1. Introduction
Shortages of basic components, risks of black-outs and energy restrictions, global pandemics: all such events are rising around the globe. Characterized as crisis, surprises, unexpected, such events are more and more common and fall under the denomination of unknows, to be “understood as acknowledged ignorance” (Reference HatchuelHatchuel, 2023). They impose a new context for organizations that more than never need to transform to manage such events, creating a new call for managing in the unknown (Reference Loch, DeMeyer and PichLoch et al., 2006). However, more than 10 years after this first call, it seems that such a regime of management remains in its infancy as we have observed facing recent crisis.
To overcome these difficulties, the OECD acknowledges the need for new skills and competencies, among them are creativity and critical thoughts, to face such “problems that have not yet been anticipated” (OECD, 2018). This is also what (Azevedo & Almeida, 2021; Leal Filho et al, 2016) highlight, calling for specific trainings and education to face current transitions and their need to take into account a diversity of knowledge and stakeholders.
This is precisely what this research will address by studying the new training logics required to address modern days unknowns stemming from transitions.
The rest of the paper is therefore organized as follows. First the literature review will position design-based management techniques as a response to address the unknowns of the transitions and the associated training challenges. Leading us to formulate precisely the research question. Then, the fourth section will clarify the research method adopted based on a new training, developed and delivered in partnership with a French company. The fifth section will present the preliminary results, focusing on the transformative power of the developed training. Finally, the last section will discuss these first results with the literature, as well as the perspectives it draws.
2. Literature review
2.1. Design approaches as a promising response
Managing the unknown in organizations calls for specific competencies, ways of reasoning and even tools, shifting from the traditional management of risks, based on decision-making. In the latter, managers are often considered as decision-makers who have all the knowledge required and must assess probabilities to choose between competing alternatives (Reference Hatchuel, Le and WeilHatchuel et al., 2002). As mentioned by some authors, on the contrary, managing in the unknown calls for the acquisition or generation of new knowledge, the generation and capacity to deal with new and fuzzy targets, but also the collaboration with distant or unusual partners who might have divergent interests (Reference Loch, DeMeyer and PichLoch et al., 2006).
For all these new managerial dimensions, design scholars have begun to provide solutions to deal with the unknowns, leaning on concepts like chimeras, utopias or surprises (Reference Gilain, Le and WeilGilain et al., 2023). One can think of all the techniques and methods developed to generate new alternatives and acquire new knowledge, especially through a logic of experimentation: Proof-Of-Concepts (POCs), with the dual exploration-exploitation power they embark, are the canonical example (Reference JobinJobin, 2021). One should also mention the logic of design thinking, with the focus on interviews, users and experimentation, that allow to generate a priori unexpected new knowledge and uncover alternatives (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013). Regarding the coordination of heterogenous actors, design scholars have worked on functional analysis, and the way it can account for a diversity of stakeholders, as well as a the logic of co-design, for instance in the context of hearth observational data, where actors are notably fragmented (Reference Barbier, Ben, Le and WeilBarbier et al., 2022).
As a consequence, it appears that for each of the challenges encountered in managing the unknown, the design literature can provide answers, at least tools and ways of reasoning, highlighting why such a corpus is relevant in the current context organizations face (Reference HugentoblerHugentobler, 2017).
2.2. Three major difficulties faced by these design approaches
However, one must be honest and acknowledge that these design-based techniques are not easily diffused in organizations, especially beyond the traditional design-oriented activities, such as R&D, product development or innovation (Reference Hatchuel, Le and WeilHatchuel et al., 2002). The literature allows us to identify three main challenges and difficulties faced by such a corpus to be really leveraged by organizations in the day-to-day activities of managing the unknown.
First, and almost by definition, design practices, as based on creative and exploratory approaches, often contradict with the logic of more exploitation-based management practices (Reference LenfleLenfle, 2012). Indeed, the latter are based on risk reduction, economic control as well as time and cost management (Reference LenfleLenfle, 2008). Second, design theories are often too abstract and formal to be used as routinized tools within organizations. Third, it is often difficult to identify the appropriate audience in organizations that would value and use adequately such design theory-based management practices.
These difficulties in fine show the need for organizations to transform themselves in order to leverage such tools (Reference Hatchuel, Le and WeilHatchuel et al., 2002). Regarding transformative issues, scholars have shown that education and training is precisely a way of transformation, at the social level (Reference DesjardinsDesjardins, 2015) and a fortiori at the managerial level within organizations. In other terms, education and training could be a way to diffuse a design-based management practice, thus nourishing a transformative capacity to manage unknowns.
