Different flags over shared terrain: Making sense of ‘design labels’

References

• Buchanan, Richard. 2001. “Design Research and the New Learning.” Design Issues 17 (4): 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1162/07479360152681056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CoDesign journal. 2024. Accessed June 2, 2024. https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/ncdn20.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, Nigel. 2023. “Design Thinking: What Just Happened?” Design Studies 86: 101187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Design Council. 2005. “The Double Diamond: A Universally Accepted Depiction of the Design Process.” Accessed June 2, 2024. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/the-double-diamond/.
   Google Scholar
• European Academy of Design. 2024. Accessed June 2, 2024. https://eadresearch.org.
   Google Scholar
• Hallnäs, Lars, and Johan Redström. 2006. Interaction design: Foundations, Experiments. Textile Research Centre, Swedish School of Textiles, University College of Borås and Interactive Institute
   Google Scholar
• Iskander, Natasha. 2018. “Design Thinking is Fundamentally Conservative and Preserves the Status Quo.” Harvard Business Review 5 (09). https://hbr.org/2018/09/design-thinking-is-fundamentally-conservative-and-preserves-the-status-quo.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, Peter. 2021. “Systemic Design: Design for Complex, Social, and Sociotechnical Systems.” In Handbook of Systems Sciences, 787–811. Singapore: Springer Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• Joore, Peter, and Han Brezet. 2015. “A Multilevel Design Model: The Mutual Relationship between Product-Service System Development and Societal Change Processes.” Journal of Cleaner Production 97: 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.043.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimbell, Lucy. 2011. “Designing for Service as One Way of Designing Services.” International Journal of Design 5: 41–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolko, Jon. 2018. “The Divisiveness of Design Thinking.” Interactions 25 (3): 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3194313.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, Vijay. 2012. 101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your Organization. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, Bella, and Bruce Hanington. 2012. Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions. Gloucester, MA: Rockport Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Participatory Design Conference. 2024. Accessed June 2, 2024. https://pdc2024.org.
   Google Scholar
• Service Design Network. 2024. https://www.service-design-network.org
   Google Scholar
• Sleeswijk Visser, Froukje. 2013. Service Design by Industrial Designers. TU Delft. https://research.tudelft.nl/en/publications/service-design-by-industrial-designers.
   Google Scholar
• Stappers, P. J., Froukje Sleeswijk Visser, and Annemiek van Boeijen. 2023. “Design Labels: The Words That Divide and Unite Us.” 15^th International Conference of the European Academy of Design, October 19, Espoo, Helsinki, 728–736. https://doi.org/10.5151/ead2023-4ESP-01Full-04Pieter-Jan-Stappers-et-al.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, Mark, and Mark Watson. 2008. Dashboard User Guide. Toronto, Canada: Institute Without Boundaries.
   Google Scholar
• Tromp, Nynke, and Stéphane Vial. 2022. “Five Components of Social Design: A Unified Framework to Support Research and Practice.” The Design Journal 26 (2): 210–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2022.2088098.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TUDelft. 2024. Accessed June 2, 2024. https://youtu.be/kw6K90A8Zcg.
   Google Scholar
• van Boeijen, Annemiek, Jaap Daalhuizen, and Jelle Zijlstra, eds. 2020. Delft Design Guide: Perspectives, Models, Approaches and Methods. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• van der Bijl-Brouwer, Mieke, and Bridget Malcolm. 2020. “Systemic Design Principles in Social Innovation: A Study of Expert Practices and Design Rationales.” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 6 (3): 386–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2020.06.001.
   Google Scholar
• Vargo, Stephen, and Robert Lusch. 2008. “Service-Dominant Logic: Continuing the Evolution.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voûte, Ena, Pieter Jan Stappers, Elisa Giaccardi, Sylvia Mooij, and Annemiek van Boeijen. 2020. “Innovating a Large Design Education Program at a University of Technology.” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 6 (1): 50–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.001.
   Google Scholar