Design students, professionals, and academics often use design labels, such as social design, co-design, and sustainable design, to position or explain their work. We argue that the labels are insufficient for a clear and nuanced approach to describing design practices, and suggest a way to say a bit more. Seventy design labels were collected and categorized, yielding five clusters. Four clusters derive their name from a necessary element of a design project, namely resources, outcomes, criteria, and methods. The fifth cluster indicates application domains. The discussion explores the clusters and the related elements. We conclude that the labels are often insufficient to clarify a position, that the elements can assist in describing and planning a design practice. But that the labels remain valuable: although these do not describe or explain how these practices are conducted, they do serve to identify specialist communities, and highlight new directions in the field.

Collaborative research projects are great opportunities for the involved design professionals to learn. Many design professionals join in such collaborations to contribute with their existing professional expertise, but also to further develop and extend that expertise. However, learning by individuals is usually not the main aim, and we lack insight in the learning opportunities through collaboration in such projects. We propose that we need to understand this learning process better in order to make this happen more often and more effectively. This paper presents how four design professionals who each participated in different collaborative research projects look back on their learning processes. We interviewed each participant and drew a process map with them. The results show that these projects offer multifaceted learning opportunities and outcomes of important value for the professionals.The paper shows that their learning a) is not always easily recognised by the professionals themselves, b) benefits from their active engagement as learners, and c) requires supportive conditions in project arrangements. The paper provides guidelines for lead researchers, design professionals, as well as funding agencies to recognise and value this learning, to support explicit reflection and articulation, and to facilitate supportive learning conditions.

In our densely-populated cities, living together in harmony between different groups of people becomes an increasingly difficult art, and one in which design can provide positive contributions. This paper describes a design project which aimed to decrease tensions between youth and residents in a city neighbourhood through an empathy-building process. Individuals from both groups were guided through the process of stepping into each others’ worlds through Virtual Reality and developing solutions together to address points of tension. Their individual transformative processes were researched through a content analysis procedure in order to make the implicit outcomes of such design processes explicit. Throughout this process new dynamics and connections emerged, revealing grounds for structurally decreasing tensions and promoting participatory approaches for social innovation. This paper describes the project and presents our learnings regarding (1) the transformative impact on the involved individuals from the neighbourhood and (2) reflections on the contributing roles of the designers in social innovation projects.

Purpose:
The increasing complexity of civil engineering projects necessitates focusing on new competencies of project participants. Based on the research on team performance and design processes that are more closely linked to the relevance of the project context, it is hypothesised that empathic abilities could play an important role in the performance of civil engineering projects. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether performance can be improved by focusing on empathic abilities during the integrated design phase.

Design/methodology/approach:
Semi-structured in-depth interviews with experts were conducted to explore the relevance of empathic abilities and their interaction with performance in a real-life infrastructure project. The project team’s empathy level was measured by means of a survey using Davis’ Interpersonal Reactivity Index method. Finally, differences between expected and measured levels of empathy were analysed.

Findings:
The results provide insights into how empathic abilities interact with performance. The measurement indicates that, on average, professionals in the civil engineering industry score relatively low on empathy. In addition, differences were identified between the expected distribution and the measured empathy levels of the team, implying a potential for improvement, in particular by increasing the empathic abilities of the project management and increasing gender diversity.

Originality/value:
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to investigate a relationship between empathy and the performance of civil engineering projects. The results provide initial insights into the empathic ability of civil engineering project teams and the potential of empathy to improve performance. Furthermore, from an empathy perspective, this study advocates increasing the gender diversity of project teams to improve performance.

Knowledge from academic design research projects does not always help design professionals to actually strengthen their work. Based on a multi-case study, this paper describes how researchers view the impact of their design research projects on design practice and what they do to achieve this. Even in projects where impact on design practice is a stated ambition, several challenges can stand in the way, such as a lack of funding opportunities and unclarity on the needs of design practice. The paper provides tips for researchers and funding parties who want to inform design practice by research, including tips to operationalize design practice roles.

In co-design, solutions are generated to serve people’s needs, short term and/or long term, through their involvement in parts of the design process. Methods like contextmapping and explorative prototyping serve these participatory processes. They help designers to step into the users’ shoes, to explore design solutions from and with their perspectives. In circumstances where contact with users is restricted, such as the recent lockdowns, user involvement is hindered and we need to find alternative ways to proceed with involving users in design processes. Instead of focussing on what is impossible because of the restrictions, we focussed on the opportunities it can bring. This paper shows that co-design is possible in times of a lockdown by deploying users in the role of co-explorer, creating ownership among users, using digital means, and obtaining an opportunity-oriented mindset.

Designers play an important role in service transformation and the development of product-service systems by applying co-creation methods. This paper presents a case of how we applied co-creation in practice and the impact this has had on developing a circular product-service system. It details the method used in the co-creation process and highlights five benefits, such as the ability to develop value-adding services for repairs and supporting each of them with user citations. Furthermore, we interviewed the project team a year into product development to assess the uptake by the company and the impact co-creation had on their design process. Based on these findings, we present a conceptual model that identifies the tangible impacts of co-creation and visualizes at what stages and levels co-creation can impact both the development of product-service systems and a company’s shift along the servitization continuum.