2.3. Teaching as a way to diffuse a design-based practice of management?
Nevertheless, the literature gives us hopes since experiments have already been conducted over the past years, in various contexts. To mention only some of them, (Reference SuacamramSuacamram, 2019) developed a number of C-K based workshops in China, so that learners can gain in creativity. Whereas (Reference Nagel, Rose, Beverly, Pidaparti, Schaefer, Coates and EckertJ. K. S. Nagel et al., 2019) gives an overview of design-theory-based biomimicry courses in undergraduate engineering curricula, some of these courses relying explicitly on formal design theories such as C-K theory (Reference Nagel, Pittman, Pidaparti, Rose and BeverlyJ. K. Nagel et al., 2017). Let us also mention some training addressed to kids in school, with trainings based on design theory aimed at developing their creativity (Camarda et al., 2021). Also (Reference SmuldersSmulders, 2011) have developed experiential learning to teach innovation theories to students that have not yet been in companies.
All the previously mentioned papers discuss design-based trainings for students and non-professional, what (Rampa & Agogué, 2021) have addressed in the context of Hydro Quebec Research Institute. The latter propose to train researchers from this Canadian energy company to specifically deal with situations where “initial unknowns are very strong”.
However, carefully looking at these experiments reveals some limits to implement such a training logic for the development of design-based management techniques. First, these teachings are mainly oriented towards increasing the creative capacity of teams in ‘design’ situations. Second, the audiences considered is limited to students (non-professional) or design professions (R&D, PD, innovation department). Therefore, these experiments do not fully respond to the challenge of diffusing design-based management techniques, and they would need to be adapted, leaving open the question of how to train professionals to manage unknowns with design-based approaches.
3. Research question
To summarize this literature review section, we saw that design-based management techniques are considered as a promising response to address current issues rising from transitions. Yet, one must acknowledge numerous difficulties in the implementation of these approaches, difficulties that scholars try to overcome with the developments of new forms of training. Educations has indeed shown its relevance to diffuse a design-based perspective, yet it also faces numerous challenges for organizations. Therefore, this research wishes to study whether it is possible to integrate the design-based techniques within organizations, especially organizations that have not historically been design ones? Precisely: how can we teach design-based methods to professionals that are regularly confronted with unknowns?
4. Method and material
To address this question, we propose an original methodology based on experiments of a new form of training for top executives. Broadly speaking, this research is based on the development and delivery of a four-days “project management” training. We shall describe this methodology more in details hereunder, focusing on three main points.
First, this research leans on a long-standing collaboration with a French company. This company has an unusual relation to trainings of its executives and wanted to develop a new “project management in the unknown” training. Second, the development of this new training led to a collaborative process that eventually led to the development and delivery of this new training. Third, and finally, this research is based on a dual empirical material: it builds both on the empirical data gathered during the one-year collaborative project to develop the new training, and on the empirical data gathered during the educational experiments.
This method based on an extensive collaboration appears as particularly relevant because it allows to us develop, experiment and refine a completely new training.
4.1. A collaborative setting with a french healthcare company
This research took place with a leading French company specialized in wound treatment, in the context of its internal university (denoted by UU in the rest of the paper). This company has a specific relationship with education, the founder being a former professor, and created the UU, which is in itself an original setting. This internal university proposes several courses, for instance decision analysis, negotiation or even leadership, all in the format of 4-days seminar, addressed to experienced executives. It is to be noted that the courses are delivered by the CEO and top management of the company, trainees being selected by the companies’ directors and human resources managers based on the variety of seniority, position in the hierarchy, skills and expertise. From a practical standpoint, the trainings are given in a facility in the countryside, outside the company, start on Sunday afternoon and end on Wednesday afternoon.
The collaboration with this internal university started in early 2022 when the CEO expressed the need for training his teams, especially high executives, to “managing the unknown”, to complete the already existent courses we mentioned. Yet, one should precise here that the initial brief given by the CEO was “to develop a 4-days training on project management in the unknown, without ever mentioning the world unknown”. To achieve this, the team of researchers had the opportunity to collaborate closely with the CEO, as well as one project manager that eventually become one of the teachers for this course. This research partnership spanned over more than 2 years and subsequently includes a rich empirical material based on interviews, case studies, steering committees, training prototypes and on-live experimentations of the final training developed. We shall now present more in detail, in the two following subsections, the process adopted to develop the training program and the empirical data the researchers have been able to gather.
4.2. The approach used to develop the training program
We have already mentioned it, but this research spanned over 2 years, while the initial approach adopted to develop a first version of the training took around 1 year, from August 2022 to October 2023. This is the approach we shall describe here, a timeline being given on Figure 1 to summarize it, where the red dots correspond to steering committees, the green dots are partial prototypes, and the blue dots are the full training delivery.
Timeline of the development and delivery of the training program
First, all the authors of the present paper took part in the development and delivery of the training program, working with the CEO of the company itself and one experienced project manager from the company. The organization adopted consisted in regular steering committees, every 6 weeks, completed with prototypes.
Second, several real practical cases from the company, have been studied and transformed in hands-on cases and exercises included in the training. These real project-management-related cases have been first proposed to the CEO, then studied in-depth by the team of researchers (based on internal documents and interviews, what we will come back to). Their potential to be transformed in hands-on cases from the training have been assessed during several steering committees, before their effective transformation into hands-on practice.
4.3. Empirical data collected from the completed training
As has been understood from the previous subsection, the method adopted, that lead to the effective development and implementation of the training, allowed the research teams to gather a rich empirical material. This material is dual in the sense that it concerns both: projects and situations within the company, based on the investigations conducted during the training-development phase, that allowed to gather internal documents, have interviews with former and present project managers, the training itself, based on the sessions delivered, that allowed to gather notes taken by the researchers, interviews with the trainees and evaluation questionnaires.
This empirical data is summarized on Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of the empirical data gathered from this training development and delivery project
The data gathered from the collaborative training-development project allow us to have a baseline reference of past and ongoing projects within the company. Whereas data gathered from the delivery of the developed training, especially the qualitative and quantitative evaluation done by students will be a major resource to understand the role of the training in the transformation of the organization. Overall, we have been able to conduct this training 4 times, training 65 persons.
5. Results: a new training logic to transform organizations with design
After having described the method and the empirical material collected, this section is dedicated to a presentation of the finally developed training as well as first insights highlighting its transformative power.
5.1. The overall training logic
The training was based on three main specific and original pedagogical features and articulated according to the logic given in Figure 2.
Articulation of the modules and training logic of the whole training
First, each day of the training started by a long debriefing to discuss feelings about the previous day, previous learnings and position them in the context of trainees (Reference CrookallCrookall, 2010; Daré et al., 2020; Dieleman & Huisingh, 2006). As such, these long morning moments were the occasion to discuss the application of learnings on trainees’ projects and therefore were a critical learning moment.
Second, each afternoon was dedicated to pivotal cases, whose objectives were to anchor previous learnings and make trainees experience the limits of these learnings. All these pivotal cases followed the philosophy of serious games (Alvarez & Djaouti, 2011) and were specifically developed for this training and inspired from real cases from various industrial contexts.
Third, every morning was dedicated to hands-on exercises and examples, to apply and practice the learnings from the course given immediately before. The specificity of these hands-on exercises is that they are strongly based on real projects and cases from the company (Reference SitzmannSitzmann, 2011).
This training has been very well received by trainees, as can be understood from their quantitative evaluation, shown on Figure 3. The average level of satisfaction is 4.9 (over 5) and they are very likely to recommend this training. Looking at the qualitative comments given by trainees can explain these very high results. First a vast majority of trainees appreciated the orientation towards action and the actionability of all learnings. Second, they put forward that the training has exceeded their expectations, and they explain their willingness to use the tools given.
5.2. First insights towards a transformative power
Now, from trainees’ evaluation we will show to what extent does this training have a transformative power. Two sets of clues can be seen from these evaluations: a transformation of trainees’ perspectives through a transformation of their view of managing in the unknown, as well a high intention to use the discovered design-based tools.
Quantitative evaluation of the training by the trainees
5.2.1. Trainees’ new perspectives on managing in the unknown
Regarding the first set of clues, numerous trainees acknowledge “habits disruption” and have been shaken by the whole training. For instance, some trainees explain that “it changed a lot of things within me”, and some acknowledge the impact of the training on the way they usually think: “it completely changed the way I think”. Other trainees realised the importance of such design-based tools and were able to relate to the issue they frequently encounter in their professional life: “many flashes during discussions and workshops made me think about my daily life”. More quantitatively, an analysis of the words used by trainees reveals that 34 trainees (52%) explicitly mentioned a transformation, a change or at least an evolution of their unknown management practice.
