Design Thinking: An Overview

Georgi V. Georgiev
Kobe University

Abstract predominant viewpoints on design thinking, paying particular

This study provides an overview of the current state of design attention to the perspective of design research and design
thinking. Through a review of the literature, the paper surveys education.
the basic viewpoints of design thinking, paying particular Thus, this paper consists of two parts. The first part discusses the
attention to the perspective of design research and design design-thinking paradigm. The second focuses on the methods
education. Two viewpoints are discussed: the “analysis of currently employed to teach design thinking. Essentially, with
design” viewpoint and the “human-centered problem solving” this structure, this paper aims to provide up-to-date guidelines
one. The necessity of design thinking to be conceptualized for teaching design thinking and developing courses on design
and taught in an effective and practical way has been pointed thinking from the viewpoint of design education.
out. Furthermore, the teaching of design thinking should be
comprehensive and attempt to develop design-thinking skills 2. Design thinking paradigm
to the fullest. Finally, education in design thinking can be seen 2.1. Bases of design thinking
as an indispensable research “ground” for understanding and Design thinking can be described as a paradigm, rather than an
enhancing human creativity and innovation in a wide range of example of a method or a methodology. Understanding of the
fields. design thinking paradigm is rooted in the analysis of designers’
thinking process. This process has long been in the focus of
1. Introduction research efforts to analyze design activities (Lawson, 1980;
1.1. Design thinking method Cross, 1982; Lawson, 2004).
Design thinking—that is, how designers think—has long Thus, the design thinking paradigm includes explicating the
been a topic of research and education in the field of design specific approach applied by designers in addressing (or
(Lawson, 1980; Rowe, 1987; Cross, 1990; Goldschmidt, 1994; providing answers to) the issues in their work (designing). This
Cross et al., 1996; Dorst, 2010), and more recently, outside paradigm extends further and includes how the knowledge
this field too (Kelley, 2001). Design thinking has been studied of such an approach, applied by designers, can be provided,
and approached from different standpoints (Cross et al., 1996; taught, and applied in addressing (or providing answers to)
Lawson, 2004; Badke-Schaub et al., 2010), and is strongly further issues. Such issues are regarded as “wicked problems”
supported as being applicable even outside the design context (see Buchanan (1992) and Rittel (1972) previously) or “ill
(Brown, 2008). However, design thinking as a method has not structured problems” (Simon, 1973). Following the notion that
been well conceptualized (Dorst, 2010). among general problems, there are many “wicked” ones, the
In attempt to clarify the existing knowledge of design thinking application of design thinking outside the context of design led
and systematize how it can be taught, this paper overviews the to the creation of different viewpoints on design thinking itself.
current research on design thinking. 2.2. Discourses on design thinking
1.2. Focus and aim The term of “design thinking,” which was used explicitly in the
This paper focuses on the answers of the following questions: late 1970s and 1980s, was preceded by a more ambiguous
(1) What is design thinking from the viewpoint of design? concept that can be traced back to the 1960s. According to
(2) 
What kind of teaching methods are commonly used for the interviews of design professionals conducted by Hassi &
education on design thinking? Laakso (2011), the roots of the term design thinking emerged in
Through a review of the literature, the paper overviews the late 1960s. The concept of design thinking is explicitly used

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

72 Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
by Lawson (1980) and was developed by Cross (1982) and design viewpoint and a human-centered problem solving
Schön (1983). It became the title of a book by Rowe, published viewpoint, respectively. The two viewpoints and the evolution
in 1987. of their understanding (definitions) are shown in Table 1.
Design thinking includes at least two key viewpoints—that of Badke-Schaub et al. (2010) discusses the different viewpoints
the designer (or design researcher) and that of the decision as follows:
makers. Melles clarifies these viewpoints as follows: “The traditional design thinking approach has meanwhile
“The term design thinking has two current meanings –the study produced a broad research history but has to cope with
of the practices of working designers—the other meaning its fragmented variety of empirical results, due to a lack of
refers to the human-centred ‘open’ problem solving process theoretical integration; the new view on design thinking as
decision makers use to solve real world ‘wicked’ problems.” management strategy is not grounded on empirical studies
(Melles, 2010, p.299) or evaluations and suffers from an ambitious and too general
Further, Badke-Schaub et al. (2010) describes this difference concept. Both approaches could gain from each other in
in viewpoints as the “traditional design thinking approach” and different ways.” (Badke-Schaub et al., 2010, p. 39)
the “new design thinking movement.” For the purposes of the These differences in viewpoints raise the question of what is
present research, we term these viewpoints an analysis of covered by the term “design thinking.”

