A Squandered it does imply, though, that not knowing what the
A Squandered it does imply, though, that not knowing what the
writers mean by theory leaves the reader having
Opportunity: A Response to make assumptions that may or may not be well
to “Examining Practical, founded.
Consider, for example, a discussion about a horse
Everyday Theory Use in
where no description of the animal itself is given. Any
Design Research” number of purposes for the animal may be assumed—
for example, that it is a herd animal that crops pas- Deirdre Barron, Swinburne University of Technology,
ture, a trophy that confers a certain status upon its Australia
owner, a source of labor or protein that is integral to food production, or even a commodity that may be
traded for profit and loss. It may even be assumed that it is an animal whose objective fulfillment of its
doi:10.1016/j.sheji.2016.12.007
purpose determines the ability of its owner to get a good bride for it. In all such discussions, these are legitimate considerations of what a horse does. Yet, in
The authors embark on the very ambitious task of such discussions, the reader would not know what a looking at how design researchers use theory in their
horse is, for there is no sense of the animal itself. The publications. This is indeed a discussion that would
assumption is that everyone—including the reading benefit the field of design and be extremely useful, if
public—shares the same knowledge of what a horse achieved, in training design researchers. Certainly the
is. The reader of this paper is positioned in a similar clarity of the writing, the simplicity of the diagrams,
way to a participant in the horse discussion. While the distinctions drawn between uses of theory within
the paper’s discussion on the uses of theory may be the framework offered, and the scholarly approach
considered valuable for consideration by design re- to the topic make this a paper that has much to offer
searchers, it nonetheless needs to take this essential the field of design research. There are some issues to
first step to define theory. The literature is not short
be considered in relation to the paper’s strength or on such discussions, which could have been reviewed otherwise.
and represented as well.
The paper starts with the assertion that “Theory This means that the paper’s embarkation on an
Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research
gaging with our article and taking the time to make research without a discussion of what theory means
insightful comments. We are energized and excited to them may be a greater issue for new and emerging
by the fact that our work has already stimulated some design researchers than for more experienced ones.
thoughts among members of the design research This leads to a further concern. I accept that
community. At the same time, we are aware that there are many ways that one can undertake textual
certain aspects of our work did not come across as or discourse analysis, and in this paper the authors
we intended, and that certain aspects of it apparently tell us that they “adopted an emergent coding ap-
stand out more than others.
proach.” 2 I read this as being an approach based on a Our goal in writing this response is not to engage feeling for the content of the papers canvassed, rather
with individual comments in much detail. We hope than using established methods of analysis. In this
that readers will engage both with our article and case, where I do not know what is meant by theory,
these three commentaries in ways that are useful to
I find that I am left not confident in the reliability of them. Instead, we will respond to a few themes that that analysis.
seem to cut across all three commentaries—refer- Having said this, it is evident that the reader will
encing specific details when appropriate. find this an interesting and potentially significant
It seems clear that what could be called the meth- contribution to the literature. The models presented
odology section of our paper raises the most concerns. have a depth of insight and understanding of the
For Henriksen and Barron, methodological issues research design field that are illuminating and infor-
seem to call the paper’s validity and results into ques- mative. They are presented in such a way as to make
tion, thus making other aspects of the paper difficult them practical and comprehensive with the use of
to engage with. For Bardzell, these concerns seem to diagrams to reinforce this feature of the discussion. A
signal that the project we have started in this article more detailed discussion of ways in which the writers
is in its early stages, and worthy of further pursuit in came to formulate the models on the basis of the
the design research community.
literature they have consulted would strengthen the There are two methodological concerns in partic- paper, but the models themselves have the potential
ular that we wish to address.
to inform and frame scholarly discussions that may When we say that we are looking for how theory take the issues identified in this paper to more com-
is used in research publications, what exactly does plex and complete analyses by others.
that mean? What do we mean by “theory”? And if we do not offer a precise enough definition of it, then how
1 Jordan Beck and Erik Stolterman, “Examining Practical, Everyday
do we know we have identified an instance of theory
Theory Use in Design Research,” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 2, no. 2 (Summer 2016): 126.
use? We are certainly not the first to say that theory
has different meanings to different people. It is pos- sible to define theory as (1) a well-substantiated expla- nation of some aspect of a phenomenon, or (2) a piece of abstract knowledge that tells us something about the fundamental entities at the core of a discipline, or (3) an analysis of facts in relation to one another.
2 Ibid., 129.
Authors’ Response
Henriksen provides several other variations in her
commentary, many of which we have encountered in
our work.
It would seem as though all of these definitions
Examination of Theory are acceptable by some, and that all could potentially
lead to different interpretations of “theory use” in
Use in Design Research design research. And it is understandable that if a
reader were to engage with our work as a “true” con- Jordan Beck, School of Informatics and Computing,
tent analysis or discourse analysis, then they could be Indiana University, USA
left with many questions or concerns about our ap- Erik Stolterman, School of Informatics and
proach. This may be because we did not describe our Computing, Indiana University, USA
aims and process with enough precision. Although we borrowed from the practice of content analysis to a
doi:10.1016/j.sheji.2016.12.008
certain degree in our approach, we did not adhere to
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016 she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
Another concern has to do with what we mean when we say that theory is “actually used” in design research. Part of this concern may have to do with methodological shortcomings. Given the description of our approach, what can we really say about how theory is used? The other part of this concern may have to do with what can be said about theory use in design research based on an examination of schol- arly publications. We can only really attempt to say something about scholars’ “rhetorical positioning”— to borrow from Bardzell’s commentary—of theory use, as opposed to theory use throughout a research project.
