Estimator Socialization in Design Thinking: The Dynamic Process of Learning How to Judge Creative Work
The assessment of ideas is a central activity in creative processes. Since teachers and coaches guide the learning of students, their assessment styles are particularly consequential. We report a longitudinal study, comparing the idea evaluation style of coaches before and after they are trained in the innovation paradigm design thinking. Initially, the coaches display a static idea assessment style. They attribute value primarily based on the requirement that ideas should be immediately effective, regardless of whether students are in the middle or in a late stage of their creative process. After being trained, the coaches have developed a dynamic, process-oriented evaluation style. They also assess ideas in line with design thinking values, with one exception. Contrary to design thinking teachings, the coaches do not come to value idea originality. The chapter closes with considerations how to facilitate the acceptance of original ideas.
KeywordsAssessment style Creativity education Design thinking Effectiveness Estimation ability Evaluation style Idea assessment Idea evaluation Longitudinal study Originality Value estimation
We thank Ronald Beghetto and Giovanni Emanuele Corazza for inviting this research to be part of their comprehensive project on dynamic perspectives in creativity education and helpful feedback on our first draft. We thank the participants of the Certification Program for Design Thinking Coaches in the summer semester of 2017 at the HPI Potsdam for taking part in our survey and for their openness to subsequent individual discussions of study results. We thank Toni Mattis for the permission to print his picture.
- Agnoli, S., Mastria, S., Kirsch, C., & Corazza G. E. (under review). Creativity in the advertisement domain: The mediating role of experience on creative achievement.Google Scholar
- Arnold, J. E. (2016). Creative engineering. In W. J. Clancey (Ed.) Creative engineering: Promoting innovation by thinking differently (pp. 59–150). Stanford : Stanford Digital Repository. Original manuscript 1959. http://purl.stanford.edu/jb100vs5745. Accessed 13 June 2017.
- Beaney, M. (2005). Imagination and creativity. Milton Keynes: Open University.Google Scholar
- Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Nurturing creativity in the micro-moments of the classroom. In K. H. Kim, J. C. Kaufman, J. Baer, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creatively gifted students are not like other gifted students. Advances in creativity and giftedness (Vol. 5). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
- Beghetto, R. A. (2016). Learning as a creative act. In T. Kettler (Ed.), Modern curriculum for gifted and advanced learners (pp. 111–127). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- Carleton, T., & Leifer, L. (2009). Stanford’s ME310 course as an evolution of engineering design. In R. Roy & E. Shehab (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th CIRP design conference – Competitive design (pp. 547–554). Cranfield: Cranfield University.Google Scholar
- Corazza, G. E. (2015). Impresa e creatività. Online lecture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfR8qJWtpfs. Accessed 14 Sept 2017.
- Corazza, G. E. (2016b). Creativity: A dynamic definition. Keynote speech at the MIC Conference 2016: From creative brains to creative societies, Università di Bologna, Bologna, 14–16 September 2016.Google Scholar
- Corazza, G. E. (2017). Creativity in education: a recursive exercise in estimation ability. Keynote speech at the Utrecht platform for creativity in education, Ut-recht University, Utrecht, 30–31 March 2017. https://platformcreativity.sites.uu.nl/wp-content/uploads/sites/145/2017/04/2017-UPCE-Giovanni-E.-Corazza.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct 2017.
- d.school. (2010). Bootcamp bootleg. http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf. Accessed 6 Mar 2017.
- Dow, S. P., & Klemmer, S. R. (2011). The efficacy of prototyping under time constraints. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research. Understand – improve – apply (pp. 111–128). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- Hasso Plattner Institute for Digital Engineering. (2017). This is design thinking: A collection of case stories. http://thisisdesignthinking.net. Accessed 29 Oct 2017.
- Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- McKim, R. H. (1972). Experiences in visual thinking. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
- McKim, R. H. (2016). Designing for the whole man. In W. J. Clancey (Ed.) Creative engineering: Promoting innovation by thinking differently (pp. 198–217). Stanford: Stanford Digital Repository. Original manuscript 1959. http://purl.stanford.edu/jb100vs5745. Accessed 13 June 2017.
- Ney, S. (2016). Manual for design thinking coaches. Potsdam: HPI School of Design Thinking.Google Scholar
- Roth, B. (2015). The achievement habit. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A., Noweski, C., Meinel, C., & Rauth, I. (2011). The co-evolution of theory and practice in design thinking – or – “mind the oddness trap!”. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research. Understand – improve – apply (pp. 81–99). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A., Royalty, A., & Meinel, C. (2016). Design thinking in higher education: How students become dedicated creative problem solvers. In C. Zhou (Ed.), Handbook of research on creative problem-solving skill development in higher education (pp. 306–328). Hershey: IGI Global.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A., Clancey, W. J., Corazza, G. E., & Meinel, C. (2017a). Theoretical foundations of design thinking. Part I: John E. Arnold’s creative thinking theories. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research. Making distinctions: Collaboration versus cooperation (pp. 13–40). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A., Paladini, C., & Meinel, C. (2017b). Do creative ideas give rise to unique private-mind or private-language problems? Paper presented at the 25th annual conference of the European Society for Philosophy and Psychology, University of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire, 14–17August 2017.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A., Clancey, W. J., & Meinel, C. (forthcoming-a). Theoretical foundations of design thinking. Part II: Robert McKim’s need based design theory. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- von Thienen, J. P. A, Ney S., Meinel C. (forthcoming-b). Idea Assessment Probes. Questionnaires to measure the idea assessment style of estimators in creative projects. Electronic Colloquium on Design Thinking Research.Google Scholar