Co-Creative Design Thinking, Power, and Boundary Critique: A Critical Systems Heuristics Perspective

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Management, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Management and Accounting, College of Farabi, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

This study develops a Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH)-informed framework for rethinking Co-Creative Design Thinking in Iran’s socio-institutional context, with emphasis on power, participation, and boundary critique. Although Design Thinking and co-creation are widely promoted as human-centered and participatory approaches, their practical application often remains limited to consultation, workshops, and post-framing feedback. This study argues that such procedural participation is insufficient unless underlying boundary judgments are critically examined. The research adopts a qualitative interpretive design based on semi-structured expert interviews with specialists in Design Thinking, service design, urban and public-sector innovation, policy-making, community participation, and systems thinking. The empirical dataset consists of 24 interviews across six stakeholder groups in Iran. Data were analyzed through inductive coding, distinguishing “is” and “ought” conditions, and subsequently mapped onto the twelve CSH boundary questions and four dimensions: motivation, control, knowledge, and legitimacy. Findings reveal four boundary gaps: a motivation gap between public value claims and institutional priorities; a control gap in decision authority and resource allocation; a knowledge gap reflecting marginalization of experiential knowledge; and a legitimacy gap involving exclusion of affected stakeholders. The study contributes a boundary-critical methodological framework that operationalizes CSH in analyzing co-creative design systems in constrained contexts. It reconstructs design practice through expert-elicited boundary judgments, producing a model of participation-as-legitimacy. The framework extends co-creation and Design Thinking literature by offering a fourfold boundary gap typology to diagnose participatory distortion and explain when co-creation becomes symbolic rather than substantive.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Journal of Design Thinking
Volume 7, Issue 1
June 2026
Pages 125-144

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics