Designerly ways of speaking: Unpacking the discourse of Design Thinking

Creating knowledge allows research communities to claim intellectual territory. Knowledge created by communities is not wholly evidence based; it is skewed, allowing them to claim territory. Existing research suggests that skewed knowledge helps the Design Thinking research community to construct a contentious dichotomy between Design Thinking and scientific thinking. There remains a significant gap in knowledge on how the community creates territory. This paper reports on an empirical study of journal articles. It uncovers how the processes of classifying key concepts and creating frameworks enable researchers to claim territory. It finds that flawed use of methodology and a lack of coherence may contribute to the acts of classifying concepts and creating frameworks – and therefore the construction of territory. It also finds that focusing on the idea that Design Thinking is ‘complex’ may allow the community to downplay the need for rigour. These troubling aspects are termed ‘Designerly Ways of Speaking’.