The International Journal of the Arts in Society: Annual Review

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Embedding "Design Thinking" in Business School Curriculum


Affiliations
1 Ryerson University, Canada
2 University of Toronto, Canada
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


With the rise of 'high experience' products and services, businesses are striving to improve the 'look and feel' of products. There is increased recognition that new approaches are necessary for resolving tensions between aesthetic, economic and technological constraints for marketing, advertising or the packaging of services and products. In an effort to capitalize on this demand for innovation, businesses are embracing 'design thinking' as a strategy to harness and manage creativity; in response, programs that embrace this multi-epistemic mode are emerging at business schools. This paper explores the pedagogical models used to teach design thinking in business programs. To date, few such approaches have been evaluated. We ask, how can design thinking skills be effectively taught? We consider the design thinking process, which draws on cognition, emotion, sensation, intuition, interrogation and other processes and skills to deal with problems that have incomplete, contradictory and changing requirements. We present an approach to design thinking in teaching and learning based on multiepistemic, Jungian and ecological models. Finally, we suggest that design thinking, rather than being taught as a course, can be embedded in curriculum and mainstreamed throughout institutions.

Keywords

Design Thinking, Pedagogy, Business Curriculum, Intuition, Process.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Badiou, A. (2007). The Event n Deleuze. Parrhesia, 2, 37-44.

  • Bauer, R. & Eagen, W. M. (2010). Designing—Innovation at the Crossroads of Structure and Process. In Creating Desired Futures-On the Relevance of Design. Basel: Birkhauser Verlag AG.

  • Bauer, R. M. & Eagen, W. M. (2008). Design Thinking—Epistemic Plurality in Management and Organization. Aesthesis, 2(3), 568-596.

  • Bergson, H. (2007) [1912a]. Matter and Memory. New York: Cosimo Classics.

  • Bergson, H. (1999) [1912b]. An Introduction to Metaphysics. Indianapolis: Hacket Publishing Company, Inc.

  • Boddy, D. (1981). Putting action learning into action. Journal of European Industrial Training, 5(5).

  • Boland, R. & Collopy, F. (2004). Managing as designing. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

  • Boundas, C. V. (2009). Gilles Deleuze and the Problem of Freedom. In Gilles Deleuze: Image and Text. Continuum International Publishing Group: London and New York.

  • Broadfoot, O. & Bennett, R. (2003). Design studios: Online? Comparing traditional face-to-face design studio education with modern Internet-based design studios. Paper presented at the Apple University Consortium. Retrieved from: http://auc.uow.edu.au/conf/conf03/papers/AUC_ DV2003_Broadfoot.pdf.

  • Brockbank, A. & McGill, I. (1998). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

  • Brown, T. (2009). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, June.

  • Cukier, W. (2011). Romancing the Consumer. The Toronto Star, Tue Mar 15 2011.

  • Cukier, W. Eagen, R.Bauer & O. Ngwenyama. (2011). Design Thinking: Can Creativity Be taught? Paper presented at The Future of Education Conference. Florence, Italy, 16-17 June, 2011.

  • Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1994) [1991]. What is Philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press.

  • Dilworth, R. L. (1998). Action learning-Setting the stage. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(1).

  • Dunne, D. & Martin, R. (2008). Design thinking and how it will change management education: An interview and discussion. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(4).

  • Eagen, W. Ngwenyama O., & Precod, F. (2006). Design charrette in the classroom as a method for outcomes based action learning in IS design. ISECON Proceedings.

  • Fenollosa, E. & Pound, E. (1968) [1936]. The Chinese Written Character as a Medium for Poetry. San Francisco: City Lights Books.

  • Jung, C. G. (1990) [1927]. Psychological Types. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: The design process demystified (3rd ed.). London, UK: Architectural Press.

  • Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. New York, NY: Harper.

  • McGill, I & Beaty, L. (1995). Action learning: A practitioner's guide. London, UK: Kogan Page.

  • Nelson, H. G. & Stolterman, E. (2001). The Design Way-Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World-Foundations and Fundamentals of Design Competence. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.

  • Ngwenyama, O. (1991). End-user Systems Development as Collaborative Action Learning. Journal of Management Systems, 3(1).

  • Revans, R. (1982). What is action learning? Journal of Management Development, 1(3).

  • Rogers, E. M. (2003) [1962]. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. New York: Free Press.

  • Rosenthal, S. (1999). Contemporary Metaphysics and the Issue of Time: Re-Thinking the "Great Divide". International Philosophic Quarterly 2(154).

  • Schön, Donald A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Schon, D. A. (1982). The reflective practitioner-How professions think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT

  • Smith, P. & O'Neil, J. (2003). A review of action learning literature. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(2).

  • Warren, C. (2011). Apple: 100 Million iPhones Sold. Mashable.com. Retrieved from: http://mashable. com/2011/03/02/100-million-iphones/.

  • Whitehead, A. N. (1985) [1929] Process and Reality. (2nd edition) Edited by David Ray Griffin, New York: The Free Press.


Abstract Views: 250

PDF Views: 0




  • Embedding "Design Thinking" in Business School Curriculum

Abstract Views: 250  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Ward Eagen
Ryerson University, Canada
Kristen Aspevig
Ryerson University, Canada
Wendy Cukier
Ryerson University, Canada
Robert Bauer
University of Toronto, Canada
Ojelanki Ngwenyama
Ryerson University, Canada

Abstract


With the rise of 'high experience' products and services, businesses are striving to improve the 'look and feel' of products. There is increased recognition that new approaches are necessary for resolving tensions between aesthetic, economic and technological constraints for marketing, advertising or the packaging of services and products. In an effort to capitalize on this demand for innovation, businesses are embracing 'design thinking' as a strategy to harness and manage creativity; in response, programs that embrace this multi-epistemic mode are emerging at business schools. This paper explores the pedagogical models used to teach design thinking in business programs. To date, few such approaches have been evaluated. We ask, how can design thinking skills be effectively taught? We consider the design thinking process, which draws on cognition, emotion, sensation, intuition, interrogation and other processes and skills to deal with problems that have incomplete, contradictory and changing requirements. We present an approach to design thinking in teaching and learning based on multiepistemic, Jungian and ecological models. Finally, we suggest that design thinking, rather than being taught as a course, can be embedded in curriculum and mainstreamed throughout institutions.

Keywords


Design Thinking, Pedagogy, Business Curriculum, Intuition, Process.

References