Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge Creation in Co-design Activities - Business-Driven Collaboration in the Development of a Digital Communication Tool

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover HCI International 2022 - Late Breaking Papers. Design, User Experience and Interaction (HCII 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13516))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1237 Accesses

Abstract

The goal of this paper was to explore the nature of university students’ and company representatives’ knowledge creation when they collaborated in co-design activities. Studies focusing on companies’ collaboration with universities and students primarily centres around how companies contribute to students’ learning of entrepreneurial skills and to the development of higher education curricula and its inclusion of entrepreneurial assets. Thus, there is a lack of understanding what kind of knowledge that students and companies jointly develop in collaborative design practices. The study applied Dewey’s theory on experience highlighting matters of social conditions of experiences as well as reflective thinking. The research was generated by means of qualitative group interviews. The analytical approach was thematic and identified three themes: (1) Genuine collaborative engagement; (2) Challenges in trying new things; and (3) Knowledge creation premises. These themes revealed different kinds of knowledge creation that took place in the co-design activities. For example, how te challenges inherent in the co-design activities encouraged the students to take risks, to work in completely new ways and to try out new ways of arguing for certain choices, which helped them to actively engage in the collaboration as an equal partner. In this way, the study contributes to questions of the kinds of knowledge that students and companies collaboratively create when engaged in co-design activities. It should however be noted that this study is based on a small sample of participants and accordingly more research is needed to validate these conclusions.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., Felten, P.: Engaging Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty. Jossey Bass, San Francisco (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bovill, C.: Co-creation in learning and teaching: the case for a whole-class approach in higher education. High. Educ. 79(6), 1023–1037 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00453-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., Millard, L., Moore-Cherry, N.: Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student-staff partnerships. High. Educ. 71(2), 195–208 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Di Salvo, B., Yip, J., Bonsignore, E., DiSalvo, C.: Participatory Design for Learning: Perspectives from Practice and Research. Routledge, Abingdon (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Tigelaar, D.: Building bridges between theory and practice in medical education using a design-based research approach: AMEE Guide No. 60 34(1), 1–10 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.595437

  6. Könings, K.D., Bovill, C., Woolner, P.: Towards an interdisciplinary model of practice for participatory building design in education. European Journal of Education (2017). 0.1111/ejed.12230

    Google Scholar 

  7. Seale, J.: Doing student voice work in higher education: an exploration of the value of participatory methods. Br. Edu. Res. J. 36(6), 995–1015 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920903342038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bron, J., Bovill, C., Veugelers, W.: Students experiencing and developing democratic citizenship through curriculum negotiation: the relevance of garth boomer’s approach. Curriculum Perspectives 42, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-021-00155-3

  9. Smith, S., Akhyani, K.: The partnership co-creation process: conditions for success? International Journal for Students as Partners 5(2), 48-66 (2021). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v5i2.4772

  10. Delpish, A., et al.: Equalizing voices: student-faculty partnerhip in course design. In: Werder, C., Otis, M. (eds.): Engaging Student Voices in the Study of Teaching and Learning, pp. 96–114. Stylus, Sterling (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lubicz-Nawrocka, T., Bovill, C.: Do Students experience transformation through co-creating curriculum in higher education? Teaching in Higher Education (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1928060

  12. Bergmark, U., Westman, S.: Co-creating curriculum in higher education: promoting democratic values and a multidimennsional view on learning. Int. J. Acad. Dev. 21(1), 28–40 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2015.1120734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Stegeager, N., Thomassen, A.O., Laursen, E.: Problem based learning in continuous education – challenges and opportunities. J. Problem Based Learning Higher Educ. 1(1), 151–175 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pocol, C.B., Stanca, L., Dabija, D.-C., Pop, I.D., Miscoiu, S.: Knowledge Co-creation and Sustainable Education in the Labor Market-driven University-Business Environment. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 781075 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.781075

  15. Pocol, C.B., Dumitras, D.E., Moldovan Teselios, C.: Exploring young students’ attitudes towards a sustainable consumption behaviour. In: Springer, S., Grimm, H. (eds.): Professionals in Food Chains, pp. 168–173. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen (2018). https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-869-8_25

  16. Gao, J., Bernard, A.: An overview of knowledge sharing in new product development. Int. J. Advanced Manufacturing Technol. 94(5–8), 1545–1550 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0140-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cummings, J.N.: Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in global organization. Manage. Sci. 50(3), 353–364 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1030.0134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Polanyi, M., Sen, A.: The Tacit Dimension. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dewey, J.: How we think. Dover Publications, INC., Mineola, New York (1910/1997)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dewey, J.: Democracy and Education. Simon and Brown (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dewey, J.: Experience and Education. Simon and Schuster (1938/2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mattelmäki, T., Brandt, E., Vaajakallio, K.: On designing open-ended interpretations for collaborative design exploration. CoDesign. Int. J. CoCreation in Design and the Arts 7(2), 79–93 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.609891

  23. Trischler, J., Pervan, S.J., Kelly, S.J., Scott, D.R.: The value of codesign: the effect of customer involvement in service design teams. J. Serv. Res. 21(1), 75–100 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sanders, E.B.N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design 4(1), 5–18 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Trischler, J., Dietrich, T., Rndle-Thiele, S.: Co-design: from expert- to user-driven ideas in public service design. Public Management Review 21(11) (2019), 1595–1619 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619810

  26. Lam, B., Pitsaki, I.: Co-deign for the development of new knowledge and practices in not-for-profit organizations. Design Management J. 13(1), 70–82 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/dmj.12044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Osborne, S.P., Radnor, Z., Strokosch, K.: Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: a suitable case for treatment? Public Manag. Rev. 18(5), 639–653 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Verschuere, B., Vanleene, D., Steen, T., Brandsen, T.: Democratic co-production. concepts and determinants. In: Brandsen, T., Steen, T., Verschuere, B. (eds.): Co-production and Co-creation. Engaging Citizens in Public Service, pp. 243–251 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315204956

  29. Storvang, P., Haug, A., Nguyen, B.: Stimulating consumer community creation through a co-design approach. Int. J. Market Res. 62(2), 176 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/470785319858929

  30. Han, S.: Reproducing the working class? incongruence between the valuation of the social-emotional skills in school and in the labor market. Sociological Perspective 64, 467–487 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/07311121420956378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stanca, L., Dabija, D.-C., Păcurar, E.: Community of practice: converting IT graduate students into specialists via professional knowledge sharing. Int. J. Systems & Cybernetics 51(2), 557–581 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/L-10-2020-0711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P.: Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: implications for academic developers. Int. J. Academic Dev. 16(2), 133–145 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bovill, C.: An investigation of co-created curricula within higher education in the UK, Ireland and the USA. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 51(1), 15–25 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.770264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. De Jans, S., Van Geit, K., Cauberghe, V., Hudders, L., De Veirman, M.: Using games to raise awareness: how to co-design serious mini-games? Computers in Education 110, 77–87 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.009

  35. Sanina, A., Kutergina, E., Balashov, A.: The co-creative approach to digital simulation games in social science education. Comput. Educ. 149, 103813 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Elsharnouby, T.H.: Student co-creation behavior in higher education: the role of satisfaction with the university experience. J. Mark. High. Educ. 25(2), 238–262 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2015.1059919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lubicz-Nawrocka, T.M.: Students as partners in learning and teaching: the benefits of co-creation of the curriculum. Int. J. Students as Partners 2(1), 47–63 (2018). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3207

  38. Brandt, E., Messeter, J., Binder, T.: Formatting design dialogues – games and participation. CoDesign 4(1), 51–64 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880809005724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hewitt-Dundas, N., Gkypali, A., Roper, S.: Does learning from prior collaboration help firms to overcome the ‘twoworlds’ paradox in university-business collaboration? Res. Policy 48, 1310–1322 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S.: The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Yin, R.K.: Qualitative Research from Start to Finish, 2nd edn. The Guilford Press, New York (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Scriven, M.: The Methodology of Evaluation. Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, Social Science Education Consortium (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the students and the company for their participation and sharing of experiences. We gratefully acknowledge Life Science Innovation, Aalborg, Denmark.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aalborg University, Kroghstræde 3, 9220, Aalborg, Denmark

    Eva Brooks & Anders Kalsgaard Møller

Authors
  1. Eva Brooks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anders Kalsgaard Møller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eva Brooks .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Open University of Japan, Chiba, Japan

    Masaaki Kurosu

  2. Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Saitama, Japan

    Sakae Yamamoto

  3. Tokyo City University, Tokyo, Japan

    Hirohiko Mori

  4. Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China

    Marcelo M. Soares

  5. World Usability Day and Bubble Mountain Consulting, Newton Center, MA, USA

    Elizabeth Rosenzweig

  6. Aaron Marcus and Associates, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Aaron Marcus

  7. Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Pei-Luen Patrick Rau

  8. Coventry University, Coventry, UK

    Don Harris

  9. Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK

    Wen-Chin Li

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Brooks, E., Møller, A.K. (2022). Knowledge Creation in Co-design Activities - Business-Driven Collaboration in the Development of a Digital Communication Tool. In: Kurosu, M., et al. HCI International 2022 - Late Breaking Papers. Design, User Experience and Interaction. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13516. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17615-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17615-9_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-17614-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-17615-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation