Published Online:https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2006.23473212

Roger Martin, dean of the Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, is interviewed on the subject of “design thinking”—approaching managerial problems as designers approach design problems—and its potential impact on management education. Under a design-thinking paradigm, students would be encouraged to think broadly about problems, develop a deep understanding of users, and recognize the value in the contributions of others. In Martin's view, the concept of design thinking can potentially address many of the criticisms currently being leveled at MBA programs. The interview is followed by a discussion and critique of the themes Martin raises.

REFERENCES

  • Argyris C. , Schön D. 1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
  • Bennis W. , O'Toole J. 2005. How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, May. Google Scholar
  • Boland R. J.Collopy F. Eds. 2004. Managing as designing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
  • Boyer E. J. 1990. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. Princeton, New York: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
  • Breen B. 2004. Masters of design. Fast Company, June. Google Scholar
  • Buchanan R. 1992. Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8 (2): Spring, 5–21. Google Scholar
  • Churchman C. W. 1967. Wicked problems. Management Science, 4 (14) December, 141–142. Google Scholar
  • Cooperrider D. L. , Whitney D. 1999. Collaborating for change: Appreciative inquiry. In Holman L.Devane T. Eds.), Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Google Scholar
  • Gangemi J. 2005. Harvard: No more grade secrets. Business Week Online, http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/dec2005/bs20051216_4604.htm?campaign_id=search. Accessed April 30 2006. Google Scholar
  • Gerdes L. 2005. An MBA with a thematic approach, Business Week Online, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_36/b3949099_mz056.htm, accessed May 5, 2006. Google Scholar
  • Ghoshal S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4 (1): 75–91. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hinings C. R. , Greenwood R. 2002. Disconnects and consequences in organization theory? Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 411–421. Google Scholar
  • Hoffman M. 1995. Is there a logic of abduction? http://www.unibielefeld.de/idm/personen/mhoffman/papers/abduction-logic.html, accessed April 5, 2006. Google Scholar
  • Kelley T. 2001. The art of innovation. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Google Scholar
  • Leonard D. , Straus S. 1997. Putting your company's whole brain to work. Harvard Business Review, July-August. Google Scholar
  • Leonard D. , Rayport J. F. 1997. Spark innovation through empathic design. Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec. Google Scholar
  • Lester R. K. , Piore M. J. , Malek K. M. 1998. Interpretive management: What general managers can learn from design. Harvard Business Review, March-April. Google Scholar
  • Martin R. 2002. Integrative thinking: A model takes shape. Rotman Management, Fall. Google Scholar
  • Martin R. 2004. The design of business. Rotman Management, Winter. Google Scholar
  • Martin R. 2005a. Embedding design into business. Rotman Management, Fall. Google Scholar
  • Martin R. 2005b. Why decisions need design, Part 1 . Business Week, August 30. Google Scholar
  • Mintzberg H. 2004. Managers not MBA's: A hard look at the soft practice of management development. Berrett-Koehler. Google Scholar
  • Norman D. A. 2002. The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books. Google Scholar
  • Nussbaum B. 2005a. Get creative! BusinessWeek, August 1. Google Scholar
  • Nussbaum B. 2005b. Getting schooled in innovation. BusinessWeek, January 3. Google Scholar
  • Peirce C. S. P. 1903. Pragmatism as a principle and method of right thinking. In Turrisi P. A. Ed., The 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism. Albany, NY, 1997: State University of New York Press. Google Scholar
  • Pfeffer J. 2006. The business school ‘business': Problems and prospects‥ Presentation, Future of the MBA Conference, Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, March. Google Scholar
  • Pfeffer J. , Fong C. 2004. The business school ‘business': Some lessons from the US experience. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (8): 1501–1520. Google Scholar
  • Senge P. 1994. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Google Scholar
  • Simon H. A. 1996. The sciences of the artificial, 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar
  • Starkey K. , Hatchuel A. , Tempest S. 2004. Rethinking the business school. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (8): 1521–1531. Google Scholar
  • Vaill P. 1989. Managing as a performing art: New ideas for a world of chaotic change. San Francisco: Josey-Bass. Google Scholar
  • Vandenbosch B. , Gallagher K. 2004. The role of constraints. In Boland R. J.Collopy F. Eds., Managing as designing: 198–207. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar