# The Use of the Semantic Network for Categorization of Problems Solved by Design Thinking

Iwona Chomiak-Orsa, Andrzej Greńczuk, Kamila Łuczak

► To cite this version:

Iwona Chomiak-Orsa, Andrzej Greńczuk, Kamila Łuczak. The Use of the Semantic Network for Categorization of Problems Solved by Design Thinking. 6th International Conference on Computational Intelligence in Data Science (ICCIDS), Feb 2023, Chennai, India. pp.141-152, 10.1007/978-3-031-38296-3_11. hal-05466036

HAL Id: hal-05466036

https://inria.hal.science/hal-05466036v1

Submitted on 19 Jan 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# The Use of the Semantic Network for Categorization of Problems Solved by Design Thinking

Iwona Chomiak-Orsa ID, Andrzej Greńczuk(✉) ID, and Kamila Łuczak ID

Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, 53-345 Wroclaw, Poland
{iwona.chomiak-orsa,andrzej.grenczuk,kamila.luczak}@ue.wroc.pl

**Abstract.** Creativity is one of the most awaited professional competences of their employees by modern entrepreneurs. Therefore, more and more importance are attached to the development and application of tools and methods supporting creativity both in the individual and team dimension. This became the main stimulus for the development of methods of creative thinking and problem solving. One of such methods, gaining more and more popularity, is Design Thinking. Despite the numerous advantages of this method, it should be realized that it cannot be used in every case. Therefore, the authors of this article defined the purpose of the article as: the use of semantic networks in the categorization of problems that can be solved with the use of Design Thinking. The research results presented in the article were obtained using triangulation of research methods such as: analytical literature review, computer simulation carried out using the Protégé program and a research experiment consisting in the simulation of selected problem situations.

**Keywords:** Ontology · Creativity · Design Thinking (DT)

## 1 Introduction

As indicated by numerous studies and business reports (Parjanen, 2012; Reiter-Palmon, 2017) individual and team creativity are competences that determine the creation of innovative business solutions, enable business continuity and, most importantly, contribute to the development of the organization. Therefore, the ability to using and properly adjust the methods and tools of creative thinking is gaining popularity in the implementation of business practices.

The reasons for the popularization of creative problem-solving methods can be found in many stimulants/factors. What's more, these stimulants permeate each other and intensify the importance of soft skills, including above all creative thinking in the development of business solutions.

One of them may be the global tendency to look for innovative solutions that accelerate economic progress by creating new solutions and technological applications (Baruk, 2013; Krzepicka & Tarapata, 2012). Therefore, managers are primarily looking for
employees characterized by entrepreneurship, good communication skills and the ability to think individually creatively.

On the other hand, technological progress, and the desire to minimize the operating costs of enterprises affect the increase in interest in automation and standardization of business processes. Employees are responsible for selected, elementary tasks, while at the same time it is not possible to make changes to the procedures they perform. This, in turn, determines their very narrow responsibility and decision-making. Such depersonalization of business processes (Parayitam, Usman, Olson, Shea, 2022; Totawar & Nambudiri, 2012) is not conducive to stimulating creative attitudes, and employees in a short time submit to procedures and stop thinking about the possibility of their improvement.

In the context of the above mechanisms, methods that stimulate creative thinking, both individual and team, are becoming increasingly important. This is extremely important in relation to teamwork, which is becoming a standard especially in the case of process-managed organizations and work in project teams.

One of such methods is Design Thinking, which in recent years has been gaining more and more supporters. This method is becoming one of the main methods used in project teams dedicated to creating innovative ideas and solving problems in the area of ICT.

Despite the numerous advantages of this method mentioned in numerous theoretical studies (Dunne, 2018; Barsalou, 2017) as well as recommendations of consulting companies, it is a method whose effectiveness depends on many factors and criteria that must be met.