In addition to the discussion of methodological concerns, we were pleased to find that some com- ments directed towards the models of theory use appeared to be positive and optimistic. It seems as though the models have some utility and value, but of course this does not mean that we think the models are complete in any sense. We agree with Bardzell when he says that the work we present in this project is “not yet done,” and we hope that as we continue to pursue this work that others in the community will join in.
Examining Practical, Everyday Theory Use in Design Research
Cara Wrigley , University of Technology Sydney, Australia
Design Innovation Catalysts: Education and Impact
Abstract Organizations globally look to design to help them innovate,
Keywords
differentiate, and compete in a changing economic climate. Consequently,
Design education
design is increasingly being regarded as a dynamic and central tactical
Design research Design-led innovation
business resource. Considering this, the question is raised: how can the specific knowledge and skills of designers be better articulated, understood, implemented, and valued as core components of strategic innovation in businesses? In seeking to answer this question, this paper proposes a new frontier for the design profession, coined the “Design Innovation Cata- lyst” (DIC). This paper reflects on both extant literature and the teaching of seven DICs embedded in industry, conducting innovation projects run
Received August 9, 2016
over a twelve to twenty-four month period. This paper reports on a unique
Accepted October 24, 2016
set of six capabilities analyzed as being not only essential for the imple- mentation of design-led innovation, but of great assistance in overcoming Email
Cara Wrigley
its associated challenges. This paper outlines the role of these new design
(corresponding author) [email protected]
professionals, and discusses the value these novel capabilities provide or- ganizations through employing DICs. Furthermore, questions surrounding how designers will develop these new capabilities, and how the design-led innovation framework in application can contribute to the future of design will also be presented.
Copyright © 2016, Tongji University and Tongji University Press. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ). The peer review process is the responsibility of Tongji University and Tongji University Press.
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.10.001
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
Introduction
1 Tim Brown, Change by Design: How Design Thinking
Interest surrounding how design can spur innovation has gained momentum
Transforms Organizations and
in recent years through many business innovation-oriented publications. New
Inspires Innovation (New York:
concepts regarding the relationship and intersection of design, innovation, and Harper Collins, 2009); Henry
Chesbrough, “Business Model
business have been developed in design practice, such as the concept of “design
Innovation: Opportunities and
thinking” and its application to business. 1 The value of design carries weight in
Barriers,” Long Range Planning
business as it can produce a different way of thinking, doing, and tackling prob- 43, no. 2-3 (2010): 354–63; S. Mac-
Donald, “Design Thinking and
lems from external perspectives. Businesses have recently begun to see design as
Design Innovation Scotland,” in
the key to greater productivity, resulting in higher-value products and services,
proceedings of the International
better processes, more effective marketing, simpler structures, and a better use of DMI Education Conference,
2 Design Thinking: New Challenges
people’s skills. Design is now perceived as more than just a niche market—it has
for Designers, Managers and
become one of the most persuasive and effective processes for solving problems,
Organizations (Cergy-Pontoise:
ensuring long-term business sustainability, and gaining competitive advantage.
ESSEC, 2008): 14–15; Roberto Verganti, Design-Driven In-
Consequently, design has increasingly become a vital and important strategic busi-
novation: Changing the Rules
ness asset, contributing to the success of innovation. 3 Demand for change within
of Competition by Radically
industry is evident, with many companies universally looking to design to help
Innovating What Things Mean (Boston: Harvard Business Press,
them transform, innovate, differentiate and compete in a global marketplace. The
benefits of design include increased quality of goods and services, improved pro-
duction flexibility, and reduced material costs. 2 Klaus Krippendorff, “On the 4 Essential Contexts of Artifacts
As previously reported, 5 design and designers are entering an era when our
or on the Proposition That
ability to solve complex problems is sought out above our technical competencies.
‘Design Is Making Sense (Of Things)’,” Design Issues 5, no. 2
The shift to expand our once graphic, product, and interaction domain design
knowledge is transitioning into the age of information systems 6 and business
7 3 Verganti, Design-Driven Inno-
model design. Central to the relationship between design and business is the role
vation; Claudio Dell’Era, Alessio
of design-led innovation (DLI). 8 It is the belief of the author that design-led inno-
Marchesi, and Roberto Verganti,
vation is positioned at the intersection of design, innovation, and business—and
“Mastering Technologies in Design-Driven Innovation,” Re-
thus serves as a viable and necessary tool in transitioning from artifact design to
search-Technology Management
business model innovation. This is not to say that all designers need to make this
53, no. 2 (2010): 12–23.
transition—rather that this emerging field needs first to be addressed as a profes-
4 George Cox, Cox Review of
sional domain in order to engage in this new era of design. 9 This raises the ques-
Creativity in Business: Building
tion of who should facilitate this role. Over the last decade, many business schools
on the UK’s Strengths (Norwich: TSO, 2005).
worldwide have developed design thinking foundational and compulsory subjects dedicated to solving business problems creatively, with some degrees doing this
5 Richard Buchanan, “Wicked
more successfully than others. Problems in Design Thinking,” It is the proposition of this paper that the “Design
Design Issues 8, no. 2 (1992):
Innovation Catalyst” (DIC) fulfills this role spanning both business and design
knowledge domains.
