Expanding and orchestrating the problem identification phase of design-based research

Design-based research (DBR) employs the identification of a problem as the key to designing solutions and generating new knowledge. Based on three empirical examples that highlight the potentials of three methods for elaborating on a problem, this paper argues that expanding, deepening and orchestrating this phase may provide crucial insights into subsequent attempts at problem-solving design. The authors discuss how the identification phase can be orchestrated in a way that facilitates a nuanced and explicit exploration of a problem. The matter of a problem is addressed by drawing on Schön’s (1983) distinction between problem-setting and problem-solving, focusing on the problem-setting process and addressing the implications of a collaborative practitioner–researcher perspective (e.g. Amiel & Reeves, 2008). When discussing paradigmatic issues in different scientific domains, as well as the issue of bridging practical and theoretical problems, the authors draw on epistemological insights to define what constitutes a problem (Adolphson,2006). Threemethods practisedby theauthors in threeDBR projects—future-workshop, dialogic-space, and co-creation methods—suggest potential approaches for enhancing practitioner–researcher collaboration when identifying a problem. From here, it is argued that the dynamic interplay between practical and theoretical problem-setting holds the potential to transcend a fixed setof problems. Furthermore, it is argued that multifaceted and diverse stakeholder collaboration creates productive tension between perspectives that can revitalize well-known ideas on the matters of a problem. The problem-setting issue in DBR is therefore not solved, but more tools are proposed for use in the phase during which a problem is identified.