placementioning

confidence: 99%

Reflecting Contemporary Design Research

Engholm

2017

FormAkademisk

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, design research has been the object of growing attention in universities and academies around the world. The present paper addresses the heterogeneous character of design research and the current need for reflection on the various approaches and interests. For this purpose, the paper follows two steps. First Keywords: Design, design research, design theory, design method, theory of science. IntroductionDesign research is a growing discipline in much the same way that design is a growing field, incorporating many sectors and applications. Design, including design research, engages in, among others things, practice-based approaches in the social sciences, the humanities and engineering. From this starting point, very different methodologies and understandings of 'design' and design 'research' have evolved, and it may be difficult to meet on common grounds, though not impossible. This was instantiated at, for example, the recent 50 th Anniversary Design Research Society Conference (DRS 2016) in Brighton, where tracks in innovation, practice-based experiments, design history, etc. not only existed side by side, but also cross-fertilised each other.The design discipline serves as the basis for debate and the development of new theories, methods and concepts. Based on a broader perspective, however, design research has no established approaches or shared scientific foundations, as research necessarily develops in a number of different branches with specific subject areas and methodological practices. This raises the need to map and identify the various approaches. So far, however, there have been few attempts at summarising or taking stock across the various branches. This paper is intended as a step in that direction.In what follows, a proposal is offered in the form of a position model concerning a specification of the disciplines, positions and mind-sets that make up design research. The model is based on a view of design research as a pluralistic and cross-disciplinary field that relies on many different disciplines and incorporates multiple scientific and methodological practices. The position model is presented, and three layers are defined. The first layer describes some of the disciplines that define design research today. The next layer describes key positions within design research, while the third layer describes some of the scientific mind-sets that have affected design research in recent years. On the basis of the model, the paper summarises a series of approaches within design research in relation to the phases 'in which design takes place', 'design on the market place' and 'the design object'. Subsequently, the paper takes up the discussion of how to conceptualise design research today as a multi-, inter-, trans-, or metadisciplinary field. Can we, on the basis of the many approaches, speak of a singular design research; how do we approach the discussion? Approaching Design ResearchDesign has traditionally been associated with the arts and the technical professions. In recent ...

show abstract

“…Today, value and value co‐creation are regarded as the core of service (Vargo, Maglio, and Akaka, ). Binder, Brandt, and Gregory () infer that companies and organizations place much emphasis and attention on value co‐creation. And companies do not create value alone anymore (Håkansson and Snehota, ); on the contrary, they create value through multiple resources and co‐create value with stakeholders (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Underpinningmentioning

confidence: 99%