Organizations have increasingly turned to the use of virtual teams (VTs) to tackle the complex nature of today’s organizational issues. To address these practical needs, VTs researchers from different disciplines have begun to amass a large literature. However, the changing workplace that is becoming so reliant on VTs comes with its own set of management challenges, which are not sufficiently addressed by current research on VTs. Paradoxically, despite the challenges associated with technology in terms of its disruption to trust development in VTs, trust is one of the most promising solutions for overcoming myriad problems. Though the extant literature includes an abundance of studies on trust in VTs, a comprehensive multidisciplinary review and synthesis is lacking. Addressing this gap, we present a systematic theoretical review of 124 articles from the disparate, multidisciplinary literature on trust in VTs. We use the review to develop an integrated model of trust in VTs. Based on our review, we provide theoretical insights into the relationship between virtuality and team trust, and highlight several critical suggestions for moving this literature forward to meet the needs of workplaces of the future, namely: better insight into how trust evolves alongside the team’s evolution, clarity about how to adequately conceptualize and operationalize virtuality, and greater understanding about how trust might develop differently across diverse types of virtual contexts with various technology usages. We conclude with guidelines for managing VTs in the future workplace, which is increasingly driven and affected by changing technologies, and highlight important trends to consider.

Design-led innovation interventions are predicated on the importance of establishing complex disciplinary collaborations. This paper reflects on the effects of different co-design methods to support knowledge exchange and the co-creation of new business ideas with multidisciplinary participants. It draws on data collected from sandpit style events entitled Chiasma, undertaken as part of the knowledge exchange hub, Design in Action (DiA) in which co-design methods were used to bring designers, entrepreneurs, and academics together to develop innovative business ideas in Scotland. Employing a thematic analysis of idea generation, team formation, and idea development, we suggest that a more nuanced range of methods, tools, and techniques can strengthen multidisciplinary engagement and participation. We argue that such approaches can be enhanced by designers and researchers' shifting focus from co-design methods to supporting collaborative mindsets in knowledge exchange towards innovation.

In times of rapid social, economic, environmental and technological change designers can play a valuable role by applying their creativity to catalyse innovative solutions to address complex problems. As they do so, it becomes apparent they need to ask fundamental questions about what they make, how they make it, and who for. The mindsets and postures of designers often go unnoticed and unacknowledged, but they profoundly influence what is identified as a problem and how it is framed and addressed. This paper draws upon a research project titled 'CO/DEsign', which explores the application of agile co-design methods in an endeavour to understand and identify the most appropriate approach for rigorous analysis. The 'CO/DEsign' project argues that, while it is important to draw upon other disciplines and borrow methods such as thematic analysis, further methods should be developed that better represent and support designers and their approaches.

Design is being performed on an ever-increasing spectrum of complex practices. As a result there is demand on the articulation of design's application across disciplinary boundaries. This paper explores this context through acknowledging the retained role of design artefacts in engaging complex, collaborative contexts and a developing understanding of boundary objects. This paper expands on notions of design artefacts as boundary objects by offering reflections on existing examples from ongoing design research in the context of health and care innovation. Through the process of framing a design problem, live models are developed as dialogical tools with collaborators to validate and inform design solutions. Such models are argued to act as boundary objects that are not static, but living artefacts open to ongoing scrutiny within the design context, offering an understanding of the value and practice of design artefacts in complex, collaborative contexts.

National creative and cultural industries policy agendas tend to focus on the economic impact of the sector often favouring scalable digital activities based in global clusters, which underpin notions of growth. There has, however, been a re-emergence of craft, which may not be scalable in the same way, into public debate, but which is increasingly recognised as part of a growing industrial sector, with benefits linked to educational, cultural and economic policy agendas. Accordingly, policymakers have begun to view craft as a stimulus to develop local and regional economies, skills and materials in relation to wider networks. Within this push towards craft-driven creative place making and economic growth, it has been argued that more sophisticated understandings of the "local" are needed that go beyond those which are inward and parochial. Based on AHRC-funded empirical research undertaken in the Northern Isles of Scotland with craft practitioners, this article attempts to provide evidence of the place-based nature of craft work highlighting both opportunities as well as constraints linked to contexts that are often referred to as remote and peripheral when contrasted with urban locations. This article argues that there is a dissonance between high-profile creative-economy policies and the political economy of the "lived experience" of craft work in non-metropolitan settings. We argue for future investigation into, what we term, fractal growthgrowth and development that considers multiple dimensionsas being a valid and valuable outcome of creative practice, which cannot be easily scaled.