5.2.2. Trainees’ intention to use design-based tools
Now regarding the second set of clues, trainees recognized the training made them discover what managing the unknown means. For instance, one admits that “he learned a lot about the world of project management, and I now have tools that I can use in my upcoming projects” whereas another admits “I gained very concrete elements and tools for project management”.It is to be noted here that they never mention the word “unknown” because one of the challenges of the training was to never mention it in order to keep an actionable and managerial language. Quantitatively, 33 trainees (51%) explicitly mentioned an intention or willingness to use the tools and techniques introduced during the training. Specifically mentioned are the creativity tools, based on C-K theory (Hatchuel & Weil, 2008), that 26 (40%) of the trainees mentioned in their evaluation.
5.2.3. In-sessions observations
Delivering the training was the also an opportunity for teachers to take notes and interview trainees during breaks. The notes gathered by all three teachers reveal that the training changed trainees’ perception of what is managing, especially in a context of transition. The interviews, as well as the morning debriefs, revealed that the trainees envisioned themselves using the tools and concepts explored during the course. Indeed, they referred both to past projects, identifying how these tools could have been applied, and to current projects, imagining how to use them to influence the course of the project.
6. Discussion, perspectives and conclusion
In this work we developed and tested a new four-days training to teach top executives from a French company to manage the unknown. The first results, based on trainees’ evaluation, indicated that this training transformed their perspectives on managing in the unknown and their willingness to implement design-based tools in their daily managerial life.
6.1. Discussion
This echoes at least three streams of the literature that we shall discuss now. First, similarities, but also differences, with design thinking and especially trainings to it must be acknowledged. Second, it appeared to us that such a training was at the origin of the creation of a common language among trainees and at the end, for the whole organization. Third, it emphasized the role of trainings not only as a transfer of knowledge, but where trainees have a major co-creation role.
6.1.1. Links and relations to design thinking
Design Thinking and the training program we developed indeed share a common ambition: equipping individuals with tools and mindsets to navigate uncertainty and generate innovative solutions (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013). Let us first recall one of the definitions of design thinking, “a discipline that uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity” (Reference BrownBrown, 2008). Consequently, both approaches emphasize the value of experimentation, user engagement, and iterative learning to explore new possibilities beyond predefined solutions. However, significant differences emerge in their application and conceptual underpinnings. While Design Thinking traditionally focuses on problem-solving through a structured process (Reference DorstDorst, 2011), our training goes beyond by addressing the broader challenge of managing the unknown. Rather than centering on predefined design challenges, our approach integrates design-based reasoning into the strategic and managerial practices of executives, embedding tools for decision-making in highly uncertain environments. Additionally, whereas Design Thinking is often taught through hands-on workshops aimed at fostering creativity in specific projects (Reference Dym, Agogino, Eris, Frey and LeiferDym et al., 2005), our training functions as a transformative learning experience, reshaping how professionals perceive and act upon unknowns across diverse organizational contexts. This distinction suggests that while Design Thinking provides valuable methods for structured innovation (Reference Wang, Chen, Lee and LinWang et al., 2024), it can often create dilemmas in innovation projects (Reference Hölzle and RhinowHölzle & Rhinow, 2019). Instead, our approach fosters a more systemic transformation, enabling organizations to integrate design-based reasoning, beyond only Design Thinking, into their managerial and strategic frameworks, by creating a common language for all the organization.
6.1.2. Creation of a common language
The training we developed was simply entitled “project management”, even though the objective was clearly to train top executives to managing the unknown. As such, one surprise for teachers and researchers was that project management appeared as a common language within the organization, across all departments and seniority. Similar to the notion of communities of practice, introduced by Etienne Wenger (Reference WengerWenger, 1999), the language of design-based project management established shared terminologies, frameworks and methodologies aligning the diversity of trainees’ perspectives. The close idea of trading zone (Reference GalisonGalison, 1997), helps us illustrate our point here. It highlights trainees, and more generally the whole organization, with divergent perspectives and expertise, can effectively collaborate through the development of a pidgin language. Pidgin language, here design-based project management, acts as a simplified and intermediary vocabulary that facilitates exchanges requiring full assimilation of perspectives, what is a real challenge to address unknown of the transitions (Reference GeelsGeels, 2010). Consequently, design-based project management is not a technical skill but rather a common language, a common infrastructure that support collective actions for managing the unknown. This is of particular importance in addressing unknowns of the transitions allowing organizations to transform themselves and embed design-based tools to address unknowns.
