4.4 Article

The contribution of Design Thinking to the R of R&D in technological innovation

Journal

R & D MANAGEMENT
Volume 52, Issue 1, Pages 108-125

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/radm.12478

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Literature on Design Thinking has mainly focused on its application in the development phase of technological innovation, with scant attention to the earlier research phase. The article explores the potential of applying Design Thinking to the research phase and finds that the logic and tools used may differ due to the more abstract nature of tasks in the research phase.
Literature on Design Thinking has mainly focused on whether its key principles enhance performance in the development phase (the D of R&D) of the technological innovation process. However, it has dedicated scant attention to the earlier research phase (the R of R&D). This aspect is surprising, given that many innovations fail as a result of early research actions and decisions. This article examines how it is possible and desirable to apply Design Thinking to the research phase of the technological innovation process. How can Design Thinking support innovation, even when advanced breakthrough technologies are at stake, the market is distant, and product applications and specific user needs have not been identified yet? To respond to this question, we investigate the research work of the design center of a global electronics company that uses a design approach called Proxemics to envision future interactions between bodies (people), objects (technology), and spaces (context). Although Proxemics is consistent with and implements the human centeredness and experimentation principles of Design Thinking, results of this study show that its logics and tools are different from those used in Design Thinking in the D of R&D due to the more abstract nature of the tasks in the R of R&D.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available