Innovation in an Academic Setting: Designing and Leading a Business Through Market-Focused, Interdisciplinary Teams

Boni, A.A.; Weingart, Laurie R.; Evenson, Shelley

doi:10.5465/amle.8.3.zqr407

Cited by 32 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the classroom, the design challenge will need to accommodate the class time available, student level, and pedagogical objectives. Design thinking teams at Carnegie Mellon University have been engaged in developing innovative ways of reducing healthcare costs (Boni, Weingart, & Evenson, 2009). Design thinking projects in the engineering program at Singapore Polytechnic challenged students to design a "Dream Home" for people 50 and above (Ping, Chow, & Teoh, 2011).…”

Section: Helping Students Move Though the Design Thinking Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching design thinking in business schools

Glen

Suciu

Baughn

et al. 2015

The International Journal of Management Education

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Helping Students Move Though the Design Thinking Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching design thinking in business schools

Glen

Suciu

Baughn

et al. 2015

The International Journal of Management Education

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…According to several authors, “the act of moving from abstract thinking to visualizing ideas and then thinking on top of those visualizations is at the heart of design for innovation” (Boni et al, , p. 409). Design scholars have argued that designers’ ability to visualize defines their practices and approach to problem solving; as such, it forms an integral part of design thinking and doing (Deserti and Rizzo, ; Kimbell, ).…”

Section: Principal Attributes Of Design Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing Design Thinking: Conceptual Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda

Micheli¹,

Wilner²,

Bhatti³

et al. 2018

J of Product Innov Manag

438

256

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design thinking has attracted considerable interest from practitioners and academics alike, as it offers a novel approach to innovation and problem‐solving. However, there appear to be substantial differences between promoters and critics about its essential attributes, applicability, and outcomes. To shed light on current knowledge and conceptualizations of design thinking we undertook a multiphase study. First, a systematic review of the design thinking literature enabled us to identify 10 principal attributes and 8 tools and methods. To validate and refine our findings, we then employed a card sorting exercise with professional designers. Finally, we undertook a cluster analysis to reveal structural patterns within the design thinking literature. Our research makes three principal contributions to design and innovation management theory and practice. First, in rigorously deriving 10 attributes and 8 essential tools and methods that support them from a broad and multidisciplinary assortment of articles, we bring much needed clarity and validity to a construct plagued by polysemy and thus threatened by “construct collapse.” Second, aided by the identification of perspectives of scholars writing about design thinking, we provide detailed recommendations for relevant topics warranting further study in order to advance theoretical understanding of design thinking and test its applications. Third, we identify the enduring, yet essential, questions that remain unresolved across the extant design thinking literature and that may impede its practical implementation. We also provide suggestions for the theoretic frames, which may help address them, and thus advance the ability of scholars and managers alike to benefit from design thinking’s apparent advantages.

show abstract

“…Many instructors recognize the pedagogical benefits of group-based learning and the need for students to develop team skills, and are integrating team activities into their classes (Boni, Weingart, & Evenson, 2009;Michaelsen, Knight, & Fink, 2004). In a survey of instructors at 4-year institutions, 59.1% reported that they use small groups in all or most of their courses (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2009).…”

Section: Business Programs Frequently Do Not Develop Students' Team Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Teamwork Skills for Assurance of Learning Using CATME Team Tools

Loughry

Ohland

Woehr

2013

Journal of Marketing Education

211

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teamwork skills are essential for graduates of business schools, yet many colleges of business do not have a feasible way to assess whether their students are learning to work effectively in teams. This article describes how a set of free web-based tools available at www.CATME.org can be used as part of a systematic assessment of a program's effectiveness in developing students' team skills. The CATME name originated with an instrument for self and peer evaluation, called the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness, which was the system's first tool. Other tools were added to help instructors manage student teams more effectively and efficiently, but the system still uses the CATME name. This article describes how, if colleges would use the CATME system in all classes that require teamwork, colleges could improve opportunities for student learning. With the data collected by the system, colleges could document that students are getting an appropriate number of team experiences and that those experiences are leading to the development of team skills.

show abstract

Innovation in an Academic Setting: Designing and Leading a Business Through Market-Focused, Interdisciplinary Teams

Cited by 32 publications

References 1 publication

Teaching design thinking in business schools

Teaching design thinking in business schools

Doing Design Thinking: Conceptual Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda

Assessing Teamwork Skills for Assurance of Learning Using CATME Team Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About