Talk:Design management

Peer review

Please provide feedback on how to further improve the article to bring it to featured article (FA) level. Wiki4des (talk) 08:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The article has been discussed on the phd-design list (the largest mailing list for design / design research experts) for further improvements. Please find a summary of the suggestions below:

It is my opinion as a DM researcher that the current article is very well documented in terms of historical facts but could be improved on three grounds.

First, I think the article is limited in DM scope.

Double loop effect - Linking to other domains. There are two directions for design management:

• Direction 1: Design management from a designer viewpoint. Managing the design process, the design team, the design consultancy ...

• Direction 2: Design management from a management viewpoint. Understanding design as a function or a core competency in organizations / institutions, as a CEO's decision to take: Design Ladder concept "Where in my business should we put design responsibility: at the operational, tactical or strategic decision level? How do we actually make it happen and implement? Recruit, educate, build a design culture, balanced scorecard etc.

Let me explain what I mean by this "double loop" effect of design management which is missing in this article:

• if we believe in the design management community that design provides value to brand, innovation, organizations performance, innovation, employee morale etc. then common sense means that when you open a book or a Wikipedia article on these issues "design" should be in the index or at least mentioned.
• if you agree that design is ALSO a profession, an industry – as part of creative industries - and is therefore creating value to any country's competitive edge, National Welfare & GNP ... consequently Design & Macroeconomics & Microeconomics should be in this Wikipedia design management article
• Management concepts such as brand, innovation, strategy, marketing, performance, value, market research, customer relationship, profit, margin, intangibles, entrepreneurship, IFRS accounting standards ... have been linked to the design activity through design management. So consequently it is design management responsibility that these concepts have to be redefined and enriched through design integration.

Designer’s skills: The current buzz on "Design Thinking", on design being useful for managers and strategists, says that there is more in design management than the ability to manage the design project or to decide a design strategy. It explains also that Designers skills are relevant in order to respond to our current environment challenges: holistic thinking, working with social scientists, experimentation, visualization etc. all these skills may become organizations capital or value creation process (see book Designing for growth Jeanne Liedtka & al ) and are part of Management education in some MBA.

Second, there should be more examples of "best practices" in design governance, Such as Wikipedia links with companies Wikipedia pages when they are actually working with design management or having in house design departments or being "design driven" in their strategy. Examples in diverse industries, automotive, hospitality and luxury, mobile telecommunications, distribution, etc. as well as "traditional design driven" fashion and furniture industries and of course Apple!

Third, there is hardly any information on design management research conferences, networks, research laboratories, PhD & Masters in Design Management and Design Management publications (DMI has two : DM Review / professional ; DM Journal / research peer review since 2002 ) FYI: Professor Rachel Cooper & Tom Lockwood, former president of Design Management Institute have worked as editors on a new" Handbook on Design Management" (Berg Publishers to be released soon 2011)"

Finally, my concern is that this current article is not proactive enough for readers in conveying the fact that design management helps building TRUST in design, measuring design value, coping with fear, providing tools for working at best with designers and for designers to improve their impact on society at large.

Another point: Wondering how you see engineering design management might be included.

Wiki4des (talk) 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

summary & reaction to the suggestions above:

• seperation into two directions (manager's & designer's point of view)
  • Agree, could be highlighted a bit more, although it is mentioned in the intro Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• linking from other articles
  • good idea, although not relevant for improving article to FA level Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• adding section for Macroeconomics & Microeconomics
  • makes the article too complex to add as a section, it is alrady covered in the design value section Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• Designer’s skills in design management
  • covered in the section business design management Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• Best practices in design management
  • disagree, best practices are not fitting into the concept of a wikipedia article Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• design management research
  • agree, section need to be improved Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• proactiveness of article for reader
  • disagree, the article should be written from a neutral point of view, not campaigning for design management Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• engineering design management
  • added "engineering design management" as a section Wiki4des (talk) 13:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

additional comments:

• the section "Value for business" needs to be simplified and / or rewritten and extended Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• the section "Different types" also needs some improvements Wiki4des (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

summarized all to-do's in the to-do-box in the top of the talk page !!! Wiki4des (talk) 13:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Further reading

Anyone know what ordering is being used in this list? It looks like chronological, with a couple of exceptions...

This list seems overly long, contains redundancy with references, and includes some questionable entries. Do we have any experts that could look at trimming it down? The proposed guideline is Wikipedia:Further_reading. --Ronz (talk) 20:14, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I will have a look at it. Wiki4des (talk) 07:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

done (sorted by year) Wiki4des (talk) 19:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:

• There is a lot of uncited text, including entire paragraphs and sections.
• There are potential sources listed in the "Further reading" section that should be used as inline citations in the article or removed.
• There are external links in the article prose.

Is anyone interested in improving this article, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 05:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Design management

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

The article contains numerous uncited statements, there are sources listed in "Further reading" which should be used as inline citations or removed, and there are external links in the article prose. Z1720 (talk) 07:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.