Therefore, like any other method, Design Thinking in specific design situations can significantly contribute to increasing creativity and thus affect the creation of an innovative, valuable, and possible to apply idea with given criteria of project success. Nevertheless, there is a whole spectrum of cases in relation to which the use of Design Thinking does not have the slightest justification, or it seems reasonable to use only selected elements of this method. Whether the DT method should be comprehensively used in solving design problems in accordance with its idea, whether to choose only its selected elements, or ultimately there is not the slightest justification in its use is determined by a significant number of determinants and many criteria that should be met.

The above theoretical digressions as well as the authors' business experience contributed to the consideration of the possibility of using tools supporting multi-criteria analysis, so that a tool could be created to support decisions on the use of the Design Thinking method in solving design problems.

As a result of the above, the authors of this article have defined a research problem: can semantic networks be used to categorize problems that can be solved by using the Design Thinking method?

Therefore, the aim of this article is to analyze the possibility of using the semantic network for categorization of legitimate problems to be solved by using the DT method.
To achieve the stated goal of the article, the following detailed research questions have been defined:

1) Is the semantic network a good solution in representing the category of design problems?

2) Can the designed network be mapped using a map of concepts (topics)?

3) What IT tools can be used to design the target semantic network?

The research presented in the article was carried out using the following research methods:

* analysis of the literature on the subject, the aim of which was to determine basic concepts, such as semantic network, project-problem, creativity, Design Thinking,

* computer simulation in the form of building a semantic network in the Protégé program,

* An experiment carried out in the form of case scenario analysis to initially verify the legitimacy of the proposed solution.

As a result of the above triangulation of research methods, the authors verified the research problem and achieved the assumed goal of the article.

The solution proposed in the article is an original approach to categorizing issues that can be solved using creative problem-solving methods such as Design Thinking. In the article, the authors pointed to the possibility of using semantic networks, which is a fully original approach to the use of this type of tasks.

## 2 Basic Concepts – A Literature Survey

Starting the theoretical considerations discussed in this article, the definition of semantic network should be presented. “Semantic networks are identified as a set of technologies and standards that formulate simple building blocks of infrastructure that supports the vision of a meaningful network” (Cardoso & Pinto 2014, p. 754). “The semantic web consists of nodal points and the relationships between them. The semantic relation of two conceptual representations refers to the sum of all connections between designations and properties (...) The nodes of this graph are concepts that can be connected to each other by edges (...) Semantic networks, also referred to as knowledge networks, which increasingly allow information to be processed via the Internet in accordance with its content and purpose, not only as pure text, i.e. a sequence of words to be read by a human” (Odlanicka-Poczobut 2019, p. 25).

Next, it is worth looking at the concept of project-problem. The exact definition of a project-problem depends on the person who constructs it, but in general terms, the project-problem can be defined as the effect of exploration of the phenomenon, followed by a cognitive perspective (Wszółek & Moszczyński, 2015). The definition of the project-problem should be unambiguous and understandable for all members of the project team, stakeholders, as well as for users of the solution.

A common problem in projects implemented by the organization is the lack of creativity among teams (Runco & Pritzker, 2020). Creativity can be defined as “a process of becoming sensitive to problems, deficiencies, gaps in knowledge, missing elements,
disharmonies, and so on; identifying the difficulty; searching for solutions, making guesses, or formulating hypotheses about the deficiencies: testing and retesting these hypotheses and possibly modifying and retesting them; and finally communicating the results" (Torrance, 1966). Developing creativity among employees, and even orienting the organization towards a reactive approach can be a significant added value for the organization, which will allow to build a competitive advantage in the market (Emami, Rezaei, Valaei & Gardener, 2023).

One way to improve creativity in organizations is to use creative problem-solving methods. One of them is Design Thinking (DT). DT is defined as a method of dealing with complex problems in many different disciplines, and in particular in Information Technology (IT) and business (Dorst, 2010). The Design Thinking method is best used for difficult and complex problems that cause many problems for organizations (Matthews, Doherty, Worthy & Reid, 2022). The Design Thinking method is based on the implementation of five stages based on cooperation and creativity. It is an iterative process that enables creative problem solutions (Cross, 2023). Among the phases of Design Thinking stands out:

* Empathize - understanding the requirements and problems of users,

* Define the problem - formulating a clear definition of the problem understandable to all team members, stakeholders, and users,

* Generate ideas (ideate) - collecting as many concepts as possible to solve the problem,

* Prototype - an attempt to present the solution to a problem in a physical way,

* Test - collecting opinions on the created prototype during research with users (Wolniak, 2017).

