Call for Papers, Final Symposium of the ADAM project


« Reclaiming the Internet » with distributed architectures: rights, technologies, practices, innovation

October 2-3, 2014, MINES ParisTech (Paris, France)

The research program ADAM (Distributed Architectures and Multimedia Applications, (1) studies the technical, political, social, socio-cultural and legal implications of distributed network architectures. This term indicates a type of network bearing several features: a network made of multiple computing units, capable to achieve its objective by sharing resources and tasks, able to tolerate the failure of individual nodes and thus not subjected to single points of failure, and able to scale flexibly. Beyond this simplified operational definition, the choice, by developers and engineers of Internet-based services, to develop these architectures instead of today’s widespread centralized models, has several implications for the daily use of online services and for the rights of Internet users.

The final symposium of the ADAM project, open to disciplines as varied as science and technology studies, information and communication sciences, economics, law and network engineering, aims at investigating these implications in terms of a central issue. With the increasingly evident centralization of the Internet and the surveillance excesses it appears to allow, what are the place and the role of the (re-) decentralisation of networks’ technical architectures – at a time when infringements upon privacy and pervasive surveillance practices are often embedded in these architectures? Are distribution and decentralization of network architectures the ways, as Philippe Aigrain suggests (2), to “reclaim” Internet services – instruments of ‘technical governance’ able to reconnect with the original organisation of cyberspace?

Papers presented at the symposium may focus on one or more of the following four axes, although we welcome proposals that do not fully subscribe to them.

  • Back to the origins”? Past and present of distributed architectures. The initial Internet model called for a decentralised and symmetrical organisation – in terms of bandwidth usage, but also of contacts, user relations and machine-to-machine communication. In the 1990s, the commercial explosion of the Internet brings about important changes, exposing the shortcomings – for the network’s usability and its very functioning – of a model presupposing the active cooperation of all network members. Today, in a world of Internet services where fluxes and data converge towards a few giants, experimentations with distributed architectures are seen as a “return to the origins”. But is it really about the dominance of an organizational principle at different times in history – or is there a co-existence of different levels of resource centralisation, hierarchy of powers, and cooperation among Internet users over time? Are we indeed witnessing a “war of the worlds” of which the recent tensions around surveillance are the most recent illustration?
  • (Re-) decentralisation, a sustainable alternative for the Internet ‘ecology’? The technical features of distributed architectures (direct connections, resistance to failure) and their ability to support the emergence of organisational, social and legal principles (privacy, security, recognition of rights) offer new paths of exploration and preservation of the Internet’s balance. At the same time, the road towards decentralisation is far from linear. The users behind the P2P nodes can assemble in collectives that are very varied in nature, complexity and underlying motivations. This variety may be dependent upon modes of aggregation, visibility devices, types of communication tools and envisaged business models (as well as the difficulty of identifying sustainable ones). Having programmed the infrastructures with the idea that the most part of users’ online activities consist in downloading data and information from clusters of servers, network access providers raise economic objections to P2P models. Finally, developers-turned-entrepreneurs themselves often need to revisit the choice of decentralisation, because of unexpected user practices, the impossibility of making distributed technology “easy” for the public, or the seductive simplicity of centralized infrastructures and economic models.
  • Decentralisation and distribution of skills, rights, control. How does distributed architecture redefine user skills, rights, capacities to control? How can law support user practices and their diversity, instead of countering them? The decentralisation of Internet services raises several issues at the crossroads of law and technology. What are the differences if compared to centralized architectures, non-modifiable by users, where data are stored on clusters of servers exclusively controlled by service providers? From the viewpoint of user empowerment, what are the consequences of introducing encryption, file fragmentation, sharing of disk space in the technical architecture? While “first-generation” P2P networks have affected copyright first and foremost, decentralised Internet-based service prompt us to investigate issues like the redefinition of notions such as creator and distributor, the responsibility of technical intermediaries, the ‘embeddedness’ of law into technical devices.
  • What are the communicational models at stake in decentralised infrastructures and architectures? Distributed Internet services have transformed and transform today the ways in which actors make sense of their communicational capacities and their responsibilities in information sharing. User empowerment, prompted by several P2P services – increasingly mobile, self-configurable and flexible – open innovative perspectives for infrastructures of communication, their functions and their mediation capacities among actors. In what ways does this evolution transform data and communication channels? What are the representations of the values subtending these architectures and the relations among their participants, vis-à-vis other Internet services, but also within the spheres of conception, discussion and circulation of these objects? What are the new forms of contribution and what do they enable in terms of pedagogical practices and shared literacies? Finally, in which ways do distributed infrastructures relate to the notion of ‘informational common good’?

We invite paper proposals in French and/or English, in the form of a 500 to 800 word abstract sent to the address Key dates:

  • Deadline for the sending of abstracts: May 15, 2014
  • Notifications of acceptance sent by the Program Committee: June 6, 2014
  • Deadline for full papers: September 15, 2014
  • ADAM final symposium: October 2-3, 2014

We envisage a collective publication originating from the conference and are looking into different possibilities (edited book or special issue of a journal).


ADAM Project Team and Program Committee of the Symposium

Maya Bacache, Département SES, Télécom ParisTech

Danièle Bourcier, CERSA, CNRS

Primavera De Filippi, CERSA, CNRS

Isabelle Demeure, INFRES, Télécom ParisTech

Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay, ISCC, CNRS

Annie Gentès, CoDesign Lab, Télécom ParisTech

François Huguet, CoDesign Lab, Télécom ParisTech

Alexandre Mallard, CSI, MINES ParisTech

Cécile Méadel, CSI, MINES ParisTech

Francesca Musiani, CSI, MINES ParisTech

(1)  Funded by the French National Agency for Research (ANR), CONTINT (Contents and Interactions) Programme

(2)  Aigrain, P. (2010). “Declouding Freedom: Reclaiming Servers, Services and Data.” In 2020 FLOSS Roadmap (2010 Version/3rd Edition),

Andrew Feenberg : Pour une théorie critique de la technique

Nous vous signalons la parution du livre d’Andrew Feenberg : Pour une théorie critique de la technique aux éditions Lux, collection Humanités, avril 2004.

Andrew Feenberg présentera et discutera cet ouvrage vendredi 4 avril 2014 de 17h à 19 h à l’Ecole normale supérieure, 45 rue d’Ulm, Salle U-V (DMA).

Andrew Feenberg est l’un des principaux philosophes de la technique aujourd’hui en Amérique du Nord. Il y poursuit la tradition de l’École de Francfort et de Marcuse, mais aussi celle de Heidegger. Après avoir enseigné aux États-Unis et ailleurs dans le monde, il est aujourd’hui « Canada Research Chair in Philosophy of Technology » à la Simon Fraser Uni- versity (Vancouver, Canada) et directeur de programme au Collège International de Philosophie.

Rencontre organisée par l’équipe Réseaux, Savoirs & Territoires (Ens) & le laboratoire Sens et Compréhension du Monde Contemporain (LASCO. Université Paris Descartes / Institut Mines-Télécom).

Cette présentation sera suivie d’une séance de signatures à quelques pas de l’ENS (à partir de 19h) : au Bistrot 77 : 77 rue Claude Bernard.

Design et imaginaire #DiM

Colloque interdisciplinaire et interprofessionnel, Université de Nîmes et Université PaulValéry, Montpellier 3, sous la direction de Stéphane Vial et Fabio La Rocca (


Le design est une pensée de l’anticipation. lI a des vues sur l’avenir. Pour le designer, « le monde est à parfaire, il est un projet et non seulement un objet qu’il faut décrire, dont il faut expliquer les causes ou comprendre le sens » (Alain Findeli). Il s’agit de « changer une situation existante en une situation préférée » (Herbert A. Simon). Cela implique une vision complète, un plan, une pensée. Le designer contemporain est un penseur, comme tend à le signifier l’expression actuelle de design thinking. Sauf que, pour repenser le monde, pour réinventer le présent, pour actualiser le futur, il faut être capable d’imaginer. Le designer est un être qui a des idées autant qu’il a des rêves. Il se nourrit de l’esprit du temps, de mythes, d’utopies, et il cherche à engendrer de nouvelles sensibilités, de nouveaux récits, de nouveaux scénarios de vie. Nul mieux que lui sait que « l’imaginaire est plus réel que le réel » (Gilbert Durand) puisque c’est ce qui doit advenir. Si l’imaginaire n’est rien d’autre que l’ensemble des images et des représentations collectives incorporées dans nos habitudes, nos objets, notre quotidien, alors le designer est peut-être un travailleur de l’imaginaire. Il conçoit à partir de son imaginaire propre autant qu’il essaie de remodeler les imaginaires autour de lui. Quels sont les grands imaginaires contemporains susceptibles d’inspirer le design ? Comment se présente l’imaginaire du concepteur en design ? Existe t il un design de l’imaginaire ?

