No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
VISUALISING AND REVERGING: UNDERSTANDING THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND VISUAL THINKING
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
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.
We investigate reverging - the phase between the diverging and converging steps in a creative process - in the context of a visual thinking agency. Creative facilitation literature advocates for such a phase, aimed at revisiting and rearranging ideas generated during diverging, to prepare for converging. However, in practice this step is often neglected or not performed well, resulting into a sense of increased complexity or lack of client ownership.
Two studies were used to investigate reverging in context: a preliminary study consisted of interviews and observations to better understand reverging in current visual thinking practices. The follow-up study focused on co-creating a tool to solve the problem identified in the preliminary study.
While the preliminary study revealed the need to involve clients in both diverging and reverging phases, the follow-up study resulted in the creation of the Whiteboard Canvas. The tool was tested in practice and several benefits of reverging in visual thinking practices emerged.
The tool empowers visual thinking practitioners to involve their clients more actively in reverging, resulting into a more deliberate creative process and an increased sense of client ownership.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
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), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Aguirre, M., Agudelo, N. and Romm, J. (2017), “Design facilitation as emerging practice: Analyzing how designers support multi-stakeholder co-creation”, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp.198–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.11.003Google Scholar
Antons, D., and Piller, F. T. (2015), “Opening the black box of “not invented here”: Attitudes, decision biases, and behavioral consequences”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 29 No. 2, 193–217. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertschi, S., Bresciani, S., Crawford, T., Goebel, R., Kienreich, W., Lindner, M., Sabol, V. and Moere, A.V. (2011), “What is knowledge visualization? perspectives on an emerging discipline”. International Conference on Information Visualisation, London, UK, 13-15.07.2011 (pp. 329–336). https://doi.org/10.1109/iv.2011.58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucciarelli, L.L. (2002), “Between thought and object in engineering design”, Design studies, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0142-694x(01)00035-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buijs, J.A. and van der Meer, J.D. (2013), Integrated creative problem solving. Eleven international publishing.Google Scholar
Bresciani, S. (2019),” Visual design thinking: a collaborative dimensions framework to profile visualisations” Design Studies, 63, pp. 92–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.04.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlile, P. R. (2004), “Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries.” Organization Science, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherubini, M., Venolia, G., DeLine, R., & Ko, A. J. (2007), “Let's go to the whiteboard: How and why software developers use drawings.” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Vol. 1, pp. 557–566. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eppler, M., and Kernbach, S. (2016), “Dynagrams: Enhancing design thinking through dynamic diagrams.” Design Studies, Vol. 47, pp. 91–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (1991), “The dialectics of sketching.” Creativity research journal, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 123143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (2003), “The backtalk of self-generated sketches.” Design issues, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 72–88. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793603762667728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, D., Brown, S., and Macanufo, H. (2010), Gamestorming: A playbook for innovators, rulebreakers and changemakers. O'Reilly Media, Inc., BostonGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1950), “Creativity.” American Psychologist, Vol. 5 No 9, pp.444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hautopp, H. and Ørngreen, R. (2018), “A Review of Graphic Facilitation in Organizational and Educational Contexts.” Designs for Learning, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 53–62. https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heijne, K. and van der Meer, H. (2019), Road Map for Creative Problem-Solving Techniques. Boom uitgevers.Google Scholar
Henderson, K. (1991). “Flexible sketches and inflexible databases: Visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 448–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399101600402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hommel, B. (2012), “Convergent and divergent operations in cognitive search.” Cognitive Search: Evolution, Algorithms, and the Brain, pp. 221–235. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9529.003.0020Google Scholar
Jansen, A. (2022), “Understanding reverging in visual thinking”, MSc dissertation, TU Delft.Google Scholar
Kalina, B. (2018), “How might emergent thinking bridge the gap between divergent and convergent thinking through the Creative Problem-Solving process?”, in Fields, K., Brunett, C. & Mance, M., Big Questions in Creativity, pp. 82–90Google Scholar
Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., and Henriksen, D. (2011), “The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: Extending the TPACK framework towards 21st century learning.” Educational Technology, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 22–28.Google Scholar
Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995), “The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 592 https://doi.org/10.1016/00246301(96)81509-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schön, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Sibbet, D. (2010), Visual meetings: How graphics, sticky notes and idea mapping can transform group productivity. John Wiley & Sons, San FransiscoGoogle 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”. Social studies of science, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tassoul, M., & Buijs, J. (2007), “Clustering: An essential step from diverging to converging.” Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00413.x Van der Lugt, R. (2005), “How sketching can affect the idea generation process in design group meetings”. Design Studies, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.08.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y., Brik, N., de Jong, P., and Goncalves, M. G. (2019), “Visualised frames: how sketching influences framing behaviour in design teams.”, in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED19), Delft, The Netherlands, 5-8.08. 2019 (pp. 449–457). https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access