Institut for Forretningsudvikling og Teknologi

Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product. / Tonetto, Leandro Miletto; Brust-Renck, Priscila G.; Ruecker, Stanley; Fogliatto, Flavio S.; Pacheco, Diego Augusto de Jesus.

I: Architectural Engineering and Design Management, Bind 17, Nr. 1-2, 2021, s. 3-16.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

Tonetto, LM, Brust-Renck, PG, Ruecker, S, Fogliatto, FS & Pacheco, DADJ 2021, 'Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product', Architectural Engineering and Design Management, bind 17, nr. 1-2, s. 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

APA

Tonetto, L. M., Brust-Renck, P. G., Ruecker, S., Fogliatto, F. S., & Pacheco, D. A. D. J. (2021). Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 17(1-2), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

CBE

Tonetto LM, Brust-Renck PG, Ruecker S, Fogliatto FS, Pacheco DADJ. 2021. Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product. Architectural Engineering and Design Management. 17(1-2):3-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

MLA

Vancouver

Tonetto LM, Brust-Renck PG, Ruecker S, Fogliatto FS, Pacheco DADJ. Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product. Architectural Engineering and Design Management. 2021;17(1-2):3-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

Author

Tonetto, Leandro Miletto ; Brust-Renck, Priscila G. ; Ruecker, Stanley ; Fogliatto, Flavio S. ; Pacheco, Diego Augusto de Jesus. / Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product. I: Architectural Engineering and Design Management. 2021 ; Bind 17, Nr. 1-2. s. 3-16.

Bibtex

@article{6020a9bd8b164dcb9b04278a973aa3b9,
title = "Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product",
abstract = "In some projects, professionals face problems in designing a product that force them to deal with uncertainties in a creative way; in others, they follow structured guidelines and rely on preexisting knowledge. In this paper, we map thinking styles (conditional, creative, exploring, independent, inquiring) used by professionals with different academic backgrounds (architects, engineers, and designers), and relate these styles to rationality, intuition, and thinking disposition. Understanding the strengths of each type of professional training is crucial to planning and managing teams that suit designs{\textquoteright} needs. Several professionals (n = 141) participated in a survey comprised of the Concept Design–Thinking Style Inventory, the Rational Experiential Inventory, and the Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. Results showed that all professionals have had their highest strength of thoughts associated with exploring new or alternative options and displayed significantly higher scores toward rationally-oriented decisions and cognitive flexibility with regards to thinking disposition. The implications of the prevalence of the different modes of thoughts for the development of new products are discussed in light of assumptions about (ir)rational human behaviour and professional stereotypes.",
keywords = "conceptual design, decision-making style, product design, thinking disposition, Thinking styles",
author = "Tonetto, {Leandro Miletto} and Brust-Renck, {Priscila G.} and Stanley Ruecker and Fogliatto, {Flavio S.} and Pacheco, {Diego Augusto de Jesus}",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "3--16",
journal = "Architectural Engineering and Design Management",
issn = "1745-2007",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1-2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in thinking styles across professionals with different academic backgrounds when developing a product

AU - Tonetto, Leandro Miletto

AU - Brust-Renck, Priscila G.

AU - Ruecker, Stanley

AU - Fogliatto, Flavio S.

AU - Pacheco, Diego Augusto de Jesus

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - In some projects, professionals face problems in designing a product that force them to deal with uncertainties in a creative way; in others, they follow structured guidelines and rely on preexisting knowledge. In this paper, we map thinking styles (conditional, creative, exploring, independent, inquiring) used by professionals with different academic backgrounds (architects, engineers, and designers), and relate these styles to rationality, intuition, and thinking disposition. Understanding the strengths of each type of professional training is crucial to planning and managing teams that suit designs’ needs. Several professionals (n = 141) participated in a survey comprised of the Concept Design–Thinking Style Inventory, the Rational Experiential Inventory, and the Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. Results showed that all professionals have had their highest strength of thoughts associated with exploring new or alternative options and displayed significantly higher scores toward rationally-oriented decisions and cognitive flexibility with regards to thinking disposition. The implications of the prevalence of the different modes of thoughts for the development of new products are discussed in light of assumptions about (ir)rational human behaviour and professional stereotypes.

AB - In some projects, professionals face problems in designing a product that force them to deal with uncertainties in a creative way; in others, they follow structured guidelines and rely on preexisting knowledge. In this paper, we map thinking styles (conditional, creative, exploring, independent, inquiring) used by professionals with different academic backgrounds (architects, engineers, and designers), and relate these styles to rationality, intuition, and thinking disposition. Understanding the strengths of each type of professional training is crucial to planning and managing teams that suit designs’ needs. Several professionals (n = 141) participated in a survey comprised of the Concept Design–Thinking Style Inventory, the Rational Experiential Inventory, and the Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. Results showed that all professionals have had their highest strength of thoughts associated with exploring new or alternative options and displayed significantly higher scores toward rationally-oriented decisions and cognitive flexibility with regards to thinking disposition. The implications of the prevalence of the different modes of thoughts for the development of new products are discussed in light of assumptions about (ir)rational human behaviour and professional stereotypes.

KW - conceptual design

KW - decision-making style

KW - product design

KW - thinking disposition

KW - Thinking styles

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089030267&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

DO - 10.1080/17452007.2020.1801376

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85089030267

VL - 17

SP - 3

EP - 16

JO - Architectural Engineering and Design Management

JF - Architectural Engineering and Design Management

SN - 1745-2007

IS - 1-2

ER -