Multidisciplinary Design Approaches

In 2012 I sat through an amazing talk on 3d printing human organs at the Fab 8 conference which we hosted in New Zealand. More than a decade later and scientists are 3D-printing conductive circuits inside living organisms. Biology is becoming a design medium. This is not a metaphor, but an engineering discipline with reusable components, version control, and design-build-test-learn loops. Researchers are already using AI to write genetic code. They’re designing drug molecules, proteins, and genetic circuits before building them in a lab. Wearable systems can now monitor patient vital signs and predict deterioration up to 17 hours in advance. MIT has turned cement into an energy storage medium. These are not just weak signals of possible futures. They're in clinical trials, field tests, and early production. This is what the next wave of hard problems looks like. Not digital, but biological, material, and physical. The domains that resisted the first wave of digital transformation (think health, food systems, built environments) are now seeing a different kind of change. One that requires design approaches that stretch what it means to design and be a designer. The design methods we've developed over the past 30 years were built for a world where you design something, hand it over, and it does what it was made to do (hopefully!) These systems are different. They adapt and respond to different conditions. They possess something closer to behaviour than function. We are seeing evolving methodologies for designing with living systems and emerging ethical frameworks. There are also designers who are pioneering new spaces for design as a discipline to expand into. But these new arenas also require different skills, perspectives and knowledge systems than those traditional designers would recognise. What do you think? Does it feel too distant as a future for design, or do you find it exciting that design continues to evolve as a discipline? #Biodesign #DesignLeadership #FutureOfDesign

Must-read! A Periodic Table for Cities: Structuring a Century of Fragmented Urban Knowledge The Urban Design Lab has developed a Periodic Table for Urban Design and Planning Elements that tackles a persistent issue in urban practice. Decades of disciplinary fragmentation have produced partial views of systems that operate as a whole. This framework stands out for its conceptual clarity and its format. It uses the architecture of the periodic table to organise urban knowledge into an intuitive system that makes complexity visible. The table positions elements across ten groups. Scale and Typologies provides the scaffolding from region to parcel. Transitional Urban Conditions covers edges and interfaces that guide behaviour and trust. Transformative Urban Forces captures macro drivers including metropolitan expansion, climate transition and digital urbanism. Morphology and Urban Form reflects how identity, collective memory and heritage shape meaning over time. Critical Urban Dynamics highlights pressures such as gentrification, displacement, housing precarity and climate vulnerability. Emergent Urban Phenomena addresses adaptive behaviours that appear under complexity. Urban Systems and Frameworks describes the operational architecture that supports daily urban life. Foundational Principles of Urbanism summarise enduring doctrines of legibility, human scale and walkability. Socio Economic Urban Systems and Cultural Spatial Foundations capture economic engines and the cultural layers that give places depth. The value lies in the structure. It offers a diagnostic scaffold to check whether analysis covers form, governance, culture and ecology. It supports strategic orientation for climate, technology and governance. It also provides shared vocabulary for multidisciplinary teams. The framework is conceptual rather than operational but its strength is the overview. It places precarity, mobility justice, morphology and memory in one analytical frame and helps practitioners handle complexity in a structured way. Developed by the Urban Design Lab. More information is available at https://lnkd.in/emJf863V #urbanplanning #urbandesign #systemsthinking #strategicplanning #complexity #urbandevelopment #planningpractice

Stop calling it “just a box.” - Packaging is a discipline of science, art, and strategy. 📦 The image below highlights something that is still widely misunderstood outside our profession: 👉 This is what it truly takes to be a modern Packaging Engineer. Early in my career, packaging was often seen as a tactical or execution-only function. Over time—working across R&D, manufacturing plants, and global supply chains—it became clear that packaging operates at the intersection of engineering rigour, human behaviour, and business performance. To drive real impact today, packaging professionals must work as multidisciplinary leaders. This framework reflects what I call the Triad of Value. 1️⃣ The Technical Architect (Science & Engineering) 📐 Packaging must perform in real-world conditions—not just on screen. • Material Expertise – Deep understanding of polymers, fibres, barriers, compatibility, and failure modes • CAD & Dieline Mastery – Translating concepts into manufacturable and scalable 3D designs • Testing & Validation – Designing for drop, vibration, compression, climate, and lifecycle durability ✅ This is where technical credibility is built. 2️⃣ The Strategic Orchestrator (Business & Operations) 🌍 Packaging is the physical bridge between factories, markets, and consumers. • Supply Chain Acumen – Cube optimization, pallet efficiency, transport and logistics cost reduction • Sustainability Leadership – Material reduction, recyclability, circular economy alignment • Regulatory & Quality Expertise – Managing global compliance without slowing speed to market ✅ This is where packaging creates measurable business value. 3️⃣ The Human Advocate (Experience & Problem Solving) 🤝 Every package is ultimately touched, opened, and judged by a person. • User-Centric Design – Accessibility, ease of use, unboxing experience, trust • Structured Problem Solving – Addressing pain points before they become failures, complaints, or waste ✅ This is where packaging builds confidence and loyalty. A note to packaging professionals & future leaders - You don’t need to master all of this on Day 1, But long-term value comes from your ability to connect these perspectives and speak multiple languages. Packaging engineers increasingly act as the translators between: • Creative & marketing ambition • Manufacturing & supply chain efficiency • Sustainability & environmental responsibility That is what makes packaging one of the most strategic and high-impact roles in industry today. 👇 Your perspective matters: - Which of these skills do you believe will be most critical in the next five years? - My view: Sustainability leadership—combined with automation and system-level thinking—will define the next generation of packaging engineers. #PackagingEngineering #PackagingLeadership #SustainablePackaging #SupplyChain #Innovation #EngineeringCareers #ProductDesign #GlobalPackaging

