1.Design thinking as an innovation approach

Companies and organizations need to innovate in response to the competition and  rapidly changing market demands. For this reason, DT is considered a supportive  approach for a range of business challenges that should be pursued by both designers  and non-designers [25]. Especially for the first phases of innovation, DT has been  argued as a successful method for generating ideas [24]. Several connections between DT and innovation, as well as factors affecting the growth of innovation, can be found  in the literature [e.g. 14, 25, 4]. According to Harhoff, Henkel, and Von Hippel [17],  “innovation is often a process to which several actors with complementary capabili- ties contribute.” Similarly, Baregheh et al. [3] defined innovation as a “multi-stage  process whereby organizations transform ideas into new/improved products, ser- vice[s] or processes,” focusing also on the multidisciplinary aspect of innovation. On the other hand, DT can also be viewed as “the application of design methods by  multidisciplinary teams to a broad range of innovation challenges” [25]. Seidel and  Fixson [25] studied the adoption of DT by novice multidisciplinary teams. “ If design  thinking is to be widely adopted, less-experienced users will employ these methods  together, but we know little about their effect when newly adopted” [25]. Their  study’s [25] implications are that novice multidisciplinary teams will more likely  succeed in applying DT when they can be guided to combine methods, are aware of  the limits of brainstorming, and can transition from more- to less-reflexive practices.  Moreover, companies adopt multidisciplinary teams during DT processes as a strategy to  increase team performance [30]. The process of innovation and how it is managed  constitute a key strategic issue for companies that rely on multidisciplinary teams. In  turn, the adoption of multiple design perspectives is expected to increase performance  in terms of the quality of decision making or the innovativeness of problem solving  [30]. West et al. [30] examined the relationships among team processes, leadership  clarity, and innovation in a healthcare context. In the innovation process, models of  brainstorming imply that group creativity can benefit from multidisciplinarity, as  brainstorming groups often generate creative and novel ideas, and the group setting is  believed to elicit a higher level of cognitive stimulation [12]. Moreover, higher de- grees of multidisciplinarity are associated with a broader range of knowledge, skills,  and abilities available to a team [30]. A relevant effect of the DT process that may have on team collaboration is the di- vergent and convergent thinking [5]. During an innovation process supported by DT, a team needs first to broaden their thinking, making it divergent, allowing multiple  inputs for their problem area. This creative part of the innovation process usually  results in a correct definition of the real problem [5][15]. In the phase of divergent  thinking, searching relevant information and creating new about the task will give a  better insight and will also balance the lack of entrepreneurial experience a team may  have [15]. As stated by Gurteen’s [15] “creativity and innovation concern the process  of creating and applying new knowledge,” supporting divergent thinking as a relevant  attribute for innovation. The composition of a team is also affecting the process at this  stage. As it was mentioned earlier, the multidisciplinarity is a relevant aspect to take

into account when fostering and stimulating creative inputs [12] in divergent thinking. The last phase of the innovation process entails putting ideas into action, adopting a  more convergent thinking [5][15] and employ an innovative solution. Garcia et al. [13] described a study whose workshops used service design tools as  frameworks to generate, develop, prototype, and assess business ideas that could po- tentially become business opportunities. They argued that both a “designerly mindset”  and the above-mentioned service design toolset might be transferred from design to  entrepreneurship to support the development of new entrepreneurial ventures. Finally,  Beckman and Barry [4] discussed strategies for encouraging innovation through edu- cation and design of organizations and work spaces, suggesting that design constitutes  of two phases of design: (1) an analytical phase of finding and discovery and (2) a  synthetic phase of invention and creation. They [4] proposed a combination of these  theories that would lead to innovation through observational or ethnographic research,  creating frameworks for understanding data, analyzing new customer needs, and de- veloping solutions or new products to meet these needs. Consequently, DT addressed by DT methods and tools is considered supportive for  generating innovation and a number of factors could affect the development of inno- vativeness. Although DT methods have been connected with generation of innova- tions, how DT tools foster innovations has received little attention in existing research and captivates the interest of business communities.

