Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:19:51.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The evolution of design patterns in joint decision-making spaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Hermann Wolfram Klöckner  and
Katja Thoring
Hermann Wolfram Klöckner*
Affiliation:
Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Germany Technical University of Munich, Germany
Katja Thoring
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, Germany
*
[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper outlines the evolution of decision-making spaces through selected instantiations, analyzing the role of design in their utility and identifying preliminary patterns in spatial layout. It builds on the combination of two research fields: A) Decision support systems and B) Creative Spaces. The paper aims to take a first step towards combining these two existing research fields by focusing on the spatial design aspects that foster the convergent aspect of creativity and to provide guidance for further research on the design of decision-making spaces.

Keywords

decision-makinguser experiencecreative spacescomplex systemsboundary objects
Type
Design Information and Knowledge
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 393 - 402
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Alexander, C., 1964. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Arnott, D., Pervan, G., 2014. A critical analysis of decision support systems research revisited: the rise of design science. J. Inf. Technol. 29, 269–293. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailenson, J., Yee, N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A., Lundblad, N., Jin, M., 2008. The Use of Immersive Virtual Reality in the Learning Sciences: Digital Transformations of Teachers, Students, and Social Context. J. Learn. Sci. 17, 102–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400701793141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brill, M., Weidemann, S., Associates, B., 2001. Disproving widespread myths about workplace design.Google Scholar
Chen, J.C.-Y., Saha, S., Bansal, M., 2023. ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMs. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.13007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cresswell, K.M., Slee, A., Coleman, J., Williams, R., Bates, D.W., Sheikh, A., 2013. Qualitative Analysis of Round-Table Discussions on the Business Case and Procurement Challenges for Hospital Electronic Prescribing Systems. PLoS ONE 8, e79394. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cropley, A., 2006. In Praise of Convergent Thinking. Creat. Res. J. 18, 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dentoni, D., Bitzer, V., Schouten, G., 2018. Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships. J. Bus. Ethics 150, 333–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3858-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubberly, H., 2022. Gui Bonsiepe: Framing Design as Interface. Disobedience Des.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumičić, Z., Thoring, K., Klöckner, H.W., Joost, G., 2022. Design elements in data physicalization: A systematic literature review. Presented at the DRS Conference, Bilbao, Spain.Google Scholar
Edwards, P.N., 1996. The Closed World: Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Few, S., 2009. Now You See It: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis. Analytics Press, Oakland, Calif.Google Scholar
Fisher, B., Green, T.M., Arias-Hernández, R., 2011. Visual Analytics as a Translational Cognitive Science. Top. Cogn. Sci. 3, 609–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01148.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frayling, C., 2006. Ken Adam and the Art of Production Design, Main edition. ed. Faber & Faber, London.Google Scholar
Gaddis, J.L., 1998. We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History, Revised ed. ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gray, P., 1987. Group decision support systems. Decis. Support Syst. 3, 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(87)90178-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J.P., 1961. Three Faces of Intellect, Studies in individual differences: The search for intelligence. Appleton-Century-Crofts, East Norwalk, CT, US. https://doi.org/10.1037/11491-066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hars-Tschachotin, B., 2014. Vom ersten Scribble bis zum Set: Die Entstehung des War Rooms | Ken Adam Archiv [WWW Document]. URL https://ken-adam-archiv.de/editorial/vom-ersten-scribble-zum-set-entstehung-des-war-rooms (accessed 11.12.23).Google Scholar
Hart, B.H.L., 2014. A History of the Second World War, Main Market edition. ed. Pan.Google Scholar
Hettinga, S., Nijkamp, P., Scholten, H., 2018. A multi-stakeholder decision support system for local neighbourhood energy planning. Energy Policy 116, 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., 1994. Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning. Fourth Edition. Allyn and Bacon, 160 Gould Street, Needham Heights, MA 02194.Google Scholar
Jungmeier, W.K., 2009. War Rooms – Medienphilosophische Aspekte. Universität Wien, Vienna.Google Scholar
Klöckner, H., Wiesner, M., 2023. REFRAMING HEARING AIDS – EXPLORING THE DESIGN SPACE OF ANALOGUE FASHIONABLE HEARING AIDS FOR USERS WITH MILD HEARING IMPAIRMENTS. Proc. Des. Soc. 3, 3045–3054. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudon, K.C., Laudon, J.P., 1997. Management Information Systems: New Approaches to Organization and Technology, 5th edition. ed. Pearson, Upper Saddle River, N.J.Google Scholar
