{"title":"Shared Conceptions in Capital Design: Co-creation and Co-evolution in Asset Allocation","authors":"Ben Van Vliet","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.05.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.05.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Capital design is a nascent discipline that reconceives institutional asset allocation as a design practice rather than a static optimization exercise. Traditional finance treats asset allocation as a decision under aleatory risk, solvable through equilibrium models and periodic rebalancing. Yet modern institutional investors operate in complex, co-evolving environments marked by epistemic uncertainty, interdependent feedback loops, universal ownership exposures, and long-horizon systemic risks. This article offers a unified conceptual vocabulary for Capital design and positions asset allocation as a structured exploration–commitment process through which investment products are co-created and investment firms co-evolve with their environments. Through a Triple Diamond model, Capital design integrates choice-making (expanding possibilities under uncertainty) with decision-making (committing under constraints) across both internal and external environments. Capital design reframes the agency problem from one of control to one of systemic alignment, using design tools such as transparency, iteration, and stakeholder co-creation to coordinate firm, client, and societal goals. By defining the core concepts of finance, capital, risk, systemic investing, universal ownership, and design-led allocation, this article provides the foundational language that is necessary for the development of Capital design as both a research framework and a practical methodology for institutional adaptation in a dynamically complex world.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 157-172"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148429271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Capital Design: Asset Classes as Design Objects","authors":"Jordan Ostapchuk, Carlos Teixeira","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.006","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.006","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Institutional investors rely on inherited asset class taxonomies that simplify decision-making but constrain holistic portfolio thinking. This article introduces <em>Capital Design</em>, a researcher-practitioner framework that treats asset classes as designable constructs and integrates eight design capabilities: abstraction, foresight, sensemaking, reframing, synthesis, abduction, mediation, and connecting. Drawing on participatory action research, research through design, and critical literature review, the study shows how embedding design interventions within pension funds and sovereign investors enables new forms of strategic choice-making under uncertainty. Through fieldwork, interviews, and studio experiments, the article demonstrates how these capabilities expand the investment choice set, leading to new asset archetypes, governance models, and portfolio configurations. By reframing asset classes as world-making devices rather than neutral categories, Capital Design offers a method for fiduciaries to align portfolios with systemic transitions such as decarbonization, digital sovereignty, and resilience while maintaining institutional rigor. The article positions design as an epistemic infrastructure for navigating uncertainty and shaping the futures capital enables.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 133-156"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Asset Owner Gearbox: Why Investment Innovation Grinds and How to Make It Turn","authors":"Ashby Monk, Dane Rook, Rajiv Sharma","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.008","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.008","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Asset owners—defined here as pensions, sovereign wealth funds, endowments, and foundations—face transformative pressures as AI, automation, and other autonomous systems reshape market structures, investment access, information advantages, operating costs, and the distribution of economic rents. Yet most of these mission-driven institutions were not built for a world of rapid change. Many were optimized for defensibility and procedural prudence rather than adaptation to change, leaving them increasingly misaligned with the opportunity set and risk environment ahead. This article explains why innovation in asset ownership is both necessary and persistently slow. We examine how innovation occurs inside asset owners and why it so often stalls. We introduce a “gearbox” model in which organizational identity drives asset allocation and, ultimately, implementation. When asset owners spin the allocation gear faster than organizational structures and implementation capabilities can adapt, the system grinds: initiatives stall, learning is outsourced, and change becomes symbolic rather than durable. We conclude with a practical operating model for turning catalyst windows into durable innovation capabilities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 203-230"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joseph V. Sinfield, Romika R. Kotian, Waire Olawolu