Table 1. Development of the viewpoints on design thinking

Authors Analysis of design viewpoint on design Human-centred problem solving viewpoint on

thinking design thinking

Stewart (2011) “Strategies for addressing ‘ill-structured’ and “A tool to aid in the navigation of transition
‘wicked’ problems; an identification originally (in this case a transition in the self-
made by thinkers within the Design Methods understanding, as well as in the operative
movement” strategies, of disciplines)”

Hassi & Laakso (2011) “Cognitive styles, methods of thinking and “Practices, thinking styles and mentality”
processing information”

Badke-Schaub et al. (2010) “The traditional design thinking approach;” “The new design thinking movement;”
“Design thinking as the as sequence “Design thinking as innovation and
of operations and structured pattern of transformation process for:
processes” • disruptive innovation to gain competitive
advantage on the global market
• to design systems or dealing with abstract
problems such as services
• human-/user-centered”

Melles (2010) “The study of the practices of working “The human-centred ‘open’ problem solving
designers;” “Abductive, wicked and process decision makers use to solve real
synthetic” world ‘wicked’ problems”

Cross (2010) “Encompasses many forms of thinking and

intelligence;” “Skilled, educated practice of
designing”

Dorst (2010) “Design thinking is characterized with a kind “Providing organizations with frameworks of
of abduction process that provide a frame ‘how’ leads to ‘value’ in unknown equitation:
for the connection of ‘how’ and ‘value’ in the ’what’ plus ‘how’ leads to ‘value’”
equation: ’what’ plus ‘how’ leads to ‘value’,
when ‘what’ and ‘how’ entities are unknown”

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
73
 Johansson & “Design discourse;” “The way designers think as they “Management discourse;” “Method for
Woodilla (2010) work” innovation and creating value”

Brown & Wyatt (2010) “Aimed at consumer insights in depth.

Design thinking is inherently optimistic,
constructive, and experiential;” “Social
challenges require systemic solutions
that are grounded in the client’s or
customer’s needs”

Brown (2009) “A discipline that uses the designer’s

sensibility and methods to match
people’s needs with what is
technologically feasible and what a
viable business strategy can convert
into customer value and market
opportunity”

Kelley (2006) “The Design Process specifies

procedures which seek creative
success through providing a client with
innovative and unique design solutions
to a defined project, done on rational
grounds, through an agreed-upon
process”

Dym et al. (2005) “Design thinking reflects the complex processes of

inquiry and learning that designers perform in a systems
context, making decisions as they proceed, often
working collaboratively on teams in a social process, and
“speaking” several languages with each other (and to
themselves)”

Lawson (2004) “‘Framing’ process is an important and central feature

of design thinking;” “‘Moving’ phase of design thinking;”
Memory has role in understanding design thinking

Taura et al. (2002) Design activities beyond “framework of problem solving;”

problem-solving process includes “Awareness of the
problem, Suggestion, Development, Evaluation, and
Conclusion”

Kelley (2001) “Continuously refined methodology”

comprising the steps: “Understand,
Observe, Visualize, Evaluate and refine,
and Implement”

Oxman (1999) “Thinking processes employing both visual and

conceptual knowledge;” “Fundamental dialectic process
of design thinking;” “Emergence of conscious access to
knowledge structures;” “The interaction between visual
and conceptual content in global strategies of design
thinking”

Buchanan (1992) “Design thinking is wicked problem approach;” “Design

problems are “indeterminate” and “wicked” because
design has no special subject matter of its own apart from
what a designer conceives it to be. The subject matter of
design is potentially universal in scope, because design
thinking may be applied to any area of human experience”

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

74 Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
 Cross (1990) “Produce novel unexpected solutions, tolerate uncertainty,
work with incomplete information, apply imagination
and constructive forethought to practical problems and
use drawings and other modelling media as a means of
problem solving;” “Must be able to resolve ill-defined
problems, adopt solution focusing strategies, employ
abductive/productive/appositional thinking and use non-
verbal, graphic and spatial modeling media”

Rowe (1987, p. 34) “Design thinking” is essential method that have specific
“style of inquiry” and “nature”:
• movement back and forth between exploration and
evaluation
• periodic unfettered speculation
• “dialogue” between designer and situation
• final less pronounced episodic character

Schön (1983) “How professionals think in action;” “Reflective

practitioner”; “Reflection in action;” “Reflective
conversation with the situation”

Cross (1982) “Designerly ways of knowing;” “Design has its own things
to know, ways of knowing them, and ways of finding out
about them”

Lawson(1980) “How designers think;” “The centre of design thinking, for

the way in which the designer chooses to shift attention
from one part of the problem to another is central to the
design strategy”

Simon (1969) “Theory of thinking;” “Thinking how it adapts itself,

through individual learning and social transmission of
knowledge, to the requirements of the task environment;”
“Use of representations in thinking”

3. Analysis of design thinking • practices

The scope of the term “design thinking” can be summarized • structured pattern of processes
as follows. • cognitive styles and methods of processing information
According to more than three decades of research on the topic • strategies for addressing “ill-structured” and “wicked”
(see Table 1, columns 2 and 3), the designer-specific approach problems
(may) include the following: These points are not exhaustive, but nevertheless give an
• shifting attention to parts of the problem idea of the diversity in the understanding of design thinking
• way of knowing from a historical perspective. Because of the ambiguous
• reflective thinking in action and constantly evolving nature of design thinking, it seems
• periodic and dialog style of inquiry impossible to provide a conclusive description of its scope.
• use of various specific types of thinking and media Consequently, the question now arises as to how the knowledge
• wicked problems approach of the design thinking approach can be provided, taught, and
• abduction with unknown entities applied.
• activities beyond framework of problem solving
• encompassing many types of skills and intelligence

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
75
 Authors The aims/goals of the teaching design thinking Essential requirements for teaching design thinking

Melles (2010) “A project-oriented semester long course with Reports, mini-tests and presentations on:
relevant readings and mid-point assessment “Applying design thinking strategies and concepts
of projects, outcomes and aims to expand the to real-world problems” via “Developing expertise
designerly basis of undergraduate designers” in the framing and solution of real world problems
Moreover: using design thinking;” “Developing expertise in
• Form a part of a broader base of foundation the range of tools and methods used to solve such
studies for such students problems and demonstrate this;” “Communicating
• Need for a mixture of project work and readings design thinking applied to a specific context in the
in curriculum design public setting.” Moreover:
• Address real world problems • Combined human-oriented, service-scoped
designerly outcomes
• Milestones through the semester stage the
process and feedback possibilities
• Projects undertaken by groups of students in
on-campus locations, where human, space and
product innovations are required
• Embracing all issues and follows a process

Dym et al. (2005) Developing thinking about designing systems in the “Effectively implementing project-based design
following: education;” “New approaches are needed to
1) Thinking about system dynamics assess the underlying theme of design learning for
2) Reasoning about uncertainty both emerging paradigms of design thinking and
3) Making estimates new modalities of design pedagogy”
4) Conducting experiments

Oxman (2004) Cognitive-based teaching approaches in design “The student functions as a design researcher
education: while learning about design, in addition to how
• Have to treat “the cognitive processes of design to design;” “Build a conceptual understanding
thinking as a form of of the knowledge domain;” “The acquisition and
• explicit teaching content” the construction of the body of concepts from
• “Teach how to construct knowledge related to precedents is considered as means to demonstrate
designs, or designing” and facilitate meaningful learning”
• “Use of appropriate representations of concepts,
conceptual structures, and conceptual
knowledge”

