Bibliographische Detailangaben
Beteiligte: Greenwood, April, Lauren, Benjamin, Knott, Jessica, DeVoss, Dànielle Nicole
In: Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 33, 2019, 4, S. 400-424
veröffentlicht:
SAGE Publications
Medientyp: Artikel, E-Artikel

Nicht angemeldet

weitere Informationen
Umfang: 400-424
ISSN: 1050-6519
1552-4574
DOI: 10.1177/1050651919854063
veröffentlicht in: Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Sprache: Englisch
Schlagwörter:
Kollektion: SAGE Publications (CrossRef)
Inhaltsangabe

<jats:p> Design thinking—at times described as a mind-set, practice, process, method, methodology, tool, heuristic, and more—is a productive, iterative approach used to engage divergent thinking. Often made up of stages incorporating empathy, definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing, design thinking provides a framework for identifying and approaching problems. Design thinking, however, generally lacks a critical–rhetorical–methodological structure that makes room for what Rebecca Burnett called “substantive conflict,” or “conflict that deals with critical issues of content and rhetorical elements.” This article situates design thinking across the professional and academic spaces in which it is heralded and implemented in order to explore how it can be used in collaborative contexts to support substantive, productive dissensus. The authors lean on the ways in which they engage in design thinking in their different roles to situate the good, the bad, and the ugly of design thinking. They conclude by suggesting a rhetorical methodology for cultivating design thinking that facilitates dissensus, addresses resistance, and considers ideological variables. </jats:p>