Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The (Positive) Design Environment as a Prerequisite of Design Orientation

The (Positive) Design Environment as a Prerequisite of Design Orientation Design is a human-centered activity. Every design project starts with the analysis of user needs and prefer- ences. This means that design orientation of a company should also be positively related to company’s busi- ness results. However, in most transitional countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEECs), design environ- ment is not supported, there is no clear national design policy, design implementation in companies varies, and there is no constant measurement of design impact. The main interest of this paper is to research the level of design implementation in Croatian companies related to the managerial approach and business re- sults, because such research is usually undertaken in more developed countries. The study focuses on the per- ception of management. This quantitative research has been carried out using an Internet survey to examine managers and CEOs from Croatian companies in different industries. The results show positive relations be - tween design environment and design orientation of a company and a significant impact of management. Key words: Design environment, design orientation, design implementation, transitional countries, management JEL Classification: M310; O310; Z110 1. Introduction In most countries, entrepreneurs have recently After a short introduction to the historical context been recognizing the benefits of design. The progres- of Croatian economic development, the paper deals sive use of design, from operational to strategic level, with literature overview on the issues of design orien- in public and private sector organizations is also re- tation, design environment, design implementation, ceiving attention in marketing management. The and design management. We then propose the initial topics of this study are design orientation and design model of relationships with hypotheses grounded implementation in Croatian companies, as well as on theory. The third section deals with the research the impact of design environment. This paper aims to highlight the role of design as one of the core ele- ments of innovation and market success, as well as the Sanja Rocco, PhD impact of the national design environment on compa- Senior Lecturer nies concerning design management. The contribu- Zagreb School of Business tion of the paper to literature is a research undertaken E-mail: sanja.rocco@pvzg.hr in Croatian companies, as such research has not yet Address: Ul. Grada Vukovara 68, Croatia been done and is usually undertaken in more devel- ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2740-151X oped countries. Copyright © 2021 by the School of Economics and Business Sarajevo 17 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION methodology and sample description. The final part convergence between EU countries. On average, EU entails the results and discussion. In the conclusion, innovation performance has increased by 8.9% since we highlight the contribution of this paper, with limi- 2012 . However, Croatia is a moderate innovator with tations and recommendations for future research. innovation score value 64, which puts the country in Substantial reforms and strong economic funda- the 23rd place out of 28 EU countries. Innovators and mentals of Croatia’s reforms since the country’s 1991 Firm investments are the strongest Croatian innova- independence have been significant, given the his- tion dimensions, while the lowest indicator scores are torical context. Croatia rapidly implemented an am- for Exports of knowledge-intensive services, Design bitious reform program based on the gradual open- applications, Venture capital expenditures, and ing of trade and investment and the creation of open Lifelong learning. Design application in Croatia, ac- market economy, driven by commitments taken dur- cording to the European Innovation Scoreboard 2020 ing its World Trade Organization (WTO) accession ne- is 10.74. In comparison, Slovenia’s (a neighboring gotiations and preparations for its strategic goal of ex-Yugoslavian republic) score value is 46.71. Also, ac- acceding to the European Union (EU). Croatia joined cording to the Global Competitiveness Index Ranking the European Union in 2013 as the 28th member 4.0 from 2019, covering 114 economies, Croatia state. Throughout the EU accession process, Croatia ranked 64th as the lowest EU state. engaged in many structural reforms. However, its Therefore, the research questions are: What is the economy is still in transition, with slower growth than perception of design by managers in Croatian com- countries at a similar stage of development, such as panies and do they use design on multiple levels? Bulgaria or Romania. Croatia’s GDP per capita remains What is their opinion about the design environment in one of the lowest in the EU. Once the industrial pow- Croatia: political, economic, social, and technological? erhouse of the former Yugoslavia, Croatia has trans- Are they willing to accept new approaches to manage- formed into a service-based economy that relies on ment, for instance, creative design thinking methods? low-productivity tourism sector for jobs and income. What about the national design strategy? Does design In fact, Croatia’s economy is by far the most reliant on environment have a significant impact on design ori- foreign visitors among its European rivals. entation of companies in whole? Our research focuses The overdependence on one sector increases on the perception of design issues by the manage- the vulnerability of Croatia to external shocks as evi- ment. Therefore, all variables in the study have been denced by the impact of the global financial crisis in operationalized from the managers’ point of view. 2008–2014. The national system of innovation as well as investment in research and development is low by EU standards. An additional problem is the high rate 2. Literature review and hypotheses of skilled workforce that keep emigrating. Small and development medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of Croatian economy in terms of their number, employ- The role of design has been and still is a subject ment, and turnover. The productivity of SMEs, howev- of discussion. From those who see design as the key er, is disturbingly low, as is the ability of Croatian SMEs element of every organization’s strategy and the most to internationalize through export. Structural reforms, vital tool of innovation in business to those who be- the encouragement of competition and entrepre- lieve that design is a key element of manipulation in neurship, and the strengthening of institutions that making poor-quality products and services desirable, would enable better functioning of market economy thereby promoting consumerism in the most negative are preconditions for creating opportunities in a com- sense. petitive environment. Diversification is a challenge However, design should in first place be human- the Croatian economy faces, as do other countries centered, providing better solutions for different from the region (OECD 2019). needs of end-users. According to the International The general situation in the Republic of Croatia Council of Design, Ico-D: “Design is a constantly concerning innovation policy will also be observed evolving and dynamic discipline. The professionally with regard to the Innovation Union Scoreboard. trained designer applies intent to create the visual, Based on the scoreboard, the EU evaluates and com- material, spatial and digital environment, cognizant pares the innovation characteristics of 28 member of the experiential, employing interdisciplinary and states and some other non-member European coun- hybrid approaches to the theory and practice of de- tries. According to the  2020 edition of the innova- sign. They understand the cultural, ethical, social, eco- tion scoreboard, the EU’s innovation performance nomic and ecological impact of their endeavors and continues to increase at a steady pace, with growing their ultimate responsibility towards people and the 18 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION planet across both commercial and non-commercial focused than before, emphasizing design as a strate- spheres”. The complex tasks of design can be seen as gic tool for innovation, economic progress, and job a conscious decision-making process by which infor- creation (Quartz+Co. 2011). mation (an idea) is transformed into an outcome, be it Raising awareness about design and its positive tangible (product) or intangible (service) (von Stamm impact to a broader audience is the basic level of de- 2008). sign policy, which a government should engage in to Depending on the context, design implies an ob- support design implementation. Design promotion jective, the intention of designing, particularly in an- initiatives usually include activities from professional alytical and creative phases. It also denotes as a pro- organizations such as design awards, conferences, cess, a drawing, a sketch, or a model in the execution publications, exhibitions, design weeks, etc. phase that gives form to an idea. The techniques and At the next level of design policy, design support is methods of design combine both the logical scientific targeted at design education and design research in- approach and the intuitive artistic approach with cul- stitutions. Initiatives are usually driven by the Ministry tural dimensions. Because design is at the same time of Education and/or the Ministry of Culture. They fo- a problem-solving activity, creative ideation, as well cus on promoting certain design disciplines (e.g., de- as the coordination between different professionals sign thinking), teaching methods, specific research involved in the process, it has also been considered topics, attracting foreign students, etc. At the same a bridge between art and science (Borja de Mozota level of design policy, design support is targeted at 2003a). Design influences user behavior in many ways companies (usually SMEs). The initiatives and activities and indirectly shapes the society. According to Best here are usually facilitated by a national design coun- (2006), design plays a key role in shaping the world cil, a design center, a design foundation or a design and generating new products, but also systems and promotion institute offering, for instance, consulting services, in response to different market conditions or advisory services, matchmaking between design- and opportunities. The final result of a designer’s work ers and businesses, education and training, grants is not forming a product but shaping social behavioral and scholarships, dissemination of information about rules (Keller 1975, p. 29). the economic value of design, libraries and informa- tion centers (including material libraries), incubation facilities, exhibition areas, and not least – tax credits (Quartz+Co. 2011, p.15). 2.1. Design orientation One of the most significant barriers to the take-up According to some scholars (e.g., Gorb 1990; Borja de of design in policy is measuring the return on invest- Mozota 2003a), design orientation can be defined as ment at micro and macro levels in both, private and an approach by the management which relies on de- public sectors. Although there is an increasing bank sign as a strategic tool. Design oriented companies are of knowledge that can contribute to evidence-based those that incorporate their design process into their policymaking, additional statistics on design impact business strategy (Moll et al. 2007). are required (Whicher, Swiatek, and Cawood 2015, p. Recently, there have been numerous studies in 11). (…) Examining design investment by enterprises different countries that confirm the positive impact is the first step to investigating comparable empiri- of design orientation on innovation capabilities. The cal evidence on design’s contribution to the European important role of design has also been recognized in economy (Whicher et al. 2015). Design policy should the Europe 2020 Growth Strategy which led to the have a clear vision linked to a specific and tangi- European Commission’s Action Plan for Design-Driven ble set of actions as well as clear targets, financing Innovation (EC 2013). The European Commission’s mechanisms, allocation of tasks, and the timeframe Innobarometer, a tool that measures innovation- for implementation and evaluation process. With the related activities in EU businesses (2001–2016), also increased interest in design at multiple levels of gov- gives evidence of the positive effects of design on ernance across the EU, there is also an opportunity innovation. for European countries to strengthen their respec- tive economies by increasing the innovativeness and performance of their companies. However, huge dif- 2.2. Design Environment ferences persist between more and less developed In most countries, the complex nature of design has European countries. Although different design sup - been acknowledged, as well as its benefits, be it eco - port programs for SMEs show significant results in nomic, cultural, social, or environmental. Recent de- economic growth, what remains a specific problem sign policies in European countries tend to be more is how to help SMEs to develop their capabilities to South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 19 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION become more design-led in developing innovations, and mission. Design Ladder, a staircase model created and more competitive. Several countries have de- by the Danish Design Centre (Ramlau and Melander veloped different models of support worldwide, but 2004) has been used for measuring design implemen- the crucial issues remain: how to employ tools, what tation in various studies and practices because of its challenges and opportunities are related to the de- simplicity. It identifies four steps: the first is no design, sign integration process, and how the management the second is design as styling, the third is design inte- of design integration takes place (Gerlitz 2016, p. 27). grated into the company, and the highest, fourth step, Concerning the strong impact of the national design is design as a strategic tool. The Design Management policy and the multiple elements of design environ- Staircase model by Kootstra (2009) describes the four ment, we propose: levels of design management inspired by Design Ladder, Level 1: No design management; Level 2: H1: Design environment is positively related to Design management as project; Level 3: Design man- design orientation of a company. agement as function and Level 4: Design management as culture/strategic management of design (Design The Croatian example shows us that the country Management Europe Survey 2009). According to the had a strong tradition of design in terms of profes- Design Management Institute (2015), there are three sional work, professional associations, promotional so-called zones of design-use in practice. The first is exhibitions, and even in terms of design theory dur- the tactical value of design – which serves for devel- ing the period of a socialist regime and planned oping new products and delivering new services. This economy when it was a part of Yugoslavia. However, aspect of design is concerned mostly with aesthetic when Croatia became independent, a clear, govern- value and functionality. In the second, organizational ment-regulated design policy was not implemented. value, design is a connector or integrator of business In 2007, there was an initiative by design associations functions. It looks at customer experience as a plat- and professionals to establish the Croatian Design form for innovation. The third, strategic value, looks Center. However, the center failed to gather support at design as a strategic resource for new business from the government and did not have a strong im- models. Since the DMI model has been developed for pact on Croatian design policy at the national level. use in companies, the stages of their model have also During the process of joining the EU, the Croatian been used in our questionnaire. Chamber of Commerce established its own design A design strategy is the effective allocation and center (2012). Still, the center did not play an impor- coordination of design resources and activities to ac- tant role in creating a national design policy and the complish a firm’s objectives of creating its appropri- initiative did not last for a long time – the center was ate public and internal identities, its product offer - unfortunately closed in 2016. Strong initiatives still ings and its environments (Olson, Cooper, and Slater exist from different groups of design professionals or 1998). Turner (2009) suggests that design takes up the individuals and design associations in the form of de- role of coordinator, facilitator, and interpreter, rather sign events, exhibitions, and festivals (Design District than a leader. As it touches so many parts of business, Zagreb, Plan D, Zagreb Design Week, etc.). It is likely everyone in the organization should understand and that this unsupportive design climate – in terms of de- value the contribution design can make and compa- sign programs focused on entrepreneurs – probably nies need to integrate it into their DNA (in Von Stamm also has a negative impact on design implementation 2008, p.117). in many companies, especially SMEs. To manage design at a strategy level, according to Borja de Mozota (2003a), is to manage the contri- bution of design to the strategy formulation process. What needs to be defined is the responsibility and 2.3. Design Implementation leadership assigned to design and its contribution to Some authors recognize three main levels of design the organizational culture, there needs to be a search implementation inside a company: Borja de Mozota for opportunities for design innovation and multiply (2003a) differentiates design as styling, design as pro - demonstrations of identity through design. This third, cess, and design as strategy. Best (2006) identifies the highest level of design management establishes links operational, tactical, and strategic level of design. At between design, corporate communications, and top the operational level, we design products, services, management. Borja de Mozota proposes two mod- and customer experiences. At the tactical level, design els for strategic positioning of design: the innate and is concerned with systems and processes inside the the acquired. While in the innate model the strategic company, and at the strategic level, we design policy role of design is part of the founder’s entrepreneurial 20 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION plan from the beginning and these companies have a “design management encompasses the ongoing pro- strong design spirit in all of their organizational pro- cesses, business decisions, and strategies that enable cesses, the acquired model is the one in which design innovation and create effectively-designed products, is learned and accepted by experience and shows a services, communications, environments, and brands progressive valorization inside the company. Based that enhance our quality of life and provide organi- on the role of design implementation which confirms zational success. The scope of design management the design orientation, we propose the following ranges from the tactical management of corporate hypothesis: design functions and design agencies, including de- sign operations, staff, methods and processes–to the H2: Design orientation of a company is positively strategic advocacy of design across the organization related to the level of design implementation. as a key differentiator and driver of organizational suc - cess. It includes the use of design thinking–or using de- In a world characterized by rapid change and un- sign processes to solve general business problems”. certainty, strategic design has emerged as a means In order to assist design managers to better iden- of implementing a range of new possibilities – rapid tify their organization’s level of design maturity, the iteration of ideas, incorporating end users, and work- design maturity matrix has been developed. It serves ing across knowledge silos – for global corporations as an assessment tool to determine where design and governments. For leaders and managers, strategic currently delivers value across three functional areas design provides an alternative means to see the big and provides a foundation for setting and achieving picture, consider all aspects of a complex problem, future design goals. Furthermore, the Design Value and implement solutions for change and long-term System with three components has been developed sustainability (Huppatz 2020, p. 126). There has been and made available at the dmi website in order to a number of case-studies [e.g., Borja de Mozota 2003; help companies: The Design Value Index, The Design Moll et al 2007; Acklin 2011; Venkatsh et al. 2012], and Maturity Matrix and the Design Value Map. Managers research on a national level in different countries [e.g., have a better perception of design in companies The Economic Effects of Design, Danish Design Centre that implement design in more levels. We therefore 2004; Design Council, UK: Designing Britain 2004, The propose: Cox Review of Creativity in Business 2005, Innovation by Design. 