Top

TechTrends

Published in:

19-11-2019 | Organizational Training and Performance

The Utility of Design Thinking to Promote Systemic Instructional Design Practices in the Workplace

Author: Jill Stefaniak

Published in: TechTrends | Issue 2/2020

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Designing within a system is ubiquitous to instructional design. In order to understand the systemic impact of design decisions within an organization, one must understand the interrelatedness of the objects within the system. Developing an understanding of context as it relates to the utility of instructional design solutions will position instructional designers to systemically influence the organization in a positive manner. This paper acknowledges the systemic challenges encountered by instructional designers in the workplace and discusses how design thinking can be leveraged with HPT strategies to assist the instructional designer with designing solutions that have a systemic impact on the organization. This paper also introduces a conceptual framework, grounded in general systems theory, that combines design thinking principles with instructional design practices to improve performance.

previous article A Pragmatic but Hopeful Conception of Creativity: a Conversation with Dr. Barbara Kerr

next article Flexibility in Formal Workplace Learning: Technology Applications for Engagement through the Lens of Universal Design for Learning

Branch, R., & Dousay, T. (2015). Survey of instructional design models, 5th ed. Bloomington, Indiana: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Branch, R., & Merrill, M. D. (2011). Characteristics of instructional design models. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

Brethower, D. M. (2006). Systemic issues. In J. A. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology 3rd ed. (pp. 111–137). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29–43.

Cennamo, K., & Kalk, D. (2019). Real world instructional design (2^nded.). New York: Routledge.

Churchman, C. W. (1964). An approach to general systems theory. In M. C. Mesarovic (Ed.), Views on general systems theory: Proceedings of the second systems symposium at case institute technology (pp. 173–175). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..

Churchman, C. W. (1965). On the design of educational systems. Audiovisual Instruction, 10(5), 361–365.

Crawford, C. (2004). Non-linear instructional design model: Eternal, synergistic design and development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 413–420.

Crowther, M. S., Keller, C. C., & Waddoups, G. L. (2004). Improving the quality and effectiveness of computer-mediated instruction through usability evaluations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 289–303.

Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking' and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532.

Foshay, W. R., Villachica, S. W., & Stepich, D. A. (2014). Cousins but not twins: Instructional design and human performance technology in the workplace. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology 4th ed (pp. 39–49). New York: Springer.

Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hall, A. D., & Fagen, R. E. (1975). Definition of system. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kin (Eds.), General systems theory and human communications (pp. 52–65). Rochelle Park: Hayden Book Company, Inc..

Hoban Jr., C. F. (1977). A systems approach to audiovisual communications. In L. W. Cochran (Ed.), Okoboji: A 20-year review of leadership 1955–1974 (pp. 67–72). Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt.

Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: Past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.

Johnson, B. (2005). Design ideation: The conceptual sketch in the digital age. Design Studies, 26(6), 613–624.

Jones, T. S., & Richey, R. C. (2000). Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 63–80.

Jones, M. K., Li, Z., & Merrill, M. D. (1992). Rapid prototyping in automated instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 95–100.

Kaufman, R. (2000). Mega planning: Practical tools for organizational success. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Kenny, R. J. (2017). Introducing journal of formative Design in Learning. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 1(1), 1–2.

Kenny, R., Zhang, Z., Schwier, R., & Campbell, K. (2005). A review of what instructional designers do: Questions answered and questions not asked. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 31(1).

Kim, J., & Ryu, H. (2014). A design thinking rationality framework: Framing and solving design problems in early concept generation. Human-Computer Interaction, 29(5–6), 516–553.

Köppen, E., & Meinel, C. (2015). Empathy via design thinking: Creation of sense and knowledge. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research: Building innovators (pp. 15–28). New York: Springer.

Koskinen, I., & Battarbee, K. (2003). Introduction to user experience and empathic design. In I. Koskinen, K. Battarbee, & T. Mattelmäki (Eds.), Empathic design (pp. 37–50). Hel: IT Press.

Koszalka, T. A., Russ-Eft, D. F., & Reiser, R. (2013). Instructional designer competencies: The standards (4th Ed.). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

Kouprie, M., & Visser, F. S. (2009). A framework for empathy in design: Stepping into and out of the user’s life. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 437–448.

