MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135160451

From Artefacts to Meanings: Reframing organisational value propositions through systemic analysis of user-product relationships

2023· article· en· W7135160451 on OpenAlexaff
Gijs Rempt, Sine Çelik, Stein Wetzer

Bibliographic record

VenueOCAD University Open Research Repository (OCAD University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingMindsetTimelineInterdependenceValue (mathematics)SensemakingCore productValue propositionBusiness modelProduct (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world is facing complex societal issues that continuously call for organisations to transition towards future-proof models. Design practices are no exception to this. As a case study, this paper focuses on the journey of a company that designs, manufactures, and sells products in the juvenile sector and has operated according to the traditional linear business models for over twenty years and now acknowledges a need for change. Our study starts by challenging future ambitions of the company through a system-oriented framework to eventually explore the role of design(ers) in employing systemic analysis of entanglements to reframe the organisation’s value propositions. Our study sheds light on the opportunities that emerge with the expansion of the solution space when the company culture is moved from an artefact-based focus towards a meaning-based focus. Deriving from a series of co-design sessions, we present the evolutionary path of user-product relationships through the product’s lifetime and use this timeline to translate the interdependent system dynamics into tangible and actionable strategic directions. We redefine what the notion of “ownership” should look like in an alternative paradigm that enables resilient futures. As a result, we present three core vision principles that guide the future of innovation in the company and thirteen key propositions that illustrate these principles with the aim of transitioning not just the company itself but also the mindset towards new product value in the market as a whole.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.038
Scholarly communication0.0160.020
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.327
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.097 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOCAD University Open Research Repository (OCAD University)Same topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207