Table ronde n°1 — Des imaginaires pour le design

Quels sont les grands imaginaires contemporains susceptibles d’inspirer le design aujourd’hui ? Comment le design se représente-t-il l’imaginaire de notre époque ? Quelle connaissance a-t-il des imaginaires à l’oeuvre chez les usagers ? Existe-t-il un imaginaire de l’innovation ? etc.

Table ronde n°2 — L’imaginaire du designer

Comment se présente l’imaginaire du concepteur en design ? Les imaginaires à l’oeuvre chez le designer. Fantasmes, croyances, mythologies de concepteur. Préjugés et préconceptions de designer. L’héroïsme en design, la figure du démiurge. La fantasmatique de l’inspiration, la dramaturgie du talent, etc.

Table ronde n°3 — Le design de l’imaginaire

Et si l’objet du design n’était pas de concevoir des objets mais des imaginaires ? Comment le designer peut-il travailler sur les imaginaires ? Quel serait le sens d’un design de l’imaginaire ? etc. Une priorité sera donnée ici

aux communications étayées sur des projets de design, réalisés ou non.

Appel à communications : date limite 16 juin 2014

#DiM est un colloque interdisciplinaire et interprofessionnel ouvert à la fois aux chercheurs en design de toutes les disciplines et aux professionnels du design de tous les secteurs. Dans une logique d’innovation académique, il est conçu à la fois comme un colloque scientifique et comme un événement culturel et créatif ouvert sur la ville et les publics. C’est pourquoi il a lieu pendant la Fête de la science 2014 à Carré d’Art, à Nîmes, en partenariat avec le Labo2 Laboratoire des usages de Carré d’Art Bibliothèque.

Dans cet esprit, nous recherchons des contributions de haut niveau scientifique qui possèdent en même temps un haut degré de clarté et d’accessibilité, loin des effets de jargon. Nous attendons des propositions et des présentations dont le titre est attractif et dont l’idée centrale est présentée de manière efficace et lumineuse. La participation des doctorants et des jeunes chercheurs est vivement souhaitée.

Deux types de soumissions sont acceptées, communication orale (A) ou poster (B).

A. Soumettre une proposition de communication orale

Date limite : 16 juin 2014 à 23h59 (heure de Paris).

Une communication orale est une intervention de 15 minutes au sein d’une table ronde : ce format d’intervention convient aussi bien aux chercheurs et jeunes chercheurs issus du monde académique qu’aux professionnels en exercice ayant une pratique de designerschercheurs.

D’une longueur maximale de 1500 signes, en langue française uniquement, les propositions sont à soumettre par voie électronique via le formulaire en ligne suivant :

Toutes les propositions soumises dans les délais seront évaluées par le comité : 3 communications par table ronde seront retenues, soit en tout 9 communications orales sélectionnées. Critères d’appréciation : qualité scientifique et adéquation avec la thématique du colloque ; clarté et accessibilité du propos. Le programme inclura également des conférenciers invités.

B. Soumettre une proposition de poster

Date limite : 16 juin 2014 à 23h59 (heure de Paris).

Un poster est une affiche imprimée au format A0 mêlant des éléments visuels et textuels et destinée à présenter une recherche en design ou un projet de design : ce format convient particulièrement aux jeunes chercheurs, aux doctorants, aux étudiants en Master ou aux professionnels en exercice.

Les propositions de poster sont à soumettre par voie électronique en 2 étapes :

1. Remplir le formulaire en ligne suivant :

2. Envoyer un prototype au format A4 en un seul fichier PDF à l’adresse :

Seules les propositions de poster respectant ces 2 étapes seront examinées. Critères d’appréciation : adéquation avec la thématique du colloque ; clarté et lisibilité, capacité à vulgariser, équilibre visuel/textuel, design graphique.

Responsables du colloque

Stéphane Vial (Université de Nîmes / Institut ACTE UMR 8218, équipe Semiotics, groupe PROJEKT)

Fabio La Rocca (Université PaulValéry Montpellier 3 / IRSACRI)

Comité d’organisation

Brigitte Auziol (Université de Nîmes)

Marianne Celka (Université PaulValéry Montpellier 3)

MarieJosé Latour (Carré d’Art Bibliothèque)

Eva Rolim (Université de Nîmes)

Georges Schambach (Université de Nîmes)

Alexandre Simonet (Carré d’Art Bibliothèque, Labo2)

Vincenzo Susca (Université PaulValéry Montpellier 3)

Didier Travier (Carré d’Art Bibliothèque, Labo2)

Bertrand Vidal (Université PaulValéry Montpellier 3)

Comité scientifique

Bernard Darras (Université Paris 1 PanthéonSorbonne / France)

Alain Findeli (Université de Nîmes / France)

Patrick Tacussel (Université PaulValéry Montpellier 3 / France)

Philippe Gauthier (Université de Montréal / Québec)

Lysianne LéchotHirt (Haute École d’Art et de Design de Genève / Suisse)

André Lemos (Universidade Federal da Bahia / Brésil)

Edgar Morin (Centre Edgar MorinIIAC / EHESS / CNRS / France)

Federico Casalegno (MIT Mobile Experience Laboratory / ÉtatsUnis)

Mots clés

Design, objet, quotidien, imaginaire, image, fantasme, croyance, mythe, représentation, fiction, storytelling, design fiction, cultures numériques, design numérique, design social, sociologie de l’imaginaire, phénoménologie du quotidien, psychologie sociale, psychologie du design, design thinking.


Ce colloque s’inscrivant dans une logique d’innovation académique, nous n’envisageons pas de publier des actes, dont l’expérience montre qu’il s’agit d’un format éditorial en cours d’obsolescence. En revanche, nous projetons de concevoir et d’éditer un livremédia intitulé Design et imaginaire en écho à l’événement.


Nous écrire à :

Site Web du colloque :


Design Management in an Era of Disruption

Organized by DMI – The Design Management Institute


Hosted by the London College of Fashion, London, United Kingdom

We announce a call for papers for the 19th Academic Design Management Conference to be held in London, UK September 2–4, 2014. The theme of the conference is Design Management in an Era of Disruption. The management of design has arguably never played such an important role as it does today. Changes to the business and social environment are making consumers more knowledgeable and discerning.  Innovations and developments in new technologies make it possible to respond to these demands in the form of mass-niche, mass-customized, or micro-niche product strategies, leading to changes in business models and the location of manufacturing as consumers increasingly participate in the product design and development process. These are all indicative of major disruptions to the ways that products and services are designed, made, and distributed. The role of the designer is in many contexts transformed. The purpose of this conference is to explore how design management is changing in this era of disruption.
We welcome early-career researchers and PhD candidates with work in progress.

We are also seeking proposals for workshops on design management research themes.

Please click here for more information on the workshops and paper submission process

Deadline for abstracts January 15th, 2014
Deadline for full papers 16 May 2014

Conference Organisers

Conference Patron: Michael Westcott, President, DMI, Boston USA; Conference Chairs: Dr. Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, UK; Professor Rachel Cooper, Lancaster University, UK; Professor Jeanne Liedtka, University of Virginia – Darden Business School, USA; Professor Alison Rieple, University of Westminster, UK


The conference is organised around 7 meta themes that are divided into 16 tracks:

Design in the creation of meaning
Transformational design management
Contextualised designing
Design management futures
Design thinking, leadership and impact
Educating Design Managers For Strategic Roles
Open Track


Theme 1: Design in the creation of meaning

1a) Designers as cultural intermediaries in an era of flux

Track chairs

Dr. Francesco Zurlo, Politecnico di Milano, Italy

Professor Luisa Collina, Politecnico di Milano, Italy

Professor Ulrike Rahe, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden

Dr. Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, UK


Designers have been described as key cultural intermediaries as a result of their role designing symbolic goods and services. In this role they play an active role in promoting consumption through attaching particular meanings and lifestyles to products and services with which consumers will identify. However, as meanings of the products and services are negotiated rather than determined at the outset, designers need to develop an understanding of how others negotiate these meanings. In addition, due to globalization and increasingly interconnected societies through digital technologies and travel, ‘local’ cultures are in a flux on an unprecedented scale. This track therefore seeks to explore relationships between culture and design. For example questions may relate to: what challenges and opportunities do designers face when exploring ‘local’ cultural resources? What processes do designers use to frame ‘local’ cultural inputs? How do they then translate these insights into new offerings, including ‘disruptive’ service innovations? What processes do designers use to ‘construct’ users whether these are ‘local’ or ‘global’? In what ways do these constructs enable or limit designers’ thinking? How do designers represent ‘culture’ within their designs?


