Book contents
- Market Studies
- Market Studies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: The Multiple Pasts, Presents and Futures of Markets and Market Studies
- Part I Market Designs and Market Misfires
- Part II Post-Performative Approaches to Studying Markets
- Part III Valuation
- Part IV Markets in Motion: Places and Spaces
- Part V The Secret Life of Market Studies Methods
- Chapter 19 Method Contestations in Marketography: From ‘Fly on the Wall’ to Methods ‘on the Fly’
- Chapter 20 The Camera Is an Engine: Ways of Seeing Perspective, Context and Reflexivity to Make and Shape Markets through Innovative Research Practice
- Chapter 21 Design Methods and Market Studies: Co-Design Methodology as Performative Research
- Chapter 22 Investigating Market Dynamics through the Online Trade Press: A Methodological Reflection
- Chapter 23 Digital Texts as Market Actors: A Semantic Network Analysis
- Part VI Broadening the Perspectives in Market Studies
- Part VII Future (Im)Perfect Markets
- Index
- References
Chapter 21 - Design Methods and Market Studies: Co-Design Methodology as Performative Research
from Part V - The Secret Life of Market Studies Methods
Published online by Cambridge University Press: aN Invalid Date NaN
Book contents
- Market Studies
- Market Studies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: The Multiple Pasts, Presents and Futures of Markets and Market Studies
- Part I Market Designs and Market Misfires
- Part II Post-Performative Approaches to Studying Markets
- Part III Valuation
- Part IV Markets in Motion: Places and Spaces
- Part V The Secret Life of Market Studies Methods
- Chapter 19 Method Contestations in Marketography: From ‘Fly on the Wall’ to Methods ‘on the Fly’
- Chapter 20 The Camera Is an Engine: Ways of Seeing Perspective, Context and Reflexivity to Make and Shape Markets through Innovative Research Practice
- Chapter 21 Design Methods and Market Studies: Co-Design Methodology as Performative Research
- Chapter 22 Investigating Market Dynamics through the Online Trade Press: A Methodological Reflection
- Chapter 23 Digital Texts as Market Actors: A Semantic Network Analysis
- Part VI Broadening the Perspectives in Market Studies
- Part VII Future (Im)Perfect Markets
- Index
- References
Summary
In an age of climate emergency and social divide, we investigate how the use of design methods in Market Studies can drive positive, real-world change through the development of moral markets. As universities catalyse technological innovation using responsible research and innovation approaches that bring in multiple stakeholders, new opportunities to simultaneously make moral markets have opened-up. Viewing moral markets as dynamic sociomaterial assemblages that seek to deliver value for people and the planet, but are always in the making, implies that Market Studies researchers can engaged in their transformation. Through a focus on design methods, we see how market-studies researcher actively engage in market interventions and transformation activities, and how this activism is shaping our understanding of the future. We draw on a pragmatist perspective on design inquiry, outlining different elements and devices of co-design methodology, and provide an example of its use in Market Studies. We conclude that, in a research environment that demands real-world impact, design methods may come to challenge and complement traditional research practices due to their ability to transform and create new worlds.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Market StudiesMapping, Theorizing and Impacting Market Action, pp. 350 - 366Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Agid, S. (2016) ‘… It’s your project, but it’s not necessarily your work …’: infrastructuring, situatedness, and designing relational practice, in Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers, vol. 1. New York: ACM Proceedings, 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L. (1970) Performative utterances, in Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 233–252.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, D., and Varey, R. J. (2006) Creating value-in-use through marketing interaction: the exchange logic of relating, communicating and knowing. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beech, N., Mason, K., Macintosh, R., and Beech, D. (2022) Learning from each other: why and how business schools need to create a ‘Paradox Box’ for academic-policy impact. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 21(3), 487–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binder, T., Brandt, E., Ehn, P., and Halse, J. (2015) Democratic design experiments: between parliament and laboratory. CoDesign, 11(3/4), 152–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blomberg, J., Suchman, L., and Trigg, R. H. (1996) Reflections on a work-oriented design project. Human–Computer Interaction, 11(3), 237–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogomolova, S., Carins, J., Dietrich, T., Bogomolov, T., and Dollman, J. (2021) Encouraging healthier choices in supermarkets: a co-design approach. European Journal of Marketing, 55(9), 2439–2463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (2010) Performative agency. Journal of Cultural Economy, 3(2), 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çalışkan, K., and Callon, M. (2009) Economization, part 1: shifting attention from the economy towards processes of economization. Economy and Society, 38(3), 369–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çalışkan, K., and Callon, M. (2010) Economization, part 2: a research programme for the study of markets. Economy and Society, 39(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (1998a) An essay on framing and overflowing: economic externalities revisited by sociology, in Callon, M. (ed.), The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell, 244–269.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (2009a) Civilizing markets: carbon trading between in vitro and in vivo experiments. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3/4), 535–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (2009b) Elaborating the notion of performativity. Le libellio d’AEGIS, 5(1), 18–29.Google Scholar