Mark, G., Lyytinen, K., Bergman, M., School, Naval Postgraduate, 2007. Boundary Objects in Design: An Ecological View of Design Artifacts. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 8, 546–568. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, R., 2019. From Artefacts to Interfaces: Gui Bonsiepe and the Re-Definition of Industrial Design, c. 1970. Interface Crit. J. 2.Google Scholar
Moran, C., 2012. Classified: Secrecy and the State in Modern Britain, New edition. ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morelli, M., Casagrande, M., Forte, G., 2022. Decision Making: a Theoretical Review. Integr. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 56, 609–629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-021-09669-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller-Wienbergen, F., Müller, O., Seidel, S., Becker, J., 2011. Leaving the Beaten Tracks in Creative Work – A Design Theory for Systems that Support Convergent and Divergent Thinking. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 12. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, J.P., Maier, H.R., Riddell, G.A., Zecchin, A.C., Daniell, J.E., Schaefer, A.M., van Delden, H., Khazai, B., O'Flaherty, M.J., Newland, C.P., 2017. Review of literature on decision support systems for natural hazard risk reduction: Current status and future research directions. Environ. Model. Softw. 96, 378–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padilla, L.M., Creem-Regehr, S.H., Hegarty, M., Stefanucci, J.K., 2018. Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 3, 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0120-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A., 1986. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. Oxford University Press Inc, Oxford.Google Scholar
Penin, L., 2021. The Disobedience of Design: Gui Bonsiepe, 1st ed. Bloomsbury Visual Arts.Google Scholar
Russell, S.J., Norvig, P., 2016. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Appoach. Global Edition, 3rd ed. edition. ed. PEV, Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto Delhi Mexico City Sao Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo.Google Scholar
Schnoor, C., Wilson, S., 2016. Goldfinger revisited. James Bond set designs by Ken Adam as modernist spaces of power. SAHANZ.Google Scholar
Seeber, I., Bittner, E., Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, T., de Vreede, G.-J., Elkins, A., Maier, R., Merz, A.B., Oeste-Reiß, S., Randrup, N., Schwabe, G., Söllner, M., 2020. Machines as teammates: A research agenda on AI in team collaboration. Inf. Manage. 57, 103174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaker, S.M., 2002. Lessons Learned from War Room Designs and Implementations.Google Scholar
Sharda, R., Barr, S.H., McDonnell, J.C., 1988. Decision Support System Effectiveness: A Review and an Empirical Test. Manag. Sci. 34, 139–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibbet, D., 2012. Visual Leaders: New Tools for Visioning, Management, and Organization Change, 1st edition. ed. Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, M., Sanchez-Vives, M.V., 2016. Enhancing Our Lives with Immersive Virtual Reality. Front. Robot. AI 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R., 1989. Institutional Ecology, `Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19, 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, F., 1986. Making and Managing High Quality Workplaces: An Organizational Ecology. Teachers College Pr, New York.Google Scholar
Thoring, K., Desmet, P., Badke-Schaub, P., 2019. Creative Space: A Systematic Review of the Literature, in: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED19), Delft, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Thoring, K., Desmet, P.M.A., Badke-Schaub, P.G., 2018. Creative environments for design education and practice: A typology of creative spaces. Des. Stud. 56, 54–83. https://doi.org/10/gdr3ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoring, K., Gonçalves, M., Mueller, R.M., Desmet, P., Badke-Schaub, P., 2021. The Architecture of Creativity: Toward a Causal Theory of Creative Workspace Design. Int. J. Des. 15, 17–36.Google Scholar
Vehlken, S., 2022. Operative communication: project Cybersyn and the intersection of information design, interface design, and interaction design. AI Soc. 37, 1131–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01346-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vischer, J., 2008. Towards an Environmental Psychology of Workspace: How People are Affected by Environments for Work. Archit. Sci. Rev. 51, 97–108. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2008.5114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, C., 2020. Information Visualization: Perception for Design, 4th edition. ed. Morgan Kaufmann, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Whitman, M.E., Mattord, H.J., 2011. Principles of Information Security. Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Zanakis, S.H., Theofanides, S., Kontaratos, A.N., Tassios, T.P., 2003. Ancient Greeks’ Practices and Contributions in Public and Entrepreneurship Decision Making. Interfaces 33, 72–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhicheng Liu, Nersessian, Stasko, N., J., 2008. Distributed Cognition as a Theoretical Framework for Information Visualization. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 14, 1173–1180. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2008.121CrossRefGoogle Scholar