Indicative References:

Buchanan, R. (2001). Design Research and the New Learning. Design Issues, 17(4), 3–23.

du Gay, P., Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H., & Negus, K. (1997). Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman. London, Great Britain: Sage Publications.

Julier, G. (2006). From Visual Culture to Design Culture. Design Issues:, 22(1), 64–76. doi: 10.1162/074793606775247817

Julier, G. (2007). The Culture of Design (2nd ed.). London UK: Sage Publications.

Negus, K. (2002). The Work of Cultural Intermediaries and the Enduring Distance Between Production and Consumption. Cultural Studies, 16(4), 501–515. doi: 10.1080/09502380210139089

Shove, E., Watson, M., Hand, M., & Ingram, J. (2008). The Design of Everyday Life (Cultures of Consumption). Oxford, UK: Berg.

Norman A. D., Verganti, R., Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs. Technology and Meaning Change.  Design Issues, 30 (1), Winter 2014


1b) Contemporary Brand Design

Track chairs

Dr. Toni-Matti Karjalainen, Aalto University School of Business

Dr. Oscar Person, Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture

Professor Shin’ya Nagasawa, Waseda University, Tokyo

Dr Ashok Ranchhod, University of  Southampton, UK

Dr Matthew Sinclair, Loughborough University, UK

Professor Joanne Roberts, University of Southampton, UK


This track looks for theoretically driven and practically relevant contributions that shed new light on the strategies, practices and processes by which contemporary brand experiences are created and managed by companies in different product fields, from consumer goods to luxury artifacts, from physical products to more service-driven brands. We are particularly interested in the mediating role of design in the creation of strong and sustainable brand recognition. In this track theme we hope to identify possible commonalities and differences in the strategies and approaches that brands in different fields apply in their product design.


Indicative References:

Kim, Angella Ji-Young @ Ko, Eun-Ju (2010) The Impact of Design Characteristics on Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention – Focus on Luxury Fashion Brands Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, Bol.34, Iss. 2 pp. 252-265

Karjalainen, Toni‐Matti, and Snelders, Dirk. “Designing Visual Recognition for the Brand*.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 27.1 (2010): 6-22.

Person, Oscar, and Dirk Snelders. “Brand styles in commercial design.”Design Issues 26.1 (2010): 82-94.

Sinclair, M. (2013) ‘Connoisseurship as a substitute for user research? The case of the Swiss watch industry’ Nimkulrat, N., Niedderer, K. and Evans, M. (eds.). EKSIG 2013: Knowing Inside Out – Experiential Knowledge, Expertise and Connoisseurship: Proceedings of the International Conference 2013 of the Design Research Society Special Interest Group on Experiential Knowledge, 4th-5th July 2013, Loughborough University, UK, pp.303-318.

Wuts, J., Person, O., Jan Hultink, E., & Brands, M. (2012). Next‐Level Branding: Digital Brand Fit in Video‐Game Design. Design Management Review,23(1), 74-82.

Kizu, Y., & Nagasawa, S. Y. (2012). Creating the New Brand Equity through EcoDesign of Cosmetics. In Design for Innovative Value Towards a Sustainable Society (pp. 463-467). Springer Netherlands.

Yin, Y., Pei, E., & Ranchhod, A. (2013). The Shopping Experience of Older Supermarket Consumers. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 26(4), 7-7.


1c) Design management and artistic interventions

Track chairs

Professor Antti Ainamo, Aalto University School of Business
Dr. Kirsi Niinimäki, Aalto University School of Arts, design and Architecture, Helsinki, Finland
Dr. Marja Soila Wadman, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Professor Lisbeth Svengren Holm, The Swedish School of Textiles, University of Borås, Sweden
Professor Clemens Thornquist, The Swedish School of Textiles, University of Borås, SwedenK


It has proved difficult to catch all the flavours and characteristics of design – what it is and how it may be valued. Many descriptions sound like most descriptions of innovation and product/service development with their focus on problem solving thereby not catching the character and value of design.. This might be one reason for why many companies still have difficulties understanding the strategic value and processes of design. There seems to be an avoidance of the aesthetic and artistic part of the design process that differentiates design from engineering. In contrast to industrial design, the field of fashion has rarely had any problem in understanding what design is and the artistic side of the design process. Despite this, the field of fashion has not traditionally been an empirical nor a theoretical field for design management research. However, art and design management is now emerging as a stream of research in both the fashion and other industries focusing on the role of creative and artistic interventions as a strategic tool in complex, chaotic and interactional global environments.


We therefore call for papers around such topics as: design fashion and art management – differences and similarities; artistic interventions and design interventions – as method, as learning process, as provocation; creative and fashion management – theoretical and empirical implications; the role of art, design and fashion in fields traditionally not associated with art, design or fashion


Indicative References:

Djelic, Marie-Laure, and Antti Ainamo (2005) “The telecom industry as cultural industry? The transposition of fashion logics into the field of mobile telephony, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 23: 45-80

Dobson, John. “Aesthetic style as a post-structural business ethic.” Journal of business ethics 93.3 (2010): 393-400.

Johansson, Ulla, And Jill Woodilla. “Looking At Design Thinking Interventions As Artistic Interventions.” Leading Through Design (2012): 871.

Laura Laaksonen, Antti Ainamo, Toni-Matti Karjalainen, (2011) “Entrepreneurial passion: an explorative case study of four metal music ventures”, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 13(1): 18 – 36.

Thornquist, Clemens. Artistic Development in [fashion] Design. Center for Textiles Research (CTF), 2010.

Niinimäki, Kirsi, and Cosette Armstrong. “From pleasure in use to preservation of meaningful memories: a closer look at the sustainability of clothing via longevity and attachment.” International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education ahead-of-print (2013): 1-10.

Person, Oscar, Dirk Snelders, and Jan Schoormans. “Reestablishing Styling as a Prime Interest for the Management of Design.” Advances in International Marketing 23 (2012): 161-177.

Schiuma, Giovanni. The value of arts for business. Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Stoneman, Paul. Soft innovation: Economics, product aesthetics, and the creative industries. Oxford University Press, 2010.

Strati, Antonio. “Aesthetic understanding of work and organizational life: approaches and research developments.” Sociology Compass 4.10 (2010): 880-893.


Theme 2: Transformational design management

2a) User-centred design (UCD): A disruptive business enabler for sustainable consumption?

Track chairs

Dr Debra Lilley, Loughborough Design School, UK

Dr Val Mitchell, Loughborough Design School, UK

Dr Stephen Worrall, E.ON, UK


The aim of this track is to explore the potential benefits of adopting a UCD approach to reduce over-consumption of resources and encourage more sustainable actions, and in doing so, gain a greater understanding of the potential influence and impact of UCD in a business context. Papers may focus on employing a UCD approach to encourage resource efficient domestic or industrial practices or energy, water, transport,  or waste reduction;  tools, approaches or frameworks for incorporating a UCD approach within business models; or practice-based case studies of UCD implementation in business strategy. Central to the debate in all papers, however, should be a discussion of the potential for UCD to act as an enabler for sustainable consumption in a way that adds value to the business.


Indicative References:

Wilson. G.T, Lilley. D and Bhamra. T (2013) Design Feedback Interventions for Household Energy Consumption Reduction, 16th Conference of the European Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production (ERSCP) & 7th Conference of the Environmental Management for Sustainable Universities (EMSU) (ERSCP-EMSU 2013), 4th-7th June 2013, Istanbul, Turkey

Moreno. M. A, Lofthouse. V. A, and Lilley. D (2011) Enabling Sustainable Consumption through User-Centred Design: an approach, Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal, Vol. 5, Issue 4, pp.707-722

Ross, T., Mitchell, V.A., & May, A.J (2012) Bottom-up grassroots innovation in transport:  motivations, barriers and enablers, Transportation Planning and Technology Volume 35, Issue 4, 2012, pages 469-489

Haines, V., Mitchell, V. and Mallaband, B. (2012) ‘Merging a practice-orientated approach with an engineering-driven product development: a case study on home improvement’, Journal of Design Research, Vol. 10, Nos. 1/2, pp.28–49.


2b) Exploring collaboration in product development: the good, the bad and the ugly

Dr. Nuša Fain, University of Strathclyde, UK

Dr. Beverly Wagner, University of Strathclyde, UK


Innovation is a key driver of competitiveness and economic growth, but nurturing it is a challenging task because it involves multiple and constantly changing actors, linkages and dynamics.  Furthermore, although collaboration and cooperation have come to dominate successful innovation, businesses often run into information and coordination problems at the different stages of the collaboration process. This means understanding collaboration, coordination and cross-functional integration processes is essential for effective innovation performance. As design is an integral part of such collaborations in innovation, contributions within this track should address the challenges new types of collaboration in innovation bring to designers. Examples include, but are not limited to cross-functional and cross-disciplinary collaboration of designers with other disciplines and functions, voice of the designer, working in dispersed design teams, engaging key stakeholders in the design process and measuring performance and product excellence through cross-functional involvement.


Indicative References:

Brandon-Jones, A., Ramsay, J., & Wagner, B. (2010). Trading interactions: supplier empathy, consensus and bias. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30(5), 453-487.

Evanschitzky, H., Eisend, M., Calantone, R. J. and Jiang, Y. (2012), Success Factors of Product Innovation: An Updated Meta-Analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29: 21–37.

Fain, N., Kline, M., & Duhovnik, J. (2011). Integrating R&D and marketing in new product development.Strojniški vestnik-Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 57(7-8), 599-609.

Fain, Nusa, Niels Moes, and Jože Duhovnik. “The role of the user and the society in new product development.” Strojniški vestnik-Journal of Mechanical Engineering 56.7-8 (2010): 513-522.

Greer, Charles R., and David Lei. “Collaborative Innovation with Customers: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Future Research*.” International Journal of Management Reviews 14.1 (2012): 63-84.

Lee, S. M., Olson, D. L., & Trimi, S. (2012). Co-innovation: convergenomics, collaboration, and co-creation for organizational values. Management Decision,50(5), 817-831.

Nakata, C. and Im, S. (2010), Spurring Cross-Functional Integration for Higher New Product Performance: A Group Effectiveness Perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27: 554–571.

Parry, M. E., Ferrín, P. F., Varela González, J. A. and Song, M. (2010), PERSPECTIVE: Cross-Functional Integration in Spanish Firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27: 606–615.


2c) Managing consumer involvement in product development

Dr. Ian Campbell, Loughborough University, UK

Dr. Matthew Sinclair, Loughborough University, UK

Professor Francesco Zurlo  Deputy Director of Politecnico of Milano and Professor of Strategic Design and furniture design;

Dr Marco Pironti Turin University,

Dr Paola Pisano Turin University,

Professor Alison Rieple, University of Westminster


Recent developments in both hardware and software have facilitated greater opportunities for consumers to become more involved in product design and manufacturing. Low-cost, easy-to-use 3D modelling software and low-cost 3D printers mean that, at least in theory, the same person can design and make their own simple product. However, for more complex products, much professional input is still needed. Therefore, a continuum now exists between totally consumer-designed products and totally professionally designed products (the latter being the norm under the mass production paradigm). The whole field of mass customisation calls for different levels of consumer involvement in product design, depending upon the type of product, the consumer’s desire for customisation and the manufacturer’s willingness to allow consumer input. Conference paper submissions that deal with any aspect of managing consumer involvement in design are most welcome. Typical topics include facilitating consumer involvement; protecting the brand; sharing of IP; deciding upon the level of customisation; pricing structures; the impact upon product liability; the effect on business models; the effect on the location of production and design in manufacturing industries; and the competences designers need in this new type of environment.


Indicative References:

Mugge, R; Schoormans, J.P.L. and Schifferstein, H.N.J.(2009) ‘Incorporating consumers in the design of their own products. The dimensions of product personalisation’, CoDesign, 5(2), pp. 79-97.

Dahl, D.W. and Moreau, C.P. (2007), ‘Thinking inside the box: why consumers enjoy constrained creative experiences’, Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), pp. 357-369.

Franke, N; Schreier, M. and Kaiser, U. (2010), ‘The ³I Designed It Myself² Effect in Mass Customization’, Management Science 56(1), pp. 125-140.

Hermans, G. and Stolterman, E. (2012), ‘Exploring Parametric Design:

Consumer Customization of an Everyday Object, Leading Innovation through Design’, Proceedings of the DMI 2012 International Research Conference, 1-4 July, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

2d) Enterprise eco system design

Track chairs

Professor Brigitte Borja de Mozota, Paris College of Art

Milan Guenther, Designer – Founder and Associate eda.c

Dr. Alice Peinado, Paris College of Art

Dr Kaja Tooming Buchanan, Assistant Professor, The Cleveland Institute of Art Ohio


In this track we welcome contributions exploring how design can help companies redesign their relationships with people through improved information systems. In recent years, strategic design management initiatives have enabled businesses to empower people through new usage paradigms of their information systems that go beyond a traditional functional focus. The goal for IT management is to focus instead on building trust by providing people with information relevant for decisions to be made through modular, innovative, open, mobile, adaptive, co designed and ubiquitous information technology.


In this track we wish to open the debate on how design can emerge as an enabler for an enterprise eco system bringing together different elements, media and functions at key intersections: how is design management explicitly designing transitions in process management at all levels?; how is meaningful dialogue among all users and stakeholders made possible through the input of design skills?; how the design process is used in a holistic way to open exchanges with both employees and business partners within the new IT context?; how is design addressing the complexity of integrating new artefacts into existing business structures, focusing on changes in people’s mind-sets to support strategic change?


Indicative references:

Guenther, M. (2012). Intersection: How Enterprise Design Bridges the Gap between Business, Technology, and People. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.


Theme 3: Contextualised designing

3a) Co-creating shared value in service design

Track chairs

Professor Tung-Jung Sung, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan

Professor Lu Yuan, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands


Service design plays an increasingly important role in provision of value in a modern economy. Value co-creation is a fundamental cornerstone of service design while, in addition, co-creation is claimed to be today’s most accepted model for innovation more widely. Therefore, how to effectively manage value co-creation has become crucial for business enterprises or communities.


Value co-creation with stakeholders under a service-dominant logic can occur in different ways. It involves an understanding of the different roles of the stakeholders involved in an holistic consideration of service contents: creating shared value highlights the importance of mutual trust and dependence (or interdependence) among the various stakeholders. As a result, achieving an integrated model or framework of value co-creation is becoming a major challenge for service design, yet there is limited research on this. Therefore, this track theme aims to offer a platform for researchers and practitioners to present the state of the art research, discuss latest developments, and envision future directions for value co-creation in service design research.


Indicative References:

Lehrer, M., Ordanini, A., DeFillippi, R., & Miozzo, M. (2012). Challenging the orthodoxy of value co-creation theory: A contingent view of co-production in design-intensive business services. European Management Journal.

Mager, B., & Sung, T. J. (2011). Special issue editorial: Designing for Services. International Journal of Design, 5(2), 1-3.

Yang, C.F., Wang, Y. C. and Sung, T. J. (2013, May). Service Experience Image for Value Co-Creation: The Creative Communities in Taipei City, In Service Science and Innovation (ICSSI), 2013 Fifth International Conference on (pp. 29-34). IEEE.

Tung, W. F., Yuan, S. T., Wu, Y. C., & Hung, P. (2012). Collaborative service system design for music content creation. Information Systems Frontiers, 1-12.

Hsieh, Yen-Hao, Soe-Tsyr Yuan, and Hsiao-Chen Liu. (2012) “Service interaction design: A Hawk-Dove game based approach to managing customer expectations for oligopoly service providers.” Information Systems Frontiers: 1-17.

Lin, F.R., Hsieh, P.S. (2011), A SAT View on New Service Development, Service Science, 3(2), 141–157

Lu, Y., & Baha, E. (2013, May). Engaged Scholarship for Designing Product Service System Innovation Opportunities in an Industrial Design Course. In Service Science and Innovation (ICSSI), 2013 Fifth International Conference on(pp. 54-58). IEEE.


3b) Design in the creative and cultural industries (CCIs) in an era of disruption

Track chairs

Professor Alison Rieple, The University of Westminster, UK

Dr Irini Pitsaki, Northumbria University

Dr. Natalie Nixon, Philadelphia University, USA

Associate Professor Birgit Jevnaker, BI Norwegian Business School, Norway


The term CCI includes experiential services such as the performing arts as well as tangible and/or scalable products that require exceptional quantities of creativity in their development processes: examples here being recorded music, fashion,  books, art exhibitions and digital media. Many of these sectors have been disrupted by the development of digital technologies and the Internet. Yet there is comparatively little writing on the management of design in the CCIs. We believe that research is needed on the role of design in cultural product development Design not simply as a means of communication or creation of objects and spaces, but rather as a process that generates experiences, and helps management to be holistic and user-centred.


We invite questions such as: is design thinking a pre-requisite for success in these types of organizations; Roger Martin used the world’s largest performing arts organization, Cirque du Soleil, as a paradigm example of design thinking? What aspects are most important – logistics, ticketing, audience flow, performance environment, workplace …? How is design used in disintermediated CCI sectors such as music and publishing? Is there a role for design in providing a substitute for a physical organization?