{"title":"Holistic Design for Sociotechnical System Transitions: Method and Instructional Setting Implementation in Engineering Education","authors":"Joseph V. Sinfield, Romika R. Kotian, Waire Olawolu","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article presents the pedagogical translation and exploratory implementation of a holistic approach to sociotechnical transition design in engineering education. A review of complex adaptive system theory, sociotechnical transition theory, innovation systems approaches, transition design, risk society theory, and systemic design approaches identifies strengths and limitations in existing methods for addressing the complex challenges facing engineers, highlighting the need for a more integrative perspective. In response, we adopt the Enabling Innovation Model, an innovation science framework structured around three iterative design phases—Envision, Shape, and Pursue—to guide students through problem exploration, solution development, and implementation planning. Developed and employed at a US R1 research university, the approach integrates technical design with broader system considerations, emphasizing social impact, sustainability, and resilience. Qualitative analysis of self-reported outcomes from two cohorts (<em>N</em> = 77) provides preliminary evidence of shifts in students’ perspectives on solution scope, innovation processes, and contextual complexity. By empowering students to proactively shape systemic change, the model offers a potential response to calls for engineering education to produce graduates capable of designing solutions that address public welfare while accounting for global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 269-304"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Redesigning Value: How Designers and Managers Can Work Together for a Better World","authors":"David Dunne, Chris Ferguson, Paolo Korre","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Designers and managers both seek to redesign value in ways that serve both societal and business goals. However, they often struggle to work together. In interviews with designers and managers, we observed hidden assumptions and entrenched practices that inhibit collaboration. We identified six double binds, conflicting demands or expectations, in which design is simultaneously supported and obstructed in organizations. Many designers, however, have found ways of addressing these double binds within their own organizations. These cases lead us to five design principles for redesigning value for a better world: start with relationships, design materials and mindsets, collectively confront assumptions, seize the critical moment, and show design leadership.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 251-268"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review of Design Science: Driving Innovation with Unified Principles","authors":"L. Siddharth","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.005","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 305-310"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Large Pension Fund Embracing the Systems Perspective: An Investment Case Study on PFZW and PGGM’s Journey","authors":"Jaap K.H. van Dam","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.009","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.009","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article is a case study, written from the inside, of one of the largest pension funds in the world, PFZW, from the Netherlands. It focuses on the process used to transform the company into one that takes responsibility for certain systemic risks, first and foremost climate change, and for directing long-term capital allocation toward desirable futures. The first part describes what triggered the process leading to the White Sheet of Paper project, the project setup, and its outcomes. We approached the project as a design problem rather than an optimization problem. It looks at the translation into practice now, a decade later. The second and last part focuses on the Capital Design angle of this project. What are the lessons learned from this project? What are my reflections on the approach? What does the case reveal about institutional change, sensemaking, or navigating uncertainty? Can we use the design principles in finance? Answering such questions sheds light on the use of intuitive design approaches by institutional investors. It aims to blur the borders between capital and design. Hopefully, this will lead to a couple of questions for future research in design in finance and insights relevant to practitioners.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 189-202"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573710","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Revisiting Democratization in Futuring Practices: Reflections on Power, Affect, and Socio-materiality. With a Reply by Lesage, Russell, and Shamsher","authors":"Sharmila Chaudhuri, Gaurav Agarwal","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.007","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 311-316"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148380108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Confronting Complexity: A Design Guide for System-Level Investors","authors":"Jon Lukomnik, William Burckart","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.sheji.2026.04.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>For most investors, the function of investing is to offset future liabilities, such as retirement. Yet, most investors define success as “beating a benchmark,” rather than funding the future. That misalignment, and the limited design decisions associated with it, stems from Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), which treats the general price level of the market as exogenous. Recently, the assumption that you cannot impact beta has been challenged by system-level investing. By reducing risk to the environmental, social, and financial systems on which the capital markets rely, system-level investors attempt to improve the overall risk/return profile of the capital markets, which determines 75–94 percent of the variability of your return. But if traditional, MPT-driven investment follows well-trodden paths, system-level investing is bushwacking through a dynamic real-world landscape. To facilitate that, we propose a set of design principles: Consensus, Relevance, Effectiveness, and Magnitude, to ensure investors focus on material systemic risks; Adaptability, Clarity, Connectivity, and Directionality, to help create healthy real-world systems. To achieve those goals, we provide a three-part taxonomy of tools: Investment Enhancement, Field Building, and Opportunity Generation. These design rules help investors cut through the complexity of system-level investing to improve the total risk/return profile rather than trying to beat a benchmark.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 173-188"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148573709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}