Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Different Types of Productive Thinking in Design: From Rational to Social Design Thinking

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design Thinking Research

Part of the book series: Understanding Innovation ((UNDINNO))

  • 1213 Accesses

Abstract

This book chapter outlines the theory of Productive Thinking in Design. This theory is the psychological foundation of today’s Design Thinking. Productive Thinking incorporates the psychological processes of finding a need, problem, or structural tension and determining a means that satisfies the need and harmonizes the tension. These psychological processes are driven by forces and factors, including attitudes, attributes, and human values. In this article, we outline five different types of Productive Thinking and discuss them in the context of Design. These are (1) Rational, (2) Situational, (3) Experimental, (4) Dialectic, and (5) Counterproductive. Each type of Productive Thinking is dependent on the situational context for which a design solution needs to be created. For example, a situation in which a solution-method can be determined directly requires Rational Productive Thinking, while unintelligible, ambiguous, and emerging situations require Experimental or Dialectic Productive Thinking. We emphasize that it is essential to cultivate a Productive Culture in which individuals can freely, creatively, confidently, competently, and collaboratively design for a harmonious ecological and social whole.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, J. L. (1974a). Conceptual blockbusting: A guide to better ideas. Stanford Alumni Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. L. (1974b). Invention and innovation in the University Paper presented at the the public need and the role of the inventor. Monterey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Avalon Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, B. L. (1965). Systematic method for designers. Council of Industrial Design.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnheim, R. (1954). Art and visual perception. University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnheim, R. (2004). Visual thinking. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnheim, R. (2009). The power of the center – A study of composition in the visual art. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, J. E. (1959). Creative engineering seminar, 1959. Stanford, University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, J. E. (1962a). Education for innovation. In S. J. Parnes & H. F. Harding (Eds.), A source book for creative thinking. Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, J. E. (1962b). Useful creative techniques. In S. J. Parnes & H. F. Harding (Eds.), A source book for creative thinking. Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auernhammer, J. M. (2012). Autopoietic organisation of knowledge, creativity and innovation: A case study of the automotive manufacturer Daimler AG. Edinburgh Napier University. Retrieved from https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?did=1&uin=uk.bl.ethos.580699

  • Auernhammer, J. M. (2020). Design research in innovation management: A pragmatic and human-centered approach. R&D Management, 50(3), 412–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auernhammer, J. M., & Hall, H. (2014). Organizational culture in knowledge creation, creativity and innovation: Towards the Freiraum model. Journal of Information Science, 40(2), 154–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auernhammer, J. M., & Roth, B. (2021). The origin and evolution of Stanford University’s design thinking: From product design to design thinking in innovation management. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 00. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12594

  • Auernhammer, J. M., Leifer, L., Meinel, C., & Roth, B. (2022). A humanistic and creative philosophy of design. In C. Meinel & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research: Achieving real innovation. Cham, CH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beach, D. (1974). Design division student shop program - A proposal. Retrieved from Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benary, W. (1923). Besprechung yon II. Psychologische Forschung, 3, 417–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjögvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P.-A. (2012). Design things and design thinking: Contemporary participatory design challenges. Design Issues, 28(3), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1957). Neural mechanisms in perception. Psychological review, 64(6), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1994). The view from the heart’s eye: A commentary. In P. M. Niedenthal & S. Kitayama (Eds.), The heart’s eye: Emotional influences in perception and attention. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1986). A study of thinking (2nd ed.). Transaction Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, R. M., Obel, B., & Håkonsson, D. D. (2015). Organizational design: A step-by-step approach. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. L. Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clancey, W. J. (1993). Situated action: A neuropsychological interpretation response to vera and simon. Cognitive Science, 17(1), 87–116. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooley, M. (1980). Architect or bee? The human/technology relationship. Langley Technical Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Solving a problem is not finding a new one: A reply to Simon. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 183–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(88)90003-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), The systems model of creativity: The collected works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pp. 47–61). Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, A. D. (1969). Methodology: Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences. de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dell’Era, C., Magistretti, S., Cautela, C., Verganti, R., & Zurlo, F. (2020). Four kinds of design thinking: From ideating to making, engaging, and criticizing. Creativity and Innovation Management, 29(2), 324–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. Henry Holt and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2019). Co-evolution and emergence in design. Design Studies, 65, 60–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies, 22, 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K. (1935). Zur Psychologie des produktiven Denkens. [The psychology of productive thought.]. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving. American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eames, C., & Eames, R. (2015). An eames anthology: Articles, film scripts, interviews, letters, notes, speeches. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman, C. (1970). On the analysis of intuitive design processes. In G. T. Moore (Ed.), Emerging methods in environmental design and planning. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehn, P., & Kyng, M. (1987). The collective resource approach to systems design. In G. Bjerknes, P. Ehn, & M. Kyn (Eds.), Computers and democracy - A Scandinavian challenge (pp. 17–58). Gower Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankl, V. E. (1992). Man’s search for meaning. Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gero, J. S. (1990). Design prototypes: A knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine, 11, 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J. W. (1980). Problem finding and human thought. The Educational Forum, 44(2), 243–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728009336151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception. Taylor & Francis.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., & Moore, J. L. (1993). Situativity and symbols: Response to Vera and Simon. Cognitive Science, 17(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(05)80009-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, S. M., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Scientific problem solving and problem finding: A theoretical model. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. C. (1977). How my thoughts about design methods have changed during the years. Design Methods and Theories, 11(1), 48–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. Crown Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koffka, K. (1912). Zur Analyse de Vorstellungen und ihrer Gesetze: eine experimentelle Untersuchung. Quelle & Meyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koffka, K. (1925). Psychologie. In M. Dessoir (Ed.), Die Philosophie in ihren Einzelgebieten (pp. 497–603). Ullstein.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koffka, K. (1927). Bemerkungen zur Denk-Psychologie. Psychologische Forschung, 9(1), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. Harcourt, Brace & Howe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Köhler, W. (1925). The mentality of the Apes. Translated from second revised edition by Ella Winter. Harcourt, Brace & Company Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2009). The Aha! moment: The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(4), 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01638.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115,154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (1972). Problem solving in architectural design. (Ph.D.). Aston University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (1980). How designers think. Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. McGraw-Hill book Company.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1943). The special case of Germany. Public Opinion Quarterly, 7(4), 555–566. https://doi.org/10.1086/265642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher, M. L., & Poon, J. (1996). Modeling design exploration as co-evolution. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 11(3), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.1996.tb00323.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, G. (2002). Origins of the cognitive (r)evolution. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Science, 38(4), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbs.10066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, J. M., & Mandler, G. (1964). Thinking: From association to gestalt. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolin, V. (2002). The politics of the artificial: Essays on design and design studies. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. Harper & Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1956). Toward a humanistic psychology. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 14(1), 10–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1995). The search for insight: Grappling with Gestalt psychology’s unanswered questions. In The nature of insight (pp. 3–32). The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKim, R. H. (1959). Designing for the whole man. In J. E. Arnold (Ed.), Creative engineering seminar, 1959. Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKim, R. H. (1972). Experiences in visual thinking. Wadsworth Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKim, R. H. (1980). Experiences in visual thinking. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKim, R. H. (1982). Innovation /. In B. McKim, C. Bernstein, & J. Anapole (Eds.), Conference on entrepreneurship at Stanford University [sound recording]: A path to the future. Stanford University Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neisser, U. (1963). The imitation of man by machine. Science, 139(3551), 193–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1956). The logic theory machine: A complex information processing system. IRE Transactions on Information Theory, 2(3), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.1956.1056797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl, G., Beitz, W., & Wallace, K. (1996). Engineering design: A systematic approach. .