Callon, M. (2010) Performativity, misfires and politics. Journal of Cultural Economy, 3(2), 163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (2016) Revisiting marketization: from interface-markets to market-agencements. Consumption Markets & Culture, 19(1), 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M. (2021) Markets in the Making: Rethinking Competition, Goods and Innovation. New York: Zone Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callon, M., and Roth, A. E. (2021) The design and performation of markets: a discussion. AMS Review, 11(3/4), 219–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarti, R., and Mason, K. (2014) Designing better markets for people at the bottom of the pyramid: bottom-up market design, in Geiger, S., Harrison, D., Kjellberg, H., and Mallard, A. (eds.), Concerned Markets: Economic Ordering for Multiple Values. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 153–177.Google Scholar
Co-founders of RRBM (2020) A vision of responsible research in business and management: striving for useful and credible knowledge, position paper. Available at: https://rrbm.network/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Position-Paper_revised_8April2020.pdf (accessed 14 December 2022).Google Scholar
Cochoy, F. (1998) Another discipline for the market economy: marketing as a performative knowledge and know‐how for capitalism. The Sociological Review, 46(S1), 194–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanza-Chock, S. (2020) Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. (2006) Design as a discipline, in Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer, 95–103.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, A. L. (2016) ‘On becoming a critically reflexive practitioner’ redux: what does it mean to be reflexive? Journal of Management Education, 40(6), 740–746.Google Scholar
Dalsgaard, P. (2014) Pragmatism and design thinking. International Journal of Design, 8(1), 143–155.Google Scholar
Dalsgaard, P. (2017) Instruments of inquiry: understanding the nature and role of tools in design. International Journal of Design, 11(1), 21–33.Google Scholar
Davis, M., et al. (2022) XR Tumor Evolution Project: a hybrid architectural space for cancer research, in Akbarzadeh, M., Aviv, D., Jamelle, H., and Stuart-Smith, R. (eds.), Hybrids and Haecceities: Projects Catalog of the 42nd Annual Conference for the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture. Philadelphia: Weitzman School of Design, University of Pennsylvania, 64–69.Google Scholar
Design Council (2021) Beyond net zero: a systemic design approach, report. London: Design Council. Available at www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/skills-learning/tools-frameworks/beyond-net-zero-a-systemic-design-approach (accessed 14 October 2022).Google Scholar
Diaz Ruiz, C., Baker, J. J., Mason, K., and Tierney, K. (2020) Market-scanning and market-shaping: why are firms blindsided by market-shaping acts? Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 35(9), 1389–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, B., and French, T. (2020) Processing the method: linking Deweyan logic and design-in-research. Design Studies, 70, DOI: 10.1016/j.destud.2020.100962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandes, J., Mason, K., and Chakrabarti, R. (2019) Managing to make market agencements: the temporally bound elements of stigma in favelas. Journal of Business Research, 95, 128–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fourcade, M., and Healy, K. (2007) Moral views of market society. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 285–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiger, S., Harrison, D., Kjellberg, H., and Mallard, A. (eds.) (2014) Concerned Markets: Economic Ordering for Multiple Values. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heskett, J. (2017) Design and the Creation of Value. London: Bloomsbury Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kjellberg, H., and Helgesson, C.-F. (2006) Multiple versions of markets: multiplicity and performativity in market practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(7), 839–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liedtka, J. (2015) Perspective: linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Light, A., and Akama, Y. (2012) The human touch: participatory practice and the role of facilitation in designing with communities, in Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers, vol. 1. New York: ACM Proceedings, 61–70.Google Scholar
Macintosh, R., Beech, N., Bartunek, J., Mason, K., Cooke, B., and Denyer, D. (2017) Impact and management research: exploring relationships between temporality, dialogue, reflexivity and praxis. British Journal of Management, 28(1), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macintosh, R., Mason, K., Beech, N., and Bartunek, J. M. (2021) Delivering Impact in Management Research: When Does It Really Happen? Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, D. (2006) An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, D., Muniesa, F., and Siu, L. (eds.) (2007) Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
March, L. (1984) The logic of design, in Cross, N. (ed.), Developments in Design Methodology. Chichester: John Wiley, 265–276.Google Scholar
Martin, R. L. (2009) The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking Is the Next Competitive Advantage. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
Mason, K., and Araujo, L. (2021) Implementing marketization in public healthcare systems: performing reform in the English National Health Service. British Journal of Management, 32(2), 473–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, K., Friesl, M., and Ford, C. J. (2017) Managing to make markets: marketization and the conceptualization work of strategic nets in the life science sector. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 52–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, K., Friesl, M., and Ford, C. J. (2019) Markets under the microscope: making scientific discoveries valuable through choreographed contestations. Journal of Management Studies, 56(5), 966–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, K., and Palo, T. (2019) Holding RRI in place in a 5G Rural Economy Grand Challenge project: the consumption and production of multiple forms of distributed knowledge. Unpublished paper presented at 35th EGOS colloquium, Edinburgh, 6 July.Google Scholar