The DT method has its own so-called toolbox, which consists of many creative techniques (Lewrick, Link & Leifer, 2020). Within the indicated phases of Design Thinking, various techniques are used, the aim of which is the correct implementation of the selected stage. Techniques include brainstorming, personas, empathy maps, customer journey map, insight cards or How Might We (den Dekker, 2020). In addition, the implementation of Design Thinking at organization is supported by various types of IT solutions such as Miro, MURAL, or ConceptBoard providing templates for the implementation of selected techniques.

In summary, using Design Thinking in solving problems, the organization focuses on the user and understanding their needs and can customize the solution to meet their requirements (Wolcott, McLaughlin, Hubbard, Rider & Umstead, 2021).

## 3 Research Methodology

To prepare a semantic network, the purpose of which will be to describe the categorization of problems solved by the Design Thinking method, the following activities should be carried out:

1. Designing the concept of the semantic network:

a. Develop concepts included in the constructed network,

b. Develop taxonomic relationships,

c. Develop words defining semantic relations,
d. Develop semantic relations,

2. Introduction to the Protégé program of ontology constructed in point 1, to map concepts and save it in the form of ontology,

3. Conducting a search based on prepared usage scenarios.

## 4 Research Results

The authors decided to use the Protégé ontological editor, due to its popularity, clear interface. In addition, their choice was dominated by a friendly visualization module – OntoGraf. Thanks to this module, you can easily navigate the created network, unlike VebVOWL (Web-based Visualization of Ontologies), OWLViz, KC-Viz. In addition, a limitation in the number of available, including friendly ontological editors was noted. Some of them, like, e.g., Ontorion Fluent Editor 2015 does not allow the creation of ontologies by verbally notating all elements of the semantic network. In turn, NeonTool Kit with the KC-Viz plugin does not allow you to navigate the created network too much, including the correct execution of scenarios.

As a result of the application of this research method a fragment of ontology was created that allows categorization of problems solved by Design Thinking. The subject matter of Design Thinking, as well as the problem solved using this method, depend on many factors, which are also presented in the prepared ontology. Table 1 shows a fragment of the metric of the ontology created.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Metric of the ontology created.</caption><thead><tr><td>Attribute name</td><td>Value</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Axiom</td><td>191</td></tr><tr><td>Logical axiom count</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Class count</td><td>49</td></tr><tr><td>Obiect property count</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>SubClassOf</td><td>83</td></tr><tr><td>DisjointClasses</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Source:** Own elaboration

Figure 1 shows the created semantic network mapped using a map of concepts, which is recorded in the ontology. The presented concepts from the concept map are presented in a taxonomic relationship.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1.** Presentation of the semantic network mapped using a concept map. **Source:** Own elaboration.</figcaption></figure>

The next step is to determine the concepts and their meanings. The selected concepts are presented in Table 2.

<table><caption>**Table 2.** A fragment of concepts included in the semantic network mapped on the map of concepts.</caption><thead><tr><td>Name of the term</td><td>Description</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Design Thinking</td><td>A method of creative problem solving and creating original products, services</td></tr><tr><td>Stages</td><td>Subsequent phases of the Design Thinking process in the project</td></tr><tr><td>Emphasize</td><td>The stage of getting to know the features, needs, requirements of users of the designed solution</td></tr><tr><td>Define</td><td>A stage aimed at developing a clear definition of the problem</td></tr><tr><td>Ideate</td><td>The stage of generating as many ideas as possible for solving the problem</td></tr><tr><td>Prototype</td><td>The stage of developing an idea by trying to give it a physical form</td></tr><tr><td>Test</td><td>The stage of collecting feedback on the developed prototype of the solution</td></tr><tr><td>Techniques</td><td>They are used to solve emerging problems</td></tr><tr><td>Survey</td><td>It allows team to collect information from users using a questionnaire</td></tr><tr><td>Empathy Map</td><td>A technique that allows to get to know the user in 6 areas: what he thinks and feels, what he sees, what he says and does, what he hears, problems, benefits</td></tr><tr><td>Personas</td><td>The prototype of a typical user of the designed solution</td></tr><tr><td>5 Whys</td><td>A technique that allows to detect the causes of the problem</td></tr></tbody></table>

