This research is based on the qualitative research methods, combining the literature review, the action research with the ideation sessions using the design thinking methods, the focus group discussions, and the descriptive analyses in order to synthesise the results of the research, implications and future research issues. The methodological framework of this research is presented in the Figure 1, illustrating main stages of the research, the literature and data sources, as well as digital tools used.
The action research allows the experimentation with the theory in a real work of organisations and deepen the views and opinions about the enablers and obstacles of the intervention, solutions or activities performed (Somekh, 2005). This combination of the theory and practice is done with the simultaneous interaction between researchers and practitioners, ensuring the co-work within the sequenced activities of the situation analyses, the experimentation, and the systematic intervention activities, analysing and describing the practices applied, gathering the feedback, and reviewing the lessons learned (Avison et.al, 2008). The action research provides the methodological framework for researching the changing situation and innovation processes (Somekh, 2005). This type of the research is particularly relevant in current circumstances as the organisations and their surrounding environment has experienced significant changes stimulated by the Covid-19 pandemic and leading to new forms of the remote work, a rapid digital leap forward, but also nourishing the social distance between employees, customers, and other stakeholders. Furthermore, the European countries encounter the green transformation towards sustainability goals aiming to change the lifestyle and consumption behaviour of the society, the value orientation of organisations, foster the emergence of a new ecosystem with the open cooperation of various stakeholders addressing the sustainability issues. The action research provides the possibility to test the feasibility and nature of new ideas (Kaplan, 1998) that in the context of this study ensured greater options to test and advocate new values generated during the interaction sessions with involved participants. Moreover, the involved participants later become as knowledge ambassadors or more “skilled implementers” (Kaplan, 1998 – 1p.) that can promote both new values and new skills of innovating these values within their organisation.
According to Somekh (2005), this study assumed eight methodological principles of the action research as presented in the Table 1.
Table 1
Methodological principles of the action research applied within this study
Reasons and methodological principles of the action research
|
1. The combination of research and action
|
2. Collaborative partnership of researchers and participants or so called “insiders” of the case
|
3. The development of knowledge and understanding of a particular case
|
4. Action research starts from a vision of social transformation and personal engagement of individuals representing the organisation
|
5. Action research involved a high level of reflexivity and sensitivity of individuals influencing the whole research process
|
6. Action research involves exploratory engagement with a wide range of existing and interdisciplinary knowledge testing its usefulness
|
7. Action research evoke learning for participants through combining research, actions, and reflection of the practice
|
Action research requires deep understanding of the broader historical, political, economic, and ideological contexts shaping the behaviour of individuals
|
Source: developed by the authors based on Somekh, 2005
Within this study we combine the principles of the action research with the design thinking methods as they are closely related and foresee the active involvement of participants in the co-creation (Stier & Smit, 2021) and the ideation process (Hesmer et.al., 2011; Meslec et.al., 2020) of new values. This methodological approach allows better knowledge valorisation (Stier & Smit, 2021) to utilise the academic knowledge within the co-creation of the value innovation applying various design thinking methods.
In this paper, the definition of the idea management is based on the following assumptions: a systematic and manageable process with 2 main parts: idea generation, evaluation, and a repeated idea generation and evaluation (if it is needed) (Mikelsone et al., 2019).
Since 2000, design thinking has become academically topical and has been increasingly applied to novel challenges practically (Baker & Moukhliss, 2020), in this case this approach will be applied to define value propositions for a company. In this paper the authors apply the definition that design thinking is a human centred approach, that includes the generation of many ideas, and the adoption of a fast prototyping approach (Foster, 2021). In this research the design thinking will be included through the design thinking approaches, for example, Persona - a persona method identifying a persona needs and desires (Chasanidou et al., 2015; Stickdorn & Schneider, 2010) and also creative thinking methods, like, Mind Mapping (Wycoff, 1991), Trend watching methods (Trendwatching, 2021) and others.
The case study was conducted in a medium-sized company located in Latvia with more than 50 employees (according to the EU recommendation 2003/361). The company works in the field of innovation and investment consultations. The company stated a necessity to redefine the value propositions. During 8-hour session 20 managers were involved, but additionally it was required to receive ideas and evaluation also from other employees and partners. The case study process was defined in several process steps (see in Table 2).
Table 2
Data gathering method
|
Data analysis method
|
Time Period
|
Method application steps
|
Action research of the Case
|
Content analysis
|
2021
|
1. The preparation for a session to redefine the values.
2. A pre-session.
3. A practical session moderation.
4. A post-session.
5. The desk review of documents and information gathered within a practical session.
6. The content analysis of materials of a practical session.
7. The descriptive analyses of the preparation, performance and the evaluation of a practical session.
|
Source: developed by the authors
The preparation for a session aimed to redefine the values and it included 2 meetings within the organization. The first meeting was organized to understand the company’s needs in detail, the second one to approve a session plan. Before the second session a detailed research on possible approaches of design thinking was caried out to reach the aims of the company. The authors have evaluated more than 20 approaches to select and combine the approach to reach the aim.
In a pre-session, prior to the first meeting, an additional issue was discovered that during an 8-hour session only 20 managers of the company would be able to participate, but the company demanded the additional involvement of more than 100 employees and partners. That was the reason why the research team decided to create the pre and post sessions. During the pre-session the list of more than 50 values that were mentioned in the company’s documents, strategies and normative acts was created and given for evaluation to the employees. So, the session started with the development of highly evaluated values. The preparation of the value list itself was separate research that is not described in this paper. The post session was conducted to evaluate and improve the created definitions of the value propositions. This is an additional recommendation for a moderation – if during a main session resource do not allow to involve all possible stakeholders, there is a possibility to create a pre (generation) and post sessions (evaluation).
In the Key insights the authors describe the sequence of created and tested practical session.