Dear Brigitte,
thank you for your comments and for planning to add the article to the
curriculum of this academic year.
To your first point. I agree that the scope on design management in the
wikipedia is limited, although it covers already many aspects. However
there is hardly no discussion on the scope of design management in the
design management community, beside discussing hot topics such as
open-innovation, co-creation, design thinking, design value etc. It
would be great to have a discussion on what is in the scope of design
management and in which direction it develops. I will promote some
cross-linking in other articles to design management.
To your second point. I think that the wikipedia is not the right
platform for best practices in design governance, as the definition
should be focused on the characteristics of design management in
general. However it is a good idea to provide links to those case
studies on other websites, such as the case studies of the design
management award, the design effectiveness award or the websites of the
British Design Council (Nesta, or 11 lessons of managing design). Find a
list of companies using design management here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_with_design_management
Such a list would be great also for design management education programs.
To your third point. Yes, the design management research section is
still very weak. This is the case, because the design management
research community is not so present if you are not a researcher. An
overview what is going on in the design management research community is
difficult to grasp, since there is no platform or summarizing literature
on this. What seems to be obvious to you, is not to an outsider of the
research community.
To your last point. Fully agree. Since the main purpose of the article
should be to engage people to get in contact with design management, it
should be much more pro-active and engaging.
Best regards,
Stenlo
|