Oxman (1999) Aims at cognitive orientation to design reasoning as “Reflection on the problem in the medium of
a foundation of design learning. “Cognitive design conceptual drawings;” “Definition of the distinction
media:” between the interactive modes of visual reasoning
The approach is “based upon the student’s and design ideation;” “The interaction between
exploration of the design problem’s conceptual student and tutor becomes more of a participatory
space and the formulation of knowledge structures process in which the articulation of principle during
which are related to potential solution spaces” the dialectical process of design becomes the
responsibility of the tutor as an articulator of the
values and issues which motivate changes in the
subsequent stages of the design representation as
a process of search”

Table 2. Practices of teaching design thinking

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

76 Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
 Figure 1. Think map of characteristics of design thinking education

4. 
Analysis of the practices used in teaching design milestones, and feedbacks; human, space, and product
thinking innovations; and an all-embracing perspective.
Research on the practices used in teaching design thinking, Teaching divergent inquiry in design thinking, Dym et al. (2005)
however, is surprisingly scarce. Table 2 provides a list of defines thinking about designing systems as having the following
some notable studies on teaching design thinking, providing a steps of thinking about system dynamics: reasoning about
timeline of the research on teaching design thinking in general. uncertainty, making estimates, and conducting experiments.
4.1. Teaching methods for design thinking These two examples are effectively implemented in project-
Pedagogical frameworks for teaching design thinking need to based design.
be developed. Teaching approaches addressing some of the Furthermore, new approaches are needed to assess the
aspects of design thinking described above (Oxman, 2004) or underlying theme of design learning for both the emerging
models of teaching design thinking exist. Currently, project- paradigms of design thinking and new modalities of design
based learning (PBL), which was explored by Dym et al. (2005), pedagogy (Dym et al., 2005). Oxman (2004) discusses cognitive-
is the most favored of these for teaching design thinking. based teaching approaches in design education. The cognitive
Melles (2010) describes a newly developed design thinking processes of design thinking have to be treated as explicit
university course as “a project-oriented semester long content of teaching, focusing on how to construct knowledge
course with relevant readings and mid-point assessment of related to designing or the object of design (Table 2). Moreover,
projects, outcomes and aims to expand the designerly basis a means of demonstrating and facilitating meaningful learning
of undergraduate designers” (Table 2). Moreover, this course is could be to build a conceptual understanding aimed at the
characterized by a broader base of foundation studies for such acquisition and construction of a body of concepts from their
students, a curriculum combining project work and reading, and precedents (ibid).
attempts to address real-world problems. Emphasis is placed Programs focus on training students on how to create
on combined human-oriented service-scoped outcomes, innovative services or products, particularly systematic and