6 Richard Buchanan, “Design
The concept for the DIC was first introduced by Wrigley and Bucolo, 11 and is
Research and the New Learn-
influenced by Norman’s 12 transitional engineer concept—itself a third discipline
ing,” Design Issues 17, no. 4
inserted in the middle of business and design to translate between the abstractions (2001): 3–23. of research and the realities of practice. Described as “transitional developers,”
7 Chesbrough, “Business Model
these people act as translators, converting design research into the language of Innovation.” business while also translating business insights into design problems for designers
8 Cara Wrigley and Sam Bucolo,
to address. “Teaching Design-Led Innova-
tion: The Future of Industrial
Martin 13 identifies the need for a creative thinker—the “Innovation Cat-
Design,” Design Principles and
alyst”—to be appointed inside organizations, to lead the way using the design
Practices 5, no. 2 (2011): 231–40.
thinking traits of empathy, ideation and experimentation. However, questions still
9 Kees Dorst, “The Core of
remain pertaining to who these catalysts are, how—and what—is to be taught, and
‘Design Thinking’ and Its Applica-
tion,” most importantly, what value they bring to organizations. This paper aims to inves- Design Studies 32, no. 6
tigate these questions and contribute to the existing body of literature regarding these catalysts. This paper presents an empirical study of seven design innovation 10 Judy H. Matthews and Cara
Wrigley, “Design and Design
catalysts trained in a postgraduate research program that were deployed in seven
Thinking in Business and
businesses to drive innovation efforts over a twelve to twenty-four month period.
Management Education and
Development,” in Findings suggest a set of six overall required capabilities and knowledge sets, and 25th Annual
Design Innovation Catalysts
Figure 1 Design Innovation Intersection.
Australian and New Zealand
the articulation of an engagement model for the education of such catalysts in the
Academy of Management Conference: The Future of Work
future.
and Organisations (Wellington, NZ: ANZAM, 2011), available at http://www.anzam.org/
The Intersection of Design, Innovation, and Business
wp-content/uploads/pdf-manag- er/629_ANZAM2011-448.PDF .
It has been documented previously by many authorities that design can help busi-
nesses innovate through processes like design-led innovation and the generation
11 Cara Wrigley and Sam
Bucolo, “New Organisational
of new business models. An important distinction of the design-led innovation
Leadership Capabilities:
process is that it is not only a problem-solving approach—as design thinking sug-
Transitional Engineer the New Designer?,” in Leading Innovation
gests—but is also a transformational process at a business level, and not exclusively
Through Design: Proceedings
at the product level ( Figure 1 ). The conservative role designers perform in the in-
of the DMI 2012 International
novation process within a business is increasingly being challenged, and requires
Research Conference (Boston: Design Management Institute,
further emphasis on the value design can bring to an organization.
Martin has published widely on the relationship between design and busi-
He
16 12 Donald A. Norman, “Tech-
ness, asking the key question, “Why can’t business and design be friends?”
nology First, Needs Last: The
makes it clear that business is centered on reliability, whilst design is focused on
Research-Product Gulf,” interac-
validity—and it is this conflict between the two approaches that creates tension.
tions 17, no. 2 (2010): 38–42.
Martin and Norman 17 both build upon Moore’s “crossing the chasm” 18 concept,
13 Roger Martin, “The Innova-
suggesting the way to successfully collaborate is to “appreciate the legitimate differ-
tion Catalysts,” Harvard Business Review 89, no.6 (2011): 82–87.
ences; empathize; seek to communicate on their terms, not yours, using tools with
which they would be familiar; and stretch out of your comfort zones.” 19
14 Ron Adner, “Match Your
The future need and use for design lies in the coupling of the project and
Innovation Strategy to Your Innovation Ecosystem,” Harvard
business levels through a holistic approach to products, services, and business
Business Review 84, no. 4 (2006):
models. This correlates with broader research trends that indicate design is moving
98; Christopher Zott, Raphael
away from a product-centric approach, and towards a method centered on busi-
Amit, and Lorenzo Massa, “The Business Model: Theoretical
ness model innovation acumen. Crossing this chasm is not only being attempted
Roots, Recent Developments,
from the design side of the equation, but also by the widespread uptake in design
and Future Research” (working
thinking units in MBAs globally. 20 Yet most of these focus on the dissemination of
paper no. 862, IESE Business School, University of Navarra,
design methods to business executives in order to solve problems from a more cus-
Barcelona 2010), available at
tomer-centric view. In all reality, such programs educate managers on the value of
http://www.iese.edu/research/
the design process, rather than actually up-skilling any of the graduates to become
pdfs/di-0862-e.pdf ; Chesbrough, “Business Model Innovation”;
catalysts themselves—giving way to a gap in knowledge about where the two edges
Mark Johnson, Clayton Chris-
of the chasm meet, and how a specialized educational program could assist in this
tensen, and Henning Kagermann,
cause. There is a lack of empirical evidence to support design-led innovation ap-
“Reinventing Your Business Model,” Harvard Business Review
proaches that indeed achieve commercial success—in addition to the lack of knowl-
86, no. 12 (2008): 57–68; Joan
edge regarding concrete and tangible methods, guides, and tools for design-led
Magretta, “Why Business Models
approaches that can drive innovation for successful business growth. 21
Matter,” Harvard Business Review 80, no. 5 (2002): 86–92; Alexander Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur, Business Model Generation: A
Design-Led Innovation Theory
Handbook for Visionaries, Game
The purpose of a previously published design-led innovation framework Changers, and Challengers, 22 ( Figure
(Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons,
2 ) is to assist companies who have the desire to grow by utilizing the strategic value
2010); David J. Teece, “Business
of design within their business. The framework illustrates that within any business,
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
Figure 2 The Design-led Framework.
