Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decision-Making in Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Disentangling Participation

Part of the book series: Computer Supported Cooperative Work ((CSCW))

Abstract

Decision-making is a complex matter, even more so in design, where every design move involves choices. In this chapter we aim at becoming more precise about how design is decision-making and what role design decisions play in design and in PD. In design – as in everyday life – we make choices and select among them. In design, this takes the form of making moves, seeing some of the effects of the moves, and acting accordingly by moving back or making a new move.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

  • Alby, F., & Zucchermaglio, C. (2006). How situated work practices shape group decision making. Organization Studies, 27(7), 943–966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to “the social psychology of creativity”. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnheim, R. (1962). The genesis of a painting, Picasso’s Guernica. Berkley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, T., Ehn, P., Jacucci, G., De Michelis, G., Linde, P., & Wagner, I. (2011). Design things. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, J., & Karasti, H. (2013). Reflections on 25 years of ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 22(4–6) 1–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, T. (2004). Making change. Dealing with relations between design and use. Dr. Philos dissertation, University of Oslo, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, T., & Stolterman, E. (1997). Design in groups—and all that jazz. In M. Kyng & L. Mathiasen (Eds.), Computers and design in context (pp. 289–316). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, T., Bødker, K., Dittrich, Y., Mogensen, P. H., & Simonsen, J. (2012). Methods: Organising principles and general guidelines for participatory design projects. In J. Simonsen & T. Robertson (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of participatory design (pp. 177–144). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity. Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Carlton House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (2005/1934). Art as experience. Perigree Trade. New York: Perigee Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esser, H. (1993). The rationality of everyday behavior: A rational choice reconstruction of the theory of action by Alfred SchuÌtz. Rationality and Society, 5(1), 7–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981). Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 171–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkmann, M. N. (2010). Enabling creativity. Imagination in design processes. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 1st International Conference on design creativity ICDC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, L. (1999). Vision and material practice: Vladimir Tatlin and the design of everyday objects. Design Issues, 15(1), 49–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, D. (1987). Working knowledge. Skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitzler, R. (1987). Mundane Reflexivität: zur Verständigung mit und über Alfred Schütz. In: Sociologia Internationalis, 25, 143–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, R. D. (1970). Kant and Coleridge on imagination. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 28(4), 485–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, H., & Stolterman, E. (2012). Digital form and materiality: propositions for a new approach to interaction design research. Paper presented at the 7th Nordic Conference on human-computer interaction: Making sense through design.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Hawking’s Haiku, Madonna’s Math: Why it is hard to be creative in every room of the house. In R. J. Sternberg, E. L. Grigorenko & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, G. (2006). Hva er kreativitet? (What is creativity). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneller, J. (1990). Imaginative freedom and the German enlightenment. Journal of the History of Ideas, 51(2), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblauch, H. (1992). Anthropologie der symbolischen Kommunikation Forschungspapier fuÌr den SFB 511 Literatur und Anthropologie. Konstanz: University of Konstanz, GE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanzara, G. F. (1983). The design process: Frames, metaphors and games. In U. Briefs, C. U. Ciborra, L. Schneider (Eds.), Systems design for, with and by the user. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review, 19, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2007). Thoughtful interaction design: A design perspective on information technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J., & Wiebe, D. (1987). Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 15, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molander, B. (1996). Kunskap i handling (Knowledge in action). Gothenberg: Daidalos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pye, D. (1964). The nature of design. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1995). Knowing-in-action: The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1943). The problem of rationality in the social world. Economica, 10(38), 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1945). On multiple realities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 5(4), 533–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1951). Choosing among projects of action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 12(2), 161–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1954). Concept and theory formation in the social sciences. The Journal of Philosophy, 51(9), 257–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütz, A. (1962). On multiple realities. In A. Schütz (Ed.), Collected papers I (pp. 207–259). Den Haag: Nijhoff.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1960). The new science of managerial decision. New York: Harper and Row.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tellioglu, H., Wagner, I., & Lainer, R. (1998). Open design methodologies. Exploring architectural practice for systems design. Paper presented at the proceedings of PDC’98, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Tone Bratteteig

  2. Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Ina Wagner

Authors
  1. Tone Bratteteig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ina Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tone Bratteteig .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bratteteig, T., Wagner, I. (2014). Decision-Making in Design. In: Disentangling Participation. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06163-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06163-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06162-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06163-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation