Designing creative frameworks: design thinking as an engine for new facilitation approaches

Abstract:Recently, much of the literature on sharing in cities has focused on the sharing economy, in which people use online platforms to share underutilized assets in the marketplace. This view of sharing is too narrow for cities, as it neglects the myriad of ways, reasons, and scales in which citizens share in urban environments. Research presented here by the Liveable Cities team in the form of participant workshops in Lancaster and Birmingham, UK, suggests that a broader approach to Sustainability 2017, 9, 701; doi:10.3390/su9050701 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2017, 9, 701 2 of 16 understanding sharing in cities is essential. The research also highlighted tools and methods that may be used to help to identify sharing in communities. The paper ends with advice to city stakeholders, such as policymakers, urban planners, and urban designers, who are considering how to enhance sustainability in cities through sharing.

show abstract

“…Using co-design [48], futures [49], and social innovation discourses (e.g., [50,51]), both workshops involved the same two sets of activities:…”

Section: Workhop Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Sharing Can Contribute to More Sustainable Cities

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the concept has gained ground among both practitioners and educators, little research has been devoted to the use of DT in organizational settings and its potential role in relation to innovation (Kimbell, 2011;Cruickshank & Evans, 2012;Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla & Çetinkaya, 2013), with a few recent exceptions (e.g., Lindberg et al, 2012;Carlgren, Elmquist & Rauth, 2014a;Liedtka, 2015;Carlgren, Rauth & Elmquist, 2016). Despite often-cited anecdotal success cases, there is a void of empirical evidence of successful use of DT in industry (e.g., Walters, 2011;Carlgren, Elmquist & Rauth, 2014a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Challenges of Using Design Thinking in Industry – Experiences from Five Large Firms

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design Thinking (DT) is advocated as a user‐centred approach to innovation, based on the way designers think and work. Despite being increasingly promoted as an approach to innovation, there is still little evidence of successful impact. Rather, indications suggest that firms find implementation challenging. The purpose of this paper is to analyse challenges of using DT in light of literature on innovation barriers, in order to discuss whether there is something unique about DT as a concept that makes it particularly challenging to use. The paper is based on an interview study of five large firms that all have at least five years of experience of using DT. The analysis shows that several of the perceived challenges can be linked to known barriers to innovation. However, other challenges have not previously been described in the innovation literature, and the paper suggests that there are some unique aspects of DT that makes it particularly challenging for firms to integrate it in innovation work. These are related to its core themes: user focus, problem framing, experimentation, visualization and diversity. Additionally, the paper contributes with an empirically based categorization of challenges that managers will find useful if they want to implement design thinking in their organizations.

show abstract

“…The difference in group proximity of ranking 1 and ranking 2 showed if a group ranked convergent or divergent. As stated in the background section, both divergent and convergent rankings could be expected (Kallis et al 2006;Cruickshank and Evans 2012), and indeed occurred. In addition, there were numerous groups with unchanged group proximity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Furthermore, participatory public policy processes are characterised by stages of divergence and convergence of ideas (Kallis et al 2006;Cruickshank and Evans 2012). The early stage of such processes has been described as a phase of divergence (Kaner 2014): participants have various ideas of what the best solution is and need room to explore their views.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group proximity and mutual understanding: measuring onsite impact of a citizens’ summit

Pigmans

Dignum²,

Doorn³

2019

J. Pub. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To better understand the impact of deliberations during participatory policymaking events, we introduce and explore the concept of group proximity. An example of such events is citizens' summits, during which many parallel groups deliberate on solutions for a policy issue. At the summit that was studied, each group followed a value deliberation process with the aim to increase mutual understanding among participants. They were asked to rank the solutions in their order of preference before and after the deliberation. From these rankings, group proximity can be calculated with a rank correlation, enabling a precise comparison of participants' preferences in each deliberative group. High group proximity indicates very similar rankings in a deliberative group, while low group proximity demonstrates the opposite. Comparing group proximity of the before and after rankings shows if a group ranked convergent, unchanged or divergent. This measure allows for a quantitative analysis of early-stage public policymaking processes.

show abstract

Designing creative frameworks: design thinking as an engine for new facilitation approaches

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

How Sharing Can Contribute to More Sustainable Cities

How Sharing Can Contribute to More Sustainable Cities

The Challenges of Using Design Thinking in Industry – Experiences from Five Large Firms

Group proximity and mutual understanding: measuring onsite impact of a citizens’ summit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About