a fluctuating scale exists spanning operational and strategic activities that have
Models, Business Strategy and
either an internal or external focus. Diverse divisions within an organization are
Innovation,” Long Range Plan- ning 43, no. 2-3 (2010): 172–94;
consigned with these different activities, and have specific targets depending on
Christopher Zott and Raphael
their functional role within the business. The framework uses the term “opportu-
Amit, “Business Model Design:
nity” or “proposition” as the pivotal aim, which weds all aspects of the organization
An Activity System Perspective,” Long Range Planning 43, no. 2-3
together. As seen in Figure 2 , the design process is dispersed across a dotted line
describing activities such as co-design, re-frame, and customer insights. As the design concept matures, all aspects of the business are informed or have the ability 15 Martin, “Innovation Cata-
lysts”; Roger Martin, The Design
to inform the opportunity, driving change and growth. Despite several such frame-
of Business: Why Design Thinking
works and conceptual models being presented on the topic, 23 the field lacks empir-
Is the Next Competitive Advan-
ical evidence surrounding design-led innovation research. Dong tage (Boston: Harvard Business 24 identified such a
Press, 2009).
significant evidence based gap in this field of research when he suggested that the models to date were more perspective than evidence based. 16 Roger Martin, “Design and
Business: Why Can’t We Be Friends?,” Journal of Business Strategy 28, no. 4 (2007): 6–12.
The Design Innovation Catalyst
17 Martin, Design of Business;
Building on the role described by Martin 25 as the “Innovation Catalyst,” the role of
Norman, “Technology First.”
the “Design Innovation Catalyst” (DIC) is to translate and facilitate design observa-
18 Geoffrey A. Moore, Crossing
tion, insight, meaning, and strategy for all facets of the organization. In this role,
the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-Tech Products to
the DIC continuously explores, instigates, challenges, and disrupts innovation inter-
Mainstream Customers, Revised
nally and externally—all from a position within the company. The DIC extends this
ed. (New York: Harper Business
process to re-aligning business activities and subsequently mapping these activities
Essentials, 1999).
back to the strategy of the firm. Engagement and involvement with many different
19 Martin, Design of Business,
internal and external stakeholders is vital to the design-led innovation process
guided by the DIC, who is continuously and iteratively prototyping solutions and
20 Judy H. Matthews, Sam
shaping the central value proposition of the firm.
Bucolo, and Cara Wrigley,
The DIC aims to understand and improve a business, which requires the reg- “Multiple Perspectives of Design
Thinking in Business Education,”
ular crossing of two axes—learning-teaching and academia-industry. The frequency
in Design Management: Towards
with which this role crosses the learning-teaching chasm forces the individual
a New Era of Innovation—2011
embedded as a catalyst to digest, reflect on, and understand imparted knowledge Tsinghua-DMI International
Design Management Symposium
with similar regularity. Frequency is also an issue with regard to the industry-aca-
Proceedings, ed. Jun Cai et al.
demia axis, with industry’s need for the timely implementation of improvement
(Hong Kong: Tsinghua DMI
initiatives seeming to conflict with academia’s requirement for the application of Symposium, 2011): 302–11.
Design Innovation Catalysts
Figure 3 Design Innovation Catalyst Framework.
21 Andy Dong, “Design ×
a rigorous and methodical process to make valid contributions to the knowledge
Innovation: Perspective or Evidence-Based Practices,”
base. The Design Innovation Catalyst Framework ( Figure 3 ) enables the catalyst
International Journal of Design
(bottom left corner) to learn within the university environment, by absorbing
Creativity and Innovation 3, no.
knowledge, discovering theories, and critiquing and questioning existing research.
3-4 (2015): 148–63.
Within industry (top left corner) however, learning takes place through the investi-
22 Sam Bucolo, Cara Wrigley,
gation of specific, real world scenarios constituting the assigned project.
and Judy Matthews, “Gaps in Organizational Leadership:
Catalysts learn to analyze and synthesize data in order to draw out valid,
Linking Strategic and Operation-
non-specific conclusions relevant to academia. When published, these findings
al Activities through Design-Led
contribute to the field of research (bottom right corner). Within industry, teaching
Propositions,” Design Manage- ment Journal 7, no. 1 (2012):
equates to presenting specific findings to the firm through running workshops and
developing design-led innovation tools. Early and continued stakeholder engage-
ment and buy-in are essential, as by nature these findings seek to generate discus-
23 Roberto Verganti, “Design,
Meanings, and Radical Inno-
sion, debate, and perhaps controversy, in order to challenge the way things have
vation: A Metamodel and a
“always” been done.
Research Agenda,” Journal of Product Innovation Management
In order to support and scaffold these catalysts from the day-to-day politics of
25, no. 5 (2008): 436–56; Verganti,
the organization, and also to assist them in communicating their research findings
Design-Driven Innovation; Jona-
to the rest of the organization, “design champions” were selected—usually nomi-
than Cagan and Craig M. Vogel,
nated by the CEO or senior management representative of the company. Creating Breakthrough Products: 26 Specifi-
Innovation from Product Planning
cally within the context of this research, the design champion is positioned within
to Program Approval (Upper
the business “primarily as an advocacy role.” 27 Kyffin and Gardien 28 refer to this
Saddle River: Financial Times Press, 2002); Krippendorff,
role as a “passionate champion”—a role they believe increases the success of de-
“Essential contexts of Artifacts.”
sign-led change. The design champion is generally a middle management employee
who reports directly to the company leaders. The design champion leverages his or her position and status within the company to advocate and disseminate design-led
24 Dong, “Design × Innovation.”
25 Martin, “Innovation Cata- lysts.”
innovation within the executive management team, meeting the catalyst weekly to plan and discuss project progress.
