Acting with Creative Confidence: Developing a Creative Agency Assessment Tool

Part of the Understanding Innovation book series (UNDINNO)


Universities around the world are quickly introducing new learning models aimed at developing creativity and innovation in students. A leading model is the experiential teaching of design thinking as a creative problem solving process aimed at enhancing students’ creative confidence. Although these programs exist, little is known about student outcomes. Furthermore, the criteria by which we evaluate student “success” is not well defined because these programs almost uniformly have ambiguously stated learning objectives. This research uses qualitative and quantitative data to capture and categorizes successful outcomes by examining alumni of these programs. Based on these data is a scale that measures creative agency, a fundamental outcome of teaching design thinking.


Business Executive Design Thinking Current Occupation Career Change Creative Output 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 84(2):191–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura A (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol 37(2):122–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckman S, Barry M (2007) Innovation as a learning process: embedding design thinking. Calif Manage Rev 50(1):25–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckman S, Joyce CK (2012) Reflections on teaching design thinking to MBA students. In: Business as an agent of world benefit conference, 2–5 June 2009Google Scholar
  5. Brereton MF, Cannon DM, Mabogunje A, Leifer L (1996) Characteristics of collaboration in engineering design teams: mediating design progress through social interaction. In: Dorst K, Christiaans H, Cross N (eds) Analyzing design activity. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  6. Buchanan R (1992) Wicked problems in design thinking. Des Issues 8(2):5–21Google Scholar
  7. Cross N (2007) Designerly ways of Knowing. Birkhauser Verlag AG, BostonGoogle Scholar
  8. (2004) Retrieved 10 July 2013 from
  9. Eris O (2004) Effective inquiry for innovative engineering design. Kluwer, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerber E (2011) Extracurricular design-based learning: preparing students for careers in innovation. Int J Eng Edu 28(2):317–324, 2012Google Scholar
  11. Gerber E, Carroll M (2012) The psychological experience of prototyping. To appear in design studies (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  12. Jobst B, Köppen E, Lindberg T, Rhinow H, Moritz J, Meinel C (2012) The faith-factor in design thinking: creative confidence through education? In: Design thinking research studying co-creation in practice. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leifer L (1996) Evaluating product-based learning education. White Paper. Center for Design Research, Stanford University, Palo Alto. Retrieved 29 Feb 2008Google Scholar
  14. Lucas WA, Cooper SY (2004) Enhancing self-efficacy to enable entrepreneurship: the case of CMI’s connections. MIT Sloan school of management working paper, 4489–04Google Scholar
  15. Lucas WA, Cooper SY (2005) Measuring entrepreneurial self-efficacy. In: EDGE conference: bridging the gap: entrepreneurship in theory and practice, Singapore, 11–13 July 2005Google Scholar
  16. Rauth I, Köppen E, Jobst B, Meinel C (2010) An educational model towards creative confidence. 1st Proc. ICDC, KobeGoogle Scholar
  17. Royalty A, Oishi L, Roth B (2012) ‘I Use it Everyday’: pathways to adaptive innovation after graduate study in design thinking. In: Design thinking research measuring performance in context. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations