Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Managing as designing 2011

1,317 views

Published on

Managing as designing, key differences and aspects

Published in: Design
  • Be the first to comment

Managing as designing 2011

  1. 1. managing as designing Prof. Jurgen Faust
  2. 2. how to start? Various possibilities: storical ndamental (philosophical) ersonal arching/constructing for design discourse in management visa versa
  3. 3. historical: tiated by Boland and Collopy (2004) ublished by Stanford Press llow up conferences in Designing with a ‘Positive Lens’ an itive Design, Convergence Managing as Designing p://convergence.case.edu/
  4. 4. Fundamentally discourse: tention was to stimulate change in management practice a cation (H. Simon) spired by the work of Frank Gehry (P.B. Lewis Building)
  5. 5. Aspects of discourse Managing as Designing oth disciplines are problem solving anagement is a design discipline ut problem solving is different in both fields
  6. 6. problem solving in managemen r paradigms in management history: ternalistic/political paradigm countability/authority paradigm orkflow paradigm ecision paradigm r and McDaniel, 1986, The decision-Making Paradigm of Organizational Design, in Managemce, V. 32, No. 5
  7. 7. paternalistic/political paradigmbal leaders allocating tribal resources, blood ties and politgiances igin of management, but still in place, SME, family drivenerprises, entire countries are managed in such ways r and McDaniel, 1986, The decision-Making Paradigm of Organizational Design, in Managemce, V. 32, No. 5
  8. 8. ccountability/authority paradigme base of Roman Empire, central to classical organizationstral to Max Weber’s thinking about bureaucracies hen designing organizations, it is important to specify whoountable for fulfilling which responsibilities and to allocateources so that they can fulfill these responsibilities r and McDaniel, 1986, The decision-Making Paradigm of Organizational Design, in Managemce, V. 32, No. 5
  9. 9. workflow paradigm he workflow paradigm is triggered by the industrialolution, where organizational structures and processes are gned around the flow of work r and McDaniel, 1986, The decision-Making Paradigm of Organizational Design, in Managemce, V. 32, No. 5
  10. 10. Decision paradigm ecisions are driven by making rational choices among rnatives using tools like: economic analysis, risk manageme tiple criteria decision making, simulation and the time valumoney. erefore the focus is on analysis instead of creating rnatives to existing solutions. decision attitude assumes that the alternatives are already d
  11. 11. designing is different... esigners are not primarily concerned in making decisions esigners are concerned to find the possible best solution d and Collopy, 2004, in Managing as Designing, Stanford press
  12. 12. esigners are always in the midst of something rown into a situation (Geworfenheit from Heidegger) thout the opportunity of acting and function as a detache erver Weick, ,Rethinking Organizational Design’, in Managing as Designing, ed. Boland and Collopyord press, 2004, 36
  13. 13. designing limitations tremely difficult decisions mbiguous and conflicting information ifting goals me pressure namic conditions mplex operational team structures oor communication ery course of action carries significant risk Weick, ,Rethinking Organizational Design’, in Managing as Designing, ed. Boland and Collopy
  14. 14. thrownness is a useful vocabulary for design cepts a different set of background assumptions mited amount of options, unreflective submission, occasio rruptions, unquestioned answers, readymade categories f ression and interpretation and disjunction between erstanding and explanation esign is only incremental Weick, ,Rethinking Organizational Design’, in Managing as Designing, ed. Boland and Collopy
  15. 15. designing ...gains meaning from thrownness uation can’t be determined esign enlarges the set of options duce blind spots cilitate brief reflection duce the disruptiveness of interruptions ncourage trial and error with safety fine primitive categories hten the coupling between existence and interpretation
  16. 16. Good design is reflection in action a good process of design, this conversation with the situationective. In answer to the situation’s back-talk, the designerects-in-action on the construction of the problem, the strategi ction, or the model of the phenomena, which have been imp s moves.’ d Schoen, The reflective Practitioner, How Professional think in Action, Perseus Books, 19
  17. 17. design thinking in Organizations based on interaction design (Buchanon, 2004) ow people relate to other people ow products mediate these relationships d Buchanon, Management and Design: Interaction Pathways in Organizational Life, in Manasigning, ed. R. Boland and F. Collopy, Stanford Press, 2004, p. 54-64
  18. 18. interaction design process ous steps: sion rategic planning eparing and planning a strategic brief for interaction desig nerating ideas for design and selecting valuable solutions anning and prototyping for the ultimate design d Buchanon, Management and Design: Interaction Pathways in Organizational Life, in Manasigning, ed. R. Boland and F. Collopy, Stanford Press, 2004, p. 54-64
  19. 19. difference between management and design esigners visualize in order to make complexity accessible f team llaborative and participatory designing pid and frequent prototyping er research and user testing sk based scenario building general --- designing looks for horizontal distribution ofponsibilities
  20. 20. design thinking in implicit in management and organizational theory hanon sees as well the domination of the analytical tools20th century dominating management: entific management anagement of human relations anagement through structural analysis n, M, Models of Management: Work, authority, and organization in a comparative perspect
  21. 21. Managing as designing the key issue analytical tools have dominated in management and therear lack of synthetic skills in new programs of human-tered action. That is a clear underdeveloped area ofnagement as designing.
  22. 22. change in system understanding he change in system understanding: we are no longer using on material systems, on systems of things, are focusing on human systems, the integration of rmation, physical artifacts, and interactions in environmen g, working, playing and learning. anon, 2001, Design Research and the New Learning, in Design Issues 200117, No. 4, 3-23
  23. 23. the order of design by R. Buchanon order: design of symbols and signs order: things and artifacts order: design of experiences and interactions order: systems and environments
  24. 24. decision paradigm Deciding choice-intelligence-design etc.
  25. 25. managing as designing process Designing
  26. 26. designing
  27. 27. thank you f. Jurgen Faust of lecture to be found at slideshare.

×