Indicative References:

Martin, R. The Design of Business- Why Design Thinking Is the Next Competitive Advantage. Boston: Harvard University Press, 2009.

Nixon, Natalie and Johanna Blakley.  “Fashion Thinking: Towards an Actionable Methodology”. Fashion Practice. Volume 4, Issue 2 Pages 153-176

Pitsaki I. (2010 b). Understanding design for cultural organizations performance. The International Journal of Design Principles and Practices. Common Ground, Champaign IL, Volume 4, pp. 10-22.


3c) Social and sustainable design management

Track chairs

Dr Rita Assoreira Almendra, University Of Lisbon (Faculty of Architecture)

Jose Andrade Vicente, Escola Superior da Gallaecia, Portugal


Social and sustainable design emerged during the last century as a new field committed to answer the urgent needs of humanity.  Due to its relativity newness, there is a lack of definition about its territory, scope and practices. This is demonstrated by the multitude of terms and expressions used to describe almost similar methods and approaches. Some of these relate to collaborative work with social sector organizations and others to designer’s own initiatives to help society face the most complex social, environmental, cultural, political and economic challenges.


Social design and sustainable design are intertwined since both advocate a change of paradigm. Sustainable human well-being a common goal to both social design and sustainable design. There is no sustainable design without balancing social/individual/ cultural dimensions with economic and environmental ones. And social design can be seen as assuming sustainable design principles and translating them into practice with a specific focus on social issues.


This track theme will focus on questions such as: Can existing strategies and business models ensure the success of a social and/or sustainable design project? Are there differences and commonalities in the management of products and services in the context of social and sustainable design approaches? What challenges do social and sustainable design practices pose at different levels of intervention – strategic, tacit and operational? How can results be measured in these type of projects: which metrics and KPIs?


Indicative References:

Brown, T., Wyatt, J., 2010. Design Thinking for Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review,pp. 30-35.

Buchanan, R., 1997. Branzi’s Dilemma: Design in Contemporary Culture. Fourth Order: Design, Management, and Organizational Change.

Carley, M., Christie, I., 2001. Managing Sustainable Development. Routhledge.

IDEO, 2008. Design for Social Impact: How-to Guide, The Rockerfeller Foundation.

Lasky, J., 2013. Design and Social Impact: A Cross Sectorial Agenda for Design Education, Research and Practice.

Mulgan, G., Caulier-Grice, J., Murray, R., 2010. The Open Book of Social Innovation. Skoll centre for social entrepreneurship.

Pearson, J., 2006. Design and Sustainability: Opportunities for Systemic transformation The Summit Foundation., GreenBlue (Green Blue Institute).

Thackara, J., 2008. We Are All Emerging Economies Now. Observatory: Design Observer Blog.


Theme 4: Design management futures

4a) New modes of design management

Track chairs

Adjunct Professor Anne Stenros, School of Arts and Design, Aalto University and Design Director at KONE Corporation, Finland
Pia Tamminen, BIT Research Centre, Aalto University, Finland


Design is more than giving an artifact form and function; it is a collaborative process by interdisciplinary teams. Because of the disintermediation of organisational hierarchies and the disruption to organisational value and supply chains, we believe that there has been a shift in the state of mind of design management – from coordination to integration. In this track we seek to explore questions such as: What are the new modes of design management, if any? How do companies integrate design teams into their product and/or service development systems in a globalised world? How do new modes of design management operate in different contexts, for example SMEs and the public sector? How do new modes of design management operate in an open design context? How is technology-enabled and user centred design-driving entrepreneurial disruption of large and small firm ecosystems?


Indicative References:

Verganti, R. (2011) How companies can systematically create innovations that customers don’t even know they want, Harvard Business Review, October, 114-120
von Busch, O. (2012) Generation Open: Contested Creativity and Capabilities, The Design Journal, 15(4), 443-460
Berends, H. et al. (2011) External designers in product design processes of small manufacturing firms, Design Studies, 32, 86-108


4b) Design Management: Future Perspectives

Professor Rachel Cooper, Lancaster University, UK

Dr. Martyn Evans, Lancaster University, UK

Dr Leon Cruikshank LancasterUniversity, UK

Associate Professor Birgit Jevnaker, BI Norwegian Business School, Norway


Design Management could be considered a mature discipline, whilst design continues its emergent qualities, expanding from traditional disciplines, crossing boundaries moving and into new areas, for example service design, social innovation design, designing knowledge exchange. At the same time design is managed at both macro (cites, systems) and micro scales (object and product) and anywhere in between. Whilst the breadth of influencing factors and design evidence to be considered and taken into account in the design become deeper and richer, e.g. sustainability, ageing, health, wellbeing etc. So how do we think about the future of the discipline? Is ‘management’ the appropriate word? How does it need to adapt in relation the changing nature of design and the new management theories? These are just a few questions that can be addressed within this theme.


Indicative References:

Borja de Mozota Brigitte , 2011, Design strategic value revisited: a dynamic theory for design as organizational function, chapter 18, The handbook of Design Management, editors Rachel Cooper, Sabine Junginger, Thomas Lockwood ,Berg publishers


4c) The role of designers in the shift towards Product Service Systems

Track chairs

Dr. Dirk Snelders, Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands and Aalto University, Helsinki

Erik Roscam Abbing, Zilver Innovation and Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

Dr. Froukje Sleeswijk Visser, Zilver Innovation and Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

Christine De Lille, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands


Many organizations are making the shift towards Product Service Systems. As products seldom stand alone these days, companies have to make this shift in order to unlock new value, both for themselves and their customers). In the midst of this shift, they are confronted with the need to find new ways of serving their customers. They must re-organise themselves. The number of new phenomena, models and strategies to deal with seems endless, and the people managing them need flexibility and openness to be able to adapt. In order to deal with this shift designers, project leaders and senior managers can play an important role. But how is this role different from designing products? What skills of designers are important in this shift? How do they organize themselves? This track aims to raise a discussion between those on the client side (the organization) and designers and other facilitators coming from both practice and academia.


Indicative References:

Morelli, N. (2009). Service as value co-production: reframing the service design process. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 20(5), 568-590.

Pawar, K. S., Beltagui, A., & Riedel, J. C. (2009). The PSO triangle: designing product, service and organisation to create value. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 468-493.

DE LILLE, C., ABBINGab, E. R., & KLEINSMANN, M. (2012). A designerly approach to enable organizations to deliver product-service systems. in Proceedings of Design Management Institute

Conference “Leading Innovation through Design” DMI 2012 , pp. 465–478.

Sleeswijk Visser, F. (Ed) (2013) Service design by Industrial Designers. Sleeswijk Visser, TUDelft. ISBN 978946186


Theme 5: Design thinking, leadership and impact

5a) Design Leadership

Track chairs 

Dr. James Moultrie, the University of Cambridge, UK

Dr. Karen Miller, the University of Cambridge, UK


Design leadership can be viewed in a number of different ways. It might be leadership of the firm in its market place or it might be leadership regarding design within the firm. It is increasingly evident that effective design leadership is important in many organisations. Design leaders might have attributes associated with leaders in other roles, but they are potentially unique in their perspective on design. This track seeks to explore the latest thinking and research around design leadership in all of its forms.

So some indicative questions might be: Is design leadership important for commercial success? How do organisations attain design leadership positions (i.e. capabilities, resources, strategies, structures etc.)?  How do individuals attain, develop and optimise design leadership roles (e.g. education, training, experience etc.)?


Indicative References:

Joziasse, F. (2011). Design leadership: Current limits and future opportunities. In: R. Cooper, S. Junginger, T. Lockwood, eds. The Handbook of Design Management. Berg: Oxford, pp. 398-413.

Miller, K. & Moultrie, J. (2013). Delineating design leaders: A framework of design management roles in fashion retail. Journal of Creativity and Innovation Management, 22, pp. 161-176.

Topalian, A. (2011). Major challenges for design leaders over the next decade. In: R. Cooper, S. Junginger, T. Lockwood, eds. The Handbook of Design Management. Berg: Oxford, pp. 379-397.



5b) Public policy and services informed by a design approach

Track chairs 

Dr Nina Terrey, ThinkPlace, Australia

Dr Sabine Junginger, Associate Professor Kolding School of Design, Denmark

The challenge facing public managers is how to transform public policies and services to be “better, quicker and cheaper” while at the same time ensure services are meaningful, relevant and helpful to the community. Design as strategy, method and skills has recently focused on investigating the transformative role of services as a way to build a more sustainable and equitable society. Design in public services was recently a topic of a UK parliamentary inquiry that looked into how design can contribute to renewing public services. The report makes a clear proposition that public leaders can acquire the skills of design to reshape and refashion the public policies and services that they are responsible. This track proposes to bring together latest research in design focusing on public policy and service design answering such questions as: What evidence is there that design approaches embedded in public organizations is a genuine way for public leaders to succeed? How have public leaders co-designed effective policies and services with their communities?  How are public services that have been co-designed more relevant and meaningful to communities? How have co-designed or coproduced public policies or services proven to reduce costs? How has design offered a fresh approach to rethinking policy, redrawing professional practice and reshaping service delivery?


