Decision-making in teamworks: sticky notes tool for degree

[EN] This paper is focused on the presentation of an open-source online tool based on the methodology of sticky notes tools to support Industrial Engineering degree students in the practical work of decision-making and in the teamwork's practical sessions. The main aim of this paper is to identify a tool to support students, as future industrial engineers, in the decision-making process through teamwork, in the establishment of strategic policies, and in the process of creating solutions, amongst others. Moreover, three different case study are provided with the main objective of showing the potential of the proposed tool in the scope of decision-making in teamwork's.Andres, B.; Sanchis, R.; Poler, R. (2016). Decision-making in teamworks: sticky notes tool for degree. ICERI Proceedings. 4293-4301. doi:10.21125/iceri.2016.2010S4293430

Utilising sharing economy to address impact-centred approach in design education

To confront the growing uncertainties and challenges on a global scale through design, this paper recommends using the sharing culture as a starting point. It establishes a connection between the sharing economy and impact-centred design by examining the components and scope of the sharing economy in existing literature. Exploring how this framework can be integrated into design education, the paper offers a comprehensive account of a course on impact-centred design, grounded on sharing economy. Throughout four years, this framework was applied to explore design solutions for addressing themes related to crisis response, disaster management, and collaborative consumption. We provide methods and deliverables to illustrate how the sharing economy and design thinking collaborate to uncover systemslevel exchanges and interactions among stakeholders. Our discussions focus on the transformative influence of such design contexts on the role of the designer, the scale of the design's impact and the designer responsibility

Improving design project management in remote learning

Design Thinking has the potential to train the soft skills of preservice teachers who will need to continuously design their future towards sustainable education. However, Design Thinking is intrinsically complex, and managing its learning and projects with large groups is not straightforward, especially in remote situations such as COVID-19. From collaborative work among disciplines, this study introduces a Design Thinking-based board to improve the implementation and management of remote design projects. This board was applied with university-level preservice teachers who worked in teams to design instructional materials for preschool. We assessed the perception of the usefulness of the board by the preservice teachers and the teachers responsible for their training, using mixed methods in two consecutive courses. The board was perceived as helpful in developing design projects and improving collaborative learning. It was beneficial for the management, monitoring, and communication, enriching the project process and outcomes. From the achieved learning, we provide guidelines for designing and using these boards to aid educators and researchers in integrating Design Thinking and developing practical and sustainable solutions. This study contributes to the natural integration of Design Thinking and technology in preservice teachers’ education with a replicable and flexible process, improving the quality of education for future generations

Guidelines for Integrating Value Sensitive Design in Responsible AI Toolkits

Value Sensitive Design (VSD) is a framework for integrating human values throughout the technology design process. In parallel, Responsible AI (RAI) advocates for the development of systems aligning with ethical values, such as fairness and transparency. In this study, we posit that a VSD approach is not only compatible, but also advantageous to the development of RAI toolkits. To empirically assess this hypothesis, we conducted four workshops involving 17 early-career AI researchers. Our aim was to establish links between VSD and RAI values while examining how existing toolkits incorporate VSD principles in their design. Our findings show that collaborative and educational design features within these toolkits, including illustrative examples and open-ended cues, facilitate an understanding of human and ethical values, and empower researchers to incorporate values into AI systems. Drawing on these insights, we formulated six design guidelines for integrating VSD values into the development of RAI toolkits.Comment: 26 pages, 8 figures, 3 table

Movement and Divergent Production, Understanding opportunity for strategic kinesthetic movement during participatory ideation sessions

With strategic kinesthetic movement making its way into education and business, and design thinking also edging into those same fields, it seems natural that the two could be integrated and referenced by facilitators who are responsible for leading a group through participatory ideation sessions. Design Thinking is a human-centered innovation process, which ultimately influences innovation and business strategy. It refers to applying a designer’s sensibility and methods of problem solving to an innovation process.1 Designers reach out to stakeholders within an opportunity space through design research methods. Often times, the designer will take on the role of a facilitator and conduct meetings with the stakeholders in order to gather information, generate ideas, or evaluate specific concepts.2 Facilitated sessions in which all stakeholders have to opportunity to contribute equally are referred to as participatory design process facilitation sessions. Participatory ideation sessions are meetings focused on one stage in a design process; the ideation stage. This research project is focused on the stage in a human-centered innovation process, referred to as the ideation stage, in which ideas are generated with stakeholders. During participatory ideation sessions, facilitators lead groups of participants through organized and strategized agendas, utilizing design research methods with the sole purpose of generating ideas for improving specified opportunity spaces.3 Generating ideas with the stakeholders allows the designer to gain insight into the stake-holder’s point of view, which ultimately aids the designer in creating a meaningful solution to a design problem. The purpose of this design research project is to develop a framework from which facilitators may gain insight and understanding of how to develop their own participatory ideation sessions utilizing strategic kinesthetic movement customized to specific contexts. The development of these participatory ideation sessions will involve the making and manipulation of generative methods and tools revolving around strategic kinesthetic movement. Designers working as facilitators utilize movement for many reasons. Movement increases productivity, confidence, creativity, and focus during facilitated sessions. Movement elevates the average body temperature which is a sign of greater blood circulation, which means more oxygen is arriving at the brain, making concentration easier.4 Movement has also been proven to improve self esteem,5 potentially enabling participants to contribute more ideas without fear of being judged. The absence of judgment allows for an increase in divergent production during participatory ideation sessions. Divergent production is defined as producing from one’s memory storage a number of alternative items of information to meet a certain need, either in exact or in modified form, as in thinking of alternative tools that might be used in opening a package.6 How might designers harness the power of movement during their facilitated sessions

DIGITAL CO-CREATION Digitalization within Service Design : Transformation from analog thinking towards digital doing

The German automotive industry has accelerated its digital transformation as OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) moving from car manufacturers towards becoming mobility providers, striving for new mobility solutions like offering Mobility as a Service (MaaS), Electric Vehicles (EVs) and Self-Driving-System (SDS). OEMs focus on expanding their core product-driven businesses to access service-orientated business models, the transformation from ownership towards shared mobility. Considering internal and external factors, this requires a new set of expertise, capabilities and an underlying approach to fulfill the demands in the complexity of human-centered development and front- and backstage alignment within the organization. At the same time, Service Design as a practice has risen in attraction by industry, being recognized and increasingly requested for its integration in the functions and divisions of the organization. The scale of Service Design in influence and impact has reached professional practice, making its way from a trendy buzzword to professional practice of turning complex problems collaboratively into tangible solutions. It is seen as a powerful opportunity for combining Business, Human-Centered Design and Engineering. Service Design establishes new ways of exploring business opportunities towards agile problem-solving but focuses on the ‘doing’ side towards further implementation. The contribution of this industrial-based doctoral thesis shall define how Service Design can be deployed and implemented in the field of organizational transformation and mobility development in the era of digital transformation (Digitalization). This research approach seeks to acquire new knowledge on how the Service Design practice can be applied and executed to be perceived as a practical approach to improve the enterprise’s processes and operating procedures and also provide a strategy to grow Service Design within the organization. This research has followed developing a pilot in a lean start-up approach of build, measure, learn with various business units and brands within the Volkswagen Group, this also implies that this research case study consisted of analyzing the Volkswagen Group needs for Service Design. The ‘10X-Service Design Lab’ (10X-SDL) has been designed as the framework of a combination of modular lab space, facilitation enhanced process, methodological driven tool box, operational model in alignment with a digital workflow and workspace striving for accelerated decision making. It is based on the hypothesis that the proposed framework enhances Service Design practice and, at the same time, it increases its attractiveness for business purposes. The 10X-SDL is designed to accelerate project development in a human-centered and holistic way by an open workspace platform lead by facilitators on which project developers, participants, and stakeholders can digitally co-create products, services, systems, and strategies. This research has been conducted as a case study within the Volkswagen Group from 2015 to 2019 in cooperation with the main partners of Service Innovation Corner (SINCO) of the University of Lapland and visual collaboration software company DEON

Embedding Design Sprint into Industrial Design Education

Design Sprint is an intensive and innovation-focused framework based on Design Thinking principles. This study discusses the potential usage of the design sprint framework in industrial design education, and focuses on its strengths and weaknesses as an educational tool. Within this context, the study reports on a design sprint workshop involving twelve industrial design students in their fifth semester. The general process and outcomes of the design sprint workshop are criticized along with the feedback of participant students. Design sprint in industrial education supports student ability to criticize their own design and creative thinking, offers a new usage of prototyping as a testing material, and enables user-designer interaction, but also challenges the students with limited time and intensive workload. Design sprint can be a tool for carrying out multidisciplinary studies, reflecting the activities of professional practice, and accelerating project progress in design education

Co-create Social Innovation - A mapping of Co-creation methods for Social Innovation

