Interdisciplinary collaboration - Design as the glue

At Tilburg University, I am part of an interdisciplinary team exploring digital health and mental well-being. Our team includes researchers from psychology, computer science, philosophy, social sciences, law, economics, and management. It’s a diverse mix of expertise and perspectives, and I have been using design as the glue to hold my collaboration together with other researchers. Let me explain why.

Different disciplines carry with them different epistemologies, or theories of knowledge. That is, each may have a different conception of what constitutes knowledge, how it is produced, and how it should be applied.

Broadly speaking, there are disciplines who would like to solve problems (e.g. engineering, medicine) and there are disciplines who would like to find problems (e.g. philosophy, social sciences).

Design is a versatile discipline that bridges gaps between problem-solving and problem-finding. Based on the design landscape drawn by Susca et al. 2018, I like to think of design as existing on a spectrum between two paradigms: affirmative design and critical design.

Affirmative design is rooted in problem-solving. It focuses on creating solutions, answering questions, and producing functional outcomes, often for industry. This is where human-centered design, inclusive design, creative capacity building, and behavioral design thrive—areas I lean into when collaborating with colleagues from problem-solving disciplines. Designers contribute by generating fictional functions to the products, services, and systems that are developed to solve problems.

On the other end of the spectrum is critical design. This paradigm embraces problem-finding. It raises questions, provokes debate, often for society. This is where design fictions and speculative design thrive - areas I lean into when collaborating with colleagues from problem-finding disciplines. Designers contribute by generating functional fictions to make the design is a medium for reflection and public dialogue.

By in both paradigms, I find that prototyping and co-design act as bridges between them. Prototypes serve as tangible artifacts that help us merge practical solutions with thought-provoking questions, enabling true interdisciplinary collaboration. Whether solving problems or creating new ones, design fosters shared understanding and drives innovation. In both problem-solving and problem-finding, co-design help us to involve relevant stakeholders in the process (of course power dynamics of co-design is inevitable, but we will get to this in a later blog).

For me, design isn’t just a discipline—it’s a unifying force.