Het lectoraat Co-Design van Hogeschool Utrecht doet met een systemisch-inclusieve ontwerpende aanpak praktijkgericht onderzoek, om complexe maatschappelijke vraagstukken te helpen oplossen. Binnen die onderzoeken stellen we vragen over het ontwerpproces en de mensen die daarbij betrokken zijn. Hoe kun je goed co-designen in de weerbarstige werkelijkheid? Wat kan helpen in die ontwerpende aanpak? Hoe kunnen mensen die niet zijn opgeleid als ontwerpers volwaardig meedoen in het ontwerpproces, en wat hebben zij daarvoor nodig aan ontwerpend vermogen? De kennis over ontwerpend vermogen die we de afgelopen vier jaar hebben opgedaan, delen we in dit boekje. We hebben dat proces getekend en beschreven als een reisverhaal van Co, die ons meeneemt op een boot over een rivier, door stroomversnellingen en langs landschappen. Met bijdragen van: Marry Bassa, Anita Cremers, Tanja Enninga, Anita van Essen, Christa van Gessel, Berit Godfroij, Joep Kuijper, Remko van der Lugt, Caroline Maessen, Lenny van Onselen, Dirk Ploos van Amstel, Karlijn van Ramshorst, Carolijn Schrijver, Fenne Verhoeven, Danielle Vossebeld, Rosa de Vries
DOCUMENT
The numerous grand challenges around us demand new approaches to build alternative sustainable futures collectively. Whereas these so-called co-design processes are becoming more mainstream, many multi-stakeholder coalitions lack practical guidance in these dynamic and systemic challenges based on entangled relationships, interactions, and experiences between stakeholders and their environments. Although scholars and practitioners convey a lot of co-design theories and methods, there does not seem to be a practical instrument beyond methods that supports new coalitions with an overview of a co-design process to come and in making shared and fundamental co-design decisions. Therefore, this paper proposes the empathic Co-Design Canvas as a new intermediate-level knowledge product existing of eight co-design decision cards, which together make up the Canvas as a whole. The Canvas is based on an existing theoretical framework defined by Lee et al. (2018), an empirical case study, and a diversity of experiences in education and practice. It aims at supporting multi-stakeholder coalitions to flexibly plan, conduct, and evaluate a co-design process. Moreover, the Canvas encourages coalitions to not only discuss the problematic context, a common purpose, envisioned impact, concrete results, and each other’s interests and knowledge, but also power, which can create trust, a more equal level playing field and empathy, and help manage expectations, which is greatly needed to overcome today’s grand challenges.
LINK
Reflections: Systemic (Co) Design is still relatively unknow to practitioners As well as to academics in the economic domain Dialogue requires active involvement and experiencing diverse perspectives through a variety of methods/tools Artifacts contribute to the continuity of the dialogues Gathering data (and interpreting data) remains complex The insights generated by the workshops connect practice and research guiding both learning and research Designers play an essential role in reflexivity and thus promote learning
DOCUMENT
Our society faces many challenges, necessitating collaborative efforts among multiple stakeholders. Our students learn this in living labs. This paper explores preliminary research on introducing co-design to novices. We introduce a case study exploring how design educators can support students in developing co-design competencies. Central to this study is our Co-Design Canvas, introduced as a pivotal tool for fostering open dialogue among diverse stakeholders. This stimulates collaboration through effective teamwork and empathic formation. The research questions aim to discover effective methods for introducing the Co-Design Canvas to living lab students, and to identify the necessary prior knowledge and expertise for both novices and educators to effectively engage with and teach the Co-Design Canvas. The paper advocates for a pedagogical shift to effectively engage students in multi-stakeholder challenges. Through a series of workshops, the Co-Design Canvas was introduced to novices. We found that this required a significant cognitive stretch for staff and students. The paper concludes by presenting a, for now, final workshop format consisting of assignments that supports introducing the Canvas and thereby co design to societal impact design novices. This program better prepares students and coaches for multi stakeholder challenges within living labs.
MULTIFILE
Co-creation as a concept and process has been prominent in both marketing and design research over the past ten years. Referring respectively to the active collaboration of firms with their stakeholders in value creation, or to the participation of design users in the design research process, there has arguably been little common discourse between these academic disciplines. This article seeks to redress this deficiency by connecting marketing and design research together—and particularly the concepts of co-creation and co-design—to advance theory and broaden the scope of applied research into the topic. It does this by elaborating the notion of the pop-up store as temporary place of consumer/user engagement, to build common ground for theory and experimentation in terms of allowing marketers insight into what is meaningful to consumers and in terms of facilitating co-design. The article describes two case studies, which outline how this can occur and concludes by proposing principles and an agenda for future marketing/design pop-up research. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Overdiek A. & Warnaby G. (2020), "Co-creation and co-design in pop-up stores: the intersection of marketing and design research?", Creativity & Innovation Management, Vol. 29, Issue S1, pp. 63-74, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12373. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. LinkedIn: https://nl.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345
MULTIFILE
Dit magazine is een uitgave van Expertise Netwerk Systemisch Co-design, een samenwerking tussen Hogeschool Inholland, Hogeschool Utrecht, Haagse Hogeschool, Hogeschool Rotterdam en partners vanuit creatieve industrie en maatschappelijk domein. Het netwerk wordt mede mogelijk gemaakt door een SPRONG subsidie vanuit Regieorgaan SIA. Samen op weg Daar staan we dan, een jaar na de start van ESC. De infrastructuur staat, het team is compleet, we leren al doende van elkaar, netwerkevents en projecten staan op stapel en we geven een doorkijkje naar de toekomst. Trots zijn we op de activiteiten die we als netwerk al hebben kunnen ontplooien. Van gezamenlijke subsidieaanvragen, projecten tot inspirerende uitwisselingen in de praktijk. We zagen elkaar op de DDW en bij de hogescholen in het kader van onderzoek en onderwijs tot en met het ontdekken van potentiële nieuwe werkveldpartners en het breder betrekken van onderzoekers en koploperlectoren in onze eigen instellingen. Ook zijn lectoren en onderzoekers doorlopend bij elkaar gekomen om in co-design toe te werken naar eerste principes passend bij een prototype framework van systemisch co-design en een overzicht van tools. Hiermee is een eerste basis gecreëerd die helpt om samen beter experimenten, interventies en projecten op te zetten in zowel onderzoek als binnen de hybride leeromgevingen.
DOCUMENT
The context of a societal challenge provides insight into the complexity of the (eco-)system surrounding the current problematic situation: the environment, the stakeholders (including nature), the highlights and frustrations, the conflicts and dilemmas, and the opportunities for change. Why is this co-design session arranged? What problematic situation is encountered? Who (individual or group) took the initiative to act? Is there a specific reason to collaboratively start taking up this societal challenge? Does everyone in this session recognise the problematic situation? Why or why not?
MULTIFILE
(‘Co’-)Designing for healthy behaviour greatly benefits from integrating insights about individual behaviour and systemic influences. This study reports our experiences in using insights about individual and systemic determinants of behaviour to inform a large co-design project. To do so, we used two design tools that encourage focusing on individual determinants (Behavioural Lenses Approach) and social / systemic aspects of behaviour (Socionas). We performed a qualitative analysis to identify 1) when and how the team applied the design tools, and 2) how the tools supported or obstructed the design process. The results show that both tools had their distinctive uses during the process. Both tools improved the co-design process by deepening the conversations and underpinnings of the prototypes. Using the Behavioural Lenses under the guidance of a behavioural expert proved most beneficial. Furthermore, the Socionas showed the most potential when interacting with stakeholders, i.c. parents and PPTs.
MULTIFILE
Introduction: There is a lack of effective interventions available for Pediatric Physical Therapists (PPTs) to promote a physically active lifestyle in children with physical disabilities. Participatory design methods (co-design) may be helpful in generating insights and developing intervention prototypes for facilitating a physically active lifestyle in children with physical disabilities (6–12 years). Materials and methods: A multidisciplinary development team of designers, developers, and researchers engaged in a co-design process–together with parents, PPTs, and other relevant stakeholders (such as the Dutch Association of PPTs and care sports connectors). In this design process, the team developed prototypes for interventions during three co-creation sessions, four one-week design sprint, living-lab testing and two triangulation sessions. All available co-design data was structured and analyzed by three researchers independently resulting in themes for facilitating physical activity. Results: The data rendered two specific outcomes, (1) knowledge cards containing the insights collected during the co-design process, and (2) eleven intervention prototypes. Based on the generated insights, the following factors seem important when facilitating a physically active lifestyle: a) stimulating self-efficacy; b) stimulating autonomy; c) focusing on possibilities; d) focusing on the needs of the individual child; e) collaborating with stakeholders; f) connecting with a child's environment; and g) meaningful goal setting. Conclusion: This study shows how a co-design process can be successfully applied to generate insights and develop interventions in pediatric rehabilitation. The designed prototypes facilitate the incorporation of behavioral change techniques into pediatric rehabilitation and offer new opportunities to facilitate a physically active lifestyle in children with physical disabilities by PPTs. While promising, further studies should examine the feasibility and effectivity of these prototypes.
LINK
Emergency care (from ambulance to emergency room) is focused on somatic care: fixing the body. When a patient with mental dysregulation who experiences ‘disproportionate feelings like fear, anger, sadness or confusion, possibly with associated behaviours’ (Van de Glind et al. 2023) does not get appropriate attention, this can result in the disruption of treatment and even psychological trauma upon trauma. To improve the emergency care process, the authors of this paper - health researchers and design researchers engaged in a project based on the experience-based co-design (EBCD) approach (Donetto et al. 2015; Bate and Robert 2007). EBCD is a method used to design better experiences in healthcare settings, in cooperation with (former) patients and healthcare professionals. The process of EBCD involves partnerships between stakeholders and the discovery and sensemaking of experiences through specialized methods to gain an understanding of the interface between user and service, to design new experiences (Bate and Robert 2007, 31). There is, however, an interesting challenge in bringing patients and care professionals together. In emergency care, patients depend greatly on their healthcare providers. The patients in this study had existing mental vulnerabilities and may have been traumatized by previous visits. We needed to enable these stakeholders to be equal partners with ownership and power, one of the characteristics of co-design in EBCD (Donetto et al. 2015). In this paper, we describe how we adapted and applied the EBCD method, with a focus on creating equal partnerships. We also reflect on the extent of our success and the diBiculties we encountered in attaining this objective.
DOCUMENT