2015, The Design Economy 2018 -The State H4: The level of design implementation is posi- of Design in the UK; Design Innovation Research, tively related to perceived design value. Ireland 2007; Design Management Europe Survey by Kootstra: An analysis of design management practic- Several mindsets, according to different authors, es in Europe 2009; Mapping of International Design have been identified as an important part of design Policies, by Quartz + Co, Denmark 2011; Westcott et thinking methodology. In particular, design thinking al. DMI Design Value Scorecard 2013; EU Commission: is human-centered, mindful of process, empathetic, Design Policy Monitor, 2015], which give evidence includes storytelling, has a culture of prototyping, is about the positive relation between the level of de- biased toward action, includes radical open-minded sign implementation and business results. A research collaboration among disciplines, integrative thinking, undertaken by the British Design Council in 2012 is optimistic, challenges constraints and supports cre- shows that, on average, businesses in UK that invest ative solutions (Brown 2009; Nussbaum 2004; Martin in design have approximately a 50% better long-term 2009). financial performance than businesses that do not. As an approach, design thinking relies on the An evaluation report from 2014 on the role of design capacities we all have, but that are overlooked and in the commercialization of science and technology abandoned in favor of more conventional problem- demonstrates that design accelerates commercial- solving practices. Not only does it focus on creating ization and increases value of products and services products and services that are human-centered, but (Design Council 2012, 2014). Therefore, we propose: the process itself is also deeply human. Design think- ing relies on our ability to be intuitive, recognize pat- H3: The level of design implementation is posi- terns, construct ideas that have emotional meaning as tively related to business results. well as being functional, and express ourselves in me- dia, other than with words or symbols. There are three main phases in the design thinking process: inspira- 2.4. The Design Management Issues tion, ideation, and implementation. In the inspiration According to the Design Management Institute phase, a problem is looked at as an opportunity which South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 21 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION motivates the search for solutions. Ideation is the pro- dimensions can be applied with a view to new forms cess of generating, developing, and testing ideas, and of creative entrepreneurship. implementation leads us from the project stage into Concerning the different use of design potentials real people’s lives (Brown and Wyatt 2010). in companies, which is mostly related to managerial Unlike critical thinking, which is a process of analy- decisions, we propose another hypothesis: sis associated with the deconstruction of ideas, design It is clear that today’s designer designs in a com- thinking is a creative process based upon the con- pletely different world than the designer of the 20th struction of ideas. By disallowing judgments, design century. Nevertheless, there is also a need for a new thinking eliminates the fear of failure and encourages approach to management – a focus on a multi-disci- maximum input and participation. Non-routine, out- plinary approach and design thinking. As Sir George of-box ideas are welcome, since these often pave the Cox (the Cox Review of Creativity in Business by British way for the most creative solutions. Every individual Design Council) puts it: “We need business people acts as a designer and design thinking is a process of who understand creativity, who know when and how applying design methodologies to solving problems to use the specialist, and who can manage innovation; in different life situations and practices (Ilipinari et al. creative specialists who understand the environment 2011). in which their talents will be used and who can talk Design thinking is typically understood as an the same language as their clients and their business expansive, free-flow process that results in various colleagues; And engineers and technologists who creative ideas for innovation. However, Chen and understand the design process and can talk the lan- Venkatesh (2013) offer an alternate understanding of guage of business” (Quartz+Co. 2011, p. 24). design thinking as a creative, but also a reductive pro- According to Verizer and Borja de Mozota (2005), cess, structured by four key filters. To generate design developing formal tools for better integrating differ - concepts, each organization should develop its own ent disciplines and the unique perspectives seem to design-thinking formula, which incorporates these be particularly lacking for bringing the user-oriented elements: user-centered design, emphasizing brand design considerations to the forefront of senior man- image, fostering collaborations, and adopting a com- agement thinking. petitor orientation. Design-oriented organizations For Buchanan (2015, p. 15), a manager or leader implement design thinking by (1) employing multiple provides appropriate environment that facilitates the modes of design thinking, (2) disseminating end-user performance of others as they work to accomplish an profiles across the organization, (3) cultivating organic undertaking. The environment is both conceptual and organizational forms to increase collaborations, (4) us- physical. Conceptually, it is the framework of values ing the brand to establish a design language, and (5) and vision that serves to accomplish a collective ob- factoring in competitors’ design outputs to implement jective or goal. It also helps individuals to achieve the design thinking (Chen and Venkatesh 2013, p. 15). personal goals of participating individuals within and Acklin and Fust (2014) propose four modes of de- beyond the organization. Physically, the environment sign management which can be distinguished with is the organization of resources needed to achieve regard to their strategic contribution to the company goals and objectives. In general management theory, and its direction: the functional aspects of management are planning, – simple design management organizing, directing, and controlling. These are the – integrated design management areas of the functional application of design thinking – dynamic design management and in organizations, bound within the traditions of man- – entrepreneurial mode of design management. agement. Managers are responsible for designing the worlds we make in organizations and for the worlds The fourth, entrepreneurial mode explores the that organizations make for others in the social life overlap of entrepreneurship with design and design around us. management. Design management has the capabil- There are different management styles and tech- ity to take on a more active role in companies in re- niques, and the use of creative methods depends spect to entrepreneurial issues in companies as well mostly on the education and knowledge of the man- in new venture creation. The entrepreneurial mode agement which is also connected with the design ori- of design management also emphasizes two dimen- entation of the company. We therefore propose: sions essential for any creative enterprise: the dimen- sion of design as a creator of new opportunities, and H5: Design orientation of a company has a signifi- the dimension of design management as a driver for cant impact on the use of creative techniques by the exploitation of these opportunities. These two the management. 22 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Can design shape organizational culture so that from the Centre for Design Innovation Ireland (2007), the organization positively affects the thoughts and and additional six criteria for the use of creative meth- behavior of individuals? The true test will be the de- ods were evaluated. For the measurement of company gree to which our efforts to introduce design thinking performance ten items were used. Respondents had into the management of organizations embodies the to evaluate the overall performance of their business fundamental principle of design (Buchanan 2015, p. as well as additional nine performance criteria (perfor- 21). The initial model of relationships with the hypoth- mance rate against competition, growth and profita- eses is shown in Figure 1. bility dimensions, demand for products/services etc.). The final part of the questionnaire included additional questions with general data about the respondents and their companies. 3. Research methodology and sample The IBM SPSS v19 statistical program was used for description data analysis, which were tested with univariate, bi- The research was conducted combining prelimi- variate and multivariate statistical methods, and struc- nary qualitative in-depth interviews and a quantitative tural equation modeling. An exploratory factor analy- online survey. After analyzing the literature, relevant sis was conducted to check the validity and reliability items for the questionnaire were used from previous of the scales. Partial Least Square Structural Equation reliable research. The questionnaire consisted of 21 Modelling analysis (with the software Smart PLS 3) questions. Content validity of the questionnaire was was conducted due to a relatively small sample, to tested with eight experts from the field of marketing, examine the relationships between main constructs. and one from the design field. Most of the respons- PLS-SEM analysis offers a good approximation of com- es were ranked on a Likert scale (1 to 5). The Design mon factor models in situations where factor-based Orientation scale was adopted from Borja de Mozota SEM cannot deliver results due to its methodological (2003b) and included 13 items. For design imple- limitations in terms of model complexity, sample size mentation a three items scale was adopted from the requirements, or inclusion of composite variables in Design Management Institute (DMI 2015). For meas- the model (Sarstedt et al. 2017) uring the managerial approach five items were used Data were collected using an online survey sent Figure 1. The initial model Source: Author’s research results South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 23 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION to CEOs, general managers, and marketing managers 4.1. Testing hypothesis H1 in Croatian companies with at least 3 employees. A fi- nal list of 2,184 email addresses was compiled based To check the relation between the design environ- on data provided from several reliable sources: the ment and design orientation and to test hypothesis Croatian Chamber of Commerce (HGK), the Croatian H1 – Design environment is positively related to de- Ministry of Entrepreneurship and Crafts (MINPRO), the sign orientation of a company – we applied the re- Croatian Agency for SMEs, Innovation and Investments gression analysis. The factor of design orientation was (HAMAG-BICRO), and the list of Croatian companies considered a dependent variable in the analysis and with GREEN MARK Sign of Excellence 2016. Managers the factor of orientation toward environment was an received an email explaining the general purpose of independent variable. the study and a link to the survey. The research began The R-value represents the multiple correlation in June 2017 and was concluded in November 2017, coefficient and is 0.197. The R  value (0.039) indicates after a reminder was sent. A significant number of re - how much of the total variation is in the dependent spondents did not finish the questionnaire. A total of variables –predictors (of DO) can be explained by the 143 managers returned usable questionnaires, yield- independent variable, the environment. ing a 61 percent completion response rate. Out of The next is the ANOVA table, which reports how these, the final sample of 112 respondents qualified well the regression equation fits the data (i.e., predicts for the research – CEOs or managers from companies the dependent variable). This table indicates that the with more than 3 employees, which is a return of 78%. independent variables predict the dependent variable There were 24% of companies with 3–10 employees, statistically significantly. The statistical significance of 34% with 11–50 employees, 15% with 51–100 em- the regression model, p < 0.0005, which is less than ployees, 6% with 101–200 employees, and 21% with 0.05, and indicates that, overall, the regression model more than 201 employees. The representation of com- statistically significantly predicts the outcome variable panies according to their size (small, medium-sized, (i.e., the regression model is a good fit of the data). and large) corresponds to the structure ratio of the The coefficients table provides us with the follow - Croatian economy. The structure according to indus- ing: Non-standardized coefficients indicate how much try type was 40% of product industries, 33% of service the dependent variable varies with an independent industries, and 27 % of combined industries. variable when all other independent variables are The final sample consisted of 58% male and 42% constant. If p < 0.05, the coefficients are statistically female respondents. Concerning the position in the significantly different from 0 (zero). The t-value and company, 61% were managers and 39% were CEOs. corresponding p-value are located in the “t” and “Sig.” In terms of age, 43% of respondents were aged 40–49 columns. As we can see from the result in Table 1, the years, and 22.3% were aged 30–39, as well as between regression analysis shows the relationship of design 50 and 59. Most of the respondents held a gradu- environment support for business with design orien- ate degree, (47.3%), followed by a master’s degree tation. The correlation is not large (R=0.197) but is sta- (15.2%), and a bachelor’s degree (13.4%). Concerning tistically significant (p<0.05). the value of design, more than 80% of managers rated The regression analysis shows the interconnection design as an important issue. In fact, 21% think that between the support from the environment to use de- design plays an important role, 27% stated that de- sign in business and the design orientation. The cor- sign is extremely important, while 30% hold design to relation is moderate (R=0.197) but statistically signifi- be a strategic tool. However, for 19 % it plays a limited cant (p<0.05). role, and only 1% believe design is of no importance. 4.2. Testing hypotheses H2 and H3 4. Results and discussion We then test the relationship between design im- Inferential statistical methods applied in this paper plementation and design orientation, as well as with were: t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and regres- business results. sion analysis. The PLS_SEM method was also applied as a confirmatory method of analyzing the direction of the influence of variables. 24 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 1. Regression Analysis Descriptive Statistics Mean SD N Design Orientation 3.852 0.685 112 Please estimate support from your environment to 2.71 1.134 112 use design in your business Model Summary Model R R- Adjusted R- Std. Error of Change Statistics squared squared the R-squared F-change df1 df2 Sig. F- Estimate change change 1 0.197 0.039 0.030 0.675 0.039 4.439 1 110 0.037 ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 2.022 1 2.022 4.439 0.037 Residual 50.106 110 0.456 Total 52.128 111 Coefficients Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig. Coefficients B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.529 0.166 21.256 0.000 Please estimate support 0.119 0.056 0.197 2.107 0.037 from your environment to use design in your business Source: Author`s research results H2: Design Orientation (DesOr) of a compa- According to the results of the Levene’s Test for ny is positively related to the level of Design Equality of Variances and t-test for Equality of Means, Implementation (DesImp). companies that use design within the company – for H3: The level of Design Implementation (DesImp) interior, and internal communication, are on average is positively related to Business Results (BusRes) more design-oriented and are more successful. However, there is no difference in design orienta- The results of Question 6 about the level of de- tion or success between companies which use or do sign implementation with variables from Q6_1 to not use design externally – for corporate communica- Q6_5 were tested for the relation with design orienta- tion, branding & marketing activities. tion and business results (see Tables 2-6). South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 25 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 2. Question Q6_1. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error We use design internally for: Mean workplace interior and internal communications Design orientation No 47 3.626 0.708 0.103 Yes 65 4.015 0.625 0.077 Business Results No 47 3.338 0.863 0.126 Yes 65 3.667 0.703 0.087 Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Lower Upper tailed) Diff. Error Diff. Design Equal 1.064 0.305 -3.075 110 0.003 -0.389 0.126 -0.640 -0.138 orientation variances assumed Equal -3.013 91.521 0.003 -0.389 0.129 -0.645 -0.133 variances not assumed Business Equal 2.978 0.087 -2.223 110 0.028 -0.330 0.148 -0.623 -0.036 Results variances assumed Equal -2.152 86.478 0.034 -0.330 0.153 -0.634 -0.025 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 3. Question Q6_2. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design externally, for: N Mean Std. Std. Error Deviation Mean corporate communication, branding & marketing activities. Design Orientation No 21 3.627 0.754 0.165 Yes 91 3.904 0.662 0.069 Business Results No 21 3.387 0.893 0.195 Yes 91 3.562 0.763 0.080 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference 26 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 Design Equal 0.496 0.483 -1.682 110 0.095 -0.277 0.165 -0.603 0.049 Orientation variances assumed Equal -1.550 27.564 0.132 -0.277 0.179 -0.643 0.089 variances not assumed Business Equal 0.405 0.526 -0.917 110 0.361 -0.175 0.191 -0.553 0.203 Results variances assumed Equal -0.830 27.126 0.414 -0.175 0.211 -0.607 0.257 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 3. Question Q6_2. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design externally, for: N Mean Std. Std. Error Deviation Mean corporate communication, branding & marketing activities. Design Orientation No 21 3.627 0.754 0.165 Yes THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENT 91 3.904 0.662 0. ATION069 Business Results No 21 3.387 0.893 0.195 Yes 91 3.562 0.763 0.080 Table 3. Continued Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.496 0.483 -1.682 110 0.095 -0.277 0.165 -0.603 0.049 Orientation variances assumed Equal -1.550 27.564 0.132 -0.277 0.179 -0.643 0.089 variances not assumed Business Equal 0.405 0.526 -0.917 110 0.361 -0.175 0.191 -0.553 0.203 Results variances assumed Equal -0.830 27.126 0.414 -0.175 0.211 -0.607 0.257 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 4. Question Q6_3. Levene's Test and t-test We use design for N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean product innovation & development. Design No 39 3.5448 0.64393 0.10311 Orientation Yes 73 4.0156 0.65339 0.07647 Business Results No 39 3.3494 0.84155 0.13476 Yes 73 3.6250 0.74565 0.08727 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.479 0.490 -3.651 110 0.000 -0.47075 0.12895 -0.72630 -0.21521 Orientation variances assumed Equal -3.667 78.730 0.000 -0.47075 0.12838 -0.72629 -0.21522 variances not assumed Business Equal 1.082 0.301 -1.781 110 0.078 -0.27564 0.15473 -0.58228 0.03100 Results variances assumed Equal -1.717 70.056 0.090 -0.27564 0.16055 -0.59584 0.04456 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 27 Table 5. Question Q6_4. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design for N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean process/service innovation, research & development Design Orientation No 41 3.4611 0.64954 0.10144 Yes 71 4.0772 0.60224 0.07147 Business Results No 41 3.3018 0.81585 0.12741 Yes 71 3.6602 0.74558 0.08848 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.014 0.908 -5.067 110 0.000 -0.61604 0.12158 -0.85699 -0.37509 Orientation variances assumed Equal -4.964 78.515 0.000 -0.61604 0.12409 -0.86306 -0.36902 variances not assumed Business Equal 1.448 0.231 -2.367 110 0.020 -0.35838 0.15140 -0.65843 -0.05834 Results variances assumed Equal -2.310 77.575 0.024 -0.35838 0.15512 -0.66724 -0.04953 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Companies that use design to develop and in- to test the relationship between design implementa- novate products and services are, on average, more tion and overall business results of the company, ac- design-oriented than companies that do not use de- cording to the DMI ScoreCard model. Three t-test ana- sign to develop products, but there is no difference in lyzes were performed for independent samples. One the success of the company according to the use of was conducted for each DM score card statement to design. check whether there is a statistically significant differ - Companies that use design to develop and in- ence in the average values of the independent vari- novate processes and services are, on average, more ables between two groups of data – subjects. As an design-oriented and also more successful than com- independent variable, the variable of total company panies that do not. success on a scale from 1 to 5 was used, where com- Companies that use design for strategic plan- panies with a score of less than 3 were in the group ning are also more design-oriented and successful of less successful companies, and companies with a than companies that do not use design in strategic score of 3–5 were put in the group of successful com- planning. panies. The following Table 7 shows average design The previous analysis is followed by the additional usage ratings for two groups of companies with re- testing of the results for Question Q_10, (see Table 7) spect to business results score. 28 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 6. Question Q6_5. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean We use design for strategic planning Design orientation No 83 3.7070 0.66712 0.07323 Yes 29 4.2655 0.56475 0.10487 Business Success No 83 3.4187 0.82603 0.09067 Yes 29 3.8448 0.56759 0.10540 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.247 0.620 -4.029 110 0.000 -0.55851 0.13862 -0.83322 -0.28381 Orientation variances assumed Equal -4.367 57.306 0.000 -0.55851 0.12791 -0.81461 -0.30241 variances not assumed Business Equal 4.235 0.042 -2.571 110 0.011 -0.42615 0.16578 -0.75469 -0.09761 Success variances assumed Equal -3.065 71.420 0.003 -0.42615 0.13903 -0.70335 -0.14896 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 7. Question Q_10. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics Business N Mean Std. Std. results Deviation Error Mean 89 4.10 1.023 0.108 We use design for development and delivery of  3.00 products, services, and communications (for < 3.00 23 3.65 1.152 0.240 aesthetic value and functionality) We use design as a connector or integrator of 89 3.71 1.140 0.121  3.00 business functions (for internal and external comm., < 3.00 23 3.13 1.014 0.211 as customer value, brand loyalty and market share) 89 3.52 1.207 0.128 We use design as strategic resource for new  3.00 business models (for strategic investments in < 3.00 23 2.83 1.114 0.232 customer experience design, long-term return on investment) Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 29 Equal 1.541 0.217 1.828 110 0.070 0.449 0.246 -0.038 0.936 We use design variances for development assumed Equal 1.703 31.545 0.098 0.449 0.264 -0.088 0.986 and delivery of variances products, not services, and assumed communications We use design Equal 0.524 0.471 2.212 110 0.029 0.577 0.261 0.060 1.095 as a connector variances assumed or integrator of Equal 2.371 37.728 0.023 0.577 0.243 0.084 1.070 business variances functions not assumed We use design Equal 1.288 0.259 2.484 110 0.691 0.278 0.140 1.242 0.015 variances as strategic assumed resource for Equal 2.605 36.534 0.013 0.691 0.265 0.153 1.228 new business variances models not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 7. Question Q_10. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics Business N Mean Std. Std. results Deviation Error Mean We use design for development and delivery of 89 4.10 1.023 0.108  3.00 products, services, and communications (for < 3.00 23 3.65 1.152 0.240 aesthetic value and functionality) 89 3.71 1.140 0.121 We use design as a connector or integrator of  3.00 business functions (for internal and external comm., < 3.00 23 3.13 1.014 0.211 as customer value, brand loyalty and market share) We use design as strategic resource for new 89 3.52 1.207 0.128  3.00 business models (for strategic investments in < 3.00 23 2.83 1.114 0.232 customer experience design, long-term return on Table 7. Continued investment) Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference We use design Equal 1.541 0.217 1.828 110 0.070 0.449 0.246 -0.038 0.936 variances for assumed development Equal 1.703 31.545 0.098 0.449 0.264 -0.088 0.986 and delivery of variances products, not services, and assumed communications We use design Equal 0.524 0.471 2.212 110 0.029 0.577 0.261 0.060 1.095 as a connector variances assumed or integrator of Equal 2.371 37.728 0.023 0.577 0.243 0.084 1.070 business variances functions not assumed Equal 1.288 0.259 2.484 110 0.691 0.278 0.140 1.242 We use design 0.015 variances as strategic assumed resource for Equal 2.605 36.534 0.013 0.691 0.265 0.153 1.228 new business variances models not assumed Source: Author`s research results As shown in Table 7, there are statistically signifi- 4.3. Testing the hypothesis H4 cant differences between less and more successful companies in the two uses of design – integration of We will test the positive relationship between the business function and strategic tool for business mod- level of design implementation (DesImp) and the per- els. In the first statement (product development and ceived design value (DesVal) by managers. delivery), there is no statistically significant difference The relationship between design implementation between more successful and less successful compa- and perceived design value is positive (R = 0.471) and nies (the score is higher here as well, but not so much statistically significant (see Table 8). that it could be accepted with certainty). This means that the hypothesis H2 about the positive relations be- tween design orientation and design implementation 4.4. Testing the hypothesis H5 has been confirmed, while H3 – about the positive relationship between level of design implementation Finally, we will test the hypothesis H5 that concerns and business results – has been partially confirmed. the positive relationship between design orientation (DesOr) of a company and use of creative techniques (CreTech) by management. 30 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 8. The t-test and Anova Model R R-squared Adjusted Std. Error of Change Statistics R-squared the R-squared change F- df1 df2 Sig. F- Estimate change change 1 0.471 0.222 0.214 0.581 0.222 27.910 1 98 0.000 ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 9.412 1 9.412 27.910 0.000 Residual 33.050 98 0.337 Total 42.462 99 Source: Author`s research results Table 9. The t-test and Anova Model Summary Model R R-squared Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics R-squared of the R- F- df1 df2 Sig. F Estimate squared change Change Change 1 0.497 0.247 0.241 0.84572 0.247 36.170 1 110 0.000 ANOVA Sum of Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 25.870 1 25.870 36.170 0.000 Residual 78.677 110 0.715 Total 104.547 111 Coefficients Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. 1 (Constant) 1.779 0.322 5.516 0.000 Use of creative 0.577 0.096 0.497 6.014 0.000 techniques Source: Author`s research results The correlation R is 0.497 and the percentage of connection between the use of creative techniques by the common variance (R-squared) is 24.7%. ANOVA management and design orientation of a company. results (Table 9) show that the regression model is sta- Hypothesis H4 has been confirmed. tistically significant (Sig<0.05). The analysis shows the South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 31 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 4.5. The PLS-SEM analysis corresponding composite indicator, the other measur- In the final stage of the analysis, we used the PLS SEM ing relationships among the composite indicators in method to test the relationship between the con- the system (Trichera et al. 2008, p. 311). structs. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) consists The validity of the PLS-SEM model has been con- of two sub-models: the measurement model and firmed because the goodness of fit SRMR is 0.065 (less structural model. The measurement model represents than 0.08, which is usually considered as a limit for the relationships between the observed data and good fitting model). Figure 11 shows values of direct the latent variables. The structural model represents and indirect impact of constructs. According to the the relationships between the latent variables. The PLS-SEM model, the design environment has a strong- partial least squares path modeling method (PLS) to er impact on design orientation (0.187), followed by structural equation modeling (SEM) allows estimating design implementation (0.125). The design environ- complex cause-effect relationship models with latent ment also has a stronger impact on the perceived variables. One of the most important advantages in design value (0.306) than the managerial approach, using SEMs is that they provide two kinds of weights: although it is also significant (0.205). one measuring the impact of each indicator on the Figure 2. The PLS-SEM Model DesEn = Design environment DesVal = Perceived Design Value DesOr = Design Orientation ManApp = Management Approach DesImp = Level of Design Implementation BusRes = Business Result Figure 2.1. R-squared values of the PLS-SEM R Square Business Results (BueRes) 0.042 Design Orientation (DesOr) 0.124 Perceived Design Value (DesVal) 0.124 Use of Creative Techniques (CreTech) 0.400 32 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION The managerial approach has a strong and posi- design implementation in different levels of a compa- tive impact on the use of creative techniques (0.645) ny. Our results also confirm that design resources are and a significant but rather modest impact on busi- important predecessors of business performance. ness results (0.205). Design orientation of a com- Our findings also confirm that the management pany is not positively related to the use of creative has to be informed and educated about design and its techniques. benefits to fully engage design resources. These find- The PLS-SEM model (fig. 2.1.) explains 12.4% of ing are especially important for Croatian SMEs which the perceived design value and 40% of use of creative make up the majority of its economy. There is a strong techniques in management. tendency in Croatian companies to maximize short- According to the results of our research, a positive run profitability, while at the same time neglecting relation exists between design orientation and design long-term goals. Therefore, in an effort to develop fac - implementation and the use of creative techniques tors that can lead to competitive advantage, managers in companies. The huge influence of the design en- and CEOs should focus not only on individual design vironment – economic, social, cultural, legal and po- resources, but also on their integration into different litical – including the national design policy, has been levels of the company. Design education and knowl- confirmed. Design environment has a strong impact edge, as well as the ability to use creative methods, on design orientation of companies, as well as on per- play an important role in understanding the impact ceived design value, but also a significant impact on and possible contribution of design in a company. managerial approach to design. Previous research, Some limitations of the research have to be taken including the European Commission Innobarometer into consideration before generalizing the results. The 2015, also indicates a positive relationship between first limitation refers to the size of the sample – the design implementation and growing a business, as drop-out rate was high, because it was hard to moti- well as the influence of national design policies, which vate managers and CEOs – our target group – to com- also fits with our results. plete a rather long questionnaire. Another limitation was the reliability of the responses because manag- ers might have been subjective in evaluating their own work and their business results. Therefore, the 5. Conclusion, contribution and responses may be overrated. Future research should limitations also contain more objective data of external variables. It is a challenge to propose a new model of man- The effects of different variables of design orienta- aging design within different design environments, tion on company performance are complex. They de- with the purpose of better cooperation between all pend on the industry, size of the company, and many the participants involved. The most important ele- influences from the surroundings, which should fur - ment of a national design environment is the support ther be continuously researched and measured. to use design resources – economic, social, cultural, le- The research results could be of interest to com- gal, and political. The results of our research show that panies in the region of the Balkans and East European more than 50% of managers see the Croatian national countries in order to increase their competitiveness. design environment as negative and unsupportive Also, further research should be expanded to other (values 2 or 1 on the 5-point scale). countries in the region. Endnotes 5.1. Contribution to Theory and Practice 1 https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/42981 Firstly, our research was undertaken in Croatia, a for- 2 https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/country-analysis/Croatia mer socialist country from the Eastern bloc. The coun- 3 https://www.weforum.org/reports/ try acceded to the European Union in 2013 and is still the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 experiencing a transitional economy. The majority of 4 https://www.ico-d.org/about/ former studies about the subject of design orientation index#defining-the-profession and design management have focused on the practice of companies in more developed European countries. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/ facts-figures/innobarometer_en Secondly, the research highlights the role of de- sign as one of the core elements of innovation. The 6 https://www.dmi.org/page/What_is_Design_Manag study extends the existing knowledge, measuring the 7 http://www.dmi.org/?DesignValue role of design orientation as well as the importance of South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 33 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION References Design Council, 2018. The Design Economy 2018. The State of Design in the UK, DC, available at: https://www.design- Acklin, C. 2011. Design Management Absorption Model council.org.uk/resources/report/design-economy-2018. – A Framework to Describe the Absorption Process Design Management Institute 2015. dmi: Design Value of Design Knowledge by SMEs with Little or No Prior Index Results and Commentary https://www.dmi.org/ Design Experience. page/2015DVIandOTW , (approached June 21, 2016). Acklin, C. and Fust, A. 2014. Towards a dynamic mode of European Commission 2013. Implementing an Action Plan design management and beyond. Proceedings, 19th for Design Driven Innovation. EC Commission staff work - DMI: Academic Design Management Conference Design ing document, SWD(2013) 380 final, Brussels. Management in an Era of Disruption, London, 2–4 European Commission 2015. “Innobarometer 2015 - The in- September 2014. novation trends at EU enterprises”, a survey conducted Best, K. 2006. Design Management: Managing Design by TNS Political & Social at the request of the European Strategy, Process and Implementation. Ava Academia. Commission, Directorate- General for Internal Market, Borja de Mozota, B. 2003a. Design management: Using Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. design to build brand value and corporate innovation. Gerlitz, L. 2016. Developing a Design Management Model DMI/Allworth Press, New York. for Innovating SMEs in the Context of Regional Smart Borja de Mozota, B. 2003b. Design and competitive edge: A Specialisation. Research in Economics and Business: model for design management excellence in European Central and Eastern Europe 2016, Vol. 8, No. 2, 26-57. SMEs. Université Paris X Nanterre. Reprint #02ABOR88, Gorb, P. 1990. Design Management: Papers from the London first published in Design Management Journal Academic Business School, Phaidon Press. Review, 2002, Vol.2, pp. 88-103. Huppatz, D. J. 2020. Design: the key concept. Bloomsburry Brown, T. 2009. Change by Design: how design thinking Publishing Plc. transforms organizations and inspires innovations. Ilipinar, G., Johnston, W. J., Montaña, J., Spender, J.C. and HarperCollins Publishers. Truex, D. P., 2011. Design Thinking in the Postmodern Brown, T. and Wyatt, J. 2010. Design Thinking for Social Organization (November 23). Humanistic Management Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, No 32, Network, Research Paper Series No. 14-6. Winter 2010. http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/ Keller, G. 1975. Design, Vjesnik, Zagreb. design_thinking_for_social_innovation. Kootstra G. L. 2009. The Incorporation of Design Management Buchannan, R. 2015. Worlds in the Making: Design, in Today’s Business Practices, An analysis of design man- Management, and the Reform of Organizational Culture, agement practices in Europe, DME Survey, Inholland. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Martin, R. 2009. The Design of Business: Why Design Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2015, Pages 5-21, https://doi. Thinking is the Next Competitive Advantage. Cambridge org/10.1016/j.sheji.2015.09.003. MA, Harvard Business Press Publishing. Centre for Design Innovation Ireland 2007. Design Difference Moll, I., Montaña, J., Guzman, F., and Praallada, F.S. 2007. - Design Innovation Research, available at: www.desig- Market orientation and design orientation: A manage- ninnovation.ie/downloads/ResearchMethodology.pdf ment model. Journal of Marketing Management, 23 (9): (accessed May 17, 2015). 861-876. Chen S. and Venkatesh A., 2013. An Investigation of How Nussbaum, B. 2004. The power of design. Business Week, Design-oriented Organisations Implement Design 17(2). Thinking. Journal of Marketing Management, Vol 00, OECD 2019. OECD Investment Policy Review of Croatia: An 1-21. http://dx.doi.org./10.1080/0267257X.2013.800898. Overview Assessment, Paris, www.oecd.org/investment/ Cox G., 2005. The Cox Review of Creativity in Business: OECD-Investment-Policy-Review-of-Croatia-Overview- Building on the UK’s Strengths. London: Design Council. Assessment.pdf. Danish Design Centre, 2004. The Economic Olson, E.M., Cooper, R. and Slater, S.F. 1998. Design strat- Effect of Design https://erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/ egy and competitive advantage. Business Horizons, 41, economic-effects-design-2004. 55–61. Design Council, 2004. Designing Britain 2005-2006. Available Ramlau, U. H. and Melander, C. 2004. In Denmark, design at: www.designcouncil.org.uk/factfinder. tops the agenda, Design Management Review, 15(4), pp. Design Council, 2015. Innovation by Design. How design 48-54. enables science and technology research to achieve Sarstedt M., Ringle C. M., and Hair J. F. 2017. Partial greater impact, DC https://www.designcouncil.org. Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. uk/resources/report/innovation-design, approached Chapter, in Homburg C. et al. (eds), Handbook 17052016. of Market Research- 3rd Edition, available at: 34 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-12017, Von Stamm, B. 2008. Managing Innovation, Design and DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1. Creativity. London: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Quartz+Co., 2011. Danish Enterprise and Construction Whicher, A., Swiatek, P. and Cawood, G. 2015. Design Policy Authority and the Danish Ministry of Culture, Mapping of Monitor 2015 - Reviewing Innovation and Design Policies International Design Policies and Strategies for Leading Across Europe, SEE Platform, PDR / Cardiff Metropolitan Design Schools and Research Institutions Prepared for University. The Danish Vision Committee “Design 2020” , available Westcott M., Sato S., Mrazek D., Wallace R., Vanka S., Bilson C. at: www.quartzco.dk. and Hardin D. 2013. The DMI Design Value Scorecard:A Venkatesh A., Digerfeldt-Månsson T., Brunel F.F., Chen S. New Design Management and Measurement Model htt- 2012. Design orientation: a grounded theory analysis ps://cdn.ymaws.com/www.dmi.org/resource/resmgr/ of design thinking and action. Marketing Theory 12(3) pdf_files/13244SAT10.pdf. 289–309, DOI: 10.1177/1470593112451388, mtq.sage- World Economic Forum, 2021. The Global Competitiveness pub.com. Report 2020, available at: https://www.weforum.org/ Veryzer, R.W. and Borja de Mozota, B. 2005. User-Oriented reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020. Design Impact on New Product Development. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2005;22:128–143. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 35 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION APPENDIX Quantitative Research – Questionnaire for online SURVEY (originally in Croatian) * Important notice: this questionnaire is addresed to the manager involved in the process of decisions about de- sign in your company; If you are not the right person, please forward this message to your colleague. Introduction: The Questionnaire consists of 6 parts: ABOUT MARKET ORIENTATION / DESIGN ORIENTATION / MANAGERIAL APPROACH / INTERFUNCTIONAL COORDINATION / YOUR BUSINESS PERFORMANCE/ YOUR DESIGN ENVIRONMENT - most of them with value scales (1-5). In the end: GENERAL DATA (5 more Qs). The questionnaire is anonymous, personal data are not to be used or published. The process lasts about 10 minutes. Please do not withdraw from completing the survey, because it would be a waste of time. We will be happy to inform you about the results of the research conceerning the relations between market and design orientation, if you leave us your e-mail address at the end. Before we start, please fill the information about your company size: Number of employees: A. 3 - 10 / B. 11 – 50 / C. 51 – 100 / D. 101 – 200 / E. < 201 I. First set of Questions: about Market and Customer orientation of your company. 1. Please evaluate the marketing activities that your company uses: (scale: 1 never - 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 1 2 3 4 5 1.1. Long-term marketing plans 1 2 3 4 5 1.2. Short-term marketing plans 1.3. Marketing communication activities planning 1 2 3 4 5 (ad and promotion) 1.4. Media Buying 1 2 3 4 5 1.5. Marketing research 1 2 3 4 5 2. Please evaluate the various market activities of your company (MO) (scale: 1 never -- 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 2.1. Our commitment to serving customers is closely 1 2 3 4 5 monitored. 2.2. Sales people share information about our 1 2 3 4 5 competitors 2.3. We achieve rapid response to competitive actions 1 2 3 4 5 2.4. Our functions are integrated to serve market needs 1 2 3 4 5 2.5. Close attention is given to after-sales services. 1 2 3 4 5 36 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 3. Please evaluate the way you determine customer needs in your company. (Scale: 1 never - 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 3.1. We sistematically measure customer satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5 3.2. Our competitive strategy is based on understand- 1 2 3 4 5 ing customer needs 3.3. We observe how customers use our products 1 2 3 4 5 3.4. We collaborate closely with key users to predict 1 2 3 4 5 future customer needs before others 3.5. We collect information necessary for detecting the appearance of new market segments (i.e. groups of 1 2 3 4 5 customers with new requirements). 3.6. We have full, updated, information on the image of 1 2 3 4 5 our products/brands by our current and potential customers. 3.7. We measure levels of customer loyalty compared to 1 2 3 4 5 last year and our competition. 3.8. We explore key trends to gain insight into what us- 1 2 3 4 5 ers will need in future. 3.9. Our objectives and strategies are driven by increas- 1 2 3 4 5 ing value for customers. II. Second set of Questions about Design orientation. 4. Please evaluate the role that design plays in your company. Design as the integral No design part of strategy. 1 2 3 4 5 5. Please evaluate the use of design for your company in the following areas. 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 5.1. We use design internally for: workplace interior and 1 2 3 4 5 internal communications. 5.2. We use design externally, for: corporate communi- 1 2 3 4 5 cation, branding & marketing activities. 5.3. We use design for product innovation & 1 2 3 4 5 development. 5.4. We use design for process/service innovation, 1 2 3 4 5 research & development. 5.5. We use design in strategic planning. 1 2 3 4 5 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 37 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 6. Compared with this year, do you expect your company’s investment in design in next 3 years to: 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 1 2 3 4 5 6.1. Decreased a lot (11% or more) 1 2 3 4 5 6.2. Stay the same 6.3. Increased a little (1- 10 %) 1 2 3 4 5 6.4. Increased a lot (11% or more) 1 2 3 4 5 6.5. I don’t know 1 2 3 4 5 6.B. Where does innovation rank among your company’s strategic priorities for next year? 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 6B.1. Top priority 1 2 3 4 5 6B.2. One of Top 3 priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.3. One of Top 10 priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.4. Not on list of priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.5. We can not afford innovations 1 2 3 4 5 7. Please evaluate these variables of design caracteristics for design management according to their influence on business performance (values from 5 = fundamental to 1 = not of concern): 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement not of funda- concern mental 7.1. Design creates competitive advantage. 1 2 3 4 5 7.2. Design contributes significantly to benefits perceived 1 2 3 4 5 by consumers. 7.3. Design changes the spirit of the firm, which becomes 1 2 3 4 5 more innovative. 7.4. Design allows a company to sell at a higher price. 1 2 3 4 5 7.5. Design improves coordination between marketing 1 2 3 4 5 and R&D functions. 7.6. Design is a know-how that transforms the processes. 1 2 3 4 5 7.7. Design gives access to a wide variety of markets. 1 2 3 4 5 7.8. Design improves coordination between production 1 2 3 4 5 and marketing. 1 2 3 4 5 7.9. Design develops project management of innovation. 7.10. Design creates new niche markets. 1 2 3 4 5 7.11. Design improves the circulation of information. 1 2 3 4 5 7.12. Design improves our internal and external 1 2 3 4 5 communication. 7.13. Design improves our services and working processes. 1 2 3 4 5 7.14. Design involves our customers in a co-creation 1 2 3 4 5 process. 7.15. Design provides sustainable development and ben- 1 2 3 4 5 efits to the community. 7.16. Design improves our long-term goals / 1 2 3 4 5 return-on-investment. 38 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 8. Please evaluate the use of design in your company according to Design Value Scorecard (DMI). scales: 1 never / 2 rarely / 3 occasionaly / 4 frequently / 5 all the time Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never all the time 8.1. We use design for development and delivery of 1 2 3 4 5 products, services and communications (for aesthetic value and functionality) 8.2. We use design as a connector or integrator of busi- ness functions (for internal and external conver- 1 2 3 4 5 sion, as lifetime customer value, brand loyalty and market share) 8.3. We use design as strategic resource for new busi- ness models (for strategic investments in customer 1 2 3 4 5 experience design, long-term return on investment) III. Third set of Questions: about managerial approach (MA) and use of - creative methods 9. Please evaluate managerial approach in your company (MA) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never regularly 9.1. Our top management discusses and compares 1 2 3 4 5 with competitors’ strengths and weaknesses. 9.2. Our top management visits important customers 1 2 3 4 5 regularely. 9.3. Our managers understand how employees con- 1 2 3 4 5 tribute to value for customers. 9.4. Our top management understands the importance 1 2 3 4 5 of design and innovation. 9.5. Our managers frequently involve employees in 1 2 3 4 5 important decisions. 9.B. Please evaluate the use of creative methods in your managerial decision making process / Scale: 1 never ---------------- 5 regularly 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 9.B.1. Brainstorming - for generating ideas / new solutions. 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.2. Mind mapping (visual pictures of ideas or concepts). 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.3. Storytelling /possible scenarios. 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.4. Prototyping the ideas/experiences/solutions (diagrams, 1 2 3 4 5 models, role-playing etc.) 9.B.5. Scamper method (adapt, substitute, put to other use) 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.6. Six thinking hats method (parallel thinking process) 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.7. None 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.8. Other (please specify): South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 39 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 10. Did you gain education or experience about creative methods /use of design skills? A. No creative skills B. Secondary school C. High education D. Specialization E. Practice IV. Fourth set of Questions: About interfunctional coordination 11. Please evaluate cooperation between different business units in your company - interfunctional coordi- nation: (IC) (Scale: 1 never ---------------- 5 regularly) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never regularly 11.1. Market information is freely shared inside our company. 1 2 3 4 5 11.2. Persons in charge of different activities in our company 1 2 3 4 5 are involved in preparing business plans & strategy. 11.3. We regularly have inter-organizational meetings to 1 2 3 4 5 discuss market trends and future development. 11.4. Marketing strategies are always drawn up in agreement 1 2 3 4 5 with other business functions. 11.5. The departments share ideas, information and/or 1 2 3 4 5 resources. V. Fifth set of Questions: – About Business performance - success 12. Please rate your firm’s performance over the last three years against competing firms. The company belongs to The company belongs the lowest scoring firms _the highest scoring firms 1 2 3 4 5 13. Please rate your firm’s GROWTH DIMENSIONS (scale from 1 to 5): Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 lowest highest GR1. Sales growth position relative to competition 1 2 3 4 5 GR2. Satisfaction with sales growth rate 1 2 3 4 5 GR3. Market share gains relative to competition 1 2 3 4 5 40 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 14. Please rate your firm’s PROFITABILITY DIMENSION (scale from 1 to 5) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 lowest highest PR1. Satisfaction with return on corporate investment. 1 2 3 4 5 PR2. Net profit position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 PR3. ROI position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 PR4. Satisfaction with return on sales. 1 2 3 4 5 PR5. Financial liquidity position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Looking back over the past 12 months, how would you describe the demand for your company’s products/ services compared to the previous year, has there been: (levels 1-5) Significant reduction Significant growth 1 2 3 4 5 VI. Sixth set of Questions: About Design Environment 16. Could you please estimate support from your environment to use design in your business: Not at all Huge support 1 2 3 4 5 If you answer was 3 or more, please be specific about the kind of support. 16.a. What kind of support did you gain: 1 2 3 4 5 Item – statement never regularely 16.A.1. Government Design Policy/Strategy (financial support, 1 2 3 4 5 benefits, funds) 16.A.2. Local community (finacial, benefits, funds) 1 2 3 4 5 16.A.3. European Union Policy/Strategy (legacy system, funds) 1 2 3 4 5 16.A.4. Other (please specify) South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 41 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 17. Please estimate the state of design in Croatia: (scale from 1 to 5) 1 2 3 4 5 Item / statement- quality lowest highest 17.1. Design industry (number of designers/design agencies, 1 2 3 4 5 promotion of design) 17.2. Design policy / Legal system (laws, authors rights, intel- 1 2 3 4 5 lectual property) 17.3. Design education in business study programs (design 1 2 3 4 5 knowledge and creative methods) 17.4. National design environment(national design strategy - 1 2 3 4 5 government design policy) VI. DATA /GENERAL QUESTIONS (about the company): Your company´s industry: A. Product / B. Service / C. Combined - product and service 1.a. How long is the company active in the market?: ___ years 1.b. Years of your company design experience: A. no design experience / B. = 1 - 5 / C. 6 – 10 / D. 11 – 19 / E. more then 20 1.c. Design awards: YES / NO 2. How has your turnover changed compared with the previous year? a) Decreased a lot (11% or more) d) Increased a little (1- 10 %) b) Decreased a little (1- 10 %) e) Increased a lot (11% or more) c) Stay the same 3. What proportion of your turnover is export? a) No export: 0% d) From 26 – 50% b) From 1 – 5% e) From 51 – 75% c) From 6 – 25% f ) From 76 – 100% INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AS THE RESPONDENT:* 1. Your position inside the company: (multiple answers are possible) a) Owner - CEO d) Design Manager b) Executive Manager e) Product Manager c) Marketing Manager f ) other:_____________________ (please specify) 2. Your gendre: X Male / X Female 2.a. Age: 25-29 / 30-39 / 40-49 / 50-59 / < 60 2.b. Your education: A) Undergraduate / B) Graduate / C) M.Sc. / D) MBA / E) Ph.D. / F) Other: ____ Thank you for your precious time and cooperation! The research results will be used for the scientific purpose only. 42 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png South East European Journal of Economics and Business de Gruyter

