Article | ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014 | Can Awareness-based Practices Benefit Co-creation in Community Social Innovation?
Göm menyn

Title:
Can Awareness-based Practices Benefit Co-creation in Community Social Innovation?
Author:
Pratik Vyas: School of Design, Northumbria University, UK Robert Young: School of Design, Northumbria University, UK Nick Spencer: School of Design, Northumbria University, UK Petia Sice: School of Design, Northumbria University, UK
Download:
Full text (pdf)
Year:
2014
Conference:
ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014
Issue:
099
Article no.:
024
Pages:
247-258
No. of pages:
12
Publication type:
Abstract and Fulltext
Published:
2014-06-25
ISBN:
978-91-7519-280-2
Series:
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings
ISSN (print):
1650-3686
ISSN (online):
1650-3740
Publisher:
Linköping University Electronic Press; Linköpings universitet


Export in BibTex, RIS or text

Multi-disciplinarity requires team members to justify and competitively defend their disciplinary perspective; which creates a risk of them becoming ego-centric (Fisher & Smith; 2011). Whiteley (1993; 2010) examined the problem of multiple intentions affecting social development projects and recognised that to design responsibly; the designer must facilitate a co-creative process. Service Designers have been seen to accommodate co-creative design activities in recent projects. In the UK; different studies to develop collaborative practices utilise diet; exercise; meditation and different group working strategies and are objective and empirical; conducted in clinical settings. However; design-based social innovation projects occur in real life (live) community contexts and mostly produce case-studies as outcomes; which are subjective and biographical. Therefore; this research looks to create a mixed-method. The research process is also multidisciplinary; whilst based in design it has a complexity science; holistic perspective; incorporating physiological and psychological methods. The derived methodology described in this paper utilises social interactions; physiological information and psychological data to build a holistic set of methods to triangulate the effects that meditative practice can have on co-creating individuals and teams. The corresponding analysis requires a three step process; firstly; generating themes or hypothesis(es); secondly; coding data based on the hypothesis and thirdly; categorizing the themes based on their relevance and importance within a multidisciplinary social innovation context by reducing the instance of ego-centricity in its team members. The contribution of the paper is that it demonstrates that a hybrid methodology can be derived to create evidence-based research to support the development of more open; collaborative and human centred approaches to innovation.

Keywords: Co-creation; research method; awareness based practices

ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014

Author:
Pratik Vyas, Robert Young, Nick Spencer, Petia Sice
Title:
Can Awareness-based Practices Benefit Co-creation in Community Social Innovation?
References:

Anderson; T.W.; & Darling; D.A. (1954). A test of goodness of fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association; 49(268); 765-769.

Bason; C. (2010). Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. The policy press. Blecker; T.; & Friedrich; G. (Eds.) (2007). Mass customization information systems in business. Igi Global.

Boorstein; S. (1996). Clinical aspects of meditation. In B.W. Scotton; A. B.; Chinen; & J. R. Battista (Eds.). Text book of transpersonal psychiatry and psychology (pp. 344-354). Basic Books.

Cellier; F.E.; & Kofman; E. (2006). Continuous system simulation. London: Springer.

Cerutti; S.; Bianchi; A.M.; & Reiter; H. (2006). Analysis of sleep and stress profiles from biomedical signal processing in wearable devices. Proceedings IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC).

Collins; A. ;Joseph; D.; & Bielaczyc; K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the learning sciences; 13(1); 15-42.

Cooke; B.; & Kothari; U. (Eds.). (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books.

Cooper; Keith D.; & Torczon; L. (2005). Engineering a Compiler. Morgan Kaufmann. ISBN 1-55860-698-X

Denzin; N. & Lincoln; Y. (1998). Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Data. London: Sage Publication.

Depraz; N.;Varela; F.J.; & Vermersch; P. (Eds.) (2003). On becoming aware: a pragmatics of experiencing. John Benjamins Publishing.

Dryden; W. & Still; A. (2006). Historical aspects of mindfulness and self-acceptance in psychotherapy. Journal of rational-emotive and cognitive-behavior therapy; 24(1); 3-28.

Epstein; W. (1995). The illusion of psychotherapy. Transaction Books.

Fisher; D & Smith; S. (2011). Co creation is chaotic: What it means for marketing when no one has control. Marketing Theory; 11(3); 325-350.

Grubbs; F.E. (1969). Procedures for detecting outlying observations in samples. Technometrics; 11(1); 1-21.

Heidegger; M. (1988). The basic problems of phenomenology. Indiana University Press. IDEO (2009). Human Centered Design Toolkit; [ONLINE] Retrieved from
http://www.ideo.com/images/uploads/work/casestudies/pdfs/IDEO_HCD_ToolKit_Complete_for_Download.pdf

Jani; H. & Sawhney; R. (2012). Orchestrating Design Collaborations: Think Like a Family. Design Management Review; 23(1); 46-57.

Jégou; F.; Manzini; E. & Meroni; A. (2004). Design Plan; a tool box to facilitate solution oriented partnerships. In E. Manzini; L. Collina; S. Evans; Solution oriented partnership. How to design industrialized sustainable solutions (pp. 107-118). Cranfield; Cranfield University.

LeCompte; M.D. & Schensul; J.J. (1999). Ethnographer’s tool kit. Alta Mira Press.

Ma; S.H.; & Teasdale; J.D. (2004). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: replication and exploration of differential relapse prevention effects. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology; 72(1); 31.

Martin; J.R. (1997). Mindfulness: A proposed common factor. Journal of Psychotherapy integration; 7(4); 291-312.

Melles; G. & Howard; Z. (2012). Empower me: social innovation design for homeless families: collective design creativity. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity; The Design Society; Glasgow; Scotland; 125-132.

NESTA (2012). National Endowment for Sciences; Technology and the Arts; NESTA. Public Services Lab. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/public_services_lab

Norum; D. (2000). The family has the solution. Journal of Systemic Therapies; 19(1); 3-15.

Payne; A.F.; Storbacka; K.& Frow; P.(2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science; 36(1); 83-96.

Platts; J.(2013). Knowledge in Action. Philosophy of Management; 1(2); 83-84.

Prahalad; C.; & Ramaswamy; V. (2003). MIT Sloan Management Review. The New Frontier of Experience Innovation; 44(4).

Prahalad; C. K.; & Ramaswamy; V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of interactive marketing; 18(3); 5-14.

Prahalad;C.K.;&Ramaswamy;V.(2012).The new frontier of experience innovation. Image. Rothwell;W. J.(2010). Effective succession planning: Ensuring leadership continuity and building talent from within. Amacom.

Scharmer; C.O. & Kaeufer; K. (2010). In front of the blank canvas: sensing emerging futures. Journal of Business Strategy; 31(4); 21-29.

Schon; D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. London: Temple Smith Sennett; R. (2008). The crafts man. Yale University Press.

Seppä; M. (2012). From Business Administration to Business Creation: The Case of the Kalevala Global Business Creation School. Technology Innovation Management Review; (June 2012: Global Business Creation).

Sevaldson; B. (2010). Discussions & Movements in Design Research; A Systems Approach to Practice Research in Design. FORM akademisk; 3(1); 8-35.

Siodmok; A. (2011) Common Sense. Design Week [ONLINE]. Retrieved from http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/Documents/Documents/OurWork/Dott/CommonSense_DottPublication.pdf

Stacey; R. (1993). Strategy as order emerging from chaos. Long range planning; 26(1); 10-17.

Vargo; S.L.; Maglio; P.P. & Akaka; M.A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European management journal; 26(3); 145-152.

West; W. (2000). Psychotherapy & spirituality: Crossing the line between therapy and religion. Sage publication.

Whiteley; N. (1993). Design for society. Reaktion books.

Whiteley; N. (2010). The Banham Lectures: Essays on Designing the Future edited by Jeremy Aynsley and Harriet Atkinson. The Design Journal; 13(2); 240-245.

ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014

Author:
Pratik Vyas, Robert Young, Nick Spencer, Petia Sice
Title:
Can Awareness-based Practices Benefit Co-creation in Community Social Innovation?
Note: the following are taken directly from CrossRef
Citations:
No citations available at the moment


Responsible for this page: Peter Berkesand
Last updated: 2017-02-21