Indicative References:

Design Commission (2013). Restarting Britain 2: Design and Public Services United Kingdom Design Commission.

Quirk, B. (2013) Local government can improve public services by hiring designers. The Guardian

Sangiorgi, D. (2011). “Transformative Services and Transformation Design ” International Journal of Design 5(2).


5c) Measuring the impact of design – and design thinking – in an era of disruption

Track chairs 

Professor Brigitte Borja de Mozota – PCA, France

Professor Jeanne Liedtka, Darden School of Business, Associate Professor Fabiane Wolff, UniRitter/Laureate International Universities, Brasil

This track focuses on the impact of design on business performance. One of the particular areas of interest is in measuring the specific outcomes – whether at the level of the individual, the team, or the organization – produced by the adoption of a design thinking approach, along with the methodological challenges of identifying and calibrating them.


We encourage submissions on these and other questions such as : How do designers feel about how their work is measured and assessed? How can design be valued/measured  –  for example design outputs or design skills as knowledge capital? Are design and design management awards pertinent tools for measurement effectiveness? What kind of strategies and resources can be used to improve managers’ knowledge about design? What are the best components to include on design balanced scorecards and other applied managerial tools?


Indicative References:

Borja de Mozota Brigitte, 2011, Design strategic value revisited: a dynamic theory for design as organizational function, chapter 18, The handbook of Design Management. Editors Rachel Cooper, Sabine Junginger, Thomas Lockwood. Berg publishers

Cooper, R., Juninger, S. & Lockwood, T. (2009). Design thinking and design management: A research and practice perspective. In Lockwood, T. (Ed.), Design thinking: Integrating innovation, customer experience, and brand value (3rd Ed.). New York, NY: Allworth Press.

DMI Journal 2011 Special Issue on The Extended Value of Design

Guo, L. (2010). Product design and financial performance. Design Management Journal, 5(1), 5-19.

Candi, M., & Gemser, G. (2010). An agenda for research on the relationships between industrial design and performance. International journal of design, 4(3), 67-77.

Hertenstein, J. H., Platt, M. B., & Brown, D. R. (2001). Valuing design: enhancing corporate performance through design effectiveness. Design Management Journal (Former Series), 12(3), 10-19.

Hertenstein, J. H., Platt, M. B., & Veryzer, R. W. (2005). The Impact of Industrial Design Effectiveness on Corporate Financial Performance*. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 3-21.

Johansson, U., Woodilla, J. & Cetinkaya. (2011). The emperor’s new clothes or The magic wand? The past, present and future of design thinking. Proceedings of the 1st Cambridge Academic Design Management Conference, Cambridge, UK.

Lindberg, T., Koppen, E., Rauth, I. & Meinel, C. (2012). On the Perception, Adoption and Implementation of Design Thinking in the IT. In Plattner, H., Meinel, C. & Leifer, L. (Eds.) Design Thinking Research. Heidelberg: Industry Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Seidel, V. & Fixson, S. (2013). Adopting ‘Design Thinking’ in Novice Multidisciplinary Teams: The Application and Limits of Design Methods and Reflexive Practices, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30 (S1): 19-33


5d) Design(ers) thinking and disruptive business model innovation: creating mental models or tangible models?

Track chairs 

Prof. Petra Badke-Schaub, Professor for Design Theory and Methodology, TU-Delft Lianne W.L. Simonse Assistant Professor,  Delft University of Technology

In this track the aim is to explore the building of the design thinking paradigm by contrasting the innovation context of product innovation and business model innovation. Specifically we like to address the question of: what are the similarities and differentiators in taking up design thinking in contribution to product innovation versus in taking up design thinking in contribution to business model innovation.

In the discourse about design thinking the emphasis is on human centered innovation. The pace and proliferation of design thinking publications have reached a point where it is useful to reflect on what has been learned. Elements for building the paradigm include for example: the description of designers’ thinking processes including intuitive and rational decision making, adaptive and flexible thinking processes, and visual and symbolic modeling, etc.


Since e-business organizations became successful, business models have become a new locus for innovation. Designers are increasingly found in new positions to apply ‘design thinking’ to the innovation of business models. Thus far, little is known about this process and how design theories and methodologies (notions, modeling methods and tools) are used. Scholars have taken different perspectives on the model part of the business models, some referring to mental models that are created in business model innovation teams others pointing out that tangible models as artifacts of design are needed.


Indicative References:

Simonse, Lianne, et al. “Mapping business models for social service design in healthcare.” Leading Through Design (2012): 431.

Badke-Schaub, P., J. Daalhuizen, and N. Roozenburg. “Towards a Designer-Centred Methodology: Descriptive Considerations and Prescriptive Reflections.”The Future of Design Methodology. Springer London, 2011. 181-197..


Theme 6: Educating Design Managers For Strategic Roles

6) Design Management Education

Track chairs 

Dr. Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, UK

Professor Richard Buchanan, Case Western Reserve University, USA

Selena Griffith, UNSW, Australia

A challenge for design and management educators is to prepare future leaders to work in strategic roles in both traditional and new economy business models. This is re-echoed by a recent European Design Leadership Board’s report finding which identified the lack of design management skills as a significant barrier to the adoption and integration of design into Europe’s enterprises, organisations and governments. A further challenge is to deliver graduates with a passion for lifelong learning and a capacity to innovate, adapt and adopt emergent design practices within the context of their own. This track seeks contributions exploring responses by educators to the need to produce more strategic designers and how emergent design practices are incorporated within the design management curriculum. The aim is to promote a debate which will inform the development of design and management education.


Indicative References:

Thomson, M., & Koskinen, T. (2012). Design for Growth & Prosperity (pp. 91). Helsinki, Finland: The European Design Leadership Board.

Theme 7: Open Track

7) Open track

Track chairs

Erik Bohemia, Rachel Cooper, Leon Cruickshank, Jeanne Liedtka, and Alison Rieple

This track is for papers that do not fit into any of the other named tracks



1st Interdisciplinary Innovation Conference Cooperating for innovation: devices for collective exploration. Paris, 2 December 2013


Conference theme

Innovation activities face a threefold challenge today: they build on the advancement of science and include an increasingly strong technological component; they involve a growing number of actors, among whom large corporations, high‐technology start‐ups, public research organizations, and user associations; they are to take into account various stakeholders’ concerns which extend beyond a mere economic or financial logic. In other words, innovation becomes – or at least attempts to become ‐ increasingly disruptive, open, and responsible. The uncertainty inherent to innovation hence bears not only on the odds of success, but also on the nature of scientific knowledge to build and leverage, on the identity of partners to enroll, and on the evaluation criteria to rely on. Marked by this threefold uncertainty, innovation regimes pertain to the exploration of new possibilities, rather than the exploitation of things already known, as James March famously put it. The conference will investigate new forms of organizing collective action given the uncertainty inherent in exploratory innovation. This issue will be addressed through the analysis of practices and devices that are put forward and tried out to equip collective exploration activities.


Le design dans l’art contemporain / colloque international, 21-23/11/13 Bordeaux

En dénonçant la «beauté amère» d’une histoire de l’art qu’ils jugeaient compromise au service de pouvoirs injustes, les artistes modernes se sont lancés dans un processus aussi utopique qu’autodestructeur. Voulant faire de tous les hommes des artistes et de la vie l’art véritable, ils ont effondré le socle des Beaux-arts sur lequel reposait la légitimité de leur pratique. Métamorphosés à la fin des années soixante en «plasticiens» «propres à tout et à rien», ils ont laissé le designer industriel répondre à l’irrépressible, car consubstantiel, désir de beauté de l’être humain. Si tout est désormais «affaire de design», faut-il en conclure que le designer, qui a profité de l’occasion pour revêtir les habits multicolores de Business Pop Star tissés dans la Factory warholienne, est devenu l’artiste par excellence d’un «monde de l’art à l’état gazeux et à la beauté illimitée» (cf. Yves Michaud) ? Poursuivant la réflexion engagée dans AC-DC : art contemporain, design contemporain (éd. HEAD-Haute École d’art et de design de Genève, 2008) et Philosophie du design (Figures de l’art XXV, éd. Puppa, 2013), ce colloque propose de regarder l’art contemporain dans le miroir du design et le design dans celui de l’art.


L’Imaginaire et les Techniques

Colloque International /// 14. – 16. novembre 2013, Paris, France /// Université Paris 1, Panthéon Sorbonne

que notre appartenance au monde des idées »
Gaston Bachelard

L’émergence des nouvelles technologies est historiquement et actuellement accompagné de discours et de visions des mondes à venir. Ce sont des rêves, des idées, des fantasmes qui s´entrecroisent dans un lieu collectif ou individuel qu´on appelle l´imaginaire. Dans l´imaginaire ces visions prennent la forme d´une langue symbolique d´images, de mots, de rites, de mythes, de récits. La technique comme capacité humaine d´inventer des outils et de mémoriser leurs usage pour pouvoir agir d´une manière durable et reproductible, utilise ce lieu de l’imaginaire pour y créer des objets, des gestes, des signes.
La réflexion actuelle sur les développements des techniques fait de plus en plus référence à la catégorie de l’imaginaire. L’imaginaire est devenu une dimension à part entière des techniques dans les travaux d’historiens dans leurs études sur les régimes de la pensée opératoire (Garçon 2012) et de socio-anthropologues comme Alain Gras et Victor Scardigli. Dans cette conjoncture, le but de ce colloque est de tenter de faire le point et d´avancer la recherche sur les imaginaires des techniques, redessiner un panorama actuel des recherches autour du sujet, et, à partir de différents points de vue, référencer des nouveaux chemins possibles.

Les imaginaires des techniques peuvent être appréhendés comme un lieu d´articulation entre l’individu et le collectif. L’imaginaire fait référence à un substrat commun, un fonds culturel, à des catégories invariantes et quasi-fixes de l’appropriation du monde (C. Lévi-Strauss, G. Dumézil, G. Bachelard, G. Durand, ou encore C. G. Jung, C. Castoriadis), qui comprennent et débordent les frontières de la conscience individuelle. Ces imaginaires peuvent être étudiés dans une perspective historique comme le produit de cultures particulières, comme des constructions dans la longue durée dotées de leur temporalités propres, discernables dans le creuset des multiples temporalités sociétales (A.-F. Garçon).

Lorsqu’on s’intéresse à l’imaginaire, on comprend que les sciences et les technologies ne sont ni « hors du social », ni hors du culturel. L’imaginaire est un ensemble de représentations imagées qui sont liées les unes aux autres, à l’instar de ce que montrait M. Halbwachs : celles de l’inventeur et du concepteur, celles du chercheur ou de l’ingénieur, celles du bricoleur et de l’usager ; tous construisent une représentation de la nature, de la technique, de l’efficacité, de l’énergie, de l’environnement, du corps, de la santé, de la communication, de la relation sociale qui mobilise images et mots, images et gestes.

A la croisée de ces traditions, on peut analyser les imaginaires dans leurs dimensions archétypales, individuelles, collectives et sociales. « Chaque individu », écrit Jean-Jacques Wunenburger, « expérimente un combinatoire d’imaginaires plus ou moins socialisés et riches, qui forment un atlas pluriel d’images, images strictement personnelles (fantasmes), images culturelles (référentiels communs à une culture) et même images universelles, véritables archétypes qui agissent et interagissent de manière transhistorique et transculturelle.»

Que peut-on apprendre en appliquant une approche multidimensionnelle aux techniques ?

Le colloque «L’imaginaire et les techniques» propose d’explorer dans ses diverses dimensions l’intrication entre les imaginaires collectifs et individuels et les techniques, l’innovation et la conception, le design. Il est le fruit de la collaboration transdisciplinaire des laboratoires et écoles d’histoire et de socio-anthropologie des techniques, de design et création industrielle :

Le Centre d’Histoire des Sciences et d’Histoire des Techniques (CH2ST) et le Centre d’Étude des Techniques, des Connaissances et des Pratiques (CETCOPRA) de l’université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne; l´Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Création Industrielle (ENSCI) et le Centre de Gestion Scientifique (CGS) de l´Ecole des Mines ParisTech.

Le colloque se veut aussi un point de départ pour la mise en commun de compétences et perspectives différentes en vue de constituer un réseau solide capable de mener des recherches communes sur un temps plus long.

Le programme privilégiera quatre axes :

1. L’imaginaire comme source de la conception technique

Quelle est la part de l’imaginaire dans la conception des œuvres techniques ? Comment les ingénieurs sont ils influencés, encadrés par l´imaginaire pendant le processus d´invention? Comment les œuvres d´art, les films, les images de la culture populaire influencent les ingénieurs dans leurs conceptions techniques? Comment les images – mentales et matérielles – gouvernent-elles la mise en imaginaire de la technique? Y a t-il des règles de fonctionnement de l´image dans la vulgarisation d´une technique? Comment est-ce que les technologies des sciences « dures » sont influencées par l´imaginaire? La découverte de la double hélice de l´ADN par James Watson et Francis Crick en 1953 par exemple était guidée par un concept esthétique. Quelle est la part d’esthétique dans le design technique? Comment interpréter les interactions entre ingénieurs, artistes et designers ? Quel est le rôle de l’imaginaire dans l’invention, l’innovation, dans l’environnement technique en général?

Il faut aussi poser la question de la transformation de l’imaginaire comme lieu de création. L’imaginaire, qui a longtemps servi à transmettre et à projeter la transformation de la matière, est aujourd’hui, créateur d’espace virtuel où le contact direct avec la matière disparaît. La transformation de la matière initiale peut se faire à travers des dispositifs gérant des données : comment dans ce procès de transformation de l’espace de création, l’homme est-il passé de créateur d’objets à créateur de modèles? (Devray 1992). Comment l’homme et son imaginaire sont devenus, ce que redoutait Mumford (1934), « le moyen par lequel une machine peut fabriquer une autre machine» ? Comment l’homme est devenu le sujet de sa propre machine (H. Arendt, G. Anders, P. Sloterdijk) ?

2. L’imaginaire dans l’usage des techniques

L´imaginaire ne joue pas seulement un rôle constitutif dans la conception technique mais aussi à l´autre bout des processus de l´innovation, lors de l´adoption de la nouveauté technique par les utilisateurs.
Se posent alors les questions suivantes : Comment l´utilisation d´un objet technique est-il influencé par l´imaginaire de son utilisateur? Où est la place de l´imaginaire dans le régime de la pratique (Garçon 2012) , c’est-à-dire l´utilisation spontanée, non-renseignée d´une technique, basée sur l´oralité et le symbolisme? Quel est le rôle du jeu dans l’apprentissage ? Si les techniques créent des « affinités profondes d’esprit entre des types d’individus divers » (Francastel 1956) comment et à quel niveau se réalisent ces transformations ?
Tenant compte du rôle actif que jouent les usagers dans l’innovation technique dans quelle mesure leur imaginaire entre-t-il en résonance ou en conflit avec celui des designers (A. Gras, S. Poirot-Delpech, G. Dubey, V. Scardigli)? Quel rôle joue ce conflit dans des débats sur le développement des biotechnologies ou des OGM, la géronto-technologie, la robotique pour tous, la médecine personnalisée ?

Si on comprend la société comme un utilisateur collectif il se pose la question des imaginaires qui sont à l’œuvre dans les choix technologiques de cette société. Est-il possible – et dans quelles formes – de penser des alternatives de choix technologiques en particulier non thermiques et décroissants dans la prédation de la nature (du passé, du présent ou du futur) à notre monde ?

3. Le rôle de l´imaginaire dans les transitions techniques

L´imaginaire joue aussi un rôle décisif dans la transition d´une culture technique à l´autre: D´un côté, l´imaginaire peut faciliter des changements techniques et leurs acceptations. Le discours fantasmé sur l´or par exemple, a aidé les chimistes médiévaux à élaborer des procédés de cémentation de l´acier (Thomas 2005). Mais de l´autre côté l´imaginaire peut aussi bloquer des inventions, empêcher des innovations. L´Europe ignorait par exemple le zinc car la méthode de production était incompatible avec son imaginaire technique.

L’industrialisation des deux dernières siècles a été vecteur de transformation des cultures techniques locales vers une culture technique mondialisée: les créations locales n’avaient pas accès aux techniques industrielles et en pâtissaient (Warnier 2003). Au sein de ces processus d’uniformisation, ce colloque, tel un regard et un espace de discussions autour de la technique et de l’imaginaire et de leurs transformations, s’avère indispensable. Ce fut aussi l’occasion d’une bifurcation radicale de l’usage de l’énergie par le privilège accordé à un seul élément : le feu (A. Gras).

4. Imaginer l´homme et la société technicienne : les techniques comme source d’imaginaire

De grands récits donnent sens à l’évolution technique : transgression des limites, émancipation de l’homme à l’égard de la nature, progrès indéfini, apocalypse… Peut-on identifier les conditions et circonstances qui déterminent le privilège accordé à tel ou tel scenario ? Les techniques ont inspiré et continuent d’inspirer de grands mythes qui définissent la condition humaine (Prométhée, Faust, boîte de Pandore, apprenti-sorcier etc). Comment ces techno-utopies et dystopies imprègnent-elles l’imaginaire individuel, social et culturel ? Dans quelle mesure ces archétypes culturels continuent-ils d’agir dans les sociétés contemporaines? Les techniques actuelles renouvellent-elles le patrimoine culturel de mythes et récits?
Le corps étant « le premier instrument de l’homme », comme le dit M. Mauss, il est ce support incarné culturel/naturel partie d’un environnement techno-naturel qui se construit aussi sur des représentations symboliques et des valeurs. Comment l’imaginaire façonne-t-il le corps comme lieu d’exercice, d’expérimentation, de mutation, et aussi comme lieu de construction d’une identité aux possibilités inédites ?

Information initialement publiée sur le :


Images de synthèse et photographies en architecture : Réalité, réalisme, fiction ?

Images de synthèse et photographies en architecture

Réalité, réalisme, fiction ?

Mercredi 05 juin 2013 à 19h00

Peruri 88 / Vertical Jakarta, MVRDV, 2012 © RSI StudioJusqu’à un passé récent, une frontière nette séparait les représentations du projet d’architecture et celles des édifices construits : d’un côté, le dessin, et de l’autre, la photographie. Cet écart entre l’idée et la réalité tend désormais à être aboli par les technologies informatiques.
Perspectivistes ou graphistes créent des images dites “de synthèse” – à l’occasion de concours, le plus souvent – avec un degré de réalisme tel qu’il devient difficile de distinguer les bâtiments existants de leur image rêvée. De leur côté, les photographes d’architecture, effectuant les reportages des bâtiments construits, utilisent des techniques numériques qui facilitent la retouche : dès lors, comment déterminer le moment de bascule où la prise de vue, prétendant à une certaine objectivité, laisse la place à une sorte d’arrangement du réel ?

La table ronde réunira ces deux professions qui, chacune, utilisent des outils relevant du domaine de la photographie, même lorsqu’ils sont virtuels. Le point de vue de chercheurs, spécialistes de la culture visuelle et des images numériques, permettra de prendre une distance sur ces questions. La projection de ces images, rarement regardées en tant que telles, s’attachera à expliquer leur “fabrication” et à observer ce qui sépare encore les images virtuelles de celles prises “sur le motif”.  En filigrane, les unes et les autres interrogent sur les fictions et les artifices qu’il convient d’utiliser pour donner de l’architecture une vision “réaliste”.


Hervé Abbadie, photographe

Éric Anton
(Artefactorylab), réalisateur d’images en architecture

Luc Boegly
, photographe

Jean-François Coulais
, géographe, enseignant à l’École nationale supérieure d’architecture de Versailles, chercheur à l’Ipraus (Institut parisien de recherche architecture urbanistique société)

André Gunthert
, maître de conférences à l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, directeur du laboratoire d’histoire visuelle contemporaine (Lhivic)

Gaël Nys
(RSI Studio), perspectiviste

Marie-Madeleine Ozdoba
, architecte, chercheuse au Lhivic

Catherine Simonet
(Loukat), perspectiviste


Information initialement publiée sur le site de la Cité de l’architecture et du patrimoine.


Anthony Dunne, le 30 mai, à l’ENSCI de 17h00 à 20h00


La conférence portera d’abord sur la modération des projets des élèves réalisés dans le cadre du workshop encadré par Anthony Dunne, puis sur la présentation de leurs travaux de recherche en tant que designers chercheurs.

Rencontre organisée par Marine Royer, designer, doctorante à l’ENSCI et l’EHESS, suite au workshop conçu autour des biotechnologies sur le thème « Quelles sont les formes futures de soins ? »

Anthony Dunne et Fiona Raby utilisent le design comme moyen pour stimuler la discussion et le débat entre les designers, l’industrie et la société sur les implications sociales, culturelles et éthiques des technologies émergentes.

Anthony est professeur et directeur du département Interactions du Royal College of Art de Londres. Il a étudié le design industriel à l’ARC avant de travailler chez Sony Design à Tokyo. De retour à Londres, il a obtenu un doctorat en « Computer Related Design » à la RCA. Il a été membre fondateur du studio de recherche CRD où il a travaillé en tant que chercheur leader de l’UE et des projets de recherche financés par l’industrie. Anthony a reçu le « Sir Misha Black Award » pour l’Innovation dans l’enseignement du design en 2009.


de 17h00 à 18h30: modération des projets des élèves dans le cadre du workshop conçu autour des biotechnologies sur le thème « Quelles sont les formes futures de soins ? ».

de 18h30 à 20h00: présentation de leurs travaux de recherche en tant que designers chercheurs.


L’audiovisuel et les nouvelles technologies – Journée d’étude à l’Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle

Mercredi 15 mai prochain, une journée d’étude sera organisée à l’université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle autour de la question “Critique et nouvelles technologies”. L’événement est organisé par les étudiants en Master 1 « Études cinématographiques et audiovisuelles » de l’université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle. Plus précisément, par les étudiants du cours de Mme Kira Kitsopanidou « Nouveaux métiers, nouveaux marchés, nouvelles pratiques ».

Cette journée s’articulera autour de deux tables rondes:

La table ronde n°1 sera l’occasion d’étudier avec des professionnels dans quelles mesures les nouvelles technologies ont pu ou peuvent encore transformer les enjeux de la “critique de cinéma et du jeu vidéo”. Comment se réactualise aujourd’hui la question des rôles de la critique vis-à-vis de ceux qui la reçoivent ? Les nouvelles technologies permettent-elles une plus grande diversité des approches et des œuvres mises en avant, et cette diversité va-t-elle de paire avec une vraie visibilité ? Qu’en est-il de l’indépendance des critiques ? Enfin comment ces nouveaux médias se positionnent-ils vis-à-vis des supports traditionnels ?À travers ces questions, nous essaierons de savoir si les nouvelles technologies entraînent réellement une innovation dans le champ de la critique de cinéma et du jeu vidéo.

 La problématique de la table ronde n°2 traitera d’un sujet audacieux : la pornographie 2.0. La discussion s’opérera principalement autour de questions économiques et sociologiques liant pornographie et numérique. Les principales question abordées tourneront autour de la visibilité offerte à la pornographie par le numérique (autopromotion, autodiffusion) et par conséquent de la réduction de la barrière amateur/professionnel, des droits d’auteurs, de l’offre et de la demande dans le milieu et des réactions des acteurs historiques face à ces évolutions. Seront aussi abordées des approches participatives de la pornographie à l’heure du numérique : simple opération de communication ou véritable business model ? Est-ce le signe d’une libération de la pensée collective à l’image de Canal+ et Arte, n’hésitant pas à lancer des séries autour de l’industrie pornographique ?


Toutes les informations sur la journée ainsi que le programme complet sont disponibles sur le site de l’évènement:

Société des Arts Technologiques – Présentation publique de Stéphan Hyronde



Accueilli dans le programme des résidences de la SAT depuis septembre 2012, l’artiste et chercheur Stéphan Hyronde développe le projet kénosis, ancré dans les champs de l’écriture et de l’art numériques. Ces dernières années, il a orienté son travail artistique autour des formes textuelles appliquées au support écranique et génératif, en explorant les possibilités dynamiques, figurales et sémantiques, sonores et vocales, offertes par ce médium.

Parallèlement à cette production artistique, Stéphan Hyronde mène également un travail approfondi de recherche théorique, portant sur les problématiques présentes dans ce type d’œuvres, au croisement de la littérature et la poésie numériques, du courant conceptuel ou néo-conceptuel, et enfin de l’art numérique et de l’installation. Il se consacre ainsi, depuis un an et demie, à un Doctorat en Études et Pratiques des arts, en cotutelle entre l’UQAM à Montréal et l’Université Paris 8, en France, ponctuant ses recherches de plusieurs interventions en colloques.


Après avoir suivi une formation vidéo à la SAT, Stéphan Hyronde a présenté une preuve de concept de 4 minutes dans la Satosphère en octobre 2012. Par la suite, il se rend en France en novembre pour réaliser, avec un appareil photo numérique, une captation sphérique à 360 degrés. Stéphan Hyronde travaille actuellement en collaboration avec l’équipe du Labodôme de la SAT afin de développer une application Ipad interactive.




Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search