| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Johansson, Ulla, 1948, et al.
(author)
-
Creating a synergistic dialogue among design thinking, strategy, and innovation
- 2011
-
In: IDBM papers vol 1. - Helsinki FI : IDBM Program, Aalto University. - 9789529286416 ; , s. 64-73
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- In a synergistic dialogue the conversational partners will stand on a humanistic ground and be desirous of harnessing the resources of design thinking, strategy, and innovation for purposes of adding value for all the actors connected with developing the product or service
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Johansson, Ulla, 1948, et al.
(author)
-
Designers dancing within hierarchies: The importance of non-hierarchical power for design integration and implementation
- 2010
-
In: New Perspectives in Design Management: Selected writings from Business & Design Lab 2007-2010. - Göteborg : Business & Design Lab Publications. - 9789163373701 ; , s. 95-122
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This chapter presents the authors' belief that hierarchical thinking and notion of power need to change before organizations can take advantage of the specific competence of designers, They introduce Mary Parker Follett's theoretical power discourse, developed in the 1920s to demonstrate an alternative view of power to classical management thinking, and relate Follett's notion of power with the characteristics of designers competence. One reason for the practical difficulties of integrating design as a strategic resources many be problems associated with doing creative work within a hierarchical organization; these obstacles can be overcome if managers and designers value a "circular response" and follow "the law of the situation."
|
|
| 6. |
- Johansson, Ulla, 1948, et al.
(author)
-
Recognizing paradoxical identities of design managers
- 2011
-
In: 4th Nordic Design Research Conference: Making Design Matter.
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- There is a need for designers with knowledge in business as well as business people with knowledge in design. All over the world master-level education programs are growing for this “in between” area. We argue that this knowledge and the identity of being “in between” are essential but also problematic. There is a danger that, similar to the relation between man and (wo)man, the business way of thinking becomes the common ground for (design) management, and the designerly characteristics become decoration, rather than another ground. In order not to suppress the one or the other, we argue that a paradoxical identity of being simultaneously both the same and different is needed. This paradoxical identity of both acknowledging the differences and at the same time looking away from them is theoretically anchored in the postmodern project – and earlier studies of one of the authors shows that it seems easier to embrace in practice than in (modernist) theory. Here we present a theoretical frame of reference and some empirical notifications from students in a Masters program in “Business & Design” at the University of Gothenburg. We will also present an ongoing empirical study.
|
|
| 7. |
- Johansson, Ulla, 1948, et al.
(author)
-
The emperor's new clothes or the magic wand? The past, present and future of design thinking
- 2011
-
In: Proceedings of the first Cambridge Academic Design Management Conference. ; :2011
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Design thinking is a discourse that – at least within its managerial realm - has been described as the best way to innovate, and as a saviour of the economy! The claim suggests a magic wand; but maybe this is a situation of the Emperor’s new clothes – instead of being everything, it may become nothing. We do not assume this will happen; instead we relate the design thinking managerial discourse to the discourse of design thinking within the design research area. We observe that the managerial discourse has a surface and popular character and is less academically anchored than the designerly one. Also, the managerial discourse seldom refers to the designerly one and thereby hinders cumulative knowledge construction, and this makes it easy to criticize from an academic perspective. We find five different discourses of “designerly thinking” or ways of making sense of what designers do in practice that have distinctly different epistemological roots. These different discourses do not stand in competition with each other but could be developed in parallel.
|
|
| 8. |
- Johansson, Ulla, 1948, et al.
(author)
-
Towards a better paradigmatic partnership between design and management
- 2010
-
In: New Perspectives in Design Management: Selected writings from Business & Design Lab 2007-2010. - Göteborg : Business & Design Lab Publications. - 9789163373701 ; , s. 37-70
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The chapter probes the academic area of design management that straddles the disciplines of design and management, the practice of managing designers, and the emerging corporate interest in the design concept. Drawing on Burrell and Morgan's (1979) paradigmatic framework, the authors problemetize the way knowledge from design merges with knowledge from management. They claim that currently design management is primarily a partnership between "main-stream management research" and design, with opportunities for more fruitful collaboration with other management paradigms.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
