{"title":"That was fun, now what?: Modelizing knowledge dynamics to explain co-design's shortcomings","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.destud.2024.101274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Co-design workshops seek solutions to complex, multi-stakeholder issues. These ephemeral encounters bring together designers and uninitiated individuals who embark in a facilitated process that mobilizes a range of simplified design tools and methods. Despite co-design's benefits in terms of representation and acceptability, these workshops also come with limitations and often fall short of their intended goals. Proceeding from stylized facts informed by both our experience and the literature, this study investigates why co-design struggles at maintaining engagement and fails to consistently deliver innovative output regardless of the number of participants involved. Namely, we employ a model-building strategy to illuminate the main knowledge dynamics during workshops and to highlight a constrained ‘reactive expansion’ mechanism that explains known co-design's shortcomings. Implications for workshop facilitation and planning are offered in closing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50593,"journal":{"name":"Design Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Studies","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X24000371","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Co-design workshops seek solutions to complex, multi-stakeholder issues. These ephemeral encounters bring together designers and uninitiated individuals who embark in a facilitated process that mobilizes a range of simplified design tools and methods. Despite co-design's benefits in terms of representation and acceptability, these workshops also come with limitations and often fall short of their intended goals. Proceeding from stylized facts informed by both our experience and the literature, this study investigates why co-design struggles at maintaining engagement and fails to consistently deliver innovative output regardless of the number of participants involved. Namely, we employ a model-building strategy to illuminate the main knowledge dynamics during workshops and to highlight a constrained ‘reactive expansion’ mechanism that explains known co-design's shortcomings. Implications for workshop facilitation and planning are offered in closing.
期刊介绍:
Design Studies is a leading international academic journal focused on developing understanding of design processes. It studies design activity across all domains of application, including engineering and product design, architectural and urban design, computer artefacts and systems design. It therefore provides an interdisciplinary forum for the analysis, development and discussion of fundamental aspects of design activity, from cognition and methodology to values and philosophy.
Design Studies publishes work that is concerned with the process of designing, and is relevant to a broad audience of researchers, teachers and practitioners. We welcome original, scientific and scholarly research papers reporting studies concerned with the process of designing in all its many fields, or furthering the development and application of new knowledge relating to design process. Papers should be written to be intelligible and pertinent to a wide range of readership across different design domains. To be relevant for this journal, a paper has to offer something that gives new insight into or knowledge about the design process, or assists new development of the processes of designing.