Interdisciplinarity is not a challenge for design science: It is our superpower! 🦸 🦸♀️ That is one of the key insights that emerged while working on our new paper (thanks for making it open access SBUR!): “Design Science Across Disciplines: Building Bridges for Advancing Impactful Business Research” co-authored with René Mauer Jan vom Brocke Marvin Hanisch Stephanie Schrage Orestis Terzidis Prof. Dr. Barbara E. Weißenberger Across information systems, strategy, business ethics & sustainability, entrepreneurship, and accounting, we found something remarkable: Each discipline brings its own rich traditions of problem framing, normative reasoning, artefact design, evaluation logic, and engagement with practice. Design science is not one method or one lineage. It has many flavors and strong traditions within each discipline — yet all are united by an interest in addressing questions of “how things should be” and “how to get there.” In my view this diversity is exactly what makes the DS research community so powerful. 🌍 Business Ethics & Sustainability brings deep normative thinking 🧩 Information systems brings strong artefact and evaluation methods 💡 Entrepreneurship brings experimentation and action 🔍 Accounting brings institutional perspectives 🎯 Strategy brings tools for shaping desirable futures Instead of trying to unify these traditions, what if we started intentionally recombining them? Imagine: - Strategy scholars drawing on design echelons and artefact logic from information systems. - Sustainability researchers using evaluation methods from design-oriented system development. - Entrepreneurship scholars integrating normative frameworks from ethics and political philosophy. - Accounting researchers using design thinking and experimentation to build new institutional solutions. What new forms of design knowledge could emerge if we proactively borrowed, blended, and hybridized methods across our disciplinary borders? For me, that is one of the biggest opportunities ahead: 👉  The more diverse our design science traditions become, the more powerful the approach gets in addressing real-world problems. I would love to hear your thoughts: Which tradition from your field has untapped potential to strengthen the broader design science community? DS:E - Center for Design Science in Entrepreneurship ESCP Business School ERCIS German Association for Business Research

Why Civil Engineers Must Understand Every Discipline on Site One thing construction taught me early is this: you can’t survive on “civil knowledge only.” On site, every discipline is connected. If you don’t understand how the other teams work, you will clash, delay the project, or worse create expensive mistakes. Architectural. Electrical. Plumbing. Mechanical. They’re not “someone else’s job.” They’re part of the system you’re responsible for coordinating. Here’s the reality: 1. Architecture sets the intent. Civil engineering executes the reality. If you don’t understand architectural layouts, door swings, finishes, and clearances, you’ll position elements wrong and force redesigns. A misplaced column can disrupt an entire floor plan. 2. Plumbing isn’t just pipes. It’s slopes, clearances, and conflict zones. If you don’t account for plumbing routes in your slab or beams, you’ll end up with unnecessary drilling, weakened members, and safety risks. 3. Electrical works aren’t “plug and play.” Engineers need to understand power layouts so you don’t bury conduits in the wrong places or cast concrete before critical sleeves are in place. This is why multidisciplinary awareness isn’t optional it’s strategic. Because when disciplines don’t talk to each other, coordination collapses. And when coordination collapses, the project bleeds time and money. I’ve seen small oversights turn into big headaches: – A rebar crew forced to cut through freshly cast concrete because conduits were forgotten. – A drainage line clashing with a beam because the slope wasn’t considered early. – Architectural finishes delayed because structural works weren’t aligned. All avoidable. All costly. The best civil engineers don’t just build. They integrate, collaborate, and foresee issues before they explode. So if you want to grow fast in this field, sharpen your multidisciplinary awareness. Understand how each discipline operates, what they need, and how your work affects theirs. That’s how you deliver smoother projects, tighter coordination, and fewer “Who did this?” moments on site. Construction is a team sport. And the best engineers know the whole game not just their part.