The (Positive) Design Environment as a Prerequisite of Design Orientation

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/the-positive-design-environment-as-a-prerequisite-of-design-BZNT6KJ0zJ
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2021 Sanja Rocco, published by Sciendo
ISSN
2233-1999
eISSN
2233-1999
DOI
10.2478/jeb-2021-0012
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Design is a human-centered activity. Every design project starts with the analysis of user needs and prefer- ences. This means that design orientation of a company should also be positively related to company’s busi- ness results. However, in most transitional countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEECs), design environ- ment is not supported, there is no clear national design policy, design implementation in companies varies, and there is no constant measurement of design impact. The main interest of this paper is to research the level of design implementation in Croatian companies related to the managerial approach and business re- sults, because such research is usually undertaken in more developed countries. The study focuses on the per- ception of management. This quantitative research has been carried out using an Internet survey to examine managers and CEOs from Croatian companies in different industries. The results show positive relations be - tween design environment and design orientation of a company and a significant impact of management. Key words: Design environment, design orientation, design implementation, transitional countries, management JEL Classification: M310; O310; Z110 1. Introduction In most countries, entrepreneurs have recently After a short introduction to the historical context been recognizing the benefits of design. The progres- of Croatian economic development, the paper deals sive use of design, from operational to strategic level, with literature overview on the issues of design orien- in public and private sector organizations is also re- tation, design environment, design implementation, ceiving attention in marketing management. The and design management. We then propose the initial topics of this study are design orientation and design model of relationships with hypotheses grounded implementation in Croatian companies, as well as on theory. The third section deals with the research the impact of design environment. This paper aims to highlight the role of design as one of the core ele- ments of innovation and market success, as well as the Sanja Rocco, PhD impact of the national design environment on compa- Senior Lecturer nies concerning design management. The contribu- Zagreb School of Business tion of the paper to literature is a research undertaken E-mail: sanja.rocco@pvzg.hr in Croatian companies, as such research has not yet Address: Ul. Grada Vukovara 68, Croatia been done and is usually undertaken in more devel- ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2740-151X oped countries. Copyright © 2021 by the School of Economics and Business Sarajevo 17 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION methodology and sample description. The final part convergence between EU countries. On average, EU entails the results and discussion. In the conclusion, innovation performance has increased by 8.9% since we highlight the contribution of this paper, with limi- 2012 . However, Croatia is a moderate innovator with tations and recommendations for future research. innovation score value 64, which puts the country in Substantial reforms and strong economic funda- the 23rd place out of 28 EU countries. Innovators and mentals of Croatia’s reforms since the country’s 1991 Firm investments are the strongest Croatian innova- independence have been significant, given the his- tion dimensions, while the lowest indicator scores are torical context. Croatia rapidly implemented an am- for Exports of knowledge-intensive services, Design bitious reform program based on the gradual open- applications, Venture capital expenditures, and ing of trade and investment and the creation of open Lifelong learning. Design application in Croatia, ac- market economy, driven by commitments taken dur- cording to the European Innovation Scoreboard 2020 ing its World Trade Organization (WTO) accession ne- is 10.74. In comparison, Slovenia’s (a neighboring gotiations and preparations for its strategic goal of ex-Yugoslavian republic) score value is 46.71. Also, ac- acceding to the European Union (EU). Croatia joined cording to the Global Competitiveness Index Ranking the European Union in 2013 as the 28th member 4.0 from 2019, covering 114 economies, Croatia state. Throughout the EU accession process, Croatia ranked 64th as the lowest EU state. engaged in many structural reforms. However, its Therefore, the research questions are: What is the economy is still in transition, with slower growth than perception of design by managers in Croatian com- countries at a similar stage of development, such as panies and do they use design on multiple levels? Bulgaria or Romania. Croatia’s GDP per capita remains What is their opinion about the design environment in one of the lowest in the EU. Once the industrial pow- Croatia: political, economic, social, and technological? erhouse of the former Yugoslavia, Croatia has trans- Are they willing to accept new approaches to manage- formed into a service-based economy that relies on ment, for instance, creative design thinking methods? low-productivity tourism sector for jobs and income. What about the national design strategy? Does design In fact, Croatia’s economy is by far the most reliant on environment have a significant impact on design ori- foreign visitors among its European rivals. entation of companies in whole? Our research focuses The overdependence on one sector increases on the perception of design issues by the manage- the vulnerability of Croatia to external shocks as evi- ment. Therefore, all variables in the study have been denced by the impact of the global financial crisis in operationalized from the managers’ point of view. 2008–2014. The national system of innovation as well as investment in research and development is low by EU standards. An additional problem is the high rate 2. Literature review and hypotheses of skilled workforce that keep emigrating. Small and development medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of Croatian economy in terms of their number, employ- The role of design has been and still is a subject ment, and turnover. The productivity of SMEs, howev- of discussion. From those who see design as the key er, is disturbingly low, as is the ability of Croatian SMEs element of every organization’s strategy and the most to internationalize through export. Structural reforms, vital tool of innovation in business to those who be- the encouragement of competition and entrepre- lieve that design is a key element of manipulation in neurship, and the strengthening of institutions that making poor-quality products and services desirable, would enable better functioning of market economy thereby promoting consumerism in the most negative are preconditions for creating opportunities in a com- sense. petitive environment. Diversification is a challenge However, design should in first place be human- the Croatian economy faces, as do other countries centered, providing better solutions for different from the region (OECD 2019). needs of end-users. According to the International The general situation in the Republic of Croatia Council of Design, Ico-D: “Design is a constantly concerning innovation policy will also be observed evolving and dynamic discipline. The professionally with regard to the Innovation Union Scoreboard. trained designer applies intent to create the visual, Based on the scoreboard, the EU evaluates and com- material, spatial and digital environment, cognizant pares the innovation characteristics of 28 member of the experiential, employing interdisciplinary and states and some other non-member European coun- hybrid approaches to the theory and practice of de- tries. According to the  2020 edition of the innova- sign. They understand the cultural, ethical, social, eco- tion scoreboard, the EU’s innovation performance nomic and ecological impact of their endeavors and continues to increase at a steady pace, with growing their ultimate responsibility towards people and the 18 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION planet across both commercial and non-commercial focused than before, emphasizing design as a strate- spheres”. The complex tasks of design can be seen as gic tool for innovation, economic progress, and job a conscious decision-making process by which infor- creation (Quartz+Co. 2011). mation (an idea) is transformed into an outcome, be it Raising awareness about design and its positive tangible (product) or intangible (service) (von Stamm impact to a broader audience is the basic level of de- 2008). sign policy, which a government should engage in to Depending on the context, design implies an ob- support design implementation. Design promotion jective, the intention of designing, particularly in an- initiatives usually include activities from professional alytical and creative phases. It also denotes as a pro- organizations such as design awards, conferences, cess, a drawing, a sketch, or a model in the execution publications, exhibitions, design weeks, etc. phase that gives form to an idea. The techniques and At the next level of design policy, design support is methods of design combine both the logical scientific targeted at design education and design research in- approach and the intuitive artistic approach with cul- stitutions. Initiatives are usually driven by the Ministry tural dimensions. Because design is at the same time of Education and/or the Ministry of Culture. They fo- a problem-solving activity, creative ideation, as well cus on promoting certain design disciplines (e.g., de- as the coordination between different professionals sign thinking), teaching methods, specific research involved in the process, it has also been considered topics, attracting foreign students, etc. At the same a bridge between art and science (Borja de Mozota level of design policy, design support is targeted at 2003a). Design influences user behavior in many ways companies (usually SMEs). The initiatives and activities and indirectly shapes the society. According to Best here are usually facilitated by a national design coun- (2006), design plays a key role in shaping the world cil, a design center, a design foundation or a design and generating new products, but also systems and promotion institute offering, for instance, consulting services, in response to different market conditions or advisory services, matchmaking between design- and opportunities. The final result of a designer’s work ers and businesses, education and training, grants is not forming a product but shaping social behavioral and scholarships, dissemination of information about rules (Keller 1975, p. 29). the economic value of design, libraries and informa- tion centers (including material libraries), incubation facilities, exhibition areas, and not least – tax credits (Quartz+Co. 2011, p.15). 2.1. Design orientation One of the most significant barriers to the take-up According to some scholars (e.g., Gorb 1990; Borja de of design in policy is measuring the return on invest- Mozota 2003a), design orientation can be defined as ment at micro and macro levels in both, private and an approach by the management which relies on de- public sectors. Although there is an increasing bank sign as a strategic tool. Design oriented companies are of knowledge that can contribute to evidence-based those that incorporate their design process into their policymaking, additional statistics on design impact business strategy (Moll et al. 2007). are required (Whicher, Swiatek, and Cawood 2015, p. Recently, there have been numerous studies in 11). (…) Examining design investment by enterprises different countries that confirm the positive impact is the first step to investigating comparable empiri- of design orientation on innovation capabilities. The cal evidence on design’s contribution to the European important role of design has also been recognized in economy (Whicher et al. 2015). Design policy should the Europe 2020 Growth Strategy which led to the have a clear vision linked to a specific and tangi- European Commission’s Action Plan for Design-Driven ble set of actions as well as clear targets, financing Innovation (EC 2013). The European Commission’s mechanisms, allocation of tasks, and the timeframe Innobarometer, a tool that measures innovation- for implementation and evaluation process. With the related activities in EU businesses (2001–2016), also increased interest in design at multiple levels of gov- gives evidence of the positive effects of design on ernance across the EU, there is also an opportunity innovation. for European countries to strengthen their respec- tive economies by increasing the innovativeness and performance of their companies. However, huge dif- 2.2. Design Environment ferences persist between more and less developed In most countries, the complex nature of design has European countries. Although different design sup - been acknowledged, as well as its benefits, be it eco - port programs for SMEs show significant results in nomic, cultural, social, or environmental. Recent de- economic growth, what remains a specific problem sign policies in European countries tend to be more is how to help SMEs to develop their capabilities to South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 19 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION become more design-led in developing innovations, and mission. Design Ladder, a staircase model created and more competitive. Several countries have de- by the Danish Design Centre (Ramlau and Melander veloped different models of support worldwide, but 2004) has been used for measuring design implemen- the crucial issues remain: how to employ tools, what tation in various studies and practices because of its challenges and opportunities are related to the de- simplicity. It identifies four steps: the first is no design, sign integration process, and how the management the second is design as styling, the third is design inte- of design integration takes place (Gerlitz 2016, p. 27). grated into the company, and the highest, fourth step, Concerning the strong impact of the national design is design as a strategic tool. The Design Management policy and the multiple elements of design environ- Staircase model by Kootstra (2009) describes the four ment, we propose: levels of design management inspired by Design Ladder, Level 1: No design management; Level 2: H1: Design environment is positively related to Design management as project; Level 3: Design man- design orientation of a company. agement as function and Level 4: Design management as culture/strategic management of design (Design The Croatian example shows us that the country Management Europe Survey 2009). According to the had a strong tradition of design in terms of profes- Design Management Institute (2015), there are three sional work, professional associations, promotional so-called zones of design-use in practice. The first is exhibitions, and even in terms of design theory dur- the tactical value of design – which serves for devel- ing the period of a socialist regime and planned oping new products and delivering new services. This economy when it was a part of Yugoslavia. However, aspect of design is concerned mostly with aesthetic when Croatia became independent, a clear, govern- value and functionality. In the second, organizational ment-regulated design policy was not implemented. value, design is a connector or integrator of business In 2007, there was an initiative by design associations functions. It looks at customer experience as a plat- and professionals to establish the Croatian Design form for innovation. The third, strategic value, looks Center. However, the center failed to gather support at design as a strategic resource for new business from the government and did not have a strong im- models. Since the DMI model has been developed for pact on Croatian design policy at the national level. use in companies, the stages of their model have also During the process of joining the EU, the Croatian been used in our questionnaire. Chamber of Commerce established its own design A design strategy is the effective allocation and center (2012). Still, the center did not play an impor- coordination of design resources and activities to ac- tant role in creating a national design policy and the complish a firm’s objectives of creating its appropri- initiative did not last for a long time – the center was ate public and internal identities, its product offer - unfortunately closed in 2016. Strong initiatives still ings and its environments (Olson, Cooper, and Slater exist from different groups of design professionals or 1998). Turner (2009) suggests that design takes up the individuals and design associations in the form of de- role of coordinator, facilitator, and interpreter, rather sign events, exhibitions, and festivals (Design District than a leader. As it touches so many parts of business, Zagreb, Plan D, Zagreb Design Week, etc.). It is likely everyone in the organization should understand and that this unsupportive design climate – in terms of de- value the contribution design can make and compa- sign programs focused on entrepreneurs – probably nies need to integrate it into their DNA (in Von Stamm also has a negative impact on design implementation 2008, p.117). in many companies, especially SMEs. To manage design at a strategy level, according to Borja de Mozota (2003a), is to manage the contri- bution of design to the strategy formulation process. What needs to be defined is the responsibility and 2.3. Design Implementation leadership assigned to design and its contribution to Some authors recognize three main levels of design the organizational culture, there needs to be a search implementation inside a company: Borja de Mozota for opportunities for design innovation and multiply (2003a) differentiates design as styling, design as pro - demonstrations of identity through design. This third, cess, and design as strategy. Best (2006) identifies the highest level of design management establishes links operational, tactical, and strategic level of design. At between design, corporate communications, and top the operational level, we design products, services, management. Borja de Mozota proposes two mod- and customer experiences. At the tactical level, design els for strategic positioning of design: the innate and is concerned with systems and processes inside the the acquired. While in the innate model the strategic company, and at the strategic level, we design policy role of design is part of the founder’s entrepreneurial 20 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION plan from the beginning and these companies have a “design management encompasses the ongoing pro- strong design spirit in all of their organizational pro- cesses, business decisions, and strategies that enable cesses, the acquired model is the one in which design innovation and create effectively-designed products, is learned and accepted by experience and shows a services, communications, environments, and brands progressive valorization inside the company. Based that enhance our quality of life and provide organi- on the role of design implementation which confirms zational success. The scope of design management the design orientation, we propose the following ranges from the tactical management of corporate hypothesis: design functions and design agencies, including de- sign operations, staff, methods and processes–to the H2: Design orientation of a company is positively strategic advocacy of design across the organization related to the level of design implementation. as a key differentiator and driver of organizational suc - cess. It includes the use of design thinking–or using de- In a world characterized by rapid change and un- sign processes to solve general business problems”. certainty, strategic design has emerged as a means In order to assist design managers to better iden- of implementing a range of new possibilities – rapid tify their organization’s level of design maturity, the iteration of ideas, incorporating end users, and work- design maturity matrix has been developed. It serves ing across knowledge silos – for global corporations as an assessment tool to determine where design and governments. For leaders and managers, strategic currently delivers value across three functional areas design provides an alternative means to see the big and provides a foundation for setting and achieving picture, consider all aspects of a complex problem, future design goals. Furthermore, the Design Value and implement solutions for change and long-term System with three components has been developed sustainability (Huppatz 2020, p. 126). There has been and made available at the dmi website in order to a number of case-studies [e.g., Borja de Mozota 2003; help companies: The Design Value Index, The Design Moll et al 2007; Acklin 2011; Venkatsh et al. 2012], and Maturity Matrix and the Design Value Map. Managers research on a national level in different countries [e.g., have a better perception of design in companies The Economic Effects of Design, Danish Design Centre that implement design in more levels. We therefore 2004; Design Council, UK: Designing Britain 2004, The propose: Cox Review of Creativity in Business 2005, Innovation by Design. 