6.1.3. Beyond knowledge transfer for the unknowns
Traditional training paradigms emphasize the role of knowledge transfer, focusing on equipping trainees with technical skills and predefined solutions, adapted to specific contexts (Reference LoveLove, 1985). However, the training we experimented here, based on design-theories to address management in the unknowns transcends this objective, aiming at a transformational learning. This transformational learning aims at reshaping participants perspectives and approaches to problems and situations. As such, this draws from the concept of critical pedagogy (Reference FreireFreire, 1978), in which trainees are largely encouraged to actively engage with the tools and concepts introduced, not just as users but as co-creators of both meaning and applications. This therefore responds to (Reference Scurati, Kwok, Ferrise and BertoniScurati et al., 2023) call for embedding learnings, especially in a game-based approach, with the idea that trainees contextualize learnings and project themselves, finally as co-creators of the learnings. Consequently, in the training, teachers not only appear as “knowledge brokers” or “fact providers”, but rather as catalysts and facilitators of learnings (Reference Frank, Lavy and ElataFrank et al., 2003). In other terms, the training not only transfer, or pass on, tools but also instils a capacity to critically assess and adapt them to emerging and yet unknown challenges. Consequently, this transformative approach of learning positions training as a vector for systemic change, in other term “boundary objects” (Reference Whalen, Berlin, Ekberg, Barletta and HammersbergWhalen et al., 2018), empowering individuals and organizations to redefine their role to face unknown of the transitions.
6.2. Perspectives
From this work two main perspectives can be derived:it might indicate a new logic of intervention within organizations and the current limitations of this study reveal some research perspectives to strengthen the demonstration.
First, throughout this training development, we revealed a new way to access an empirical context, allowing us to dive into various projects within the company. As such, the development of this training appeared as a new form of intervention-research. Both developing and delivering the training exceeded a pure logic of knowledge transfer and surprisingly offered a way to access new actors in organizations, as well as new phenomena and new questions regarding management in the unknown.
Second, we must acknowledge that the results presented here are preliminary and it would require more studies to better characterize the transformative impact of the developed training. Indeed, this study is mainly based on trainees’ qualitative evaluation, what already hints into our point, but rather weakly. This explains why we are pursuing this work to study projects of the company and their evolution between before and after project managers had the trainings. This would allow us to understand in what sense have the training a transformative power for organizations.
6.3. Conclusion
As a conclusion, the current context of transitions, whether ecological or digital, is at the origin of numerous unknowns, calling for a new regime of management. We saw with the literature that managing the unknown requires design-based tools and ways of reasoning, in fine requiring organizations to transform themselves. Education is one vector of transformation so we looked at how we can train professionals design-based managing techniques to manage the unknown.
With a strong and long collaborative setting with one French company, we developed and delivered a brand-new training, leading us to experiment its transformative power. We evaluated this based on interviews of more than sixty trainees and their evaluation of the course. Overall, we reveal that this training, that articulates theoretical courses with serious games and hands-on exercises, do transform trainees both in their perspective and their willingness to use design-based techniques.
In line with several streams of the literature, the training we presented in this preliminary work acted as the creation of a common language across all departments, seniority and experiences of individuals in the organization. Going further, it goes beyond the logic of education as a transfer of knowledge, the classroom being now a platform to exchange ideas, leverage given concepts and project them into trainees’ daily life.
This preliminary work already has several implications and opens numerous avenues for further research. First, it revealed that teaching in organizations is a good way to access an empirical context and position teaching as a new logic of research intervention. Second, we have seen that we have been able to give a basic proof of the transformative power, based on trainees’ evaluation. Yet a more ambitious and strong proof of this would be looking at various projects and study their long history, before and after the project manager followed the training. This would also help in several directions and especially it would strengthen our understanding of the impact of the training in trainees and maybe better characterize the unknowns that can be addressed and managed by design-based techniques.
Acknowledgments
We here would like to sincerely thank Guirec Le Lous and Aurélie Charre from Urgo Medical for their support throughout this training project.
Open access
