Rethink The Design Office

Research into organisational creativity and the importance of group identity to creative design

Master thesis (2021)

Authors

D.J.G. Hietbrink Architecture and the Built Environment

Contributors

R.R.J. van de Pas Architectural Engineering - Architecture and the Built Environment (supervisor 1)
J.A. van de Voort Architectural Engineering - Architecture and the Built Environment (supervisor 2)
E.J.G.C. van Dooren Public Building and Housing Design (supervisor 2)
Faculty
Architecture and the Built Environment
Copyright: © 2021 Daan Hietbrink
Office Identity Innovation Creativity Collective Group creativity Design office
More Info
expand_more

Published Date

13-07-2021

Language

English

Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Faculty

Architecture and the Built Environment

Abstract

The question central in this research was: What are the structures used by successful innovative firms and how can the understanding of these structures help growing firms to maintain their innovative nature? Three case-studies have been conducted among innovative firms with an innovative record. In the analysis of the cases five important structural factors where identified: collaboration, communal identity, collective working, connection with social resources and creative space. These five structural elements support a way of working that facilitate the environmental factors for creativity. To Summarize this, the innovative success of these firms can be explained by their ‘collective character’. Most Young firms have an environment very much suited for creativity and innovation, although they might not have the experience or capacity to develop these. When firms grow they do so along a number of paths these paths are ‘one way streets’. As a side effect these bring systems into the organization that could be counterproductive to innovation. When innovation is the main purpose a collective structure is more suitable than the traditional business structure. The firms incorporated in this case study have found a way to grow without losing the characteristics needed to stay innovative.