We propose the concept of a problem-sustaining pattern as a revision of the established concept of mental disorder. The proposed concept preserves valuable features of the established concept, such as recognition of the client’s hardships and scientifically informed justification of specific interventions. However, several assumptions behind the established concept have been widely criticized, both in terms of their clinical and moral normativity as well as their ontological and empirical soundness. We argue that a focus on problem-sustainment allows us to reframe the issue of demarcation in a way that helps avoid stigmatization while clarifying the role of client agency in diagnosis. We also propose a shift toward thinking in terms of patterns of dynamic interaction, which is more in line with current developments in complexity science. We conclude the article with a discussion of further research that would be needed to address various questions raised by our proposal.@en

In this paper, we present a vision on how engineers can play different roles in future society 2030. First we predicted how society in the Netherlands (in relation to Europe and the rest of the world) is going to develop and how future engineers will behave, act and take their position in this future world. We used the ‘Vision in Design’ methodology to unravel the complexity of future society step-by-step and to understand the diversity of engineer(ing)-behaviour: 260 relevant future conditions for 2030 were derived from 10 interviews with visionaries in society, experts in the field of engineering education and from literature search. Clustering these factors into ten driving forces helped us to discover three independent determining dimensions, defining eight possible engineer-behaviours in 2030. As a result of this rich contextual research, these eight roles are further illustrated with accompanying skills and pathways to support role development. The vision and roles have been developed in co-creation and validated in a series of workshops with a wide variety of people within and beyond academia and within the professional world of engineering.@en

The car has, more than any other, become a product with highly emotional properties and a significant impact on society. The automotive styling process as generally educated and practiced today has its foundation in the 1930’s in the Detroit studios of General Motors and has not changed significantly since. The automotive industry and its market however have evolved dramatically. Car companies need to manage brand portfolios rather than a single brand and manage synergy between SBUs without compromising brand identities. It is due to the very properties of the styling process that automotive styling departments have not acquired a position in the value chain that allows an active role in corporate strategy formulation. Cynically, the tacit skills and culture that allow stylists to design successful cars also appear to be the threshold in implementing methodologies that would allow a more influential power base. The myth of the profession is embraced passionately by those who are a part of it. Being part of a myth is even better than being a scientist. Styling strategy and competitive advantage fail to emerge and each new model generation puts a company at a larger risk than acceptable. Styling is currently recognized as a main automotive design driver. However it is no longer sufficient to design the next generation without a strategic context that exceeds the level of the business unit. The resources that are invested in a new car, and the number of people that depend on it, are too high. The challenge is to design and introduce a scientific business framework into the styling process without compromising or bounding tacit skills, which are so critical to the appeal of the final design.@en