Design thinking is an approach gaining momentum as a strategy for promoting empathy-driven, human-centered innovation. To evaluate the implementation of design thinking for engaging with communities about health and well-being, we undertook a qualitative analysis of an engagement between students and relevant community stakeholders during a project to develop a health intervention aimed at increasing medication compliance in an elderly community in South Africa. Major findings from this research indicated that design thinking offers opportunities for enriching community–university engagements. However, given constraints on time and procedure that are associated with the academy, the fast, dynamic style of design thinking is not optimally suited for developing the level of trust and rapport that is required for engagements in communities where social-cultural differences operate as barriers. Researchers who wish to utilize design thinking will need to devise and tailor additions to tool kits to meet the specific needs of engagements related to personal health and well-being.
National Planning Commission. National development plan 2030: our future–make it work.
Pretoria:
Presidency of South Africa, 2012, p.1.
2.
Beck C, Mathambo V, Mkhize S, Friedman I, Apicella L and Rutenberg N. Key findings from an evaluation of the mothers2mothers program in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Horizons Final Report, 2007.
3.
SchneiderHHlopheHvan RensburgD.Community health workers and the response to HIV/AIDS in South Africa: tensions and prospects. Health Policy Plan2008;
23: 179–187.
4.
BerghAMvan RooyenEPattinsonRC.Scaling up kangaroo mother care in South Africa: ‘on-site’ versus ‘off-site’ educational facilitation. Hum Resour Health2008;
6: 13.
5.
TomlinsonMHuntXRotheram-BorusMJ.Diffusing and scaling evidence‐based interventions: eight lessons for early child development from the implementation of perinatal home visiting in South Africa. Ann N Y Acad Sci2018;
1419: 218–229.
6.
BarronPPillayYDohertyT, et al.
Eliminating mother-to-child HIV transmission in South Africa. Bull World Health Organ2013;
91: 70–74.
7.
MottaLAShephardMDBrinkJ, et al.
Point-of-care testing improves diabetes management in a primary care clinic in South Africa. Prim Care Diabetes2017;
11: 248–253.
8.
PetersenISsebunnyaJBhanaA, et al.
Lessons from case studies of integrating mental health into primary health care in South Africa and Uganda. Int J Ment Health Syst2011;
5: 8.
9.
CanceddaCFarmerPEKerryV, et al.
Maximizing the impact of training initiatives for health professionals in low-income countries: frameworks, challenges, and best practices. PLoS Med2015;
12: e1001840.
10.
CoovadiaHJewkesRBarronP, et al.
The health and health system of South Africa: historical roots of current public health challenges. Lancet2009;
374: 817–834.
11.
KilewoEGFrumenceG.Factors that hinder community participation in developing and implementing comprehensive council health plans in Manyoni District, Tanzania. Glob Health Action2015;
8: 26461.
12.
MagnussenLEhiriJJollyP.Comprehensive versus selective primary health care: lessons for global health policy. Health Aff2004;
23: 167–176.
13.
WoldesenbetSJacksonDLombardC, et al.
Missed opportunities along the prevention of mother-to-child transmission services cascade in South Africa: uptake, determinants, and attributable risk (the SAPMTCTE). PLoS One2015;
10: e0132425.
14.
ThomasTNarayananPWheelerT, et al.
Design of a Community Ownership and Preparedness Index: using data to inform the capacity development of community-based groups. J Epidemiol Community Health2012;
66: ii26–ii33.
15.
GoodmanRABunnellRPosnerSF.What is “community health”? Examining the meaning of an evolving field in public health. Prev Med2014;
67: S58–S61.
16.
StokolsD.Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion. Am J Health Promot1996;
10: 282–298.
17.
BoorseC.Health as a theoretical concept. Philos Sci1977;
44: 542–573.
18.
World Health Organization. First ten years of the World Health Organization. Geneva: The World Health Organization, 1958.
19.
CookeBKothariU.The case for participation as tyranny. In: CookeBKothariU (eds) Participation: the new tyranny.
New York:
Zed Books, 2002, pp.1–15.
20.
IsraelBASchulzAJParkerEA, et al.
Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health1998;
19: 173–202.
21.
IshamJNarayanDPritchettL.Does participation improve performances? Establishing causality with subjective data. World Bank Econ Rev1995;
9: 175–200.
22.
ManikuttyS.Community participation: so what? Evidence from a comparative study of two rural water supply and sanitation projects in India. Dev Policy Rev1997;
15: 115–140.
23.
NarayanD.The contribution of people’s participation to rural water supply: findings from 122 projects.
Washington, DC:
World Bank, 1992.
24.
Wallerstein, NB and Duran B. Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health promotion practice 2006; 7: 312--323.
25.
BanksSArmstrongACarterK, et al.
Everyday ethics in community-based participatory research. Contemp Soc Sci2013;
8: 263–277.
26.
BoyerEL.Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate.
Princeton, NJ:
Carnegie Foundation, 1990.
27.
CallesonDCJordanCSeiferSD.Community-engaged scholarship: is faculty work in communities a true academic enterprise?Acad Med2005;
80: 317–321.
28.
Peterson TH. Engaged scholarship: Reflections and research on the pedagogy of social change. Teaching in higher education 2009; 14: 541--552.
29.
OswaldKGaventaJLeachM.Introduction: interrogating engaged excellence in research. IDS Bull2017;
47: 1–18.
30.
HallBL.From margins to center: the development and purpose of participatory action research. Am Soc1992;
23: 15–28.
31.
MinklerMWallersteinN. Part one: introduction to community-based participatory research. In: Minkler M and Wallerstein N (eds) Community-based participatory research for health.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass, 2003, pp.5–24.
32.
PetrasEMPorporaDV.Participatory research: three models and an analysis. Am Soc1993;
24: 107–126.
33.
BotesLvan RensburgD.Community participation in development: nine plagues and twelve commandments. Commun Dev J2000;
35: 41–58.
34.
HeymansC.Setting agendas where the issues are: the developmental limits and possibilities of local- and urban planning and management process. Dev South Afr1994;
11: 33–48.
35.
ReardonKWelshJKreiswirthB, et al.
Participatory action research from the inside: community development practice in East St. Louis. Am Sociol1993;
21: 69–91.
36.
BazzanoANMartinJHicksE, et al.
Human-centred design in global health: a scoping review of applications and contexts. PLoS One2017;
12: e0186744.
37.
RittelH. The reasoning of designers. In: Arbeitspapier zum international congress on planning and design theory, Boston, 17--20 August 1987.
38.
DeweyJ.How we think.
Lexington, MA:
D.C. Heath, 1910.
39.
PeirceCS. Pragmatism – the logic of abduction. In: Hartshorne C and Weiss P (eds) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 5. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1903, pp.195–205.
40.
QuayJ.Education, experience and existence: engaging Dewey, Peirce and Heidegger.
Abingdon:
Routledge, 2013.
41.
GiacominJ.What is human centred design?Des J2014;
17: 606–623.
42.
BrownTWyattJ.Design thinking for social innovation. Dev Outreach2010;
12: 29–43.
ThorpeAGammanL.Design with society: why socially responsive design is good enough. CoDesign2011;
7: 217–230.
45.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241- 210: ergonomics of human-centred system interaction – part 210: human-centred design for interactive systems.
Geneva:
International Organization for Standardization, 2010.
46.
AmiriMDezfooliMSMortezaeiSR.Designing an ergonomics backpack for student aged 7–9 with user centred design approach. Work2012;
41: 1193–1201.
47.
CatalaniCGreenEOwitiP, et al.
A clinical decision support system for integrating tuberculosis and HIV care in Kenya: a human-centered design approach. PLoS One2014;
9: e103205.
48.
FaHnrichCDeneckeKAdeoyeOO, et al.
Surveillance and outbreak response management system (SORMAS) to support the control of the Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa. Euro Surveillance2015; 20.
49.
Knoblock-HahnALLeRougeCM.A qualitative, exploratory study of predominantly female parental perceptions of consumer health technology use by their overweight and/or obese female adolescent participating in a fee-based 4-week weight-management intervention. J Acad Nutr Diet2014;
114: 570–577.
50.
RobinsonLBrittainKLindsayS, et al.