26 Judy H. Matthews, Sam Bucolo, and Cara Wrigley, “Challenges and Opportunities in the Journey of the Design-Led
Industry Demand = Educational Opportunity
Innovation Champions,” in Leading Innovation Through
Currently, many new courses are being developed to assist in growing design
Design: Proceedings of the DMI
thinking skills within business programs worldwide. 29 These programs—as well as
2012 International Research
design-driven courses—need to be expanded to focus on the gaps in organizational
Conference, ed. Erik Bohemia, Jeanne Liedtka, and Alison Rieple
capabilities related to a combination of underlying knowledge, skills, and abilities.
(Boston: DMI, 2012), 768–75.
Tertiary institutions are well positioned to provide this new knowledge through
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016 she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
27 Wrigley and Bucolo, “New Organisational Leadership,” 7.
ness and capability gap to be addressed at once. In 2013, a new program based on design-led innovation was initiated at the Queensland University of Technology,
Gardien, “Navigating the
Australia. This program focuses on embedding design tools and processes within an
Innovation Matrix: An Approach
organization, and using these processes with design leadership qualities to enable
to Design-Led Innovation,”
companies to create breakthrough innovation and achieve sustained growth.
International Journal of Design 3,
The embedded Masters and PhD research program described here involved no. 1 (2009): 67. three stakeholders—the university, industry, and the student cohort. The program
29 Cara Wrigley and Kara
operated over a twelve-month (Master’s of Research) and three-year period (PhD), Straker, “Design Thinking Ped-
agogy: The Educational Design
with the focus of the program being the DIC’s “embedded” nature, placed in a firm
Ladder,” Innovations in Education
to work on a specific pilot project within the business. The key objectives of the
and Teaching International
design-led innovation program were (1) to explore the value of design-led innova- (2015): 1–12, accessed October
23, 2016, http://www.tandfonline.
tion inside embedded business practices; (2) to pilot the adoption of a design-led
com/doi/abs/10.1080/14703297.
innovation approach within a business through a specific project and (3) to collec-
2015.1108214?src=recsys&jour-
nalCode=riie20 tively contribute to the development of a learning community, and share common . challenges and strategies to overcome barriers to adoption of design-led innovation
30 Sharon Helmer Poggenpohl,
within Australian businesses. “Communities of Practice in
Design Research,” She Ji: The
Each week, the students spent three to four days in the firm and one to two
Journal of Design, Economics, and
days in the Design-led innovation Lab at the university. The lab provided a space for
Innovation 1, no. 1 (2015): 44–57,
DOI: the researchers to explore design approaches, discuss research methods, host inter- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
sheji.2015.07.002 .
national expert guest speakers, share learning, explore new knowledge from theory to industry application, and test new approaches and tools. It also served as a place for firms to workshop ideas and projects collectively.
The difference between an internship program—a popular practice—and an embedded higher degree research cohort is that internships are often undertaken either as a component of an undergraduate degree, or shortly after graduation. These programs typically involve utilizing knowledge, skills, techniques, and pro- cesses that are well understood, and often take new knowledge to the firm, or extend their knowledge of how to conduct “business as usual.” In the case of the embedded higher degree research catalyst cohort, graduate design students applied design-led innovation principles to the business operations of an organization, uncovering the opportunities, barriers, and challenges companies face in applying design principles and methods to all aspects of their business.
Through their research in separate workplaces, each student contributes their findings to the emerging discipline of design-led innovation. Through the process of capturing deep customer insights and translating them into narratives and stories, each catalyst facilitates the successful implementation of design-led inno- vation within their corporate culture. Given the complex, interwoven nature of an organization’s culture, and the need to engage with employees at all levels within that firm—to uncover latent barriers to adoption—these projects require the higher level of research expertise that postgraduate students possess. The outcome of this program is new knowledge diffusion amongst the businesses as they absorb
a design-led approach through the selected industry project. Derived from the design-led innovation framework ( Figure 2 ) a design-led ap- proach was developed by the author, consisting of three integrated stages and ten sub-stages ( Figure 4 ). These are:
• Dissect (understand, reveal and ask); • Learn (propose, prototype, provoke and reframe); and • Integrate (design, share and transform).
This overarching framework is a non-linear process, as illustrated by the broken lines in Figure 4 , providing the mechanism by which, when applied, design may
be used to transform and differentiate an organization. The extent to which the
Design Innovation Catalysts
Figure 4 Design-Led Innovation Approach.
31 Bob Dick, “Postgraduate
framework is applied is dependent upon the specifics of the organization—in-
Programs Using Action Research,” The Learning Orga-
cluding size, industry sector, market position, and corporate culture—and was
nization 9, no. 4 (2002): 159–70;
used to scaffold the projects inside the organizations. Each of the three stages
Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt and Chad
consisted of a series of questions, activities, and tools (as shown in Table 1 ) to assist
Perry, “Action Research within Organisations and University
the catalysts in their intention to embed design-led innovation inside each of the
Thesis Writing,” The Learning
organizations.
Organization 9, no. 4 (2002):
Using the design-led approach ( Figure 4 ) as a foundation, research questions
were posed surrounding the challenges, barriers, and opportunities—both per-
32 Timothy Clark, Alexander
ceived and actual—to adopting the approach within the respective organizations.
Osterwalder, and Yves Pigneur, Business Model You: A One-Page
The teaching content and approach to these projects is described and detailed in
Method for Reinventing Your
Table 1 .
Career (Hoboken: John Wiley &
Driving questions the DIC sought to explore, and how this was achieved using
Sons, 2012).
specific tools and activities is outlined in the prescribed sections of the table.
33 Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke, “Using Thematic Anal- ysis in Psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, no.
Research Approach
2 (2006): 77–101; Matthew B.
