Skip to content
1981
Volume 5, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2055-2106
  • E-ISSN: 2055-2114

Abstract

This article argues that using a design-led approach is highly beneficial when tackling complex problems to transform ambiguity into actionable design briefs and solution opportunities. This is evidenced by way of an ongoing project with a large public-sector organization. Northumbria University’s School of Design academic experts use design-led approaches to innovation that promotes ‘creative fusion’ between diverse stakeholders in order to tackle ‘wicked problems’. The authors continue this work as part of an Arts and Humanities Research Council/ European Regional Development Fund-funded programme entitled Creative Fuse North East (CFNE), involving five regional universities, of which the project discussed here is a part. The main objectives of CFNE are to develop and deploy approaches to innovation that apply skills from creative graduates to benefit the wider creative economy, address barriers to innovation and promote growth and sustainability within and without the Creative, Digital and IT sector (CDIT). The authors propose that to do this it is vital to convert stakeholders into co-creation activists empowered with the creative confidence and tools required to speculate about uncertain futures.

© 2019 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
2019-03-01
2026-04-10

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alves, J., Marques, M. J., Saur, I. and Marques, P. (2007), ‘Creativity and innovation through multidisciplinary and multisectoral cooperation’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 16:1, pp. 27–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bailey, M., Aftab, M. and Duncan, T. (2014), ‘New design is bigger and harder – Design mastery in a changing world’, in E. Bohemia, A. Eger, W. Eggink, A. Kovacevic, B. Parkinson and W. Wits (eds), DS 78: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE14), Design Education and Human Technology Relations, University of Twente, 4–5 September, Enschede: The Design Society, Institution of Engineering Designers, pp. 443–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey, M., Aftab, M. and Smith, N. (2015), ‘Hidden value-towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies’, in LearnxDesign: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, 28–30 June, Chicago: Aalto University, pp. 290–307.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bailey, M. and Smith, N. (2010), ‘Safe environments for innovation-developing a new multidisciplinary masters programme’, in DS 62: Proceedings of E&PDE 2010, the 12th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, When Design Education and Design Research meet…, Trondheim, 2–3 September, Glasgow: The Design Society, pp. 60–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bailey, M. and Smith, N. (2016), ‘Making it work; Integrated academic practice’, in Proceedings of 20th DMI: Academic Design Management Conference; Inflection Point: Design Research Meets Design Practice, Boston, 22–29 July, Boston: Design Management Institute, pp. 2346–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bailey, M., Smith, N. and Aftab, M. (2013), ‘Connecting for impact-multidisciplinary approaches to innovation in small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs)’, DRS // Cumulus Conference 2013, The 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo, The Design Research Society, 14–17 May.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bandura, A. (1982), ‘Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency’, American Psychologist, 37:2, pp. 122–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Beckman, S. and Barry, M. (2008), ‘Developing design thinking capabilities’, Step Inside Design, 24, pp. 82–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. and Hillgren, P.-A. (2010), ‘Participatory design and democratizing innovation’, in PDC ‘10, Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, Sydney, 29 November–3 December, New York: ACM, pp. 41–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. and Hillgren, P.-A. (2012a), ‘Agonistic participatory design: Working with marginalised social movements’, CoDesign, 8:2&3, pp. 127–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. and Hillgren, P.-A. (2012b), ‘Design things and design thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges’, Design Issues, 28:3, pp. 101–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Bødker, S. (1996), ‘Creating conditions for participation: Conflicts and resources in systems development’, Human-Computer Interaction, 11:3, pp. 215–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Boer, L. and Donovan, J. (2012), ‘Provotypes for participatory innovation’, in DIS 12, Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference, Newcastle Upon Tyne, 11–15 June, New York: ACM, pp. 388–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Bornet, C. and Brangier, E. (2016), ‘The effects of personas on creative codesign of work equipment: An exploratory study in a real setting’, CoDesign, 12:4, pp. 243–56.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Bowen, S., Durrant, A., Nissen, B., Bowers, J. and Wright, P. (2016), ‘The value of designers’ creative practice within complex collaborations’, Design Studies, 46, pp. 174–98.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Broadley, C., Champion, K., Johnson, M. P. and McHattie, L.-S. (2016), ‘From participation to collaboration: Reflections on the co-creation of innovative business ideas’, in P. Lloyd and E. Bohemia (eds), Proceedings of DRS2016: Design + Research + Society - Future-Focused Thinking, vol. 5, Brighton, 27–30 June, Brighton: The Design Research Society, pp. 1739–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Brown, T. and Katz, B. (2009), Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, New York: Harper Collins.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Brown, T. and Wyatt, J. (2010), ‘Design thinking for social innovation’, Development Outreach, 12:1, pp. 29–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Brown, V. A. (2010), ‘Collective inquiry and its wicked problems’, in V. A. Brown, J. A. Harris and J. Y. Russell (eds), Tackling Wicked Problems through the Transdisciplinary Imagination, London: Earthscan, pp. 61–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Buchanan, R. (1992), ‘Wicked problems in design thinking’, Design Issues, 8:2, pp. 5–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Bucolo, S. and Matthews, J. H. (2011), ‘Design led innovation: Exploring the synthesis of needs, technologies and business models’, Participatory Innovation Conference 2011, University of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg, 13–15 January.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Bucolo, S. and Wrigley, C. (2014), ‘Design-led innovation: Overcoming challenges to designing competitiveness to succeed in high cost environments’, in G. Roos and N. Kennedy (eds), Global Perspectives on Achieving Success in High and Low Cost Operating Environments, Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 241–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Bucolo, S., Wrigley, C. and Matthews, J. (2012), ‘Gaps in organizational leadership: Linking strategic and operational activities through design-led propositions’, Design Management Journal, 7:1, pp. 18–28.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Coyne, R. (2005), ‘Wicked problems revisited’, Design Studies, 26:1, pp. 5–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Cross, N. (2006), Designerly Ways of Knowing, London: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Davis, J., Docherty, C. A. and Dowling, K. (2016), ‘Design thinking and innovation: Synthesising concepts of knowledge co-creation in spaces of professional development’, The Design Journal, 19:1, pp. 117–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (2017), Building Our Industrial Strategy: Green Paper, London: HM Government, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/611705/building-our-industrial-strategy-green-paper.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Design Council (2015), The Design Economy: The Value of Design to the UK, London: Design Council, https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/The%20Design%20Economy%20executive%20summary.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Dombrowski, C., Kim, J. Y., Desouza, K. C., Braganza, A., Papagari, S., Baloh, P. and Jha, S. (2007), ‘Elements of innovative cultures’, Knowledge and Process Management, 14:3, pp. 190–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Dorst, K. (2011), ‘The core of “design thinking” and its application’, Design Studies, 32:6, pp. 521–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Dorst, K. (2015), Frame Innovation: Create New Thinking by Design, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Dorst, K. and Cross, N. (2001), ‘Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem solution’, Design Studies, 22:5, pp. 425–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Facer, K. and Enright, B. (2016), Creating Living Knowledge: The Connected Communities Programme, Community-University Relationships and the Participatory Turn in the Production of Knowledge, Bristol: University of Bristol.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Flyvbjerg, B. (2011), ‘Case study’, in N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 301–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Fong, S. W. P. (2003), ‘Knowledge creation in multidisciplinary project teams: An empirical study of the processes and their dynamic interrelationships’, International Journal of Project Management, 21:7, pp. 479–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Fraser, H. (2012), Design Works: How to Tackle Your Toughest Innovation Challenges through Business Design, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Fremantle, C., Gulari, M. N., Fairburn, S. M., Hepburn, L.-A., Valentine, G. and Meagher, L. (2016), ‘Impact by design: Evaluating knowledge exchange as a lens for evaluating the wider impacts of a design-led business support programme’, in Proceedings of the 20th Academic Design Management Conference (DMI: ADMC), Inflection Point: Design Research Meets Design Practice, Boston, 28–29 July, Boston: Design Management Institute, pp. 410–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Gerring, J. (2007), Case Study Research: Principles and Practices, New York: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Gray, D., Brown, S. and Macanufo, J. (2010), Gamestorming: A Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers and Changemakers, Cambridge: O’Reilly.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Gulari, M. N. and Fremantle, C. (2015), ‘Are design-led innovation approaches applicable to SMEs?’, in G. Bingham, D. Southee, J. Mccardle, A. Kovacevic, E. Bohemia and B. Parkinson (eds), Great Expectations: Design Teaching, Research and Enterprise; Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE15), 3–4 September, Glasgow: The Design Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Hocking, V. T. (2010), ‘Designerly ways of knowing: What does design have to offer’, in V. A. Brown, J. A. Harris and J. Y. Russell (eds), Tackling Wicked Problems: Through the Transdisciplinary Imagination, London: Earthscan, pp. 242–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Innovate UK (2015), Design in Innovation Strategy 2015–2019, Swindon: Technology Strategy Board, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/474557/Design_in_Innovation_Strategy_2015-2019_WEB.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Jenssen, J. I. and Jörgensen, G. (2004), ‘How do corporate champions promote innovations?’, International Journal of Innovation Management, 8:1, pp. 63–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Kelley, D. and Kelley, T. (2013), Creative Confidence: Unleashing the Creative Potential Within Us All, New York: Crown Business.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Knowles, H. and Spencer, N. (2016), ‘Designing with stakeholders during social innovation projects: A mapping and analysis tool’, in E. Bohemia, L. Buck, K. Eriksen, A. Kovacevic, N. Ovesen and C. Tollestrup (eds), DS 83, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE16), Design Education: Collaboration and Cross-Disciplinarity, Aalborg, Denmark, 8–9 September, Glasgow: The Design Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Krabye, A., Matthews, J., Wrigley, C. and Bucolo, S. (2013), ‘From production to purpose-using design led innovation to build strategic potential in a family-owned SME’, IEEE Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium, Shenzhen, 1–2 December, New Jersey: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 37–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Kyffin, S., Aftab, M. and Spencer, N. (2017), ‘Social value creation through multidisciplinary design education’, IASDR 2017, Design Research Conference, Cincinnati, International Association of Societies of Design Research, 31 October–3 November.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Lam, B. (2017), ‘Applying strategic design as a holistic approach to investigate and address real world challenges’, Strategic Design Research Journal, 10:2, pp. 164–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Liedtka, J. (2011), ‘Learning to use design thinking tools for successful innovation’, Strategy & Leadership, 39:5, pp. 13–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. de Mello Freire, K. (2017), ‘From strategic planning to the designing of strategies: A change in favor of strategic design’, Strategic Design Research Journal, 10:2, pp. 91–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Michlewski, K. (2016), Design Attitude, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Morehen, J., Wrigley, C. and Wright, N. (2013), ‘Teaching design thinking and design led innovation to non-designers: A tertiary facilitator multidisciplinary study’, in Proceedings 2013 IEEE Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium: Design-Driven Business Innovation, Shenzhen, 1–2 December, New Jersey: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 55–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Myerson, J. (2018), ‘Keynote address’, E&PDE, 20th International Conference on Engineering & Product Design Education, London, 6–7 September.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Nissani, M. (1997), ‘Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research’, The Social Science Journal, 34:2, pp. 201–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Norman, D. A. and Verganti, R. (2014), ‘Incremental and radical innovation: Design research vs. technology and meaning change’, Design Issues, 30:1, pp. 78–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Nusem, E., Matthews, J., Wrigley, C. and Bucolo, S. (2013), ‘The challenges of adopting design-led innovative strategies in not for profits: The role of consumers, culture and employees’, in Proceedings 2013 IEEE Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium: Design-Driven Business Innovation, Shenzhen, 1–2 December, New Jersey: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 284–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Nusem, E., Wrigley, C. and Matthews, J. (2017), ‘Developing design capability in nonprofit organizations’, Design Issues, 33:1, pp. 61–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Parkinson, D., Bohemia, E., Yee, J. and Smith, N. (2012), ‘Design process and organisational strategy: A storytelling perspective’, Design Research Society 2012: Bangkok, Bangkok, Chulalongkorn University, 1–4 July, Bangkok.