Can Awareness-based Practices Benefit Co-creation in Community Social Innovation?

Pratik Vyas
School of Design, Northumbria University, UK

Robert Young
School of Design, Northumbria University, UK

Nick Spencer
School of Design, Northumbria University, UK

Petia Sice
School of Design, Northumbria University, UK

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 99:24, s. 247-258

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2014-06-25

ISBN: 978-91-7519-280-2

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)


Multi-disciplinarity requires team members to justify and competitively defend their disciplinary perspective; which creates a risk of them becoming ego-centric (Fisher & Smith; 2011). Whiteley (1993; 2010) examined the problem of multiple intentions affecting social development projects and recognised that to design responsibly; the designer must facilitate a co-creative process. Service Designers have been seen to accommodate co-creative design activities in recent projects. In the UK; different studies to develop collaborative practices utilise diet; exercise; meditation and different group working strategies and are objective and empirical; conducted in clinical settings. However; design-based social innovation projects occur in real life (live) community contexts and mostly produce case-studies as outcomes; which are subjective and biographical. Therefore; this research looks to create a mixed-method. The research process is also multidisciplinary; whilst based in design it has a complexity science; holistic perspective; incorporating physiological and psychological methods. The derived methodology described in this paper utilises social interactions; physiological information and psychological data to build a holistic set of methods to triangulate the effects that meditative practice can have on co-creating individuals and teams. The corresponding analysis requires a three step process; firstly; generating themes or hypothesis(es); secondly; coding data based on the hypothesis and thirdly; categorizing the themes based on their relevance and importance within a multidisciplinary social innovation context by reducing the instance of ego-centricity in its team members. The contribution of the paper is that it demonstrates that a hybrid methodology can be derived to create evidence-based research to support the development of more open; collaborative and human centred approaches to innovation.


Co-creation; research method; awareness based practices


Anderson; T.W.; & Darling; D.A. (1954). A test of goodness of fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association; 49(268); 765-769.

Bason; C. (2010). Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. The policy press. Blecker; T.; & Friedrich; G. (Eds.) (2007). Mass customization information systems in business. Igi Global.

Boorstein; S. (1996). Clinical aspects of meditation. In B.W. Scotton; A. B.; Chinen; & J. R. Battista (Eds.). Text book of transpersonal psychiatry and psychology (pp. 344-354). Basic Books.

Cellier; F.E.; & Kofman; E. (2006). Continuous system simulation. London: Springer.

Cerutti; S.; Bianchi; A.M.; & Reiter; H. (2006). Analysis of sleep and stress profiles from biomedical signal processing in wearable devices. Proceedings IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC).

Collins; A. ;Joseph; D.; & Bielaczyc; K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the learning sciences; 13(1); 15-42.

Cooke; B.; & Kothari; U. (Eds.). (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books.

Cooper; Keith D.; & Torczon; L. (2005). Engineering a Compiler. Morgan Kaufmann. ISBN 1-55860-698-X

Denzin; N. & Lincoln; Y. (1998). Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Data. London: Sage Publication.

Depraz; N.;Varela; F.J.; & Vermersch; P. (Eds.) (2003). On becoming aware: a pragmatics of experiencing. John Benjamins Publishing.

Dryden; W. & Still; A. (2006). Historical aspects of mindfulness and self-acceptance in psychotherapy. Journal of rational-emotive and cognitive-behavior therapy; 24(1); 3-28.

Epstein; W. (1995). The illusion of psychotherapy. Transaction Books.

Fisher; D & Smith; S. (2011). Co creation is chaotic: What it means for marketing when no one has control. Marketing Theory; 11(3); 325-350.

Grubbs; F.E. (1969). Procedures for detecting outlying observations in samples. Technometrics; 11(1); 1-21.

Heidegger; M. (1988). The basic problems of phenomenology. Indiana University Press. IDEO (2009). Human Centered Design Toolkit; [ONLINE] Retrieved from

Jani; H. & Sawhney; R. (2012). Orchestrating Design Collaborations: Think Like a Family. Design Management Review; 23(1); 46-57.

Jégou; F.; Manzini; E. & Meroni; A. (2004). Design Plan; a tool box to facilitate solution oriented partnerships. In E. Manzini; L. Collina; S. Evans; Solution oriented partnership. How to design industrialized sustainable solutions (pp. 107-118). Cranfield; Cranfield University.

LeCompte; M.D. & Schensul; J.J. (1999). Ethnographer’s tool kit. Alta Mira Press.

Ma; S.H.; & Teasdale; J.D. (2004). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: replication and exploration of differential relapse prevention effects. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology; 72(1); 31.

Martin; J.R. (1997). Mindfulness: A proposed common factor. Journal of Psychotherapy integration; 7(4); 291-312.

Melles; G. & Howard; Z. (2012). Empower me: social innovation design for homeless families: collective design creativity. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity; The Design Society; Glasgow; Scotland; 125-132.

NESTA (2012). National Endowment for Sciences; Technology and the Arts; NESTA. Public Services Lab. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/public_services_lab

Norum; D. (2000). The family has the solution. Journal of Systemic Therapies; 19(1); 3-15.

Payne; A.F.; Storbacka; K.& Frow; P.(2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science; 36(1); 83-96.

Platts; J.(2013). Knowledge in Action. Philosophy of Management; 1(2); 83-84.

Prahalad; C.; & Ramaswamy; V. (2003). MIT Sloan Management Review. The New Frontier of Experience Innovation; 44(4).

Prahalad; C. K.; & Ramaswamy; V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of interactive marketing; 18(3); 5-14.

Prahalad;C.K.;&Ramaswamy;V.(2012).The new frontier of experience innovation. Image. Rothwell;W. J.(2010). Effective succession planning: Ensuring leadership continuity and building talent from within. Amacom.

Scharmer; C.O. & Kaeufer; K. (2010). In front of the blank canvas: sensing emerging futures. Journal of Business Strategy; 31(4); 21-29.

Schon; D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. London: Temple Smith Sennett; R. (2008). The crafts man. Yale University Press.

Seppä; M. (2012). From Business Administration to Business Creation: The Case of the Kalevala Global Business Creation School. Technology Innovation Management Review; (June 2012: Global Business Creation).

Sevaldson; B. (2010). Discussions & Movements in Design Research; A Systems Approach to Practice Research in Design. FORM akademisk; 3(1); 8-35.

Siodmok; A. (2011) Common Sense. Design Week [ONLINE]. Retrieved from http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/Documents/Documents/OurWork/Dott/CommonSense_DottPublication.pdf

Stacey; R. (1993). Strategy as order emerging from chaos. Long range planning; 26(1); 10-17.

Vargo; S.L.; Maglio; P.P. & Akaka; M.A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European management journal; 26(3); 145-152.

West; W. (2000). Psychotherapy & spirituality: Crossing the line between therapy and religion. Sage publication.

Whiteley; N. (1993). Design for society. Reaktion books.

Whiteley; N. (2010). The Banham Lectures: Essays on Designing the Future edited by Jeremy Aynsley and Harriet Atkinson. The Design Journal; 13(2); 240-245.

Citeringar i Crossref