2.Design-thinking methods and tools

A large number of design methods and tools facilitate the DT innovation process. Alves and Nunes [1] surveyed various sources from both industry and academia and  collected more than 164 methods and tools related to service design (SD). The  suggested taxonomy of the selected 25 SD tools and methods [1] provides guidance to  novice participants and enforces team coherence, while it can be supportive for  practitioners. Using a four-quadrant chart, Alves and Nunes [1] clustered the most  relevant methods according to various dimensions, such as the motivation to use it,  the audience, the representations used, and activities in the design process. The major- ity of these methods are used to understand the problem [1], and thus selecting the  right methods is important especially in first phases of the DT process. The DT process consists of five stages: empathizing, defining, ideating, prototyp- ing, and testing [5]. Empathizing relates to direct interaction with users, on whom the  definition is based. Ideation phase includes brainstorming and generating solutions,  while the prototype phase implies rapidly making numerous prototypes. Finally, the  test phase can also include the final implementation. From a design perspective, it is  possible to address DT as the creation of meaning [20] and making sense of things  [9]. Selecting the right tools is undoubtedly important for effective decision making  and communication in a multidisciplinary team. The tools can be physical, such as a  pen, paper, and whiteboard, or software tools with rich graphics that support the DT

process. The tools can also be used to help a team adopt a new perspective on design  tasks, to visualize the system’s complexity and depending on the design stage reflect a  convergent or divergent view of design. The rest of this section presents six selected DT methods, with a corresponding,  web-based software tool that can be used to implement each method. The criteria for  choosing these methods lie in their visualization techniques and ability to enhance  communication within multidisciplinary teams, but also in their simplicity in use by  non-experts.