Each of the seven catalysts spent a minimum twelve months (MDes) and max-
Miles and A. Michael Huberman,
imum of twenty-four months (PhD) conducting their own action research projects Qualitative Data Analysis: An 31
Expanded Sourcebook (Thousand
within the various organizations (detailed in Table 2 ). In order to answer the re-
Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994).
search aims of this paper, three different sets of data were collected:
1) semi-structured interviews with seven design champions,
2) semi-structured interviews with seven design innovation catalysts, and
3) interviews with seven design innovation catalysts. The first and second set of semi-structured interviews were conducted with design
champions inside the organizations, as well as the DICs, to assess capabilities and perceived value within the organization. Each was questioned in regards to the de- sired capabilities—a combination of underlying knowledge, skills and abilities—of this new “Design Innovation Catalyst.” Participants were also asked to discuss their role and capacities to fulfill that role, as well as the perceived value both held for the firm, the industry, and the university. Each individual interview lasted approx- imately one hour. The third set of data collected pertained to a series of questions framed by the “Business Model You” canvas developed by Clark, Osterwalder and
Pigneur, 32 which was used to assess the DIC value, capabilities, and resources required to achieve the objectives of the program outlined earlier in the paper. This allowed for exploration of nine main probing concepts—value provided, interac- tions, benefits and costs, capabilities, and role of the DIC.
A thematic analysis 33 was used to generate usable results pertaining to
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016 she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
34 Michael Quinn Patton,
proach to implementation. This triangulation of analysis validated the thematic “Qualitative Interviewing,”
analysis, 34 and provided a richer understanding of the participant responses. This
in Qualitative Research and
Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed.
analysis produced six (6) overarching capabilities informing the design innovation
catalyst engagement model.
Capabilities of the Design Innovation Catalyst
The following six capabilities were derived from the embedded design-led inno- vation research program. They consist of the following: designer knowledge and skills, business knowledge and understanding, cognitive abilities, customer and stakeholder centricity, personal qualities, and research knowledge and skills.
Design Knowledge and Skills
Inherent design knowledge and problem solving skills are an integral part of the catalyst role. The seven DICs were graduated designers—industrial designers and architects—and as such the core visualization talents instilled in them enabled fluid communication between the various disciplines/departments of the organi- zations. Design knowledge, skills, tools, abilities, and experience supported DIC leadership of problem solving sessions, and helped DICs to facilitate audience participation in design content generation, as opposed to a non-design trained catalyst—usually a graphic illustrator able to record what is being voiced in the project, yet unable to personally shape content. Designers have trust in the design process over the outcome, which can be startling for those accustomed to pre-deter- mining outcomes before a process has begun. Their knowledge base and experience allowed the DICs to speak from a position of authority regarding design and the overall process. An example of this was found in DIC D, who visualized the issues surrounding the internal politics of the organization to try to facilitate a mediated conversation. Results pointed to realigning the organization away from production line results to a more purpose-driven way of operating.
DIC key capabilities include: • Design visualization, which enables communication between various disci-
plines and stakeholders in a firm; and • Visual and verbal creation, manipulation, facilitation, and implementation of design tools and processes.
Business Knowledge and Understanding
The DIC must have a basic understanding of key business theory and application concepts, including strategy, business models, new product development cycles, organizational change, entrepreneurship, innovation, and marketing. This basic understanding of business process allowed the DIC to participate in conversations regarding business drivers—such a conversation would not have been possible without it, as these business practices and concerns span all areas, levels, and departments of the company. More specifically, using design knowledge to exper- iment and prototype with traditional business frameworks—such as a business model—requires DICs to demonstrate their business expertise. This was evidenced in DIC B, where a new business model concept was designed based on a value prop- osition comparison of competitors, and a visual mapping of these various offerings into a typology matrix to visualize complex gaps in the market. Afterwards, the DIC visualized the organization’s new business model concept to communicate the idea at every level of the organization, regardless of rank, role or department domain.
DIC business capabilities include: • Knowledge and understanding of key business concepts—including strategy,
Design Innovation Catalysts
Table 1. Design-led innovation stages.
DLI Stage Sub-Stage Driving
Design Tools Question
Description
Dissect Understand What business - What is your company’s purpose, or what is your “why?” - The business model canvas are you in?
- What is your value proposition?
(analysis)
- What differentiates you from your competitors?
- Activity map (analysis)
- What do you do on a daily basis that reinforces this
- Identify your thinking style and
point of difference?
cultural thinking style
- What activities could you do less of that do NOT
- 3 horizons model
reinforce this point of difference?
- Innovation audit (incremental,
- How would you describe your innovation process and
platform or radical)
portfolio?
- Competitor analysis
- What is the biggest problem your market is facing?
- SWOT analysis
- How have you addressed this through innovation in
- Dynamic SWOT analysis
your company? - What are the different activities your company undertakes in the three horizons model?
Reveal Who are your
- Listening skill development tool stakeholders?
- Describe your customers and or stakeholders.
- Who are they (name, age, profession)?
- Journey map
- Why have they chosen to purchase or engage with your
- Emotional touch point timeline
product and or services?
- Persona
- What are some of the biggest issues they encounter in
- What market segmentation data
their daily lives?
do you have?
- What do they value?
- Demographics and psychometrics
- What do they need and want?
- A day in the life of….
- What are their aspirations and routines?
- Storyboarding
- How do you engage with customers? - When was the last time you engaged with a real
customer?
Ask Do you have
- Describe your strategy.
- Constantly question and seek out
contradictions strategy?
a matching
- Is everyone in the organization aware and in alignment
of the same strategy?
- What is your why?
- Do the internal stakeholders know and or share the
- Golden circles
same strategy vision?
- Is your company united in their
- How does your strategy align to your customers?
golden circles?
- Do your current product and or service offerings help
- Activity map comparison
solve their biggest issue?
- Business model canvas analysis
- What sort of difference do you make to their lives? - Is your company still relevant?
Learn Propose What are the
- Persona proposed
- How do you shift your company’s perspective from a
- Build idea maturity rather than assumptions?
YOU to a THEM approach?
- Describe their issues, concerns, aspirations and values.
absolutes
- Test any assumptions about your customers by failing
- Narratives
fast and building upon it with insights
- Deep customer insights
- Can you map your assumptions of customers and
- 5 Whys
stakeholder values and insights with your current
- Value chain analysis
company strategy?
- Stakeholder journey mapping
- Build your personas into various narratives for various stakeholders, based on the all the internal information you have as well as any assumptions.
Prototype What are
- Succeed early by failing fast the valued
- Prototype your narrative with your stakeholder to
- Examples of business model insights?
gather deep customer insights.
- This is done through the storytelling/narrative
canvas models
technique followed by a thematic analysis.
- Narrative
- Build upon your assumptions with valued insights.
- Value proposition assessment - Co-design - Thematic analysis - Persona
(Continued on next page…)
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
Table 1. (Continued) Table 1. Design-led innovation stages. DLI Stage Sub-Stage
Driving
Design Tools Question
Description
Learn Provoke What new
- Customer interviews meanings have
- If you iterate the (propose, prototype, provoke) process,
- Thematic analysis you created?
what patterns of meaning are generated?
- Do the new propositions uncover new meanings?
- Value proposition assessment
- What are some of the common patterns of meaning that
- Emotional design
emerge? - Can you validate the meaning of the new offering by provoking your customers’ true emotions? - How can the use of dead reckoning guide the process?
Re-frame What new
- Emotional touch point timeline opportunities
- What are some solutions to the common patterns of
- Re-frame against customer can you provide
meaning?
insights value to?
- Are you constantly challenging and seeking
alternatives?
- What is the new value
- Prototype and evaluate against strategy.
proposition?
- What are the alternative product and or service
- Compare activity maps
offerings that incorporate the new customer valued
- Compare business model canvas
insights? - Do they reflect the company strategy? - Are they bold enough? - How can we do things differently? - What new business models are possible? - What are the new propositions?
Integrate Design What are the
- Design new solutions to the new new product
- Design new solutions to capitalize on these
found problems and service
opportunities and maximize your capabilities.
- Contextualize findings within the offering?
- What is the revised business model for this new value
proposition?
business
- How different is it to the existing business model?
- New Activity Map
- How different is this to the existing strategy?
- New Business Model Canvas
- What will need to change?
- Narratives
- What new capabilities do we need? - Which ones are no longer relevant? - How do you ensure we deliver value at each touch
point? - How do you map this to all aspects of the business?
Share How do you
- Pitching collectively
- How do you share your solutions with the company?
- Visual communication execute on
- What are all the blockers from their perspective on why
- Design champions inside the this?
this CANNOT be executed?
- What key activities, assets and relationships do your
organization
company require to overcome these blockers?
- Co-design (internally, and then
- What capabilities do you require and what can you use?
externally)
- How do you overcome the blockers and co-design the
- Narrative of the future of the
solution with all stakeholders?
relevant business sector/s
- How do you pitch internally?
- Bring people along internally
- How do you sell the idea or process from the bottom up or from the top down? - What are the challenges with communication thins? - How would you communicate it?
Transform How do you
- Activity map: Today and execute and
- How will you educate and execute the cultural change
tomorrow integrate these
in the company required to facilitate this process?
- Business model for tomorrow leanings across
- By learning from the process and encouraging
- Customer of tomorrow the entire
exploration in your employees your company will be
- How do you get there? organization?
most responsive to change.
- How will you disseminate this common language across
the company? - How will you ensure constant challenging and refinement of understanding?
Design Innovation Catalysts
Table 2. Design Innovation Catalyst cohort. (Horizontally continued on next page…)
DIC MDes or Design Catalyst Role
Company Engagement PhD
Design Champion
Embedded in
Company Focus
Role
Industry Sector
Purpose
A PhD Catalyst worked to integrate
Apply DLI to three (3) design at all stages of the inno-
Strategic
Transportation
Aviation support
projects to help build vation pipeline to ensure the
Development
design capacity in the firm was able to encourage and
Director
organization reward stakeholders for creativi- ty by providing the design skills to articulate their ideas.
B PhD Role title was Project Officer-Cus- Marketing
Seeking assistance to tomer-led Innovation.
Healthcare
Aged care provider
Manager
innovate for growth in a dynamic environment
Role responsibility was to identify and leverage customer insights into alternative and innovative service, product and business model opportunities.
C MDes Role was to demonstrate the
Seeking assistance to DLI process by facilitating the
R&D Manager
Infrastructure
Energy production
innovate for growth in transformation of deep customer
and distribution
dynamic environment insights into business models.
D MDes Knowledge and tool broker
Product focused, and between academic theory and
Company Director
Manufacturing
Seeking assistance
Supplier for Retail practical firm expertise.
with sustainable
business model and
Trade
direction
Role was a facilitating catalyst within the firm to encourage re-thinking competitiveness and challenging the status quo.
E MDes Role was independent, self-di-
Seeking assistance to rected researcher embedded
Company Director
Manufacturing
Product and
innovate for growth in within the research and develop-
technology services;
dynamic environment ment department.
