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 problemsetting 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). Three methods practised by the authors in three DBR 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 problemsetting holds the potential to transcend a fixed set of 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.

No abstract