the adoption of Design Thinking in a Singaporean ministry

229 Pages·2017·18.91 MB·English

by  Dribbisch, Katrin

T I
RANSLATING NNOVATION
THE ADOPTION OF DESIGN THINKING IN A SINGAPOREAN MINISTRY

Katrin Dribbisch

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION

Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Political Science (Dr. rer. pol.)
at the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences,
Potsdam University, Germany.

First supervisor: Prof. Dr. Katharina Hölzle
Second supervisor: Prof. Dr. Isabella Proeller

DFG-Research Training Group
‘Wicked Problems, Contested Administration’ (WIPCAD)
University of Potsdam Department of Economics and Social Sciences
August-Bebel-Straße 89 14482 Potsdam, Germany
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License:
Attribution 4.0 International
To view a copy of this license visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Published online at the
Institutional Repository of the University of Potsdam:
URN urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-104719
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-104719
T C
ABLE OF ONTENTS
TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................ IV
FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................................... V
ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... VII

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 2
1.1 RELEVANCE .................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 WICKED PROBLEMS AND DESIGN THINKING ....................................................................................... 3
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 THE ARGUMENT: TRANSLATING DESIGN THINKING .............................................................................. 5
1.5 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS ............................................................................................................... 7
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................. 10
2.1 DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.2 DESIGN THINKING AS A MANAGEMENT PRACTICE ............................................................................... 12
2.3 INNOVATION ADOPTION AND PRACTICE ADAPTATION ......................................................................... 14
2.4 NEO-INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AND MANAGEMENT FASHION THEORY ON THE CIRCULATION OF IDEAS .......... 16
2.5 TRANSLATION THEORY .................................................................................................................. 17
2.5.1 Translation theory: A Scandinavian neo-institutionalist perspective ................................. 18
2.5.2 How to operationalise translation? ..................................................................................... 20
2.6 THEORETICAL APPROACH AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK OF THIS STUDY ............................................... 27
2.7 RESEARCH GAPS ........................................................................................................................... 29
I
3 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................................................ 32
3.1 CASE STUDY APPROACH ................................................................................................................. 33
3.2 CASE SELECTION ........................................................................................................................... 34
3.2.1 Local institutional context ................................................................................................... 35
3.2.2 The adopting organisation .................................................................................................. 36
3.2.3 Chronology of Design Thinking Adoption ............................................................................ 37
3.3 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................ 38
3.3.1 Field research ....................................................................................................................... 38
3.3.2 Sampling strategy and Interview sample ............................................................................ 39
3.3.3 Semi-structured interviews .................................................................................................. 41
3.3.4 Data triangulation with observation and documents ......................................................... 41
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................ 42
3.5 CRITICAL REFLECTION AND LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................... 43
4 EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 46
4.1 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF DESIGN THINKING’S TRANSLATION ................................................. 46
4.1.1 How did the departments introduce Design Thinking? ....................................................... 51
4.1.2 Design Thinking Templates ................................................................................................. 52
4.2 CASE STUDIES: THE INTRA-ORGANISATIONAL TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING .................................. 64
4.2.1 Design Thinking in the Service Delivery Department A: The first adopter .......................... 64
4.2.2 Design Thinking in the Corporate Planning Department: The early adopter ..................... 85
4.2.3 Design Thinking in the service delivery & customer service divisions: The followers ....... 117
4.2.4 Design Thinking in Policy Divisions: The late adopters ..................................................... 129
4.3 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................. 152
4.3.1 The Object of translation: the Design Thinking process and its elements ........................ 153
4.3.2 Context-specific translation of Design Thinking ................................................................ 159
4.3.3 Actors and their reframing: translation as a construction of fit between
Design Thinking and local context ..................................................................................... 161
4.3.4 Characteristics of the innovation adoption process .......................................................... 163
II
5 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................... 172
5.1 THEORETICAL FINDINGS REGARDING THE TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING ...................................... 173
5.2 REFINING THE TRANSLATION MODEL ............................................................................................. 185
5.3 WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM TRANSLATION THEORY ABOUT INNOVATION ADOPTION? .......................... 188
5.4 WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE CASE-SPECIFIC TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING ABOUT ITS USE IN
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SETTINGS? .............................................................................................. 189
6 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................. 194
6.1 THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTION ....................................................................................................... 195
6.2 EMPIRICAL CONTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................... 196
6.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE .................................................................... 196
6.4 IMPLICATIONS AND AVENUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ....................................................................... 197
7 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 199
8 APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................................ 206
8.1 INTERVIEW GUIDE ....................................................................................................................... 206
8.2 LIST OF INTERVIEWEES ................................................................................................................. 208
8.3 LIST OF PRIMARY DOCUMENTS ...................................................................................................... 211
8.4 CODING SCHEME ........................................................................................................................ 212
EIDESSTATTLICHE ERKLÄRUNG ................................................................................................................ 217