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
77
 team-based idea creation, exploring the viewpoint of users, for reflection (of own activities) and skills, relationships with
idea sharing using prototypes, and the development of effective patterns and structures, a focus on practice, and attempts
communication to express the ideas (Ishii et al., 2009). The to wicked (uncertain, ill-structured) problems (Figure 1).
three steps of “understanding,” “creating,” and “realizing” have Consequently, a key question arises: how can such skills and
been considered indispensable for the attainment of in-depth knowledge be taught?
understanding of humanity and society, idea and prototype Applications of the teaching of the design thinking approach
development, and truly feasible strategic planning, through are sought in the following areas:
team-based collaboration (i.school Annual Report, 2011, p. 2). • Design education (Dym et al., 2005; Melles et al., 2012)
These characteristics of learning indicate the goal of education • Other types of education (e.g., management (Skaggs et al.,
on design thinking—enhancing creativity. 2009))
Thus, this learning should engage design students’ inner In recent years, differences in discourses on design thinking
senses and emotions (Taura & Nagai, 2011). As design thinking have been increasingly discussed (Badke-Schaub et al., 2010;
depends on the inner senses of the designer, it relates also to Stewart, 2011). However, the common target is teaching design
the designer’s motivation (Taura & Nagai, 2012). thinking.
4.2. Guidelines for courses on design thinking Therefore, the future challenge in design thinking is to provide
An overview of some of the first courses on design thinking a concise theoretical and practical framework for design
can be found in Melles (2010). The newly developed course on thinking to be taught effectively. Design thinking needs to be
design thinking has the following key characteristics: established as a discipline in the future, a discipline that plays a
• “Majority of readings still employing design-oriented texts” fundamental role in learning about and addressing unstructured
• Lectures “focus on design and innovation issues” real-world problems.
• “Degree project work and industry involvement varies with the
level of the course—undergraduate or postgraduate” 6. Conclusions
• “Use of visualisation tools and other strategies, including First, design thinking should be clearly conceptualized and
prototyping, familiar to design students” taught in an effective and practical way. The teaching of design
The course is focus on application of design to resolve wicked thinking should embrace all aspects of design and attempt
problems, and requires students to come up with practical to develop design-thinking skills to the fullest. Reduction or
user-oriented solutions to such problems. simplification of the approach of design thinking usually greatly
Furthermore, a systematic understanding of the features reduces its effectiveness.
of the concept generation process (Taura et al., 2012), and Next, further research efforts are needed to develop design
approaches that can be employed in reflecting on one’s own thinking methods and practices by conducting studies in the
design activities (Nagai et al., 2011) should be incorporated in design thinking classroom. Such an opportunity can be obtained
courses on design thinking. owing to the inherent features of the approach as (self- and
4.3. Practice outside the framework of design team-) reflective and by providing sufficient representations of
The human-centered problem solving approach has been used the occurred processes (e.g. sketches, think maps etc.). Hence,
to tackle social challenges that require systemic solutions, and design thinking, specifically education in design thinking, can be
that are grounded in the client’s or customer’s needs (Brown & seen as an indispensible research “ground” for understanding
Wyatt, 2010). Such practices are used with an intention to gain and enhancing human creativity and innovation in a wide range
in-depth consumer understanding through design thinking, of fields.
which is an inherently optimistic, constructive, and experiential
process that relies on local expertise.

References
5. Discussion
Badke-Schaub, P., Roozenburg, N., & Cardoso, C., (2010)
The main characteristics of the approach can be summarized Design Thinking: A paradigm on its way from dilution to
as including certain logic (abduction), inquiry (style of), a need meaninglessness?, Ed. by Dorst, K., Stewart, S., Staudinger, I.,