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Papanek, V. (1973). Design for the real world. Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pólya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (2002). An unended quest. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rams, D. (1995). Less but better. Jo Klatt Design + Design Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. (1982). Systems analysis of the ‘first and second generations’. In P. Laconte, J. Gibson, & A. Rapoport (Eds.), Human and energy factors in urban planning: A systems approach (pp. 35–52). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. (1987). The reasoning of designers: Delivered at the International Congress on Planning and Design Theory. IGP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, C. R. (1954). Toward a theory of creativity. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 11(4), 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, B. (2015). The achievement habit: Stop wishing, start doing, and take command of your life. Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, P. G. (1987). Design thinking. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudofsky, B. (1964). Architecture without architects: A short introduction to non-pedigreed architecture: [exhibition, New York, Museum of Modern Art, November 9, 1964-February 7, 1965]. Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–687. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/259121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1963). Displacement of concepts. Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1973). Beyond the stable state. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1992a). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-7051(92)90020-G

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1992b). The theory of inquiry: Dewey’s legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22(2), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/1180029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selz, O. (1922). Über die Gesetze des geordneten Denkverlaufs: Zur Psychologie des Produktiven Denkens und des Irrtums. F. Cohen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man; social and rational. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1981). Otto Selz and information-processing psychology. In N. H. Frijda & A. D. D. Groot (Eds.), Otto Selz: His contribution to psychology (pp. 147–163). De Gruyter Mouton.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1988). Creativity and motivation: A response to Csikszentmihalyi. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(88)90002-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (2017). Karl Duncker and cognitive science: Ideas and their makers (pp. 3–16). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. J., & Thompson, E. (1990). Color vision: A case study in the foundations of cognitive science. Revue de Synthèse, 111(1), 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03181032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vera, A. H., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Situated action: Reply to William Clancey. Cognitive Science, 17(1), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701_8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verganti, R. (2009). Design-driven innovation: Changing the rules of competition by radically innovating what things mean. Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Ehrenfels, C. (2014). Über Gestaltqualitäten. In M. Schneider (Ed.), Information über Gestalt (pp. 106–108). Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. J. Cape.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, M. Theater for humanity. Retrieved from https://www.theaterforhumanity.com

  • Wertheimer, M. (1920). Über Schlussprozesse im produktiven Denken. De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer, M. (1945). Productive thinking. Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer, M. (1996). A contemporary perspective on the psychology of productive thinking. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, R. A. (1987). Sensorimotor modulation and the variable action pattern (VAP): Toward a noncircular definition of drive and motivation. Psychobiology, 15(1), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, R., Gu, N., Ostwald, M., & Gero, J. S. (2015). Empirical support for problem–solution coevolution in a parametric design environment. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 29(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060414000316

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The first author would like to thank Larry Leifer, Bernie Roth, and the wider design community at Stanford for cultivating this self-actualized behavior. It is tremendously freeing when people support and help one another.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mechanical Engineering Design Group, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Jan Auernhammer & Bernard Roth

Authors
  1. Jan Auernhammer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernard Roth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Auernhammer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hasso Plattner Institute and Digital Engineering Faculty, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Christoph Meinel

  2. Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Larry Leifer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Auernhammer, J., Roth, B. (2022). Different Types of Productive Thinking in Design: From Rational to Social Design Thinking. In: Meinel, C., Leifer, L. (eds) Design Thinking Research . Understanding Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09297-8_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation