Learning to cross organizational boundaries in design
F. V. Amstel
Abstract:The design and exploitation of large, complex projects, is often distributed among different organizations, each with own interests. Collaboration cannot be enforced, since there is typically no clear hierarchy among them. Designers and users must cross organizational boundaries to foster collaboration, if that is to happen. Three healthcare construction projects in The Netherlands have been studied for that matter, and the difficulties found in establishing collaboration suggest that boundary crossing is not only an opportunity to learn from significant others, but a learning challenge on its own. The challenges observed in these projects have been modeled as a board game that simulates the design and operation of a hospital under constant expansion. This game has been played by civil engineering bachelor students in a collaborative design course. Further insights about the challenges for learning to cross organizational boundaries in design were given by students. Introduction Since work is increasingly being distributed across and among organizations, there is a growing interest in boundaries in organization research. In the case of design work, boundaries are seen as a result of the common strategy to cope with raising complexity: specialization (Rau, Neyer, & Möslein, 2012). Boundaries are not only the result, but also the condition for specialization, since it is precisely where the distributed pieces of work are put together by professionals coming from both sides of the boundary. When such encounter does not happen spontaneously, a new specialization may emerge just to put the pieces together. Design itself, as a work practice, emerged to bridge the gap between production and consumption of commodities. Despite all the efforts to take consumers and users into account, or even, to include them as participants and co-designers (Bjögvinsson, Ehn, & Hillgren, 2012), the boundary is preserved; the design practice legitimates itself among others by operating this cross. There is a recent trend in design practice, for instance, to take the design boundary crossing expertise to other practices, as “glue” for multidisciplinary and collaborative work. Design practitioners claim to have a particular way of working — “design thinking” — that enables targeted and creative collaboration (Kelley & Van Patter, 2005) through the design of artifacts that can represent multiple perspectives at the boundary of disciplines (Bjögvinsson et al., 2012; Luck, 2007; Morrison & Dearden, 2013; Whyte, 2011). Practitioners are supposed to learn thinking like a designer by using these artifacts (Luck, 2012), following design methods, and interacting with the design practitioner, who position herself as more or less neutral facilitator among the disciplines (Lee, 2008). Following this trend, design curriculums have been created or adjusted to develop this boundary crossing expertise. Beyond the professional marketing, however, there is little evidence and generalized instructions on how practitioners from other areas can learn to cross boundaries from design. An initial step in this endeavor could be to clarify how design practitioners learn to cross boundaries, in the first
Engineering