Brogan Ogilvie, Nicholas Spencer, Mark Bailey, and Helen Simmons
Systemic change and transformation have evolved into a prevalent concern for design scholars and practitioners. Whilst this agenda broadens the horizons of design’s potential role and social impact, recent research (both within and external to the design community) has called for greater criticality toward this movement, and the development of research and practice capabilities that allow designers to navigate complex institutional realities. Failing to do so may result in the design being ineffective at best, or at worst, inadvertently reproducing the systems (and their production of harm) it aims to transform.
The work presented in this paper draws on evidence from an ongoing doctoral study that explores the utility of the institutional logics perspective (ILP) for design research and practice. The concept of innovation narratives is proposed and used as a lens to explore the often ambiguous and contradictory landscape around inclusive innovation. This study utilises data generated through a 4-month research placement embedded within a project aimed at establishing an Inclusive Innovation Network (IIN). It presents findings indicating the prevalence of three distinct inclusive innovation narratives within a particular organisational context and generates knowledge on the utility of integrating the ILP with design’s reflective practice.
This research highlights how, by becoming cognisant of dominant and alternative innovation narratives within a complex system, practitioners can more intentionally navigate contestation and contradiction to embed and empower innovation narratives that resist and challenge the existing system. This is significant because it offers a new understanding of how design and design practitioners might bring about systemic transitions by restructuring dominant neoliberal innovation narratives.
KEYWORDS: systemic design, institutional logics, innovation narratives, inclusive innovation, neoliberalism