A Finnish Interventionist Approach to Design Thinking: Lessons for Internationalization

Higher education institutions increasingly recognize the need to transform their pedagogical approaches to better prepare students for contemporary professional challenges. Design-based education (DBE) has emerged as a significant advancement beyond traditional instructional methods, integrating elements of competence-based education with sustainable pedagogical principles (Geitz & de Geus, 2019). This educational framework emphasizes collaborative learning within authentic contexts, where students develop both professional competencies and metacognitive capabilities through structured yet flexible learning experiences.

While design thinking and design-based education are often discussed in similar contexts, they are distinct yet complementary approaches. Design thinking is a problem-solving methodology primarily focused on innovative, human-centered solutions across various domains, characterized by its iterative process of empathizing, defining, ideating, prototyping, and testing (Brown, 2009; Kolko, 2015; Razzouk & Shute, 2012; Plattner, 2010). In contrast, design-based education is a comprehensive educational framework specifically tailored to learning environments, emphasizing the integration of design principles into pedagogical practices (Geitz & de Geus, 2019). Design thinking can be viewed as a powerful methodological tool within the broader DBE approach (Cross, 2011), providing students and educators with a structured yet flexible approach to addressing complex educational and professional challenges. This symbiotic relationship allows DBE to leverage design thinking’s creative problem-solving techniques while maintaining its core focus on developing metacognitive capabilities and professional competencies (Lahdenperä et al., 2022; Razzouk & Shute, 2012).

Recent research on university-industry collaboration demonstrates that effective learning environments in higher education must carefully balance academic rigor with authentic professional experiences. The Design Factory model, as studied by Lahdenperä et al. (2022), illustrates how educational institutions can create learning spaces where knowledge emerges through meaningful interactions between students, educators, and industry partners. This approach particularly emphasizes the development of general competencies across four key domains: interpersonal skills, professional attitudes, product development capabilities, and project management expertise.

Evidence suggests that student engagement and learning outcomes in such innovative environments depend significantly on how students perceive and interact with their learning context. Studies examining student experiences have identified several critical factors influencing both academic performance and psychological well-being, including the perceived relevance of coursework, quality of peer support, alignment of learning objectives with assessment methods, and effectiveness of feedback systems (Geitz et al., 2024). These findings underscore the importance of thoughtfully designed learning environments that support both cognitive development and student well-being.

The implementation of DBE offers particular benefits for both small-medium enterprises (SMEs) and large organizations. SMEs can enhance their competitive position by developing deeper customer insights and fostering innovation cultures, while larger organizations can improve cross-functional collaboration and customer-centricity. This adaptability across organizational contexts makes DBE particularly valuable for international educational collaboration.

A practical illustration of DBE’s international application emerged through a collaborative initiative between Häme University of Applied Sciences, Finland, and Dongbei University of Finance and Economics (DUFE) in Dalian, China. This intervention aimed to introduce Nordic innovation approaches within a Chinese educational context, focusing on creative problem-solving methodologies and design thinking principles (see Foster, 2021; Razzouk & Shute, 2012).

Two teachers, Dr. Sajal Kabiraj and Dinesh Poudel from Häme University of Applied Sciences, Finland collaborated with Dongbei University of Finance and Economics (DUFE) in Dalian, China, to implement design-based education principles. The primary goal was to transform the teaching-learning environment by introducing a sustainable educational approach that integrates authentic industry challenges with academic learning (Geitz & de Geus, 2019). Through this interventionist approach, the teachers aimed to bridge Finnish and Chinese educational practices by establishing a co-creation pedagogy where students, teachers, and industry partners could collaborate effectively (Lahdenperä et al., 2022). The core objective was to shift from traditional classroom instruction to an innovative teaching-learning environment that emphasizes both metacognitive development and professional competence development through structured yet flexible learning experiences.

Through design thinking methodology, the teachers created an authentic learning environment where students engaged in a structured yet iterative educational process. The approach emphasized the development of both subject-specific knowledge and general competencies through university-industry collaboration (Lahdenperä et al., 2022). This was exemplified through a Finnish case example that served as a vehicle for sustainable teaching and learning practices, bringing Nordic educational innovation to the Chinese context. The learning activities were anchored in an authentic business challenge from a Finnish company, allowing students to experience how DBE integrates theoretical understanding with practical application. This pedagogical approach helped students develop not only problem-solving capabilities but also metacognitive skills and professional competencies that are essential for their future careers (Geitz & de Geus, 2019). The real-world scenario demonstrated how design-based education can effectively bridge the gap between academic learning and professional practice while fostering student engagement and well-being.

In terms of the intervention design for DBE based Design Thinking implementation, several choices were made:

1. Intervention location
2. Training participants
3. Company type

1. Intervention location: The case company was a Finnish large merchandising industry, a company that has a hand in thousands of products worldwide but sells only one thing: rights. A theme park in Finland was chosen as the intervention location. This choice allowed for a real-world application of DBE in a Finnish context, providing insights and learnings specific to the local market and culture.

2. Training participants: The training involved the students at a Chinese partner university who were given the challenge of proposing ways to internationalize the Finnish company for entering Chinese market, especially in area of theme parks. This choice ensured that those interacting with potential consumers and facing the challenges firsthand could contribute their perspectives and ideas to the intervention while developing key competencies through university-industry collaboration (Lahdenperä et al., 2022). Sustainability of the theme park was one of the central elements, aligning with sustainable teaching and learning principles (Geitz & de Geus, 2019). The students evaluated the modes of entry into the Chinese market and suggested that WFOE (Wholly Foreign Owned Enterprise) would be the most ideal entry path. The students also evaluated the SDGs which could be applicable for the theme park. Other well-known foreign theme parks like Disney and Universal Studios have recently entered the Chinese market.

Strategic action theory emphasizes how firms can build and defend their competitive advantages at different stages of their lifecycle, highlighting the importance of exploiting market opportunities and relative resources for growth (Grimm et al., 2005). Companies “go international” for different reasons, some reactive (or defensive) and some proactive (or aggressive). Reactive reasons include Global competition, Trade barriers, Regulations and restrictions by home country government, and Customer demand. Proactive reasons include Economies of Scale, Growth Opportunities, Resource access and Cost savings, and Incentives (Chen, & Miller, 2015, Denrell & Powell, 2015; Wiersema, & Bowen 2008).

3. Company type (Family managed business): The Finnish case company can be best described as a Family Managed Business with another holding company which is a worldwide licensing agent of the company. This choice reflects the focus of the intervention on demonstrating the applicability and effectiveness of design thinking in a smaller organizational context, where resource constraints and competition can pose unique challenges.

Changes in psychological and team variables can be expected after a DBE intervention due to several factors. Firstly, this educational approach encourages a shift in mindset, fostering more open and creative approaches to learning and problem-solving. This can lead to increased engagement, motivation, and satisfaction among participants, positively impacting their psychological well-being (Geitz et al., 2024). Secondly, the collaborative nature of DBE promotes effective teamwork, communication, and trust-building. This can result in improved team dynamics, cooperation, and a sense of shared purpose. Finally, the success and positive outcomes of the educational intervention can boost confidence and morale within the team, further reinforcing positive psychological and team variables.

One of the proposed outcomes of the discussion was that to create a cooperative and innovative culture, a company can embrace design thinking principles by valuing and encouraging diverse perspectives, fostering a safe environment for experimentation and learning from failure, and promoting cross-functional collaboration. Design thinking can change a company’s culture by instilling a customer-centric mindset, encouraging creativity, and promoting a culture of continuous improvement and innovation. This would be an important consideration for Family Managed Businesses. In a larger organization, design thinking can drive a cultural shift towards agility, adaptability, and customer-centricity, breaking down silos and fostering collaboration among different departments or teams.

In a research context, mechanisms that may work include the systematic application of design thinking methods and tools to investigate research problems, gather and analyze data, and generate insights. Design thinking can provide a structured approach to research, allowing for a more human-centered and iterative exploration of research questions. However, scholars need to consider limitations in research design, such as the potential influence of researcher bias, the generalizability of findings, and the need for rigorous data collection and analysis methods. It is important to balance the flexibility and creativity of design thinking with the rigor and validity required in academic research.

Students loved the engaging and interactive nature of the workshop. The DBE based design thinking workshop not only provided the Chinese students with new knowledge but also challenged them to think critically and apply their learning in practical scenarios. Through carefully designed exercises and group activities, students were able to develop their analytical skills, question assumptions, and develop innovative solutions to complex problems.

As the teachers reflected on this experience, the teachers were energized by the potential of design thinking to transform education globally. At Häme University of Applied Sciences (HAMK), design-thinking is as a core component of our educational approach. The response from students was phenomenal. Feedback from the Design Thinking workshop was overwhelmingly positive, with students and faculty alike indicating that participants gained valuable new insights and skills. Many students noted how the program pushed them to think outside the box and approach challenges from multiple perspectives, enhancing their critical thinking abilities. Multidisciplinary approaches are important interventions in implementing design thinking.

A design thinking training thus should cover the key principles and methods of design thinking, including techniques for empathizing with users, defining problem statements, generating and evaluating ideas, prototyping and testing solutions, and iterating based on feedback. It should also emphasize the importance of collaboration, interdisciplinary teamwork, and a user-centered approach. Overall, the design thinking intervention can create a positive impact on the psychological well-being of participants and foster a more collaborative and innovative team environment.