(continued)
<table><caption>**Table 2.** (continued)</caption><thead><tr><td>Name of the term</td><td>Description</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>The four Ws</td><td>A technique that allows to define a problem on four levels: Where, When, Why, What</td></tr><tr><td>How Might We</td><td>A technique that involves asking questions that will be used in the ideation stage</td></tr><tr><td>Brainstorming</td><td>A technique that aims to collect as many ideas as possible about the solution</td></tr><tr><td>Insight cards</td><td>A technique that aims to summarize the most important insights about the challenge in the problem being solved</td></tr><tr><td>Yes, and...</td><td>A technique that allows team to expand the concept of an idea, refine it and share it with your team, waiting for feedback</td></tr><tr><td>Tree testing</td><td>A testing technique that allows users to evaluate the hierarchy and ability to find topic data in an app</td></tr><tr><td>Problem categories</td><td>Types of problems that can be solved using Design Thinking</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Source:** Own elaboration

The next step is to develop the concepts of semantic relations. The following is an excerpt from the relational concepts included in the prepared network:

* Can be solved with,

* Has criteria,

* Is used in,

* Not related,

* Size above 4,

* Is high,

* Is low,

* Uses.

The developed fragment of the taxonomic relationship of the ontology is presented in Table 3. This table contains the main taxonomic relationships.

As part of the taxonomic relationship, the authors identified sample categories of problems that define alternative paths modeled by the network.
<table><caption>**Table 3.** Fragment of a taxonomic relationship.</caption><thead><tr><th>Name of the concept (class)</th><th>Class name (subclasses)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Stages</td><td><ul><li>Empathize</li><li>Define</li><li>Ideate</li><li>Prototype</li><li>Test</li></ul></td></tr><tr><td>Techniques</td><td><ul><li>Survey</li><li>Emphaty Map</li><li>Personas</li><li>5 Whys</li><li>The four Ws</li><li>How Might We</li><li>Brainstorming</li><li>Reverse Thinking</li><li>Insight cards</li><li>„Yes, and…”</li><li>Card sorting</li><li>Crazy 8’s</li><li>Storyboarding</li><li>Role-Playing</li><li>A/B Tests</li><li>Usability testing</li><li>Tree Testing</li></ul></td></tr><tr><td>Problem categories</td><td><ul><li>Difficult contact with the project owner</li><li>No clearly defined user needs</li><li>No verification by users of individual stages of solution development</li><li>Lack of cooperation with users in the process of creating a solution</li><li>Too short time to complete the project properly</li><li>No budget</li><li>No ideas for a solution</li></ul></td></tr><tr><td>Design Thinking</td><td><ul><li>Yes</li><li>No</li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Own elaboration

Then, from the prepared concepts and concepts of relations, developed into a table containing semantic relations between concepts. A description of the semantic relationship fragment is presented in Table 4.

We also identified the criteria (Fig. 2) which characterize a specific problem. The criteria determinates the final query which will deter if the Design Thinking will be or not be used.

Testing whether the goal was achieved was preceded by defining and executing two scenarios. These scenarios are designed to perform a search of the semantic network and
<table><caption>**Table 4.** Fragment of a semantic relationship.</caption><thead><tr><td>Source concept</td><td>Relationship name</td><td>Target term</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Survey</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Empathize</td></tr><tr><td>Emphaty map</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Empathize</td></tr><tr><td>Personas</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Empathize</td></tr><tr><td>5 Whys</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Define</td></tr><tr><td>The four Ws</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Define</td></tr><tr><td>How Might We</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Define</td></tr><tr><td>Brainstorming</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Ideate</td></tr><tr><td>Reverse Thinking</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Ideate</td></tr><tr><td>Insight cards</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Ideate</td></tr><tr><td>„Yes, and…”</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Ideate</td></tr><tr><td>Card sorting</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Prototype</td></tr><tr><td>Crazy 8's</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Prototype</td></tr><tr><td>Storyboarding</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Prototype</td></tr><tr><td>Role-Playing</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Prototype</td></tr><tr><td>A/B Tests</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Test</td></tr><tr><td>Usability Testing</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Test</td></tr><tr><td>Tree Testing</td><td>Is used in</td><td>Test</td></tr><tr><td>Difficult contact with the project owner</td><td>Can be solved by</td><td>Survey</td></tr><tr><td>Too short time to complete the project properly</td><td>Can be solved by</td><td>Survey</td></tr><tr><td>Too short time to complete the project properly</td><td>Can be solved by</td><td>How might we</td></tr><tr><td>No budget</td><td>Can be solved by</td><td>Survey</td></tr><tr><td>No budget</td><td>Can be solved by</td><td>Crazy 8s</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Source:** Own elaboration

verify whether it is possible to get an answer to the questions posed. To implement the usage scenarios, the Protégé editor and the OntoGraf plugin were used, which allows to visualize the network as well as navigate it. Scenarios 1 and 2 were created manually.

**Scenario 1.** The project manager noticed a problem with the budget allocated for the implementation of the project (Fig. 3).

From the tree we select: “Problem categories”, then “No budget”. Right-click and select Expand on - > “has_criteria”. Related concepts are developed. He then develops the concept of “team size” after the “size above 4” relationship. In addition, 2 other terms indicated (“project orientation” and “time pressure”) additional criteria conditions.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2.** Identified criteria. **Source:** Own elaboration.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3.** Result of the scenario 1. **Source:** Own elaboration.</figcaption></figure>

As a result of the first scenario, the Design Thinking method can be used when the project is task-oriented, the time pressure is low, and the team size is over 4 people.

**Scenario 2.** Employees of the organization noticed problems in contact with the project owner (Fig. 4).

From the tree select “Problem categories”, then “Difficult contact with the project owner”. We right-click and select Expand on “has_criteria” and then extend the concept of “project orientation” after the “task-oriented” relationship.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4.** Result of the scenario 2. **Source:** Own elaboration.</figcaption></figure>
As a result of the second scenario, it can be seen that we cannot apply the Design Thinking method, because the project is task-oriented, not the user-oriented.

# 5 Summary and Conclusions

The article presents selected fragments of the semantic network, aimed at presenting the relationships between selected categories of problems and the legitimacy and possibility of applying the method of creative thinking, which is Design Thinking.

The developed semantic network presented in the form of a fragment of the semantic network indicates that the semantic network allows better adjustment of the Design Thinking method and its scope in relation to selected decision problems. On the basis of literature studies, analysis of business use cases, as well as the experience of the authors (who have undergone numerous trainings in the field of Design Thinking), they defined the category of problems, criteria and adapted individual techniques to the stages of Design Thinking.

It can be mapped using a map of concepts (topics), which will greatly facilitate not only navigating it, but also its further update. Since the concept map can be saved using ontology, this allows further programming work, which will allow the creation of a domain application (by using an editor with which you can not only read the network, but also run the appropriate inference plugins and manage its content) or an IT system. The created semantic network can be opened in available ontological editors, as well as use dedicated programming libraries in programming languages such as Java or Python, in the case of creating an IT system.

The developed semantic network is applicable in business, especially for project managers. If there is a problem in the project that can be matched to the categories formulated by the authors, managers can use this network to check whether the method of creative problem solving – Design Thinking – can be used for the selected problem. In addition, the authors have defined eight criteria that are related to the possibility of using Design Thinking. For example, if a project manager notices a problem with the budget, he or she must then define the values of the selected criteria, for example: team diversity, project orientation, or time pressure. Based on these values, the developed semantic network will answer whether it is possible to apply Design Thinking in a specific situation.

In the course of developing this system, the authors encountered problems related to the identification of problem categories. It should be emphasized that at the moment in the article the authors presented only the main idea of the target system by presenting a fragment of logic. In further work, the authors assume the development of more categories of problems, as well as the use of other methods to solve them.

Creating such a tool can significantly support the decision to use Design Thinking by managers in solving a selected problem. The experiment, presented graphically in Figs. 3 and 4, clearly indicates the legitimacy of using semantic networks to categorize problems that can be solved by using the Design Thinking method. Which indicates that the goal set in the article has been achieved.
References

Barsalou, L.W.: Define design thinking. She Ji: The J. Des. Econ. Innovation **3**(2), 102–105 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.10.007

Baruk, J.: Innowacje jako czynnik sukcesu organizacji. Zarządzanie i finanse **4**(1), 7–16 (2013)

Cardoso, J., Pinto, A.M.: The Web Ontology Language (OWL) and its applications. In: Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Information Science Pub (2014). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5888-2.ch756

Cross, N.: Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Bloomsbury Publishing (2023)

den Dekker, T.: Design thinking. Routledge (2020)

Dorst, K.: The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Des. Stud. **32**(6), 521–532 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006

Dunne, D.: Design thinking at Work: How Innovative Organizations are Embracing Design. University of Toronto Press (2018)

Emami, M., Rezaei, S., Valaei, N., Gardener, J.: Creativity mindset as the organizational capability: the role of creativity-relevant processes, domain-relevant skills and intrinsic task motivation. Asia-Pacific J. Bus. Adm. **15**(1), 139–160 (2023)

Krzepicka, A., Tarapata, J.: Innowacje jako czynnik budowania wzrostu wartości przedsiębiorstwa. Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Humanitas. Zarządzanie **2**, 74–89 (2012)

Lewrick, M., Link, P., Leifer, L.: The Design Thinking Toolbox: A Guide to Mastering the Most Popular and Valuable Innovation Methods. John Wiley & Sons (2020)

Matthews, B., Doherty, S., Worthy, P., Reid, J.: Design thinking, wicked problems and institutioning change: a case study. CoDesign 1–17 (2022)

Odlanicka-Poczobut, M.: Istota sieci semantycznych – pułapki i korzyści zastosowania w sądownictwie. Comp. Legilinguistics **40**, 21–41 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2019.40.2

Parayitam, S., Usman, A.S., Olson, B.J., Shea, T.: Effect of emotional exhaustion and knowledge sharing on depersonalization, work accomplishment, and organizational performance. Int. J. Knowl. Manag. (IJKM) **18**(1), 1–20 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.291101

Parjanen, S.: Experiencing creativity in the organization: From individual creativity to collective creativity. Interdiscip. J. Inform., Know. Manag. **7**, 109–128 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.28945/1580

Reiter-Palmon, R. (ed.): Team creativity and Innovation. Oxford University Press (2017)

Runco, M.A., Pritzker, S.R. (eds.): Encyclopedia of creativity. Academic press (2020)

Torrance, P.: Verbal Tests. Forms A and B-Figural Tests, Forms A and B. The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition. Princeton, New Jersey: Personnel Press, p. 6 (1966).

Totawar, A.K., Nambudiri, R.: An overview of depersonalization in the organizational context. Indore Manage. J. **4**(2), 64–72 (2012)

Wolcott, M.D., McLaughlin, J.E., Hubbard, D.K., Rider, T.R., Umstead, K.: Twelve tips to stimulate creative problem-solving with design thinking. Med. Teacher **43**(5), 501–508 (2021)

Wolniak, R.: The design thinking method and its stages. Systemy Wspomagania w Inżynierii Produkcji **6**(6), 247–255 (2017)

Wszółek, M., Moszczyński, K.: Algorytmizacja procesów projektowych. w: Grech, M. (red.) Communication Design: badanie i projektowanie komunikacji 4 Kraków, Libron, 2015, s. 173–195 (2015)