Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking

Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called "wicked problems," with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for proble...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Media and communication (Lisboa) 2024-03, Vol.12 (3), p.1
1. Verfasser: Richterich, Annika
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 3
container_start_page 1
container_title Media and communication (Lisboa)
container_volume 12
creator Richterich, Annika
description Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called "wicked problems," with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable "problems," in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests. Keywords design thinking; inequality; innovation; social change; solutionism; techno-fix; technological solutionism
doi_str_mv 10.17645/mac.7427
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A787765263</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A787765263</galeid><sourcerecordid>A787765263</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1013-d81b975e01443aa3c580f401fa94e353b293d47337048af13ca1eb09dd80f8893</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptjUFLwzAUx4MoOOYOfoOABxHWmTRpk55kdE4Hgx2cXstrmnbR9hVMJ_v4RvSwgbzDe_z5_d6fkGvOZlylMrnvwMyUjNUZGcVciyiWIjs_ui_JxPt3xhgXaRrrZETWOeDtQJfuQLc75x_oCrH_gqHHKX3pjYOW5jvAxk4pYBWidj-4Hp3vqEO6sN41-GPih8PmilzU0Ho7-dtj8rp83ObP0XrztMrn66jhoTmqNC8zlVjGpRQAwiSa1ZLxGjJpRSLKOBOVVEIoJjXUXBjgtmRZVQVO60yMyc3v3wZaWzis--ETTOe8KeZKK5UmcSoCNfuHClPZzpkebe1CfiLcnQiBGexhaGDvfbHavB2z36LwakY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Richterich, Annika</creator><creatorcontrib>Richterich, Annika</creatorcontrib><description>Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called "wicked problems," with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable "problems," in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests. Keywords design thinking; inequality; innovation; social change; solutionism; techno-fix; technological solutionism</description><identifier>ISSN: 2183-2439</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2183-2439</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.17645/mac.7427</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cogitatio Press</publisher><subject>Case studies ; Innovations ; Social aspects ; Social change ; Textbooks</subject><ispartof>Media and communication (Lisboa), 2024-03, Vol.12 (3), p.1</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 Cogitatio Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Richterich, Annika</creatorcontrib><title>Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking</title><title>Media and communication (Lisboa)</title><description>Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called "wicked problems," with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable "problems," in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests. Keywords design thinking; inequality; innovation; social change; solutionism; techno-fix; technological solutionism</description><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Social change</subject><subject>Textbooks</subject><issn>2183-2439</issn><issn>2183-2439</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptjUFLwzAUx4MoOOYOfoOABxHWmTRpk55kdE4Hgx2cXstrmnbR9hVMJ_v4RvSwgbzDe_z5_d6fkGvOZlylMrnvwMyUjNUZGcVciyiWIjs_ui_JxPt3xhgXaRrrZETWOeDtQJfuQLc75x_oCrH_gqHHKX3pjYOW5jvAxk4pYBWidj-4Hp3vqEO6sN41-GPih8PmilzU0Ho7-dtj8rp83ObP0XrztMrn66jhoTmqNC8zlVjGpRQAwiSa1ZLxGjJpRSLKOBOVVEIoJjXUXBjgtmRZVQVO60yMyc3v3wZaWzis--ETTOe8KeZKK5UmcSoCNfuHClPZzpkebe1CfiLcnQiBGexhaGDvfbHavB2z36LwakY</recordid><startdate>20240301</startdate><enddate>20240301</enddate><creator>Richterich, Annika</creator><general>Cogitatio Press</general><scope>IOV</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240301</creationdate><title>Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking</title><author>Richterich, Annika</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1013-d81b975e01443aa3c580f401fa94e353b293d47337048af13ca1eb09dd80f8893</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Social change</topic><topic>Textbooks</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Richterich, Annika</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><jtitle>Media and communication (Lisboa)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Richterich, Annika</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking</atitle><jtitle>Media and communication (Lisboa)</jtitle><date>2024-03-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1</spage><pages>1-</pages><issn>2183-2439</issn><eissn>2183-2439</eissn><abstract>Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called "wicked problems," with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable "problems," in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests. Keywords design thinking; inequality; innovation; social change; solutionism; techno-fix; technological solutionism</abstract><pub>Cogitatio Press</pub><doi>10.17645/mac.7427</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2183-2439
ispartof Media and communication (Lisboa), 2024-03, Vol.12 (3), p.1
issn 2183-2439
2183-2439
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A787765263
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Case studies
Innovations
Social aspects
Social change
Textbooks
title Can't Fix This? Innovaton, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T20%3A19%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can't%20Fix%20This?%20Innovaton,%20Social%20Change,%20and%20Solutionism%20in%20Design%20Thinking&rft.jtitle=Media%20and%20communication%20(Lisboa)&rft.au=Richterich,%20Annika&rft.date=2024-03-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1&rft.pages=1-&rft.issn=2183-2439&rft.eissn=2183-2439&rft_id=info:doi/10.17645/mac.7427&rft_dat=%3Cgale%3EA787765263%3C/gale%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A787765263&rfr_iscdi=true