Lee, S. H. (1999). Usability testing for developing effective interactive multimedia software: Concepts, dimensions, and procedures. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 2(2).

Matthews, M. T., Williams, G. S., Yanchar, S. C., & McDonald, J. K. (2017). Empathy in distance learning design practice. TechTrends, 61(5), 486–493.

Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5–7.

Miller, J. G. (1978). Living systems. New York: McGraw Hill.

Mizikaci, F. (2006). A systems approach to program evaluation model for quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(1), 37–53.

Mood, A. (1964). Some problems inherent in the development of a systems approach to instruction. Paper presented at conference on new dimensions for research in educational media implied by the systems approach to education. Syracuse: Syracuse University.

Parrish, P. (2006). Design as storytelling. TechTrends, 50(4), 72–82.

Pershing, J. A. (2006). Human performance technology fundamentals. In J. A. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology (3rd ed., pp. 5–26). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Pulsinelli, A., & Roubie, C. (2001). Using diversity modeling for instructional design. Performance Improvement, 40(7), 20–27.

Rapanta, C., & Cantoni, L. (2013). Being in the users' shoes: Anticipating experience while designing online courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 765–777.

Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(30), 330–348.

Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Educational technology research in a VUCA world. Educational Technology, 55(2), 26–30.

Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Tracey, M. W. (2011). The instructional design knowledge base: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Routledge.

Roberts, J. P., Fisher, T. R., Trowbridge, M. J., & Bent, C. (2016). A design thinking framework for healthcare management and innovation. Healthcare, 4(1), 11–14.

Rose, E., & Tingley, K. (2008). Science and math teachers as instructional designers: Linking ID to the ethic of caring. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 34(1).

Rothwell, W. (2005). Beyond training and development: The groundbreaking classic on human performance enhancement (2nd ed.). New York: Amacom.

Roytek, M. A. (2010). Enhancing instructional design efficiency: Methodologies employed by instructional designers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 170–180.

Rummler, G. A. (2006). The anatomy of performance: A framework for consultants. In J. A. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology 3rd ed. (pp. 986–1007). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Segal, L. D., & Fulton Suri, J. (1997). The empathic practitioner: Measurement and interpretation of user experience. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 41st annual meeting, Albuquerque, NM.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (Third ed.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..

Stefaniak, J. (2018). Performance technology. In R. E. West (ed.), Foundations of learning and instructional design technology: The past, present, and future of learning and instructional design technology. EdTechBooks.org. Retrieved from http://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/performance_technology

Stefaniak, J., Baaki, J., Hoard, B., Stapleton, L. (2018). The influence of perceived constraints during needs assessment on design conjecture. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 55–71.

Sugar, W. (2014). Studies of ID practices: A review and synthesis of research on ID current practices. London: Springer.

Tessmer, M. (1993). Planning and conducting formative evaluations. New York: Kogan Page Limited.

Tessmer, M., & Richey, R. C. (1997). The role of context in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 85–115.

Tessmer, M., & Wedman, J. F. (1990). A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(2), 77–85.

Tracey, M. W. (2015). Design team collaboration with a complex design problem. In B. Hokanson, G. Clinton, & M. W. Tracey (Eds.), The design of learning experience (pp. 93–108). New York: Springer.

Tripp, S., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(1), 31–44.

Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19(3), 249–271.

van Rooij, S. W. (2012). Based personas: Teaching empathy in professional education. Journal of Effective Teaching, 12(3), 77–86.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory (Vol. 1). New York: Braziller.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1972). The history and status of general systems theory. The Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 407–426.

Title: The Utility of Design Thinking to Promote Systemic Instructional Design Practices in the Workplace
Author: Jill Stefaniak
Publication date: 19-11-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: TechTrends / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Electronic ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00453-8

Springer Professional

The Utility of Design Thinking to Promote Systemic Instructional Design Practices in the Workplace

Abstract

Premium Partner

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Developing Faculty to Teach with Technology: Themes from the Literature

AECT International Conference 2019 Through the Eyes of a New Member

Facilitating Informal Learning at Work

Performance Improvement Technology for Building a Sustainable OER Initiative in an Academic Library

Science vs Art in the History of Learning, Design, and Technology

Flexibility in Formal Workplace Learning: Technology Applications for Engagement through the Lens of Universal Design for Learning

Premium Partner