Living on the Edge: design artefacts as boundary objects

Abstract

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.

Problems in Problem-Based Design Engineering Education : Towards a Multidisciplinary Designerly Educational Approach

“…e term boundary object was rst introduced by Star and Griesemer (1989) in the eld of Zoology to refer to objects that facilitated and bridged di erent perspectives to aid communication between di erent social groups or disciplines (Carlile, 2002;Stoytcheva, 2013). In the context of design engineering, boundary objects could be interpreted as artifacts, tools, or methods that facilitate communication, collaboration, and knowledge sharing between di erent stakeholders involved in the design problem-solving process (Bergman et al, 2007;Hussmo et al, 2022;Pierre Johnson et al, 2017;Rhinow et al, 2012). ese objects act as a common reference point that helps bridge the gaps and di erences in understanding and perspectives among various stakeholders.…”

“…In design engineering, they can take the form of models, drawings, prototypes, design documentations, methodological tools, etc. (Bergman et al, 2007;Hussmo et al, 2022;Pierre Johnson et al, 2017;Rhinow et al, 2012). ey can aid not only in collaboration between students from di erent elds but also in student-to-teacher interactions and teacher-to-teacher interactions (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011).…”

“…Prototypes can act as tangible manifestations of ideas that bridge the communication gap between diverse stakeholders of the design process aiding to nd common understanding (Carlile, 2002). Prototypes can help to demonstrate design concepts, requirements, and user experience expectations, which in turn facilitates communication and negotiation between groups or individuals (Bergman et al, 2007;Hussmo et al, 2022;Pierre Johnson et al, 2017;Rhinow et al, 2012). Furthermore, prototype uidity of both interpretability and physical manifestation allows for engagement in meaningful discussions to explore and expand ideas, to both validate and iteratively re ne problem understanding and what might be a possible solution.…”

Co-design as a public service to support social innovations in city making

“…Building upon the results of phase 1, we elaborated a conceptual map displaying 4 main design directions: the central one represented the core theme (Park of the Nature), while the surrounding areas supported the exploration of alternatives (Park of the Agriculture, Park of the History and Park of the Wellness). We called this map 'compass for envisioning': it was the central boundary object (Meroni, Selloni and Rossi, 2018;Johnson et al, 2017;Star, 1989) of all workshops, printed on a large board hung on the wall, it served as a physical and conceptual support for the codesign activities (figure 1).…”

The Boundary Object of a Makerspace

“…The study further has relevance in a wider perspective, such as for primary school, curriculum thinking and other contexts that aim for active student learning and interdisciplinary collaboration. The boundary object concept, which originates from the social sciences, was chosen as a part of a theoretical framework because the concept has been shown to have a value for collaboration that spans several other research areas, such as in engineering and mathematics (Shanahan et al, 2016), design education (Johnson et al, 2017) and in arts education for children (Frisch, 2020). A stronger focus on collaboration across these areas is needed because it contributes to solving the challenges defined in the sustainability goals.…”