Design Thinking and Innovation: Synthesising Concepts of Knowledge Co-creation in Spaces of Professional Development

Abstract

This paper explores how design thinking connects to concepts of knowledge creation and innovation. A case study of a knowledge sharing network in the social services sector is used to illustrate how design thinking supports Ba, the spaces for knowledge creation. Further exploration of the four enabling conditions for Ba resulted in delineation of two distinct types: relational and structural. Relational enablers support three groups of enabling conditions: interaction, shared values and communication. It is proposed that design thinking aligns well with relational enabling conditions for Ba to create the ideal spaces for knowledge creation. The group of structural enablers can assist or obstruct change and relate to the culture and management approaches of an organisation, which may or may not be assisted by design thinking. However, to ensure that design thinking is not undermined, and innovation is achieved, the presence of an appropriate structural enabler is critical for success.

Lonely at the Top: How Do Senior Leaders Navigate the Need to Belong?

“…This supports Kanter’s (1979) propositions that top executives can often experience powerlessness because they are accountable for results, without necessarily having the required supplies, support, and information. Additionally, as Davis, Docherty, and Dowling (2016) claim “power in organizations is shared between diverse people rather than invested in one individual” (p. 130). This has important implications in relation to previous findings.…”

Living up to the expectations: The effect of design thinking on project success

“…In her exploratory multiple case study, Liedtka (2018a) examines how 22 organizations apply design thinking in practice and develops hypotheses about how the practices can influence innovation outcomes. Other single case studies present design thinking applications in the public sector, information and communication technology, design, automotive, marketing and many other areas (e.g., Bryant & Wrigley, 2015; Davis, Docherty, & Dowling, 2016; Wrigley, Nusem, & Straker, 2020). However, even though these case studies mention advantages like connecting certain individuals in the development process to the customer and providing the foundation for better decision making (e.g., Bryant & Wrigley, 2015), they do not explicitly focus on the effectiveness of design thinking for achieving project success.…”

A design-led approach to transforming wicked problems into design situations and opportunities

“…Particularly relevant to this paper are recent proponents of using designers to instigate and facilitate collaborations, for example calls from industry (Design Council, 2015;Bucolo & Wrigley, 2014;Fraser, 2012;Liedtka, 2011;Verganti, 2009) and academia (Wrigley & Straker, 2017;Bowen et al, 2016;Sanders & Stappers, 2008). A design-led approach to cocreation (Davis, Docherty, & Dowling, 2016) includes activities that encourage participants to (amongst other things):…”

“…Brown & Katz, 2009). Often features such as flexible (changing according to project needs), open and dedicated project spaces, equipped with creative resources to enable reflection and visualisation are cited as key components of environments that foster collaboration and innovation (Davis, Docherty, & Dowling 2016). Co-creative environments must ensure that they are inclusive i.e.…”