1.Design thinking as an innovation approach Companies and organizations need to innovate in response to the competition and rapidly changing market demands . For this reason , DT is considered a supportive approach for a range of business challenges that should be pursued by both designers and non - designers [ 25 ] . Especially for the first phases of innovation , DT has been argued as a successful method for generating ideas [ 24 ] . Several connections between DT and innovation , as well as factors affecting the growth of innovation , can be found in the literature [ e.g. 14 , 25 , 4 ] . According to Harhoff , Henkel , and Von Hippel [ 17 ] , “ innovation is often a process to which several actors with complementary capabili- ties contribute . ” Similarly , Baregheh et al . [ 3 ] defined innovation as a “ multi - stage process whereby organizations transform ideas into new / improved products , ser- vice[s ] or processes , ” focusing also on the multidisciplinary aspect of innovation . On the other hand , DT can also be viewed as “ the application of design methods by multidisciplinary teams to a broad range of innovation challenges ” [ 25 ] . Seidel and Fixson [ 25 ] studied the adoption of DT by novice multidisciplinary teams . “ If design thinking is to be widely adopted , less - experienced users will employ these methods together , but we know little about their effect when newly adopted ” [ 25 ] . Their study ’s [ 25 ] implications are that novice multidisciplinary teams will more likely succeed in applying DT when they can be guided to combine methods , are aware of the limits of brainstorming , and can transition from more- to less - reflexive practices . Moreover , companies adopt multidisciplinary teams during DT processes as a strategy to increase team performance [ 30 ] . The process of innovation and how it is managed constitute a key strategic issue for companies that rely on multidisciplinary teams . In turn , the adoption of multiple design perspectives is expected to increase performance in terms of the quality of decision making or the innovativeness of problem solving [ 30 ] . West et al . [ 30 ] examined the relationships among team processes , leadership clarity , and innovation in a healthcare context . In the innovation process , models of brainstorming imply that group creativity can benefit from multidisciplinarity , as brainstorming groups often generate creative and novel ideas , and the group setting is believed to elicit a higher level of cognitive stimulation [ 12 ] . Moreover , higher de- grees of multidisciplinarity are associated with a broader range of knowledge , skills , and abilities available to a team [ 30 ] . A relevant effect of the DT process that may have on team collaboration is the di- vergent and convergent thinking [ 5 ] . During an innovation process supported by DT , a team needs first to broaden their thinking , making it divergent , allowing multiple inputs for their problem area . This creative part of the innovation process usually results in a correct definition of the real problem [ 5][15 ] . In the phase of divergent thinking , searching relevant information and creating new about the task will give a better insight and will also balance the lack of entrepreneurial experience a team may have [ 15 ] . As stated by Gurteen ’s [ 15 ] “ creativity and innovation concern the process of creating and applying new knowledge , ” supporting divergent thinking as a relevant attribute for innovation . The composition of a team is also affecting the process at this stage . As it was mentioned earlier , the multidisciplinarity is a relevant aspect to take into account when fostering and stimulating creative inputs [ 12 ] in divergent thinking . The last phase of the innovation process entails putting ideas into action , adopting a more convergent thinking [ 5][15 ] and employ an innovative solution . Garcia et al . [ 13 ] described a study whose workshops used service design tools as frameworks to generate , develop , prototype , and assess business ideas that could po- tentially become business opportunities . They argued that both a “ designerly mindset ” and the above - mentioned service design toolset might be transferred from design to entrepreneurship to support the development of new entrepreneurial ventures . Finally , Beckman and Barry [ 4 ] discussed strategies for encouraging innovation through edu- cation and design of organizations and work spaces , suggesting that design constitutes of two phases of design : ( 1 ) an analytical phase of finding and discovery and ( 2 ) a synthetic phase of invention and creation . They [ 4 ] proposed a combination of these theories that would lead to innovation through observational or ethnographic research , creating frameworks for understanding data , analyzing new customer needs , and de- veloping solutions or new products to meet these needs . Consequently , DT addressed by DT methods and tools is considered supportive for generating innovation and a number of factors could affect the development of inno- vativeness . Although DT methods have been connected with generation of innova- tions , how DT tools foster innovations has received little attention in existing research and captivates the interest of business communities . 2.Design - thinking methods and tools A large number of design methods and tools facilitate the DT innovation process . Alves and Nunes [ 1 ] surveyed various sources from both industry and academia and collected more than 164 methods and tools related to service design ( SD ) . The suggested taxonomy of the selected 25 SD tools and methods [ 1 ] provides guidance to novice participants and enforces team coherence , while it can be supportive for practitioners . Using a four - quadrant chart , Alves and Nunes [ 1 ] clustered the most relevant methods according to various dimensions , such as the motivation to use it , the audience , the representations used , and activities in the design process . The major- ity of these methods are used to understand the problem [ 1 ] , and thus selecting the right methods is important especially in first phases of the DT process . The DT process consists of five stages : empathizing , defining , ideating , prototyp- ing , and testing [ 5 ] . Empathizing relates to direct interaction with users , on whom the definition is based . Ideation phase includes brainstorming and generating solutions , while the prototype phase implies rapidly making numerous prototypes . Finally , the test phase can also include the final implementation . From a design perspective , it is possible to address DT as the creation of meaning [ 20 ] and making sense of things [ 9 ] . Selecting the right tools is undoubtedly important for effective decision making and communication in a multidisciplinary team . The tools can be physical , such as a pen , paper , and whiteboard , or software tools with rich graphics that support the DT process . The tools can also be used to help a team adopt a new perspective on design tasks , to visualize the system ’s complexity and depending on the design stage reflect a convergent or divergent view of design . The rest of this section presents six selected DT methods , with a corresponding , web - based software tool that can be used to implement each method . The criteria for choosing these methods lie in their visualization techniques and ability to enhance communication within multidisciplinary teams , but also in their simplicity in use by non - experts .