III
T
ABLES
TABLE 1: TRANSLATION MODELS FOR ADOPTION PHASE ..................................................................................................... 26
TABLE 2: MICRO-STRATEGIES OF CONTEXTUALISATION ...................................................................................................... 28
TABLE 3: DESIGN THINKING PHASES, STEPS, METHODS AND TOOLS AS PROPOSED BY THE DESIGN AGENCY .................................... 56
TABLE 4: DESIGN THINKING PHASES AND EXEMPLARY TOOLS PROPOSED BY THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ......................................... 61
TABLE 5: COMPARISON OF ADOPTED DESIGN THINKING TEMPLATES ..................................................................................... 63
TABLE 6: TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING IN SERVICE DELIVERY DEPARTMENT A ............................................................... 82
TABLE 7: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PRINCIPLES IN THE SERVICE DELIVERY DEPARTMENT A ............................................... 83
TABLE 8: TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING IN THE CORPORATE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ................................................... 114
TABLE 9: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PRINCIPLES IN THE CORPORATE PLANNING DEPARTMENT .......................................... 115
TABLE 10: TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING IN THE SERVICE DELIVERY AND CUSTOMER SERVICE DIVISIONS ............................. 126
TABLE 11: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PRINCIPLES IN SERVICE DELIVERY AND CUSTOMER SERVICE DIVISIONS ......................... 127
TABLE 12: TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING IN THE POLICY DIVISIONS ............................................................................ 149
TABLE 13: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PRINCIPLES IN POLICY DIVISIONS ......................................................................... 150
TABLE 14: : TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING ACROSS DIVISIONS ................................................................................... 168
TABLE 15: DEFINITION OF LEVEL OF ADOPTION OF DESIGN THINKING ................................................................................. 178
TABLE 16: REFINED TYPOLOGY OF MICRO-STRATEGIES OF CONTEXTUALIZATION .................................................................... 187
TABLE 17: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES ................................................................................................................................ 208
TABLE 18: LIST OF PRIMARY DOCUMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 211
TABLE 19: CODE SYSTEM ........................................................................................................................................... 212

