Business Design. A new way forward. A powerful tool for unlocking social value.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wicked problems are features of modern life, which is complex, volatile, and unruly. The speed of change is unprecedented, requiring new models for problem solving that create space for flexibility, agility, and fluidity. Design Thinking, a human-centred approach to problem-solving, has led to the emergence of Business Design. This paper explores the current understanding and application of business design as a discipline. The paper makes the argument that business design is a dynamic problem solving approach that can be applied to problems beyond business and organizations. As the discipline matures, five attributes - (1) Analogical Thinking, (2) Curiosity Driven Inquiry, (3) Systems Thinking, (4) Data Translator, and (5) Incrementalism and Foresight - will define the next generation of business design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.036 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".