Design Thinking as a Strategic and Cognitive Framework for Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Over the past two decades, Design Thinking has moved from the margins of design practice into the core of business strategy, entrepreneurship, and innovation research. Initially associated with industrial design and creative problem-solving, the framework has been widely adopted by corporations, startups, public institutions, and universities as a structured approach to addressing complex, ill-defined problems. Its appeal lies in its promise to integrate creativity with analytical rigor while keeping human needs at the center of organizational decision-making. Human-centered design approaches, such as design thinking, target user needs but lack built-in mechanisms to systematically address biases. Since design thinking is a human centered approach to problem-solving that integrates a mindset, process, and toolbox to drive innovation it can be take extensive human skill. It inspires creative solutions to complex problems by balancing user needs, technological possibilities, and business requirements (Scharff, et al., 2025). However, while design thinking prioritizes human needs, it does not inherently cover how to deal with biases. It also does not address how power, systemic inequities, and designer biases influence the design process and outcomes (Scharff, et al., 2025). Education leaders have highlighted the significance of incorporating design thinking in graduate level programs, which will inculcate student observation and inquiry skills and make them more employable (Das, et al., 2024). The design thinking approach involves an iterative process of generating ideas, testing them, and refining them based on feedback. This approach can be used to tailor education programs to enhance career self-efficacy. Design Thinking is argued to be a better approach for practical applications and identifies social consequences as the primary outcome of knowledge creation (Das, et al., 2024). This paper provides an examination of the Design Thinking framework, situating it within broader theoretical debates in management, entrepreneurship, and innovation studies. It argues that Design Thinking is best understood not merely as a set of tools, but as a cognitive and organizational logic that reshapes how firms identify opportunities, generate solutions, and adapt to uncertainty.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-12-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18446379
Primary Topic
Design Education and Practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Design Thinking as a Strategic and Cognitive Framework for Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Miguel Virgen
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Design Education and Practice
article

Design Thinking as a Strategic and Cognitive Framework for Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Miguel Virgen
article en

Abstract

Over the past two decades, Design Thinking has moved from the margins of design practice into the core of business strategy, entrepreneurship, and innovation research. Initially associated with industrial design and creative problem-solving, the framework has been widely adopted by corporations, startups, public institutions, and universities as a structured approach to addressing complex, ill-defined problems. Its appeal lies in its promise to integrate creativity with analytical rigor while keeping human needs at the center of organizational decision-making. Human-centered design approaches, such as design thinking, target user needs but lack built-in mechanisms to systematically address biases. Since design thinking is a human centered approach to problem-solving that integrates a mindset, process, and toolbox to drive innovation it can be take extensive human skill. It inspires creative solutions to complex problems by balancing user needs, technological possibilities, and business requirements (Scharff, et al., 2025). However, while design thinking prioritizes human needs, it does not inherently cover how to deal with biases. It also does not address how power, systemic inequities, and designer biases influence the design process and outcomes (Scharff, et al., 2025). Education leaders have highlighted the significance of incorporating design thinking in graduate level programs, which will inculcate student observation and inquiry skills and make them more employable (Das, et al., 2024). The design thinking approach involves an iterative process of generating ideas, testing them, and refining them based on feedback. This approach can be used to tailor education programs to enhance career self-efficacy. Design Thinking is argued to be a better approach for practical applications and identifies social consequences as the primary outcome of knowledge creation (Das, et al., 2024). This paper provides an examination of the Design Thinking framework, situating it within broader theoretical debates in management, entrepreneurship, and innovation studies. It argues that Design Thinking is best understood not merely as a set of tools, but as a cognitive and organizational logic that reshapes how firms identify opportunities, generate solutions, and adapt to uncertainty.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Doctors Hospital (US), Liberty University (US)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Design Education and Practice
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.