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Price, R., Wrigley, C., Dreiling, A. and Bucolo, S. (2013), ‘Design led innovation: Shifting from smart follower to digital strategy leader in the Australian airport sector’, in Proceedings 2013 IEEE Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium: Design-Driven Business Innovation, Shenzhen, 1–2 December, New Jersey: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 251–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Rittel, H. W. and Webber, M. M. (1973), ‘Dilemmas in a general theory of planning’, Policy Sciences, 4:2, pp. 155–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Robson, C. (2002), Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers, 2nd ed., Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Rogers, E. M. (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, New York: Free Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Russell, J. Y. (2010), ‘A philosophical framework for an open and critical transdisciplinary inquiry’, in V. A. Brown, J. A. Harris and J. Y. Russell (eds), Tackling Wicked Problems through the Transdisciplinary Imagination, London: Earthscan, pp. 31–60.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J. (2008), ‘Co-creation and the new landscapes of design’, Co-Design, 4:1, pp. 5–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J. (2014), ‘Probes, toolkits and prototypes: Three approaches to making in codesigning’, CoDesign, 10:1, pp. 5–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Sanders, E. B.-N. and Westerlund, B. (2011), ‘Experiencing, exploring and experimenting in and with co-design spaces’, Nordic Design Research Conference, Making Design Matter, Helsinki, NORDES, 29–31 May.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Sapsed, J., Nightingale, P., Camerani, R., Mateos-Garcia, J., Voss, G., Coad, A. and Byford, J. (2013), The Brighton Fuse, Brighton: University of Brighton and Sussex, http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/63573/1/The%20Brighton%20Fuse.pdf. Accessed 10 February 2017.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Schoffelen, J., Claes, S., Huybrechts, L., Martens, S., Chua, A. and Moere, A. V. (2015), ‘Visualising things: Perspectives on how to make things public through visualisation’, CoDesign, 11:3&4, pp. 179–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Sinek, S. (2011), Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action, London: Portfolio Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Spencer, N., Bailey, M., Smith, N., Davidson, J. and Sams, P. (2017), ‘What on earth is responsible innovation anyway? (And how to teach it)’, in DS 88: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE17), Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future, Oslo, 7–8 September, Institution of Engineering Designers, The Design Society, pp. 38–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Sterling, N., Bailey, M., Spencer, N., Lampitt Adey, K., Chatzakis, E. and Hornby, J. (2018), ‘From conflict to catalyst: Using critical conflict as a creative device in design-led innovation practice’, in The 21st DMI: Academic Design Management Conference Proceedings; ADMC18: Next Wave, Ravensbourne University London, 1–2 August, Boston: The Design Management Institute, pp. 226–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Vaajakallio, K. and Mattelmäki, T. (2014), ‘Design games in codesign: As a tool, a mindset and a structure’, CoDesign, 10:1, pp. 63–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Verganti, R. (2009), Design-Driven Innovation: Changing the Rules of Competition by Radically Innovating What Things Mean, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Wrigley, C. (2016), ‘Design innovation catalysts: Education and impact’, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics and Innovation, 2:2, pp. 148–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Wrigley, C. (2017), ‘Principles and practices of a design-led approach to innovation’, International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 5:3&4, pp. 235–55.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Wrigley, C. and Straker, K. (2017), ‘Design thinking pedagogy: The educational design ladder’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54:4, pp. 374–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Yin, R. (2014), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Bailey, M., Chatzakis, E., Spencer, N., Lampitt Adey, K., Sterling, N. and Smith, N. (2019), ‘A design-led approach to transforming wicked problems into design situations and opportunities’, Journal of Design, Business & Society, 5:1, pp. 95–127, doi: 10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
Loading
A design-led approach to transforming wicked problems into design situations and opportunities
Journal of Design, Business & Society 5, 95 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs.5.1.95_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): co-creation; creative confidence; design catalysts; frames; innovation; multidisciplinary

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test