Business-to-business
F MDes The design catalyst was to apply
Seeking assistance the design-led approach to gen-
R&D Manager
Manufacturing
Specialized product;
with new product line erate buy-in of the value of using
Supplier to retail
emerging design thinking to create better business model propositions. Po- sitioned as part of the marketing and communications team, the Product Manager and Marketing Manager were key stakeholders in the research.
and consumers
G MDes To lead multiple DLI projects
New Product within the firm, as mechanisms
Marketing
Manufacturing
Specialized product;
development to pilot to inform the larger customer
Manager
Supplier to retail
DLI approach support business model.
and consumers
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation Volume 2, Number 2, Summer 2016
Value Delivered
References
A capability to quickly visualize and test ideas Rebecca Price and Cara Wrigley, “Deign and a Deep Customer Insight Approach to Innova- with passengers and stakeholders and gather
tion,” Journal of International Consumer Marketing 28, no. 2 (2016): 92–105; deep customer insights.
Rebecca A. Price, Cara Wrigley, and Karla Straker, “Not Just What They Want, But Why They Developing business opportunities through
Want It: Traditional Market Research to Deep Customer Insights,” Qualitative Market design propositions whilst aligning to the firm’s
Research: An International Journal 18, no. 2 (2015): 230–48;
vision for the future. Rebecca Price, Cara Wrigley, and Alexander Dreiling, “Are You on Board? The Role of De- sign-led Innovation in Strengthening Key Partnerships within an Australian Airport,” in Design for Business: Volume 3, ed. Gjoko Muratovski (Chicago: University of Chicago Press/ Intellect Books, 2015), 42–61.
Visualize empathy through the customers’ per- Erez Nusem, Cara Wrigley and Judy Matthews, “Exploring Aged Care Business Models: A spective of the larger issue at hand, rather than
Typological Study,” Ageing and Society, First View (2015): 1–24;
just the interaction points with the company. Erez Nusem, Aimee Defries, and Cara Wrigley, “Applying Design-led Innovation in a Not- for-Profit Aged Care Provider to Create Shared Value,” in Design for Business: Volume 3, ed. Gjoko Muratovski (Chicago: University of Chicago Press/Intellect Books, 2015), 172–93;
Erez Nusem, Cara Wrigley, and Judy Matthews, “Developing Design Capability in Non-Profit
Organizations,” Design Issues 33, no. 1 (2017): forthcoming.
Mapping of key drivers and stakeholders of the Tim Stevenson, Cara Wrigley, and Judy Matthews, “A Design Approach to Innovation in the business as a refection and planning tool.
Australian Energy Industry,” Journal of Design, Business & Society 2, no. 1 (2016): 49–70. The qualitative process of gaining deep customer
insights; results and evidence of lowered barri- ers to performance of such tasks.
Provided new tools, approaches, and reframing Anja Krabye, Judy Matthews, Cara Wrigley, and Sam Bucolo, “From Production to Purpose: perspectives.
Using Design-led Innovation to Build Strategic Potential in a Family-Owned SME,” in proceedings of the IEEE Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium: Design-Driven
A facilitator of change inside the business in Business Innovation, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Shenzhen, China order to change from being business as usual to
(IEEE, 2013): 37–46.
being value and future oriented. Increased awareness, knowledge, and practice in
strategic design thinking; created a platform for further development of competitive practice.
Main value delivered was in a new customer en- Rohan Doherty, Cara Wrigley, Judy H. Matthews, and Sam Bucolo, “Climbing the Design gagement. Model where customers were utilized
Ladder: Step by Step,” Revista D.: Design, Educação, Sociedade e Sustentabilidade 7, no. 2 in the re-framing of problems and co-design a
solution with. Rohan Doherty, Cara Wrigley, and Judy H. Matthews, “Understanding, Utilizing and Valuing Design Tools in Business,” in Design for Business: Volume 3, ed. Gjoko Muratovski (Chicago: University of Chicago Press/Intellect Books, 2015), 90–109.
Permanent employment to continue to deploy Erica Pozzey, Cara Wrigley, and Sam Bucolo, “Unpacking the Opportunities for Change design thinking tools and techniques, in order
within a Family Owned Manufacturing SME: a Design-led Innovation Case Study,” in to build stronger relationships with customers
Leading Innovation through Design: Proceedings of the DMI 2012 International Research Confer- and various stakeholders in the value chain.
ence, ed. Erik Bohemia, Jeanne Liedtka, and Alison Rieple (Boston: DMI, 2012), 841–55; Erica Pozzey, Sam Bucolo, and Cara Wrigley, “Influencing Innovation in SME’s: From
More customer attention is being placed on the Designer to Transitional Engineer,” in Proceedings of the Australian Centre (ACE) for Entre- earlier phases of new product development to preneurship Research Exchange Conference (Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, ensure greater, more sustainable value proposi-
tions and design briefs that are strongly defined.
Saw a fundamental shift in its thinking. The Peter Townson, Judy Matthews, and Cara Wrigley, “Outcomes from Applying Design-led In- firm now discusses innovation across all aspects
novation in an Australian Manufacturing Firm,” Technology Innovation Management Review of business, and is doing so without being forced
6, no. 6 (2016): 49–58.
by economic conditions. This is in part attribut- ed to the constant engagement by the firm with DLI on a day-to-day basis.
Design Innovation Catalysts
• Competency with business discourse typically used in conjunction with
future business growth management; • An ability to identify business drivers spanning all areas, levels, and depart-
ments of an organization; • An ability to challenge the established assumptions and status quo of the
business; and • Understanding of business process and modeling concepts in a variety of
industries.