Keeping in Touch Everyday (KITE) project: developing assistive technologies with people with dementia and their carers to promote independence. Int Psychogeriatr2009;
21: 494–502.
51.
SaxHAllegranziBUc ̧KayI, et al. ‘
My five moments for hand hygiene’: a user- centred design approach to understand, train, monitor and report hand hygiene. J Hosp Infect2007;
67: 9–21.
52.
MinklerM.Community-based research partnerships: challenges and opportunities. J Urban Health2005;
82: ii3–ii12.
53.
CasselJ.The contribution of the social environment to host resistance. Am J Epidemiol1976;
104: 107–123.
54.
CobbS.Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosom Med1976;
38: 300–314.
55.
CarlgrenLElmquistMRauthI.Design thinking: exploring values and effects from an innovation capability perspective. Des J2014;
17: 403–423.
56.
ByrneESahayS.Participatory design for social development: a South African case study on community-based health information systems. Inf Technol Dev2007;
13: 71–94.
57.
WallersteinNDuranB.Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. Am J Public Health2010;
100: S40–S46.
58.
NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 12, 2018.
BaumH.Fantasies and realities in university-community partnerships. J Plan Educ Res2000;
20: 234–246.
61.
CuthillM. “
Working together”: a methodological case study of ‘engaged scholarship. Gateways2010;
3: 20–37.
62.
OchockaJMoorlagEJanzenR.A framework for entry: PAR values & engagement strategies in community research. Gateways2010;
3: 1–19.
63.
Karnieli-MillerOStrierRPessachL.Power relations in qualitative research. Qual Health Res2009;
19: 279–289.
64.
CranstonJ.Relational trust: the glue that binds a professional learning community. Alta J Educ Res2011;
57: 59–72.
65.
JagoshJBushPLSalsbergJ, et al.
A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health2015;
15: 725.
66.
Le DantecAFoxS. Strangers at the gate: gaining access, building rapport, and co-constructing community-based research. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing, Vancouver BC, Canada, March 14--18 February 2015, pp.1348–1358. New York: ACM.
67.
LewisYRShainLQuinnSC, et al.
Building community trust: lessons from an STD/HIV peer educator program with African American barbers and beauticians. Health Promot Pract2002;
3: 133–143.
68.
GaglioBNelsonCCKingD.The role of rapport: lessons learned from conducting research in a primary care setting. Qual Health Res2006;
16: 723–734.
69.
NorfolkTBirdiKWalshD.The role of empathy in establishing rapport in the consultation: a new model. Med Educ2007;
41: 690–697.
70.
WattsJH.Emotion, empathy and exit: reflections on doing ethnographic qualitative research on sensitive topics. Med Sociol Online2008;
3: 3–14.
71.
ClarkJ.Beyond empathy: an ethnographic approach to cross-cultural social work practice (Unpublished manuscript). Toronto: Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, 2000.
72.
WallworkE. Ethical analysis of group rights for the collaborative initiative of research ethics in environmental health. Report to Collaborative Research Ethics Project, Religion Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, (2003 May).
73.
GuijtIShahMK. Waking up to power, conflict and process. In: Guijt I and Shah MK (eds) The myth of community. Gender issues in participatory development. London: ITDG, 2001, pp.1–23.
74.
OswaldK.Interrogating an engaged excellence approach to research (IDS Evidence Report 214). Brighton: IDS, 2016.
75.
McCormackB.Engaged scholarship and research impact: integrating the doing and using of research in practice. J Res Nurs2011;
16: 111–127.
ClarkT.Gaining and maintaining access: exploring the mechanisms that support and challenge the relationship between gatekeepers and researchers. Qual Soc Work2011;
10: 485–502.
YanceyAKOrtegaANKumanyikaSK.Effective recruitment and retention of minority research participant. Annu Rev Public Health2006;
27: 1–28.
80.
ApgarJMMustonenTLoveraS, et al.
Moving beyond co-construction of knowledge to enable self-determination. IDS Bull2017;
47: 55--72.
81.
EidePAllenCB.Recruiting transcultural qualitative research participants: a conceptual model. Int J Qual Methods2005;
4: 44–56.
82.