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

78 Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
Paton, B., & Dong, A., Proceedings of the 8th Design Thinking Demystified. London, Architectural Press.
Research Symposium (DTRS8) Interpreting Design Thinking, Lawson, B., (2004) What Designers Know. London, Architectural
Sydney, 19-20 October, pp. 39-49. Press.
Brown, T., (2009) Change by Design: How Design Thinking Melles, G., (2010) Curriculum Design Thinking: A New Name for
Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. New York: Old Ways of Thinking and Practice?, Ed. by Dorst, K., Stewart,
Harper Collins Publishers. S., Staudinger, I., Paton, B., Dong, A., Proceedings of the 8th
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J., (2010) Design Thinking for Social Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS8) Interpreting
Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2010, Design Thinking, Sydney, 19-20 October, pp. 299-308.
31-35. Melles, G., & Howard, Z., & Thompson-Whiteside, S., (2012)
Buchanan, R., (1992) Wicked problems in design thinking, Teaching Design Thinking: Expanding Horizons in Design
Design issues, 8(2), pp. 5-21. Education, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31,
Cross, N., (1982) Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, pp.162-166.
3(4), pp. 221-227. Nagai, Y., Taura, T., & Sano, K., (2011) Research Methodology
Cross, N., (1990) The nature and nurture of design ability. for the Internal Observation of Design Thinking through the
Design Studies, 11(3), pp. 127-140. Creative Self-formation Process, Design Creativity 2010, T.
Cross, N., (2010) Design Thinking as a Form of Intelligence, Ed. Taura, & Y. Nagai, (Eds.), London, Springer, pp. 215-222.
by Dorst, K., Stewart, S., Staudinger, I., Paton, B., & Dong, A., Oxman, R., (1999) Educating the designerly thinker, Design
Proceedings of the 8th Design Thinking Research Symposium Studies, 20, 105-122.
(DTRS8) Interpreting Design Thinking, Sydney, 19-20 October, Oxman, R., (2004) Think-maps: teaching design thinking in
pp. 99-105. design education, Design Studies, 25, pp. 63–91.
Cross, N., Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K., (1996) (Eds.), Analysing Rittel, H., (1972) On the Planning Crisis: Systems Analysis of
design activity, Wiley, Chichester, UK. the ‘First and Second Generations’, Bedriftskonomen, 8, pp.
Dorst, K., (2010) The Nature of Design Thinking, Ed. by 390-396.
Dorst, K., Stewart, S., Staudinger, I., Paton, B., & Dong, A., Rowe, P.G., (1987) Design thinking. The MIT Press, The
Proceedings of the 8th Design Thinking Research Symposium Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
(DTRS8) Interpreting Design Thinking, Sydney, 19-20 October, Massachusetts.
pp. 131-139. Schön, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How
Dym, C.L., Agogino, A.M., Eris, O., Frey, D.D., & Leifer, L.J., Professionals Think in Action. New York, Basic Books.
(2005) Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning, Simon, H.A., (1969) The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge,
Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), pp. 103-120. MIT Press.
Goldschmidt, G., (1994) On visual design thinking: the vis kids Simon, H.A., (1973) The structure of ill structured problems,
of architecture, Design studies, 15(2), pp. 158-174. Artificial Intelligence, 4 (3-4), pp. 181-201.
Hassi, L., & Laakso, M., (2011) Conceptions of design thinking Skaggs, P., Fry R., & Howell, B., (2009) Design Thinking, ICSID
in the design and management discourses: Open questions conference 2009.
and possible directions for research. Proceedings of the Stewart, S.C., (2011) Interpreting Design Thinking, Editorial,
IASDR2011, the 4th World Conference on Design Research, 31 Design Studies, 32(6), pp. 515-520.
Oct. - 4 Nov, TU-Delft, the Netherlands. Taura, T., & Nagai, Y., (2011) Discussion on Direction of Design
i.school Annual Report, (2011) Annual Report 2011-12 of Creativity Research (Part 1) - New Definition of Design and
i.school of The University of Tokyo, Retrieved from http:// Creativity: Beyond the Problem solving Paradigm. In Design
ischool.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/file/annualreport2011.zip Creativity 2010, T. Taura, & Y. Nagai, (Eds.), London, Springer,
Ishii, K., de Weck, O., Haruyama, S., Maeno, T., Kim, S., pp. 3-8.
& Fowler, W., (2009) Active Learning Project Sequence: Taura, T., & Nagai, Y., (2012) Concept Generation for Design
Capstone Experience for Multi- Disciplinary System Design and Creativity: A Systematized Theory and Methodology. London:
Management Education, Proceedings of the 17th International Springer.
Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’09), California, USA, Taura, T., Yamamoto, E., Fasiha, M.Y.N., Goka, M., Mukai, M.,
Vol. 10, pp. 57-68. Nagai, Y., & Nakashima, H., (2012) Constructive simulation
Johansson, U., & Woodilla, J., (2010) How to avoid throwing the of creative concept generation process in design: a research
baby out with the bath water: An ironic perspective on design method for difficult-to-observe design-thinking processes,
thinking. EGOS Colloquim 2010, 30 June 30 - 3 July, Lisbon, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 23, Issue 4, pp. 297-321.
Portugal. Taura, T., Yoshimi, T., & Ikai, T., (2002) Study of gazing points
Kelly, D., (2006) Design Thinking. Retrived from http://www. in design situation: A proposal and practice of an analytical
extrememediastudies.org/extreme_media/1_navigating/pdf/ method based on the explanation of design activities, Design
navigating_design_thinking.pdf Studies, 23(2), pp. 165-185.
Kelly, T., (2001) The art of innovation: lessons in creativity from
IDEO, America’s Leading Design Firm, Crown Publishing Group.
Lawson, B., (1980) How Designers Think: The Design Process

デザイン学研究特集号 / デザイン思考 Design Thinking

Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design
Vol.20-1 No.77 2012
79