Background and issue of study: The global financial crisis, climate change, demographic changes, and rising inequality are some of the global trends that put pressure on public leaders and organizations, civil society organizations and corporations to shift to a social and environmental sustainable development. Social innovations are demanded to be both drivers of positive societal change and forces against negative developments. Often cross-sectoral, open and collaborative, create new relationships and are built on pro-sumption, grassroots involvement, bottom-up processes, co-production and mutualism. Aspects that can be enhanced with the support of well-designed and wellhosted co-creation activities and processes. Even if there is a common understanding that co-creation plays an important role in the creation of social innovation there is a lack of clarity on what co-creation is and how to actually co-create social innovation. This report aims to give taxonomy for co-creation of social innovation and a general co-creation process that structures the different co-creation methods in a useful way. It is meant to brief people that are new to the area and give a practical framework for social innovation practitioners. Purpose statement: The main purpose with this report is to understand the cocreation methods that are used for enabling Social Innovation. Three sub-purposes: • Sub-purpose one is to identify and describe which cocreation concepts and methods are used among social innovation actors in the same context as Lund University Social Innovation Center (LUSIC). • Sub-purpose two is to design and present a framework that makes it easier to find the "best" cocreation method for the perceived situation during the co-creation process. • Sub-purpose three is to explain how the framework can be used to easy find the "best" co-creation method for the perceived situation during the cocreation process, or plan and implement an entire cocreation process. 4 Methodology: Basic theory about co-creation has been compiled from relevant academic articles and complemented with theory from references found during the field research. A field study methodology inspired by the first phase in the Design Thinking process, Inspiration, has been used in order to find co-creation concepts, and offer a better understanding of the concepts and the co-creation methods they included. During this process 23 relevant actors and events in South Sweden, Denmark, South Finland, and the Basque Country were visited. From presentations, observations, discussions, and participation relevant information and insights where gathered through notes and pictures. The information from the field studies has then been complemented with more literature studies about co-creation concepts and methods that were identified during the field studies. In order to find a process that could structure the co-creation methods a methodology inspired by the second step in the Design Thinking process, Ideation, was used. First an early prototype, a sketch, was created and then developed into the final co-creation process and table for social innovation. Finally found co-creation methods were sorted into the table. Conclusions: The found co-creation concepts in the social innovation are: Art of Hosting, Design Thinking, Service Design, Graphic Facilitation, Visual Thinking, the Business Model Canvas and Transversal Dialogue. The designed structure for how to find the appropriate method for common situations during a co-creation process is a co-creation method table divided after a designed co-creation process built up by three main phases: A. Discover, B. Ideation and C. Implementation. The phases are divided into subphases and some of the sub-phases are divided into steps. The different co-creation methods are sorted into the table according to the sub-phases and the steps. The recommended way to use the co-creation method table is to co-create the social innovation process with stickynotes in a Graphic roadmap with activities (sub-phases and steps) and methods from the co-creation method table

Building Community at Distance: A Datathon during COVID-19

This paper aims to use the experience of an in-person event that was forced to go virtual in the wake of COVID-19 as an entryway into a discussion on the broader implications around transitioning events online. It gives both practical recommendation to event organizers as well as broader reflections on the role of digital libraries during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.This work is supported by a generous grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Scholarly Communications program. Additional support was forthcoming from Compute Canada. Authors sincerest thanks to their funders for their support

Design Thinking for Innovation. Stress Testing Human Factors in Ideation Sessions

This paper reports on a series of studies that attempt to unpick the factors that contribute to successful team ideation. Ideation is a popular, structured approach to creative thinking, where the goal is to produce many viable and innovative ideas and concepts. This is often accomplished through structured collaborative workshops that include ‘Design Thinking’ techniques and methods. The reported studies involved manipulating variables in controlled experiments with subjects (AKA ideators). The sample of ideators, were tasked with generating ideas to solve a challenge and the outcome of their work was measured by quantity and quality of output. The latter criterion was assessed by an expert panel using a standardised evaluation framework. Four variables were employed to understand idea generation success factors. These were identified as common and thus easily applied factors in typical ideation scenarios and included varying levels of participant stimulation (before sessions), presence or absence of a facilitator, application of ‘Design Thinking’ technique (or not) and lastly, participant profile based on professional background. In this case, participant characteristics were split between designers and non-designers. The different experiments were run, with participants generating ideas in a timeboxed activity in which their outputs were assessed against the various experimental conditions. The findings suggest that counter orthodox thinking, applying the methods (e.g. Round Robin) is less effective than the influence of ideators’ differing professional background and their level of stimulation. These conclusions in turn suggest the possibility of extending the effectiveness of workshop facilitation to increase efficiency and quality of output. The paper concludes with pointers on improving ideation. In particular, increasing levels of engagement and immersion among participants and using aspects of game theory are seen a possible areas of further investigation