Sometimes, I feel like the instructional design community can be a bit of an echo chamber. We attend the same conferences, read the same articles, and follow the same thought leaders. While this provides a strong sense of community, I wonder if we're missing out on valuable perspectives from other fields. 🤔 Think about the user experience (UX) designer's focus on intuitive navigation and user-centered design. Or the marketer's expertise in capturing attention and driving engagement. Or the behavioral psychologist's understanding of motivation and habit formation. 🧠 I've personally found immense value in exploring concepts and practices from these seemingly disparate fields and applying them to my instructional design work. It's like adding new tools to your toolkit and seeing familiar challenges in a fresh light. 💡 What's one concept or practice you've borrowed from another field that has significantly enhanced your approach to instructional design? Let's break down those silos! #CrossDisciplinaryLearning #InnovationInID #UXForLearning #BehavioralScienceInLearning

Would you live or work in a building where the train and car runs right through it? In some cities around the world, roads and railway are built on top, middle of buildings, and even trains pass straight through residential towers. These are not science fiction scenes — they are real-world engineering responses to dense urban environments and limited space. Here are some fascinating examples: 🔹 Chongqing, China A light rail train passes through the 6th to 8th floors of a residential building — complete with an integrated station inside. This design maximizes land use in a mountainous city but requires advanced vibration isolation and noise control engineering. 🔹 Tenerife, Spain A road runs along the rooftop of an apartment building. Built on a steep coastal slope, this design solves roadway alignment challenges without additional land acquisition — though it introduces structural and waterproofing complexities. 🔹 Gate Tower Building, Osaka, Japan A highway pierces through floors 5 to 7 of this office tower. The road and building are structurally separated, with noise and vibration effectively isolated. A unique case of vertical land sharing, backed by clever legal and engineering coordination. While these structures demonstrate innovation in space-constrained urban areas, they also come with challenges: - Structural loading and fatigue - Noise and vibration control - Emergency evacuation and safety - Maintenance accessibility Such designs require a high level of interdisciplinary collaboration — architecture, structural engineering, transportation, and MEP — working together from concept to construction and operation. If you know more similar case, please write it in the comment. and your thought. #UrbanDesign #Structural #Infrastructure #Bridge #Civil #Engineering #TransportationInnovation

A designer’s role in multidisciplinary creative collaboration In the world of product development, the most innovative solutions often result from intense collaboration across diverse perspectives Diversity comes in many flavors… cultural, gender, specialties, disciplines, skillsets and more Let’s talk about the designer's role in a multidisciplinary setting As designers, we're more than just creators We’re the translators, mediators, and catalysts that bring different perspectives together to shape meaningful products and experiences When we worked on the John Deere 1R electric tractor at BMW Designworks, our core team consisted of designers, engineers, product marketers, and model makers We were a small but accomplished group of around six people, united by one common goal… to design, engineer, and convert a 1R combustion tractor into a drivable 1R electric tractor Looking back, my roles as the creative director and lead designer wasn’t just about designing and building the tractor… it became a lot more than that… _Translator... Acting as the bridge between engineering, marketing, and business strategy, turning complex ideas into tangible, user-centric solutions. Clear communication was crucial to ensure everyone understood the project's vision and goals… and stay on track _Holistic Problem Solver... Integrating insights from various disciplines allowed us to approach problems from multiple angles in real time. It's about finding solutions that are both innovative and feasible, balancing creativity with practicality _Rapid Prototyping & Iteration... True innovation requires rapid iteration with input from all corners. By involving designers, engineers, and model makers in the prototyping phase, we could address real-world constraints while keeping the user experience front and center _Aligning a Shared Vision... Design isn't just about aesthetics… it's about empathy. By aligning with other disciplines on a user-centric goal, we ensured every aspect of the product resonated with the people it was designed for _Mediating Ideas and Realities... Navigating the delicate balance between bold ideas and practical limitations was key. We had limited time, and our role was to champion creativity while mediating conflicts, ensuring the final product was both innovative, viable and on time _Championing Innovation Together... Collaboration is about co-creation. By combining diverse expertise, we were able to push boundaries, generate breakthrough ideas, and build products that truly stood out _Building a Collaborative Culture... Great design emerges when we acknowledge and celebrate diverse contributions. It’s about fostering a collaborative culture where every voice is heard and every idea is valued The magic happens when we bring together minds from different disciplines to create something that none of us could have achieved alone. In your experience, how has cross-disciplinary collaboration impacted your design process?

🟥 Strategies for Constructing Organ-Specific Organoid Chips The construction of organ-specific organoid chips (also known as organoid-on-a-chip systems) requires an integrated approach combining stem cell biology, tissue engineering, and microfluidic design. These platforms are designed to replicate the microenvironment, function, and spatial organization of human organs in vitro and are used for disease modeling, drug screening, and regenerative applications. The first key strategy is to use patient-derived organoids cultured from pluripotent stem cells or adult stem cells that are able to recapitulate the cellular diversity and tissue architecture of specific organs (e.g., liver, brain, intestine, kidney, or lung). These organoids are then embedded in biocompatible scaffolds or hydrogels to support their three-dimensional growth and maintain physiological functions. Second, microfluidic systems need to be incorporated to simulate dynamic physiological conditions, such as fluid shear stress, perfusion, and nutrient exchange. These chips often contain microchannels lined with endothelial cells to simulate blood flow and enable vascular-organoid interactions. Third, mechanical and biochemical manipulations need to be utilized to enhance organ-specific differentiation and maturation. This may involve stretching (for lung or intestinal models), pulsatile flow (for heart or vascular models), or chemical gradients to guide tissue patterning. Fourth, sensor integration is increasingly important for building organ-specific organoid chips, enabling real-time monitoring of key parameters such as pH, oxygen content, metabolic activity, and drug response. Finally, modular design strategies allow multiple organoid connections on a single chip, such as the gut-liver system or the brain-retina system, enabling inter-organ communication studies. In summary, organ-specific organoid chips are designed through a multidisciplinary strategy involving stem cell-derived organoids, biomaterials, microfluidic perfusion, physiological stimulation, and biosensing. These systems are rapidly evolving into powerful platforms for precision medicine, toxicology testing, and modeling of human biological functions. Reference [1] Shun Zhang et al., Lab Chip 2021 (doi: 10.1039/d0lc01186j) #OrganoidonChip #OrganoidEngineering #Microfluidics #TissueEngineering #PrecisionMedicine #StemCellTechnology #RegenerativeMedicine #LabonChip #DrugScreening #DiseaseModeling #BiotechInnovation #NextGenHealthcare #BiomedicalEngineering #OrganChip #PersonalizedMedicine #CSTEAMBiotech

Chatted with Col Jason “TOGA” Trew, PhD (USAF Retired) on friday about Design Thinking and wanted to contrast it with the Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP) to see why Mercury's approach can feel backwards. Because it is often the opposite! MDMP solves well-defined, tactical or operational problems with clear objectives and measurable outcomes. It emphasizes efficiency, clarity, and predictability. Design Thinking is suited for complex, ambiguous problems that benefit from human-centered exploration, creativity, and adaptability. 1. How to start MDMP: Begins with a clearly defined mission from higher command, and the process revolves around achieving that specific mission, and the focus is on understanding constraints, resources, and objectives within that framework. Design Thinking: Starts with empathy and problem discovery. It involves deeply understanding the needs, emotions, and perspectives of those affected by the problem, without assuming the problem is fully known. Often, the initial challenge is reframed based on insights gathered during this phase. 2. How to make progress MDMP is highly structured and sequential. Each step builds on the previous one, with little backtracking (barring error). Design Thinking is iterative. Designers are encouraged to cycle back, test, and refine ideas repeatedly. Its not a mistake to revisit earlier steps. 3. Convergent vs. Divergent Approach MDMP aims to converge on a single, viable course of action that is then executed. After analyzing different COAs (courses of action), MDMP narrows down to a final choice to be implemented. Design Thinking emphasizes divergent thinking, encouraging multiple ideas and broad exploration before converging on a solution. 4. Risk Mitigation vs. Risk Embracement MDMP focuses on wargaming and risk analysis to anticipate potential challenges and eliminates options that introduce too much uncertainty. Design Thinking embraces uncertainty and views it as an opportunity for learning. Prototyping and testing results in failures and uncovers unexpected insights. 5. Analysis-Based vs. Synthesis-Based MDMP is grounded in rational analysis, with heavy emphasis on objective information, data, and feasibility. The decision-making process is rooted in military objectives, resources, and operational constraints. Design Thinking is human-centered and complex. The process addresses the lived experiences of people affected by the problem. Knowledge is situated and contextual. 6. Command vs. Collaboration MDMP typically follows a hierarchy where leadership has the final say, and decisions are made top-down. Design Thinking emphasizes collaborative input and cross-functional teamwork. Ideas are built with input from all team members, including end-users, fostering a culture of shared ownership. 7. Solution Certainty vs. Solution Exploration While MDMP seeks the right answer, Design Thinking seeks many possible answers, refined through continuous feedback and iteration.