IV
F
IGURES
FIGURE 1: TYPOLOGY OF DESIGN THINKING BY DI RUSSO (2016: 42) .................................................................................. 14
FIGURE 2: YIN'S (2012) BASIC TYPES OF DESIGNS FOR CASE STUDIES .................................................................................... 34
FIGURE 3: VISUALISATION OF INTERVIEWEES WITHIN THE ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE (OWN DEPICTION) .................................. 40
FIGURE 4: OVERVIEW OF THE CASE STUDIES ..................................................................................................................... 47
FIGURE 5: SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION, STEP 1 - SDD A INTRODUCES DT (OWN DEPICTION) ........................................................ 47
FIGURE 6: TEMPLATE, SOURCE AND SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION: STEP 2 - CPD LAUNCHES IN-HOUSE TRAINING PROGRAMME ............ 48
FIGURE 7: SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION, STEP 3 – 20 PEOPLE FROM VARIOUS DIVISIONS ARE SELECTED FOR THE PROGRAMME ............. 48
FIGURE 8: SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION, STEP 4 – 20 DT FACILITATORS RETURN TO THEIR DIVISIONS (OWN DEPICTION) ...................... 49
FIGURE 9: SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION, STEP 5A – UNITS CAN REQUEST DT TRAINING THROUGH VOLUNTEER DT FACILITATORS .......... 49
FIGURE 10: SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION, STEP 5B – CPD OFFERS TWO DT TRAINING PROGRAMMES PER YEAR ................................. 50
FIGURE 11: DESIGN THINKING PROCESS BY THE DESIGN AGENCY, ADAPTED FROM ‘DESIGN THINKING FOR EDUCATORS’ ................. 54
FIGURE 12: CONVERGING AND DIVERGING PHASES DURING HUMAN-CENTRED DESIGN PROCESS ................................................. 55
FIGURE 13: VENN DIAGRAM OF HUMAN-CENTRED DESIGN ................................................................................................. 55
FIGURE 14: DESIGN THINKING MINDSETS BY THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ................................................................................ 58
FIGURE 15: RADICAL COLLABORATION MINDSET AT THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ....................................................................... 59
FIGURE 16: DESIGN THINKING VENN DIAGRAM BY THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ........................................................................ 59
FIGURE 17: SPATIAL DESIGN OF THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ................................................................................................. 60
FIGURE 18: FIVE-STEP DESIGN THINKING PROCESS BY THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD .................................................................... 60
FIGURE 19: SIX-STEP DESIGN THINKING PROCESS BY THE D.SCHOOL STANFORD ...................................................................... 61
FIGURE 20: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PROCESS IN SERVICE DELIVERY DEPARTMENT ........................................................ 84
FIGURE 21: DOOR SIGN OF THE INNOVATION SPACE .......................................................................................................... 92
FIGURE 22: THE INNOVATION SPACE DURING A WORKSHOP ................................................................................................ 92
FIGURE 23: INTERIOR OF THE INNOVATION SPACE ............................................................................................................. 93
FIGURE 24: DOOR SIGN OF THE PROTOTYPICAL INNOVATION SPACE ...................................................................................... 94
FIGURE 25: INTERIOR OF THE INNOVATION SPACE PROTOTYPE ............................................................................................. 94
FIGURE 26: PROTOTYPING MATERIAL INSIDE OF THE HEADQUARTER'S INNOVATION SPACE ........................................................ 95
FIGURE 27: WORKSPACES ARE ORGANISED IN CUBICLES. DT RULES ARE ON THE WALLS ............................................................ 96
FIGURE 28: CUBICLE OF A CPD EMPLOYEE ...................................................................................................................... 96
FIGURE 29: USE OF POST-ITS WITHIN THE CUBICLE STRUCTURE ............................................................................................ 97
FIGURE 30: DT RULE WRITTEN ON A WALL ...................................................................................................................... 97
FIGURE 31: SELF-MADE DT POSTER WITHIN A CUBICLE ...................................................................................................... 98
FIGURE 32: DT PROJECT MEETING IN A REGULAR CONFERENCE ROOM .................................................................................. 99
FIGURE 33: TRANSLATED VERSION OF DESIGN THINKING PROCESS IN THE CORPORATE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ......................... 116
FIGURE 34: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PROCESS IN THE SERVICE DELIVERY AND CUSTOMER SERVICE DIVISIONS ..................... 128
FIGURE 35: TRANSLATED DESIGN THINKING PROCESS IN POLICY DIVISIONS .......................................................................... 150
FIGURE 36: OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS (OWN DEPICTION) ................................................................................................... 152
FIGURE 37: OVERVIEW WITH FOCUS ON THE OBJECT OF TRANSLATION (OWN DEPICTION) ....................................................... 153
FIGURE 38: COMPARISON OF TRANSLATED DT VERSIONS ACROSS THE MINISTRY (OWN DEPICTION) ......................................... 155
FIGURE 39: OVERVIEW WITH FOCUS ON CONTEXT-SPECIFIC TRANSLATION OF DT (OWN DEPICTION) ......................................... 159
FIGURE 40: OVERVIEW WITH FOCUS ON ACTORS AND THEIR REFRAMING OF DT (OWN DEPICTION) ........................................... 161
FIGURE 41: OVERVIEW WITH FOCUS ON CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INNOVATION ADOPTION PROCESS (OWN DEPICTION) ............... 163
FIGURE 42: INFLUENCING FACTORS OF TRANSLATION OF DESIGN THINKING (OWN DEPICTION) ................................................ 175
FIGURE 43: HYPOTHESISED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TASK TYPE AND TRANSLATION OF DT, MODERATED BY PERCEIVED FIT ............ 176
V
FIGURE 44: HYPOTHESISED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MODE OF ADOPTION AND TRANSLATION OF DT ........................................ 177
FIGURE 45: JUNGINGER'S (2009: 26) MODEL OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DESIGN FUNCTION AND ORGANISATION ............... 179
FIGURE 46: HYPOTHESISED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TYPE OF EXPERTISE AND TRANSLATION OF DT ........................................... 181
FIGURE 47: DIFFERENT FOCUS AREAS OF TYPES OF EXPERTISE ............................................................................................ 182
FIGURE 48: HYPOTHESISED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEQUENCE OF ADOPTION AND TRANSLATION OF DT .................................. 183
FIGURE 49: HYPOTHESISED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ADOPTION OF SIMILAR PRACTICES AND TRANSLATION OF DT ...................... 184

VI