Design Principles for Creative Spaces

Thoring, Katja; Mueller, Roland M.; Desmet, Pieter; Badke-Schaub, Petra

doi:10.21278/idc.2018.0233

Cited by 12 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This means allowing for a space in which individuals can perform individual work, resources that facilitate the coordination and separation of work (such as screen splitting), etc. Second, when designing for in-person collaboration meetings, the meeting space must be considered (Thoring, Mueller, Desmet, & Badke-Schaub, 2018). Facility of movement plays a key role; when students gather around a vertical workspace, collaboration seems to emerge more quickly, where fixed individual spaces encourage students to stay in place and rely on an animator.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Physical-Digital Workspaces to Support Globally Collaborative Work

Tucker

Gidel

Fluckiger

2019

Proc. Int. Conf. Eng. Des.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines some aspects of physical-digital workspaces, focusing on multi-user, multi-touch technologies and how different workspaces impact collaboration. We introduce the concept of globally collaborative work. We chose to use case studies completed by groups of students in an engineering course to test different workspace modalities: the use of a large multi-touch table top in conjunction with a multi-touch board (vertical), the use of tablets with the multi-touch board, and finally the multi-touch board alone. The evaluation criteria are based on modes of interaction which emerge during globally collaborative work sessions: individual work, communication, coordination, cooperation and collaboration. We hypothesized that the workspaces would influence collaborative activity, expecting to see higher rates of collaboration in the table top environment than in the other two modalities studied. However, results showed less co-building and more cooperative work, as students divided their work and later attempted to negotiate a coherent product built on individual contributions. Lastly, we share a few design recommendations based on these results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Physical-Digital Workspaces to Support Globally Collaborative Work

Tucker

Gidel

Fluckiger

2019

Proc. Int. Conf. Eng. Des.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Design Theories, Type 5. Four sources presented design theories that provided concrete guidelines or principles how to design a creative space (Doorley and Witthoft, 2012;Thoring et al, 2018cThoring et al, , 2018bvan Meel et al, 2010). Tools and Artefacts.…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Education and practice contexts. Nine sources addressed both, education and practice environments (Groves-Knight and Marlow, 2016;Kohlert and Cooper, 2017;McCoy and Evans, 2002;Oksanen and Ståhle, 2013;Thoring et al, 2018bThoring et al, , 2018aThoring et al, , 2018cThoring et al, , 2015Walter, 2012). Innovation laboratories.…”

Section: Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cannon & Utriainen (2013), Doorley & Witthoft (2012), Jankowska & Atlay (2008), Haner (2005), Martens (2008), McCoy (2005, Meinel et al (2017), Moultrie et al (2007), Oksanen & Ståhle (2013), Setola & Leurs (2014), Thoring et al (2018b), Walter (2012) Culture of Space, Reflect Identity, Symbolic Aspects…”

Section: Iced19mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cannon & Utriainen (2013), Groves-Knight & Marlow (2016), Kohlert & Cooper (2017), Lewis & Moultrie (2005), Lindahl (2004), Martens (2008), Moultrie et al (2007), Oksanen & Ståhle (2013), , Paoli, Sauer, & Ropo (2017), Thoring et al (2012aThoring et al ( , 2012bThoring et al ( , 2017aThoring et al ( , 2018aThoring et al ( , 2018b, Walter (2012), Williams (2013) Ownership of Space Cannon & Utriainen (2013), Leurs et al (2013), Lewis & Moultrie (2005), Schmidt, Brinks & Brinkhoff (2015), Setola & Leurs (2014) Accessibility Moultrie et al (2007), Schmidt, Brinks & Brinkhoff (2015), Thoring et al (2018b) Facilitator, Assistant…”

Section: Iced19mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Creative Space: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Thoring

Desmet

Badke-Schaub

2019

Proc. Int. Conf. Eng. Des.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art research about creative work and learning environments. We conducted a systematic literature search within the Scopus database and identified a total of 70 relevant sources discussing creative spaces within academic, practice, or other innovation environments. Among the included sources are 48 academic publications and 22 sources from company research and illustrative coffee-table books that are discussed separately. We analyse the academic sources regarding their theoretical contribution, as well as regarding their scope. Finally, the included sources are categorized according to three areas of interest: (1) the addressed space types for different creative activities, (2) abstracted requirements for creative spaces, and (3) concrete characteristics and configurations of a creative space. The results provide an in-depth insight into the current state of research on the topic of creative spaces. Practitioners, educators, and researchers can use the presented overview to investigate the possible impact of creative workspace design and to identify research gaps for conducting further research in the field.

show abstract

An Analytical Framework for Designing Future Hybrid Creative Learning Spaces: A Pattern Approach

Zhu

Yang

2023

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Existing frameworks which serve as reference for the design of creative space in educational institutions and organizations, have shown some limitations. On one hand, current spatial design theories concerned with hybrid spaces and digital technologies are limited; on the other hand, the analysis of digital technologies' influence on spaces conducted in Information System and Computer Science research fields rarely uses a spatial theory as a foundation [1]. The aim of this ongoing research is to develop an analytical framework that integrates creative space types and a blended space model in support of the design of future hybrid creative environments (FHCS framework).The current findings have shown that many different social-spatial design solutions exist in both physical and digital spaces, and which are systematically organized as a pattern language. Identified pattern candidates are from specific application domains (e.g., spatial design, HCI Design, E-learning, and game design), and they capture and represent design knowledge of experts. Therefore, the pattern language from Christopher Alexander et al. [2] seems an appropriate approach to bring together design guidance and tools from different disciplines, in a vocabulary that can be shared across disciplines. Through a pattern mining process, various pattern frameworks and many pattern candidates that are related to the design of hybrid creative learning spaces have emerged from the analysis. As a result, 323 patterns are derived from four disciplines, and 13 generic pattern clusters have evolved in relation to the hybrid design themes.

show abstract

Design Principles for Creative Spaces

Cited by 12 publications

References 14 publications

Designing Physical-Digital Workspaces to Support Globally Collaborative Work

Designing Physical-Digital Workspaces to Support Globally Collaborative Work

Creative Space: A Systematic Review of the Literature

An Analytical Framework for Designing Future Hybrid Creative Learning Spaces: A Pattern Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About