Mason, K., and Spring, M. (2011) The sites and practices of business models. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(6), 1032–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mele, C., Pels, J., and Storbacka, K. (2015) A holistic market conceptualization. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 100–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melles, G. (2008) An enlarged pragmatist inquiry paradigm for methodological pluralism in academic design research. Artifact: Journal of Design Practice, 2(1), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. C., and Salkind, N. J. (2002) Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, P. (2008) Calculating economic life. Journal of Cultural Economy, 1(1), 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muniesa, F. (2007) Market technologies and the pragmatics of prices. Economy and Society, 36(3), 377–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nenonen, S., Storbacka, K., and Windahl, C. (2019) Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating increased value creation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(4), 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nthubu, B., Pérez, D., Richards, D., and Cruickshank, L. (2022) Navigating complexity through co-design: visualising, understanding and activating entrepreneurial ecosystems. The Design Journal, 25(5), 730–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oertzen, A.-S., Vink, J., Odekerken-Schröder, G., Mager, B., and Azevedo, S. (2022) Navigating the tensions of integrating lived experience in participatory healthcare design. The Design Journal, 25(6), 997–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ossandón, J., and Ureta, S. (2019) Problematizing markets: market failures and the government of collective concerns. Economy and Society, 48(2), 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., and Stilgoe, J. (2012) Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palo, T., Mason, K., and Roscoe, P. (2020) Performing a myth to make a market: the construction of the ‘magical world’ of Santa. Organization Studies, 41(1), 53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1966) Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. Available at https://archive.org/details/collectedpapers0007peir/page/n7/mode/2up.Google Scholar
Pérez, D., Hands, D., Mckeever, E., and Whitham, R. (2019) Design within social entrepreneurship: a framework to reveal the use of design in interdisciplinary spaces. The Design Journal, 22(S1), 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rittel, H., Webber, M. M., and Cross, N. (1984) Planning problems are wicked problems, in Cross, N. (ed.), Developments in Design Methodology. Chichester: John Wiley, 135–144.Google Scholar
Roscoe, P., and Chillas, S. (2014) The state of affairs: critical performativity and the online dating industry. Organization, 21(6), 797–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, A. E. (2018) Marketplaces, markets, and market design. American Economic Review, 108(7), 1609–1658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rylander Eklund, A., Navarro Aguiar, U., and Amacker, A. (2022) Design thinking as sensemaking: developing a pragmatist theory of practice to (re)introduce sensibility. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39(1), 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sembada, A. (2018) The two sides of empowering consumers to co-design innovations. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(1), 8–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, D. (2000) For a sociology of worth, keynote address for the meeting of the European Association of Evolutionary Political Economy, Berlin, 2 November.Google Scholar
Steen, M. (2013) Co-design as a process of joint inquiry and imagination. Design Issues, 29(2), 16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, L., Blomberg, J., Orr, J. E., and Trigg, R. (1999) Reconstructing technologies as social practice. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 392–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, P. V., Anderson‐Connell, L. J., and Wu, W. (2003) Consumer co‐design of apparel for mass customization. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 7(4), 398–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vink, J., Wetter-Edman, K., and Aguirre, M. (2017) Designing for aesthetic disruption: altering mental models in social systems through designerly practices. The Design Journal, 20(1), 2168–2177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetter-Edman, K., Vink, J., and Blomkvist, J. (2018) Staging aesthetic disruption through design methods for service innovation. Design Studies, 55, 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitham, R., Mason, K., Pérez, D., and Ford, C. J. (2019a) Open valuation: making visible hidden value in entrepreneurial and innovation practice. Lancaster University. Available at www.lancaster.ac.uk/open-valuation (accessed 4 May 2024).Google Scholar
Whitham, R., Pérez, D., Mason, K., and Ford, C. J. (2019b) Realising the value of open innovation in policy making: equipping entrepreneurs for valuation work. The Design Journal, 22(S1), 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windahl, C. (2017) Market sense-making in design practice: exploring curiosity, creativity and courage. Journal of Marketing Management, 33(3/4), 280–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windahl, C., Karpen, I. O., and Wright, M. R. (2020) Strategic design: orchestrating and leveraging market-shaping capabilities. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 35(9), 1413–1424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windahl, C., and Wetter-Edman, K. (2019) Designing for service: from service-dominant logic to design practice (and vice versa), in Vargo, S., and Lusch, R. (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic. London: SAGE, 674–688.Google Scholar