Technologies play a
crucial role in this

people have reflexive understanding of the rules. To engage in the “design” of an organization means to address and reflect on these rules, whereas designing a technological artifact is done according to laws that correspond to the natural sciences. Because normative rules are reflexively understood and produced by people, any “design” of the rules necessarily involves the people they affect. Thus, no one can design an organization for someone else. The only thing that someone can do for another is to design representations and constraints such as formal roles, staffing, processes, and hierarchical structures. Designing an organization therefore involves other activities, such as supporting members of the organization in reflecting and bringing attention to the normative rules of their own organization.

Despite this important distinc-
tion, these two applications of
design have much in common.
There appears to be a basic way of
framing the important elements of
what it means to design. Scholars
have named this design thinking
and design attitude. Nigel Cross
also used the phrase “designerly
ways of knowing.”
First of all, design embodies a
distinct epistemology. Schön con-
trasted it with the dominant epis-
temology of technical rationality,
which emphasizes rational problem
solving based on theory and sci-
ence [ 1]. On the other hand, actual
professional practices in general
and design practices in particular
embody reflection-in-action. This
means designers face each unique
situation and, at the same time, see
it as something familiar. Through
this, they frame the situation and
test successive frames by taking
actions experimentally and reframe
the situation based on what they
learn. To many in management,
this kind of practice appears unsta-
ble and subjective.

learning, although, as
we’ve emphasized,
technologies are only
a means, not an end.

We therefore need to
broaden the role
of technology.

Technology can be a
tool for learning
design thinking and
facilitating cultural
change.

 

in abstract. In each instance of detailed parts (e.g., technical features, roles, communication, work processes, language, documents), strategies become salient, emerging over time, often in ways that are not intended, ultimately impacting interpersonal behavior.

Fourth, design involves power relations. Buchanan claimed that design is rhetorical, as “the art of conceiving and planning products,” which are “vehicles of argument and persuasion about the desirable qualities of private and public life” [ 4]. We have experienced the process of design in an organization as a political process. One group tries

March + April 2011