Pedagogy innovation for management graduates: application of design thinking

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to develop a pedagogy combining analytic reasoning with a more exploratory skill set that style practitioners have embraced and business schools have traditionally neglected. It proposes a viable business which will be converted into market opportunities. The study aims to expand the domain of design thinking (DT) by applying the concept in the higher education sector with special reference to management education. Design/methodology/approach This paper emerged out of an application of one of the models of DT in the field of higher education. While several models of DT are deployed by various sectors, the 3I model developed by IDEO in 2001 was chosen as appropriate to design a pedagogy for MBA students. The data were complemented by classroom teaching experiments, evaluation and student performance. Findings This paper provides empirical insights about how a change is brought about during implementing a new pedagogy in the system. This innovative pedagogy was named as “Integrative and Interactive Approach.” It was offered to first-year postgraduate students of management. Research limitations/implications Because of the chosen approach, the research results may lack generalizability. Researchers are encouraged to test the model in a smaller group before implementing. Practical implications The paper focuses on the testing and implementation of DT in innovating a pedagogy with reference to one chosen institute. The cost, benefits and challenges may differ when applied to other institutes of same kind. Originality/value This paper fulfills an identified need to have an integrated approach of teaching in management education using case study approach.

Exploring the dynamics of design thinking in management education and training: a critical review, taxonomic analysis and practical implications

“…Despite the burgeoning demand in industry and academia for DT and its significant potential in shaping creative and engaging pedagogies for education and training, ongoing debates persist on effectively imparting DT education (Schumacher and Mayer, 2018). A potential source of this conflict and ongoing discourse may be the absence of concrete, in-depth practical implementations, resulting in a need for a clear and intricate procedure for teaching and training in multidisciplinary approaches (Selvalakshmi et al, 2022). This absence, in turn, creates a sense of uncertainty among educators and academicians when teaching or training for DT (Schumacher and Mayer, 2018).…”

“…Lack of in-depth description of the methodology used Some studies omit details on how they designed proposed pedagogies using DT in management education and training. This creates ambiguity, leaving an open ground for assumptions about the use of theoretical literature, expertise from academic peers, and personal practical experience, which might be challenging for inexperienced scholars (Chongwatpol, 2020;Selvalakshmi et al, 2022). Furthermore, instances were noted where authors did not explicitly mention the methods they had employed such as sampling strategies (Cummings and Yur-Austin, 2022;Larson et al, 2019;Thacker and Berardi, 2021;Junior et al, 2020), manual coding or software-based analyses, or any other technique used to derive the outcomes (including principles, themes, codes, time slots/durations, models, course structures, among others).…”

“…Previous research on DT, and management education and training has simply summarised the existing body of literature (Bandera et al, 2020;Dantas de Figueiredo, 2021). A few authors, have however, undertaken empirical work, including workshops, exercises, interventions, and trials, among others (Selvalakshmi et al, 2022). The two issues mentioned-lack of a parsimonious framework and conceptual tensions arising from a lax evaluation of the current state-of-the-art literature-underscore the need for a thorough critical review.…”

“…, 2020; Dantas de Figueiredo, 2021). A few authors, have however, undertaken empirical work, including workshops, exercises, interventions, and trials, among others (Selvalakshmi et al. , 2022).…”

Mapping Study of Design Thinking on Product Development in The Last 10 Years

“…The stages in design thinking tend three to six steps/stages in it. The concept presented by Brown regarding design thinking is the most well-known design thinking process today (Suresh & Kolluru, 2022). Brown explained that the design thinking cycle model has three phases in it, namely: inspiration, ideas, and implementation where problem-solving is the main focus and identification of existing opportunities.…”