The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Need for Design Thinking in Business Schools
Abstract
The demands placed on today's organizations and their managers suggest that we have to develop pedagogies combining analytic reasoning with a more exploratory skill set that design practitioners have embraced and business schools have traditionally neglected. Design thinking is an iterative, exploratory process involving visualizing, experimenting, creating, and prototyping of models, and gathering feedback. It is a particularly apt method for addressing innovation and messy, ill-structured situations. We discuss key characteristics of design thinking, link design-thinking characteristics to recent studies of cognition, and note how the repertoire of skills and methods that embody design thinking can address deficits in business school education.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research
Prince, M. (2004) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x · Cited by 7,334
Hake, R. R. (1998) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.18809 · Cited by 6,072
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
Wicked Problems in Design Thinking
Buchanan, R. (1992) · Design Issues · doi:10.2307/1511637 · Cited by 3,539 · cited 3×
“Methods problems have been characterized as illdefined, ill-structured, “wicked” problems (Buchanan, 1992; Cross, 1982).”
BackgroundConditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree.
Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0016755 · Cited by 2,443
A theory of medical decision making and health: fuzzy trace theory
Reyna, V. F. (2008) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x08327066 · Cited by 602
Cited by
Buhl, A., Schmidt-Keilich, M., Muster, V., Blazejewski, S., Schrader, U., Harrach, C., Schäfer, M., & Süßbauer, E. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.259 · Cited by 188
From Visualization to Legal Design: A Collaborative and Creative Process
Berger‐Walliser, G., Barton, T. D., & Haapio, H. (2017) · American Business Law Journal · doi:10.1111/ablj.12101 · Cited by 62
Design thinking for sustainable development: A bibliometric analysis and case study research
Leal Filho, W., Schmidberger, I., Sharifi, A., Vargas, V. R., Rampasso, I. S., Dibbern, T., Liakh, O., Aina, Y. A., Trevisan, L. V., Mbah, M. F., et al. (2024) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142285 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Glen, R., Suciu, C., & Baughn, C.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Learning & Education
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2014-12
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 653-667
- ISSN
- 1537-260X (ISSN-L)
- 1944-9585
- OpenAlex
- W2170438104
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 11.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