ElyAMarinA.Learning about ‘engaged excellence’ across a transformative knowledge network. IDS Bull2017;
47: 73--86.
83.
PittoreKTe LinteloDGeorgalakisJ, et al.
Choosing between research rigour or support for advocacy movements, a false dichotomy?IDS Bull2017;
47: 101–118.
84.
DeciELRyanRM (eds). Handbook of self-determination research.
Rochester:
University of Rochester Press, 2002.
85.
DeciELRyanRM.Self-determination theory: a macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Can Psychol/Psychologie Canadienne2008;
49: 182.
86.
GutierrezLMLewisEA. Education, participation, and capacity building in community organizing with women of color. In: Minkler M (ed) Community organizing and community building for health. 2nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005, pp.240–253.
87.
MorrisonPStomskiNJ.Embracing participation in mental health research: conducting authentic interviews. Qual Res J2015;
15: 47–60.
88.
BornmannL.What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2013;
64: 217–233.
89.
MartinBR.The research excellence framework and the “impact agenda”: are we creating a Frankenstein monster?Res Eval2011;
20: 247–254.
90.
DolanCShakrokhTEdströMJ, et al.
Engaged excellence or excellent engagement? Collaborating critically to amplify the voices of male survivors of conflict-related sexual violence. IDS Bull2017;
47: 19–37.
91.
ResnikDBKennedyCE.Balancing scientific and community interests in community-based participatory research. Account Res2010;
17: 198–210.
92.
EylerJGilesD.Where’s the learning in service-learning?
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass, 1999.
93.
PetersonTH.Engaged scholarship: reflections and research on the pedagogy of social change. Teach High Educ2009;
14: 541–552.
94.
SaidiTvan der WesthuizenDConradC, et al. Learning by solving as a pedagogical approach to inclusive health innovation. Dev South Afr. Epub ahead of print 18 July 2019. DOI: 10.1080/0376835X.2019.1640662.
95.
IsraelBAParkerEARoweZ, et al.
Community-based participatory research: lessons learned from the Centers for Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research. Environ Health Perspect2005;
113: 1463–1471.
96.
KonéASullivanMSenturiaKD, et al.
Improving collaboration between researchers and communities. Public Health Rep2000;
115: 243–248.
97.
ParkerEAIsraelBABrakefield-CaldwellW, et al.
Community action against asthma: examining the partnership process of a community-based participatory research project. J Gen Intern Med2003;
18: 558–567.
98.
LongC.Teach your students to fail better with design thinking. Learn Lead Technol2012;
39: 16–20.
99.
Morrow-HowellN.Productive engagement of older adults: effects on well-being.
St. Louis, MO:
Center for Social Development, Washington University, 2000.
100.
GruenRLElliottJHNolanML, et al.
Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet2008;
372: 1579–1589.
101.
KimaroHCNhampossaJL.Analyzing the problem of unsustainable health information systems in less‐developed economies: case studies from Tanzania and Mozambique. Inf Technol Dev2005;
11: 273–298.
102.
KelleyDKelleyT.Creative confidence: unleashing the creative potential within us all.
New York:
Crown Publishing, 2013.
103.
SmithJNobleH.Bias in research. Evid Based Nurs2014;
17: 100–101.
104.
BrundiersKWiekARedmanCL.Real-world learning opportunities in sustainability: from classroom into the real world. Int J of Sus in Higher Ed2010;
11: 308–324.
105.
GrantAMBerryJW.The necessity of others is the mother of invention: intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Acad Manag J2011;
54: 73–96.
106.
HoeverIJVan KnippenbergDVan GinkelWP, et al.
Fostering team creativity: perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. J Appl Psychol2012;
97: 982.
107.
RobertsDLPalmerR.Developing a visceral market learning capability for new product development. Int J Market Res2012;
54: 199–220.
108.
DamasioAR.The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, B, Biol Sci1996;
351: 1413–1420.
109.
DoorewaardHBrounsB.Hegemonic power processes in team‐based work. Appl Psychol2003;
52: 106–119.
110.
Johansson-SköldbergUWoodillaJ, andÇetinkayaM,
Design thinking: past, present and possible futures. Creativ Innovat Manag2013;
22: 121–146.
