Andy Penaluna and Kathryn Penaluna
Andrew Penaluna and Kathryn Penaluna
Written from the perspective of authors with extensive experience of design education as well as entrepreneurial education, this chapter observes the dominance of business school perspectives and suggests that a closer look at design education could ‘oil the wheels of development’. The main objectives are to overtly align the parallels discovered, question the perceived superficiality of Design Thinking as an interpretation of how designers are taught, and to consider areas of contrast and conformity. Our questions ask if entrepreneurial educators and researchers are reinventing wheels, and, if this is the case, where are the opportunities to learn? We find that creativity, innovation, resilience, flexibility and adaptability, opportunity recognition, dealing with ambiguity, risk and failure are aspects that bridge both worlds. However, business education is primarily evaluated through theory expression and application using analysis and hindsight, whereas design education is future oriented and rewards synthesis, novelty, insight and foresight. Design education is inherently experiential, and focuses on resourcefulness and innovation; thus, it provides exemplars for further research and development.
Andy Penaluna, Kathryn Penaluna and Ivan Diego
Across the globe creativity is viewed as a key component of entrepreneurship (Manimala 2009; UNCTAD-MYM 2011; Wang 2011; World Economic Forum 2009). The challenge for educators across the curriculum is to enhance their learners' capacity to gain the skills, knowledge and personal attributes needed to apply creative ideas and innovations to practical situations (Rae et al. 2010). Creative outputs are dependent on the development of divergent thinking strategies; ways of assisting enlightenment through the production of as many alternative solutions as possible (Gardner 1982; Gomez 2007), which subsequently develop the capacity to make new connections and associations (Schumpeter 1934). This research is based on an extended literature review encompassing government and policy reports, entrepreneurship and creativity literature, and recent developments in cognitive neurology, specifically those related to 'Neuroscience'. These are compared and contrasted to empirical evidence from pedagogic approaches from the creative industries.