2015, The Design Economy 2018 -The State H4: The level of design implementation is posi- of Design in the UK; Design Innovation Research, tively related to perceived design value. Ireland 2007; Design Management Europe Survey by Kootstra: An analysis of design management practic- Several mindsets, according to different authors, es in Europe 2009; Mapping of International Design have been identified as an important part of design Policies, by Quartz + Co, Denmark 2011; Westcott et thinking methodology. In particular, design thinking al. DMI Design Value Scorecard 2013; EU Commission: is human-centered, mindful of process, empathetic, Design Policy Monitor, 2015], which give evidence includes storytelling, has a culture of prototyping, is about the positive relation between the level of de- biased toward action, includes radical open-minded sign implementation and business results. A research collaboration among disciplines, integrative thinking, undertaken by the British Design Council in 2012 is optimistic, challenges constraints and supports cre- shows that, on average, businesses in UK that invest ative solutions (Brown 2009; Nussbaum 2004; Martin in design have approximately a 50% better long-term 2009). financial performance than businesses that do not. As an approach, design thinking relies on the An evaluation report from 2014 on the role of design capacities we all have, but that are overlooked and in the commercialization of science and technology abandoned in favor of more conventional problem- demonstrates that design accelerates commercial- solving practices. Not only does it focus on creating ization and increases value of products and services products and services that are human-centered, but (Design Council 2012, 2014). Therefore, we propose: the process itself is also deeply human. Design think- ing relies on our ability to be intuitive, recognize pat- H3: The level of design implementation is posi- terns, construct ideas that have emotional meaning as tively related to business results. well as being functional, and express ourselves in me- dia, other than with words or symbols. There are three main phases in the design thinking process: inspira- 2.4. The Design Management Issues tion, ideation, and implementation. In the inspiration According to the Design Management Institute phase, a problem is looked at as an opportunity which South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 21 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION motivates the search for solutions. Ideation is the pro- dimensions can be applied with a view to new forms cess of generating, developing, and testing ideas, and of creative entrepreneurship. implementation leads us from the project stage into Concerning the different use of design potentials real people’s lives (Brown and Wyatt 2010). in companies, which is mostly related to managerial Unlike critical thinking, which is a process of analy- decisions, we propose another hypothesis: sis associated with the deconstruction of ideas, design It is clear that today’s designer designs in a com- thinking is a creative process based upon the con- pletely different world than the designer of the 20th struction of ideas. By disallowing judgments, design century. Nevertheless, there is also a need for a new thinking eliminates the fear of failure and encourages approach to management – a focus on a multi-disci- maximum input and participation. Non-routine, out- plinary approach and design thinking. As Sir George of-box ideas are welcome, since these often pave the Cox (the Cox Review of Creativity in Business by British way for the most creative solutions. Every individual Design Council) puts it: “We need business people acts as a designer and design thinking is a process of who understand creativity, who know when and how applying design methodologies to solving problems to use the specialist, and who can manage innovation; in different life situations and practices (Ilipinari et al. creative specialists who understand the environment 2011). in which their talents will be used and who can talk Design thinking is typically understood as an the same language as their clients and their business expansive, free-flow process that results in various colleagues; And engineers and technologists who creative ideas for innovation. However, Chen and understand the design process and can talk the lan- Venkatesh (2013) offer an alternate understanding of guage of business” (Quartz+Co. 2011, p. 24). design thinking as a creative, but also a reductive pro- According to Verizer and Borja de Mozota (2005), cess, structured by four key filters. To generate design developing formal tools for better integrating differ - concepts, each organization should develop its own ent disciplines and the unique perspectives seem to design-thinking formula, which incorporates these be particularly lacking for bringing the user-oriented elements: user-centered design, emphasizing brand design considerations to the forefront of senior man- image, fostering collaborations, and adopting a com- agement thinking. petitor orientation. Design-oriented organizations For Buchanan (2015, p. 15), a manager or leader implement design thinking by (1) employing multiple provides appropriate environment that facilitates the modes of design thinking, (2) disseminating end-user performance of others as they work to accomplish an profiles across the organization, (3) cultivating organic undertaking. The environment is both conceptual and organizational forms to increase collaborations, (4) us- physical. Conceptually, it is the framework of values ing the brand to establish a design language, and (5) and vision that serves to accomplish a collective ob- factoring in competitors’ design outputs to implement jective or goal. It also helps individuals to achieve the design thinking (Chen and Venkatesh 2013, p. 15). personal goals of participating individuals within and Acklin and Fust (2014) propose four modes of de- beyond the organization. Physically, the environment sign management which can be distinguished with is the organization of resources needed to achieve regard to their strategic contribution to the company goals and objectives. In general management theory, and its direction: the functional aspects of management are planning, – simple design management organizing, directing, and controlling. These are the – integrated design management areas of the functional application of design thinking – dynamic design management and in organizations, bound within the traditions of man- – entrepreneurial mode of design management. agement. Managers are responsible for designing the worlds we make in organizations and for the worlds The fourth, entrepreneurial mode explores the that organizations make for others in the social life overlap of entrepreneurship with design and design around us. management. Design management has the capabil- There are different management styles and tech- ity to take on a more active role in companies in re- niques, and the use of creative methods depends spect to entrepreneurial issues in companies as well mostly on the education and knowledge of the man- in new venture creation. The entrepreneurial mode agement which is also connected with the design ori- of design management also emphasizes two dimen- entation of the company. We therefore propose: sions essential for any creative enterprise: the dimen- sion of design as a creator of new opportunities, and H5: Design orientation of a company has a signifi- the dimension of design management as a driver for cant impact on the use of creative techniques by the exploitation of these opportunities. These two the management. 22 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Can design shape organizational culture so that from the Centre for Design Innovation Ireland (2007), the organization positively affects the thoughts and and additional six criteria for the use of creative meth- behavior of individuals? The true test will be the de- ods were evaluated. For the measurement of company gree to which our efforts to introduce design thinking performance ten items were used. Respondents had into the management of organizations embodies the to evaluate the overall performance of their business fundamental principle of design (Buchanan 2015, p. as well as additional nine performance criteria (perfor- 21). The initial model of relationships with the hypoth- mance rate against competition, growth and profita- eses is shown in Figure 1. bility dimensions, demand for products/services etc.). The final part of the questionnaire included additional questions with general data about the respondents and their companies. 3. Research methodology and sample The IBM SPSS v19 statistical program was used for description data analysis, which were tested with univariate, bi- The research was conducted combining prelimi- variate and multivariate statistical methods, and struc- nary qualitative in-depth interviews and a quantitative tural equation modeling. An exploratory factor analy- online survey. After analyzing the literature, relevant sis was conducted to check the validity and reliability items for the questionnaire were used from previous of the scales. Partial Least Square Structural Equation reliable research. The questionnaire consisted of 21 Modelling analysis (with the software Smart PLS 3) questions. Content validity of the questionnaire was was conducted due to a relatively small sample, to tested with eight experts from the field of marketing, examine the relationships between main constructs. and one from the design field. Most of the respons- PLS-SEM analysis offers a good approximation of com- es were ranked on a Likert scale (1 to 5). The Design mon factor models in situations where factor-based Orientation scale was adopted from Borja de Mozota SEM cannot deliver results due to its methodological (2003b) and included 13 items. For design imple- limitations in terms of model complexity, sample size mentation a three items scale was adopted from the requirements, or inclusion of composite variables in Design Management Institute (DMI 2015). For meas- the model (Sarstedt et al. 2017) uring the managerial approach five items were used Data were collected using an online survey sent Figure 1. The initial model Source: Author’s research results South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 23 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION to CEOs, general managers, and marketing managers 4.1. Testing hypothesis H1 in Croatian companies with at least 3 employees. A fi- nal list of 2,184 email addresses was compiled based To check the relation between the design environ- on data provided from several reliable sources: the ment and design orientation and to test hypothesis Croatian Chamber of Commerce (HGK), the Croatian H1 – Design environment is positively related to de- Ministry of Entrepreneurship and Crafts (MINPRO), the sign orientation of a company – we applied the re- Croatian Agency for SMEs, Innovation and Investments gression analysis. The factor of design orientation was (HAMAG-BICRO), and the list of Croatian companies considered a dependent variable in the analysis and with GREEN MARK Sign of Excellence 2016. Managers the factor of orientation toward environment was an received an email explaining the general purpose of independent variable. the study and a link to the survey. The research began The R-value represents the multiple correlation in June 2017 and was concluded in November 2017, coefficient and is 0.197. The R  value (0.039) indicates after a reminder was sent. A significant number of re - how much of the total variation is in the dependent spondents did not finish the questionnaire. A total of variables –predictors (of DO) can be explained by the 143 managers returned usable questionnaires, yield- independent variable, the environment. ing a 61 percent completion response rate. Out of The next is the ANOVA table, which reports how these, the final sample of 112 respondents qualified well the regression equation fits the data (i.e., predicts for the research – CEOs or managers from companies the dependent variable). This table indicates that the with more than 3 employees, which is a return of 78%. independent variables predict the dependent variable There were 24% of companies with 3–10 employees, statistically significantly. The statistical significance of 34% with 11–50 employees, 15% with 51–100 em- the regression model, p < 0.0005, which is less than ployees, 6% with 101–200 employees, and 21% with 0.05, and indicates that, overall, the regression model more than 201 employees. The representation of com- statistically significantly predicts the outcome variable panies according to their size (small, medium-sized, (i.e., the regression model is a good fit of the data). and large) corresponds to the structure ratio of the The coefficients table provides us with the follow - Croatian economy. The structure according to indus- ing: Non-standardized coefficients indicate how much try type was 40% of product industries, 33% of service the dependent variable varies with an independent industries, and 27 % of combined industries. variable when all other independent variables are The final sample consisted of 58% male and 42% constant. If p < 0.05, the coefficients are statistically female respondents. Concerning the position in the significantly different from 0 (zero). The t-value and company, 61% were managers and 39% were CEOs. corresponding p-value are located in the “t” and “Sig.” In terms of age, 43% of respondents were aged 40–49 columns. As we can see from the result in Table 1, the years, and 22.3% were aged 30–39, as well as between regression analysis shows the relationship of design 50 and 59. Most of the respondents held a gradu- environment support for business with design orien- ate degree, (47.3%), followed by a master’s degree tation. The correlation is not large (R=0.197) but is sta- (15.2%), and a bachelor’s degree (13.4%). Concerning tistically significant (p<0.05). the value of design, more than 80% of managers rated The regression analysis shows the interconnection design as an important issue. In fact, 21% think that between the support from the environment to use de- design plays an important role, 27% stated that de- sign in business and the design orientation. The cor- sign is extremely important, while 30% hold design to relation is moderate (R=0.197) but statistically signifi- be a strategic tool. However, for 19 % it plays a limited cant (p<0.05). role, and only 1% believe design is of no importance. 4.2. Testing hypotheses H2 and H3 4. Results and discussion We then test the relationship between design im- Inferential statistical methods applied in this paper plementation and design orientation, as well as with were: t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and regres- business results. sion analysis. The PLS_SEM method was also applied as a confirmatory method of analyzing the direction of the influence of variables. 24 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 1. Regression Analysis Descriptive Statistics Mean SD N Design Orientation 3.852 0.685 112 Please estimate support from your environment to 2.71 1.134 112 use design in your business Model Summary Model R R- Adjusted R- Std. Error of Change Statistics squared squared the R-squared F-change df1 df2 Sig. F- Estimate change change 1 0.197 0.039 0.030 0.675 0.039 4.439 1 110 0.037 ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 2.022 1 2.022 4.439 0.037 Residual 50.106 110 0.456 Total 52.128 111 Coefficients Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig. Coefficients B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.529 0.166 21.256 0.000 Please estimate support 0.119 0.056 0.197 2.107 0.037 from your environment to use design in your business Source: Author`s research results H2: Design Orientation (DesOr) of a compa- According to the results of the Levene’s Test for ny is positively related to the level of Design Equality of Variances and t-test for Equality of Means, Implementation (DesImp). companies that use design within the company – for H3: The level of Design Implementation (DesImp) interior, and internal communication, are on average is positively related to Business Results (BusRes) more design-oriented and are more successful. However, there is no difference in design orienta- The results of Question 6 about the level of de- tion or success between companies which use or do sign implementation with variables from Q6_1 to not use design externally – for corporate communica- Q6_5 were tested for the relation with design orienta- tion, branding & marketing activities. tion and business results (see Tables 2-6). South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 25 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 2. Question Q6_1. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error We use design internally for: Mean workplace interior and internal communications Design orientation No 47 3.626 0.708 0.103 Yes 65 4.015 0.625 0.077 Business Results No 47 3.338 0.863 0.126 Yes 65 3.667 0.703 0.087 Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Lower Upper tailed) Diff. Error Diff. Design Equal 1.064 0.305 -3.075 110 0.003 -0.389 0.126 -0.640 -0.138 orientation variances assumed Equal -3.013 91.521 0.003 -0.389 0.129 -0.645 -0.133 variances not assumed Business Equal 2.978 0.087 -2.223 110 0.028 -0.330 0.148 -0.623 -0.036 Results variances assumed Equal -2.152 86.478 0.034 -0.330 0.153 -0.634 -0.025 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 3. Question Q6_2. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design externally, for: N Mean Std. Std. Error Deviation Mean corporate communication, branding & marketing activities. Design Orientation No 21 3.627 0.754 0.165 Yes 91 3.904 0.662 0.069 Business Results No 21 3.387 0.893 0.195 Yes 91 3.562 0.763 0.080 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference 26 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 Design Equal 0.496 0.483 -1.682 110 0.095 -0.277 0.165 -0.603 0.049 Orientation variances assumed Equal -1.550 27.564 0.132 -0.277 0.179 -0.643 0.089 variances not assumed Business Equal 0.405 0.526 -0.917 110 0.361 -0.175 0.191 -0.553 0.203 Results variances assumed Equal -0.830 27.126 0.414 -0.175 0.211 -0.607 0.257 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 3. Question Q6_2. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design externally, for: N Mean Std. Std. Error Deviation Mean corporate communication, branding & marketing activities. Design Orientation No 21 3.627 0.754 0.165 Yes THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENT 91 3.904 0.662 0. ATION069 Business Results No 21 3.387 0.893 0.195 Yes 91 3.562 0.763 0.080 Table 3. Continued Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.496 0.483 -1.682 110 0.095 -0.277 0.165 -0.603 0.049 Orientation variances assumed Equal -1.550 27.564 0.132 -0.277 0.179 -0.643 0.089 variances not assumed Business Equal 0.405 0.526 -0.917 110 0.361 -0.175 0.191 -0.553 0.203 Results variances assumed Equal -0.830 27.126 0.414 -0.175 0.211 -0.607 0.257 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 4. Question Q6_3. Levene's Test and t-test We use design for N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean product innovation & development. Design No 39 3.5448 0.64393 0.10311 Orientation Yes 73 4.0156 0.65339 0.07647 Business Results No 39 3.3494 0.84155 0.13476 Yes 73 3.6250 0.74565 0.08727 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.479 0.490 -3.651 110 0.000 -0.47075 0.12895 -0.72630 -0.21521 Orientation variances assumed Equal -3.667 78.730 0.000 -0.47075 0.12838 -0.72629 -0.21522 variances not assumed Business Equal 1.082 0.301 -1.781 110 0.078 -0.27564 0.15473 -0.58228 0.03100 Results variances assumed Equal -1.717 70.056 0.090 -0.27564 0.16055 -0.59584 0.04456 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 27 Table 5. Question Q6_4. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics We use design for N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean process/service innovation, research & development Design Orientation No 41 3.4611 0.64954 0.10144 Yes 71 4.0772 0.60224 0.07147 Business Results No 41 3.3018 0.81585 0.12741 Yes 71 3.6602 0.74558 0.08848 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.014 0.908 -5.067 110 0.000 -0.61604 0.12158 -0.85699 -0.37509 Orientation variances assumed Equal -4.964 78.515 0.000 -0.61604 0.12409 -0.86306 -0.36902 variances not assumed Business Equal 1.448 0.231 -2.367 110 0.020 -0.35838 0.15140 -0.65843 -0.05834 Results variances assumed Equal -2.310 77.575 0.024 -0.35838 0.15512 -0.66724 -0.04953 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Companies that use design to develop and in- to test the relationship between design implementa- novate products and services are, on average, more tion and overall business results of the company, ac- design-oriented than companies that do not use de- cording to the DMI ScoreCard model. Three t-test ana- sign to develop products, but there is no difference in lyzes were performed for independent samples. One the success of the company according to the use of was conducted for each DM score card statement to design. check whether there is a statistically significant differ - Companies that use design to develop and in- ence in the average values of the independent vari- novate processes and services are, on average, more ables between two groups of data – subjects. As an design-oriented and also more successful than com- independent variable, the variable of total company panies that do not. success on a scale from 1 to 5 was used, where com- Companies that use design for strategic plan- panies with a score of less than 3 were in the group ning are also more design-oriented and successful of less successful companies, and companies with a than companies that do not use design in strategic score of 3–5 were put in the group of successful com- planning. panies. The following Table 7 shows average design The previous analysis is followed by the additional usage ratings for two groups of companies with re- testing of the results for Question Q_10, (see Table 7) spect to business results score. 28 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 6. Question Q6_5. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean We use design for strategic planning Design orientation No 83 3.7070 0.66712 0.07323 Yes 29 4.2655 0.56475 0.10487 Business Success No 83 3.4187 0.82603 0.09067 Yes 29 3.8448 0.56759 0.10540 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference Design Equal 0.247 0.620 -4.029 110 0.000 -0.55851 0.13862 -0.83322 -0.28381 Orientation variances assumed Equal -4.367 57.306 0.000 -0.55851 0.12791 -0.81461 -0.30241 variances not assumed Business Equal 4.235 0.042 -2.571 110 0.011 -0.42615 0.16578 -0.75469 -0.09761 Success variances assumed Equal -3.065 71.420 0.003 -0.42615 0.13903 -0.70335 -0.14896 variances not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 7. Question Q_10. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics Business N Mean Std. Std. results Deviation Error Mean 89 4.10 1.023 0.108 We use design for development and delivery of  3.00 products, services, and communications (for < 3.00 23 3.65 1.152 0.240 aesthetic value and functionality) We use design as a connector or integrator of 89 3.71 1.140 0.121  3.00 business functions (for internal and external comm., < 3.00 23 3.13 1.014 0.211 as customer value, brand loyalty and market share) 89 3.52 1.207 0.128 We use design as strategic resource for new  3.00 business models (for strategic investments in < 3.00 23 2.83 1.114 0.232 customer experience design, long-term return on investment) Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 29 Equal 1.541 0.217 1.828 110 0.070 0.449 0.246 -0.038 0.936 We use design variances for development assumed Equal 1.703 31.545 0.098 0.449 0.264 -0.088 0.986 and delivery of variances products, not services, and assumed communications We use design Equal 0.524 0.471 2.212 110 0.029 0.577 0.261 0.060 1.095 as a connector variances assumed or integrator of Equal 2.371 37.728 0.023 0.577 0.243 0.084 1.070 business variances functions not assumed We use design Equal 1.288 0.259 2.484 110 0.691 0.278 0.140 1.242 0.015 variances as strategic assumed resource for Equal 2.605 36.534 0.013 0.691 0.265 0.153 1.228 new business variances models not assumed Source: Author`s research results Table 7. Question Q_10. Levene's Test and t-test Group Statistics Business N Mean Std. Std. results Deviation Error Mean We use design for development and delivery of 89 4.10 1.023 0.108  3.00 products, services, and communications (for < 3.00 23 3.65 1.152 0.240 aesthetic value and functionality) 89 3.71 1.140 0.121 We use design as a connector or integrator of  3.00 business functions (for internal and external comm., < 3.00 23 3.13 1.014 0.211 as customer value, brand loyalty and market share) We use design as strategic resource for new 89 3.52 1.207 0.128  3.00 business models (for strategic investments in < 3.00 23 2.83 1.114 0.232 customer experience design, long-term return on Table 7. Continued investment) Independent Samples Test Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means for Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Lower Upper tailed) Difference Difference We use design Equal 1.541 0.217 1.828 110 0.070 0.449 0.246 -0.038 0.936 variances for assumed development Equal 1.703 31.545 0.098 0.449 0.264 -0.088 0.986 and delivery of variances products, not services, and assumed communications We use design Equal 0.524 0.471 2.212 110 0.029 0.577 0.261 0.060 1.095 as a connector variances assumed or integrator of Equal 2.371 37.728 0.023 0.577 0.243 0.084 1.070 business variances functions not assumed Equal 1.288 0.259 2.484 110 0.691 0.278 0.140 1.242 We use design 0.015 variances as strategic assumed resource for Equal 2.605 36.534 0.013 0.691 0.265 0.153 1.228 new business variances models not assumed Source: Author`s research results As shown in Table 7, there are statistically signifi- 4.3. Testing the hypothesis H4 cant differences between less and more successful companies in the two uses of design – integration of We will test the positive relationship between the business function and strategic tool for business mod- level of design implementation (DesImp) and the per- els. In the first statement (product development and ceived design value (DesVal) by managers. delivery), there is no statistically significant difference The relationship between design implementation between more successful and less successful compa- and perceived design value is positive (R = 0.471) and nies (the score is higher here as well, but not so much statistically significant (see Table 8). that it could be accepted with certainty). This means that the hypothesis H2 about the positive relations be- tween design orientation and design implementation 4.4. Testing the hypothesis H5 has been confirmed, while H3 – about the positive relationship between level of design implementation Finally, we will test the hypothesis H5 that concerns and business results – has been partially confirmed. the positive relationship between design orientation (DesOr) of a company and use of creative techniques (CreTech) by management. 30 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION Table 8. The t-test and Anova Model R R-squared Adjusted Std. Error of Change Statistics R-squared the R-squared change F- df1 df2 Sig. F- Estimate change change 1 0.471 0.222 0.214 0.581 0.222 27.910 1 98 0.000 ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 9.412 1 9.412 27.910 0.000 Residual 33.050 98 0.337 Total 42.462 99 Source: Author`s research results Table 9. The t-test and Anova Model Summary Model R R-squared Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics R-squared of the R- F- df1 df2 Sig. F Estimate squared change Change Change 1 0.497 0.247 0.241 0.84572 0.247 36.170 1 110 0.000 ANOVA Sum of Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 25.870 1 25.870 36.170 0.000 Residual 78.677 110 0.715 Total 104.547 111 Coefficients Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. 1 (Constant) 1.779 0.322 5.516 0.000 Use of creative 0.577 0.096 0.497 6.014 0.000 techniques Source: Author`s research results The correlation R is 0.497 and the percentage of connection between the use of creative techniques by the common variance (R-squared) is 24.7%. ANOVA management and design orientation of a company. results (Table 9) show that the regression model is sta- Hypothesis H4 has been confirmed. tistically significant (Sig<0.05). The analysis shows the South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 31 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 4.5. The PLS-SEM analysis corresponding composite indicator, the other measur- In the final stage of the analysis, we used the PLS SEM ing relationships among the composite indicators in method to test the relationship between the con- the system (Trichera et al. 2008, p. 311). structs. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) consists The validity of the PLS-SEM model has been con- of two sub-models: the measurement model and firmed because the goodness of fit SRMR is 0.065 (less structural model. The measurement model represents than 0.08, which is usually considered as a limit for the relationships between the observed data and good fitting model). Figure 11 shows values of direct the latent variables. The structural model represents and indirect impact of constructs. According to the the relationships between the latent variables. The PLS-SEM model, the design environment has a strong- partial least squares path modeling method (PLS) to er impact on design orientation (0.187), followed by structural equation modeling (SEM) allows estimating design implementation (0.125). The design environ- complex cause-effect relationship models with latent ment also has a stronger impact on the perceived variables. One of the most important advantages in design value (0.306) than the managerial approach, using SEMs is that they provide two kinds of weights: although it is also significant (0.205). one measuring the impact of each indicator on the Figure 2. The PLS-SEM Model DesEn = Design environment DesVal = Perceived Design Value DesOr = Design Orientation ManApp = Management Approach DesImp = Level of Design Implementation BusRes = Business Result Figure 2.1. R-squared values of the PLS-SEM R Square Business Results (BueRes) 0.042 Design Orientation (DesOr) 0.124 Perceived Design Value (DesVal) 0.124 Use of Creative Techniques (CreTech) 0.400 32 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION The managerial approach has a strong and posi- design implementation in different levels of a compa- tive impact on the use of creative techniques (0.645) ny. Our results also confirm that design resources are and a significant but rather modest impact on busi- important predecessors of business performance. ness results (0.205). Design orientation of a com- Our findings also confirm that the management pany is not positively related to the use of creative has to be informed and educated about design and its techniques. benefits to fully engage design resources. These find- The PLS-SEM model (fig. 2.1.) explains 12.4% of ing are especially important for Croatian SMEs which the perceived design value and 40% of use of creative make up the majority of its economy. There is a strong techniques in management. tendency in Croatian companies to maximize short- According to the results of our research, a positive run profitability, while at the same time neglecting relation exists between design orientation and design long-term goals. Therefore, in an effort to develop fac - implementation and the use of creative techniques tors that can lead to competitive advantage, managers in companies. The huge influence of the design en- and CEOs should focus not only on individual design vironment – economic, social, cultural, legal and po- resources, but also on their integration into different litical – including the national design policy, has been levels of the company. Design education and knowl- confirmed. Design environment has a strong impact edge, as well as the ability to use creative methods, on design orientation of companies, as well as on per- play an important role in understanding the impact ceived design value, but also a significant impact on and possible contribution of design in a company. managerial approach to design. Previous research, Some limitations of the research have to be taken including the European Commission Innobarometer into consideration before generalizing the results. The 2015, also indicates a positive relationship between first limitation refers to the size of the sample – the design implementation and growing a business, as drop-out rate was high, because it was hard to moti- well as the influence of national design policies, which vate managers and CEOs – our target group – to com- also fits with our results. plete a rather long questionnaire. Another limitation was the reliability of the responses because manag- ers might have been subjective in evaluating their own work and their business results. Therefore, the 5. Conclusion, contribution and responses may be overrated. Future research should limitations also contain more objective data of external variables. It is a challenge to propose a new model of man- The effects of different variables of design orienta- aging design within different design environments, tion on company performance are complex. They de- with the purpose of better cooperation between all pend on the industry, size of the company, and many the participants involved. The most important ele- influences from the surroundings, which should fur - ment of a national design environment is the support ther be continuously researched and measured. to use design resources – economic, social, cultural, le- The research results could be of interest to com- gal, and political. The results of our research show that panies in the region of the Balkans and East European more than 50% of managers see the Croatian national countries in order to increase their competitiveness. design environment as negative and unsupportive Also, further research should be expanded to other (values 2 or 1 on the 5-point scale). countries in the region. Endnotes 5.1. Contribution to Theory and Practice 1 https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/42981 Firstly, our research was undertaken in Croatia, a for- 2 https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/country-analysis/Croatia mer socialist country from the Eastern bloc. The coun- 3 https://www.weforum.org/reports/ try acceded to the European Union in 2013 and is still the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 experiencing a transitional economy. The majority of 4 https://www.ico-d.org/about/ former studies about the subject of design orientation index#defining-the-profession and design management have focused on the practice of companies in more developed European countries. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/ facts-figures/innobarometer_en Secondly, the research highlights the role of de- sign as one of the core elements of innovation. The 6 https://www.dmi.org/page/What_is_Design_Manag study extends the existing knowledge, measuring the 7 http://www.dmi.org/?DesignValue role of design orientation as well as the importance of South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 33 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION References Design Council, 2018. The Design Economy 2018. The State of Design in the UK, DC, available at: https://www.design- Acklin, C. 2011. Design Management Absorption Model council.org.uk/resources/report/design-economy-2018. – A Framework to Describe the Absorption Process Design Management Institute 2015. dmi: Design Value of Design Knowledge by SMEs with Little or No Prior Index Results and Commentary https://www.dmi.org/ Design Experience. page/2015DVIandOTW , (approached June 21, 2016). Acklin, C. and Fust, A. 2014. Towards a dynamic mode of European Commission 2013. Implementing an Action Plan design management and beyond. Proceedings, 19th for Design Driven Innovation. EC Commission staff work - DMI: Academic Design Management Conference Design ing document, SWD(2013) 380 final, Brussels. Management in an Era of Disruption, London, 2–4 European Commission 2015. “Innobarometer 2015 - The in- September 2014. novation trends at EU enterprises”, a survey conducted Best, K. 2006. Design Management: Managing Design by TNS Political & Social at the request of the European Strategy, Process and Implementation. Ava Academia. Commission, Directorate- General for Internal Market, Borja de Mozota, B. 2003a. Design management: Using Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. design to build brand value and corporate innovation. Gerlitz, L. 2016. Developing a Design Management Model DMI/Allworth Press, New York. for Innovating SMEs in the Context of Regional Smart Borja de Mozota, B. 2003b. Design and competitive edge: A Specialisation. Research in Economics and Business: model for design management excellence in European Central and Eastern Europe 2016, Vol. 8, No. 2, 26-57. SMEs. Université Paris X Nanterre. Reprint #02ABOR88, Gorb, P. 1990. Design Management: Papers from the London first published in Design Management Journal Academic Business School, Phaidon Press. Review, 2002, Vol.2, pp. 88-103. Huppatz, D. J. 2020. Design: the key concept. Bloomsburry Brown, T. 2009. Change by Design: how design thinking Publishing Plc. transforms organizations and inspires innovations. Ilipinar, G., Johnston, W. J., Montaña, J., Spender, J.C. and HarperCollins Publishers. Truex, D. P., 2011. Design Thinking in the Postmodern Brown, T. and Wyatt, J. 2010. Design Thinking for Social Organization (November 23). Humanistic Management Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, No 32, Network, Research Paper Series No. 14-6. Winter 2010. http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/ Keller, G. 1975. Design, Vjesnik, Zagreb. design_thinking_for_social_innovation. Kootstra G. L. 2009. The Incorporation of Design Management Buchannan, R. 2015. Worlds in the Making: Design, in Today’s Business Practices, An analysis of design man- Management, and the Reform of Organizational Culture, agement practices in Europe, DME Survey, Inholland. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Martin, R. 2009. The Design of Business: Why Design Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2015, Pages 5-21, https://doi. Thinking is the Next Competitive Advantage. Cambridge org/10.1016/j.sheji.2015.09.003. MA, Harvard Business Press Publishing. Centre for Design Innovation Ireland 2007. Design Difference Moll, I., Montaña, J., Guzman, F., and Praallada, F.S. 2007. - Design Innovation Research, available at: www.desig- Market orientation and design orientation: A manage- ninnovation.ie/downloads/ResearchMethodology.pdf ment model. Journal of Marketing Management, 23 (9): (accessed May 17, 2015). 861-876. Chen S. and Venkatesh A., 2013. An Investigation of How Nussbaum, B. 2004. The power of design. Business Week, Design-oriented Organisations Implement Design 17(2). Thinking. Journal of Marketing Management, Vol 00, OECD 2019. OECD Investment Policy Review of Croatia: An 1-21. http://dx.doi.org./10.1080/0267257X.2013.800898. Overview Assessment, Paris, www.oecd.org/investment/ Cox G., 2005. The Cox Review of Creativity in Business: OECD-Investment-Policy-Review-of-Croatia-Overview- Building on the UK’s Strengths. London: Design Council. Assessment.pdf. Danish Design Centre, 2004. The Economic Olson, E.M., Cooper, R. and Slater, S.F. 1998. Design strat- Effect of Design https://erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/ egy and competitive advantage. Business Horizons, 41, economic-effects-design-2004. 55–61. Design Council, 2004. Designing Britain 2005-2006. Available Ramlau, U. H. and Melander, C. 2004. In Denmark, design at: www.designcouncil.org.uk/factfinder. tops the agenda, Design Management Review, 15(4), pp. Design Council, 2015. Innovation by Design. How design 48-54. enables science and technology research to achieve Sarstedt M., Ringle C. M., and Hair J. F. 2017. Partial greater impact, DC https://www.designcouncil.org. Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. uk/resources/report/innovation-design, approached Chapter, in Homburg C. et al. (eds), Handbook 17052016. of Market Research- 3rd Edition, available at: 34 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-12017, Von Stamm, B. 2008. Managing Innovation, Design and DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1. Creativity. London: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Quartz+Co., 2011. Danish Enterprise and Construction Whicher, A., Swiatek, P. and Cawood, G. 2015. Design Policy Authority and the Danish Ministry of Culture, Mapping of Monitor 2015 - Reviewing Innovation and Design Policies International Design Policies and Strategies for Leading Across Europe, SEE Platform, PDR / Cardiff Metropolitan Design Schools and Research Institutions Prepared for University. The Danish Vision Committee “Design 2020” , available Westcott M., Sato S., Mrazek D., Wallace R., Vanka S., Bilson C. at: www.quartzco.dk. and Hardin D. 2013. The DMI Design Value Scorecard:A Venkatesh A., Digerfeldt-Månsson T., Brunel F.F., Chen S. New Design Management and Measurement Model htt- 2012. Design orientation: a grounded theory analysis ps://cdn.ymaws.com/www.dmi.org/resource/resmgr/ of design thinking and action. Marketing Theory 12(3) pdf_files/13244SAT10.pdf. 289–309, DOI: 10.1177/1470593112451388, mtq.sage- World Economic Forum, 2021. The Global Competitiveness pub.com. Report 2020, available at: https://www.weforum.org/ Veryzer, R.W. and Borja de Mozota, B. 2005. User-Oriented reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020. Design Impact on New Product Development. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2005;22:128–143. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 35 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION APPENDIX Quantitative Research – Questionnaire for online SURVEY (originally in Croatian) * Important notice: this questionnaire is addresed to the manager involved in the process of decisions about de- sign in your company; If you are not the right person, please forward this message to your colleague. Introduction: The Questionnaire consists of 6 parts: ABOUT MARKET ORIENTATION / DESIGN ORIENTATION / MANAGERIAL APPROACH / INTERFUNCTIONAL COORDINATION / YOUR BUSINESS PERFORMANCE/ YOUR DESIGN ENVIRONMENT - most of them with value scales (1-5). In the end: GENERAL DATA (5 more Qs). The questionnaire is anonymous, personal data are not to be used or published. The process lasts about 10 minutes. Please do not withdraw from completing the survey, because it would be a waste of time. We will be happy to inform you about the results of the research conceerning the relations between market and design orientation, if you leave us your e-mail address at the end. Before we start, please fill the information about your company size: Number of employees: A. 3 - 10 / B. 11 – 50 / C. 51 – 100 / D. 101 – 200 / E. < 201 I. First set of Questions: about Market and Customer orientation of your company. 1. Please evaluate the marketing activities that your company uses: (scale: 1 never - 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 1 2 3 4 5 1.1. Long-term marketing plans 1 2 3 4 5 1.2. Short-term marketing plans 1.3. Marketing communication activities planning 1 2 3 4 5 (ad and promotion) 1.4. Media Buying 1 2 3 4 5 1.5. Marketing research 1 2 3 4 5 2. Please evaluate the various market activities of your company (MO) (scale: 1 never -- 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 2.1. Our commitment to serving customers is closely 1 2 3 4 5 monitored. 2.2. Sales people share information about our 1 2 3 4 5 competitors 2.3. We achieve rapid response to competitive actions 1 2 3 4 5 2.4. Our functions are integrated to serve market needs 1 2 3 4 5 2.5. Close attention is given to after-sales services. 1 2 3 4 5 36 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 3. Please evaluate the way you determine customer needs in your company. (Scale: 1 never - 5 regularly) 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 3.1. We sistematically measure customer satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5 3.2. Our competitive strategy is based on understand- 1 2 3 4 5 ing customer needs 3.3. We observe how customers use our products 1 2 3 4 5 3.4. We collaborate closely with key users to predict 1 2 3 4 5 future customer needs before others 3.5. We collect information necessary for detecting the appearance of new market segments (i.e. groups of 1 2 3 4 5 customers with new requirements). 3.6. We have full, updated, information on the image of 1 2 3 4 5 our products/brands by our current and potential customers. 3.7. We measure levels of customer loyalty compared to 1 2 3 4 5 last year and our competition. 3.8. We explore key trends to gain insight into what us- 1 2 3 4 5 ers will need in future. 3.9. Our objectives and strategies are driven by increas- 1 2 3 4 5 ing value for customers. II. Second set of Questions about Design orientation. 4. Please evaluate the role that design plays in your company. Design as the integral No design part of strategy. 1 2 3 4 5 5. Please evaluate the use of design for your company in the following areas. 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 5.1. We use design internally for: workplace interior and 1 2 3 4 5 internal communications. 5.2. We use design externally, for: corporate communi- 1 2 3 4 5 cation, branding & marketing activities. 5.3. We use design for product innovation & 1 2 3 4 5 development. 5.4. We use design for process/service innovation, 1 2 3 4 5 research & development. 5.5. We use design in strategic planning. 1 2 3 4 5 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 37 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 6. Compared with this year, do you expect your company’s investment in design in next 3 years to: 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 1 2 3 4 5 6.1. Decreased a lot (11% or more) 1 2 3 4 5 6.2. Stay the same 6.3. Increased a little (1- 10 %) 1 2 3 4 5 6.4. Increased a lot (11% or more) 1 2 3 4 5 6.5. I don’t know 1 2 3 4 5 6.B. Where does innovation rank among your company’s strategic priorities for next year? 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 6B.1. Top priority 1 2 3 4 5 6B.2. One of Top 3 priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.3. One of Top 10 priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.4. Not on list of priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6B.5. We can not afford innovations 1 2 3 4 5 7. Please evaluate these variables of design caracteristics for design management according to their influence on business performance (values from 5 = fundamental to 1 = not of concern): 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement not of funda- concern mental 7.1. Design creates competitive advantage. 1 2 3 4 5 7.2. Design contributes significantly to benefits perceived 1 2 3 4 5 by consumers. 7.3. Design changes the spirit of the firm, which becomes 1 2 3 4 5 more innovative. 7.4. Design allows a company to sell at a higher price. 1 2 3 4 5 7.5. Design improves coordination between marketing 1 2 3 4 5 and R&D functions. 7.6. Design is a know-how that transforms the processes. 1 2 3 4 5 7.7. Design gives access to a wide variety of markets. 1 2 3 4 5 7.8. Design improves coordination between production 1 2 3 4 5 and marketing. 1 2 3 4 5 7.9. Design develops project management of innovation. 7.10. Design creates new niche markets. 1 2 3 4 5 7.11. Design improves the circulation of information. 1 2 3 4 5 7.12. Design improves our internal and external 1 2 3 4 5 communication. 7.13. Design improves our services and working processes. 1 2 3 4 5 7.14. Design involves our customers in a co-creation 1 2 3 4 5 process. 7.15. Design provides sustainable development and ben- 1 2 3 4 5 efits to the community. 7.16. Design improves our long-term goals / 1 2 3 4 5 return-on-investment. 38 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 8. Please evaluate the use of design in your company according to Design Value Scorecard (DMI). scales: 1 never / 2 rarely / 3 occasionaly / 4 frequently / 5 all the time Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never all the time 8.1. We use design for development and delivery of 1 2 3 4 5 products, services and communications (for aesthetic value and functionality) 8.2. We use design as a connector or integrator of busi- ness functions (for internal and external conver- 1 2 3 4 5 sion, as lifetime customer value, brand loyalty and market share) 8.3. We use design as strategic resource for new busi- ness models (for strategic investments in customer 1 2 3 4 5 experience design, long-term return on investment) III. Third set of Questions: about managerial approach (MA) and use of - creative methods 9. Please evaluate managerial approach in your company (MA) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never regularly 9.1. Our top management discusses and compares 1 2 3 4 5 with competitors’ strengths and weaknesses. 9.2. Our top management visits important customers 1 2 3 4 5 regularely. 9.3. Our managers understand how employees con- 1 2 3 4 5 tribute to value for customers. 9.4. Our top management understands the importance 1 2 3 4 5 of design and innovation. 9.5. Our managers frequently involve employees in 1 2 3 4 5 important decisions. 9.B. Please evaluate the use of creative methods in your managerial decision making process / Scale: 1 never ---------------- 5 regularly 1 2 3 4 5 Item - statement never regularly 9.B.1. Brainstorming - for generating ideas / new solutions. 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.2. Mind mapping (visual pictures of ideas or concepts). 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.3. Storytelling /possible scenarios. 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.4. Prototyping the ideas/experiences/solutions (diagrams, 1 2 3 4 5 models, role-playing etc.) 9.B.5. Scamper method (adapt, substitute, put to other use) 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.6. Six thinking hats method (parallel thinking process) 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.7. None 1 2 3 4 5 9.B.8. Other (please specify): South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 39 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 10. Did you gain education or experience about creative methods /use of design skills? A. No creative skills B. Secondary school C. High education D. Specialization E. Practice IV. Fourth set of Questions: About interfunctional coordination 11. Please evaluate cooperation between different business units in your company - interfunctional coordi- nation: (IC) (Scale: 1 never ---------------- 5 regularly) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 never regularly 11.1. Market information is freely shared inside our company. 1 2 3 4 5 11.2. Persons in charge of different activities in our company 1 2 3 4 5 are involved in preparing business plans & strategy. 11.3. We regularly have inter-organizational meetings to 1 2 3 4 5 discuss market trends and future development. 11.4. Marketing strategies are always drawn up in agreement 1 2 3 4 5 with other business functions. 11.5. The departments share ideas, information and/or 1 2 3 4 5 resources. V. Fifth set of Questions: – About Business performance - success 12. Please rate your firm’s performance over the last three years against competing firms. The company belongs to The company belongs the lowest scoring firms _the highest scoring firms 1 2 3 4 5 13. Please rate your firm’s GROWTH DIMENSIONS (scale from 1 to 5): Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 lowest highest GR1. Sales growth position relative to competition 1 2 3 4 5 GR2. Satisfaction with sales growth rate 1 2 3 4 5 GR3. Market share gains relative to competition 1 2 3 4 5 40 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 14. Please rate your firm’s PROFITABILITY DIMENSION (scale from 1 to 5) Item - statement 1 2 3 4 5 lowest highest PR1. Satisfaction with return on corporate investment. 1 2 3 4 5 PR2. Net profit position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 PR3. ROI position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 PR4. Satisfaction with return on sales. 1 2 3 4 5 PR5. Financial liquidity position relative to competition. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Looking back over the past 12 months, how would you describe the demand for your company’s products/ services compared to the previous year, has there been: (levels 1-5) Significant reduction Significant growth 1 2 3 4 5 VI. Sixth set of Questions: About Design Environment 16. Could you please estimate support from your environment to use design in your business: Not at all Huge support 1 2 3 4 5 If you answer was 3 or more, please be specific about the kind of support. 16.a. What kind of support did you gain: 1 2 3 4 5 Item – statement never regularely 16.A.1. Government Design Policy/Strategy (financial support, 1 2 3 4 5 benefits, funds) 16.A.2. Local community (finacial, benefits, funds) 1 2 3 4 5 16.A.3. European Union Policy/Strategy (legacy system, funds) 1 2 3 4 5 16.A.4. Other (please specify) South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021 41 THE (POSITIVE) DESIGN ENVIRONMENT AS A PREREQUISITE OF DESIGN ORIENTATION 17. Please estimate the state of design in Croatia: (scale from 1 to 5) 1 2 3 4 5 Item / statement- quality lowest highest 17.1. Design industry (number of designers/design agencies, 1 2 3 4 5 promotion of design) 17.2. Design policy / Legal system (laws, authors rights, intel- 1 2 3 4 5 lectual property) 17.3. Design education in business study programs (design 1 2 3 4 5 knowledge and creative methods) 17.4. National design environment(national design strategy - 1 2 3 4 5 government design policy) VI. DATA /GENERAL QUESTIONS (about the company): Your company´s industry: A. Product / B. Service / C. Combined - product and service 1.a. How long is the company active in the market?: ___ years 1.b. Years of your company design experience: A. no design experience / B. = 1 - 5 / C. 6 – 10 / D. 11 – 19 / E. more then 20 1.c. Design awards: YES / NO 2. How has your turnover changed compared with the previous year? a) Decreased a lot (11% or more) d) Increased a little (1- 10 %) b) Decreased a little (1- 10 %) e) Increased a lot (11% or more) c) Stay the same 3. What proportion of your turnover is export? a) No export: 0% d) From 26 – 50% b) From 1 – 5% e) From 51 – 75% c) From 6 – 25% f ) From 76 – 100% INFORMATION ABOUT YOU AS THE RESPONDENT:* 1. Your position inside the company: (multiple answers are possible) a) Owner - CEO d) Design Manager b) Executive Manager e) Product Manager c) Marketing Manager f ) other:_____________________ (please specify) 2. Your gendre: X Male / X Female 2.a. Age: 25-29 / 30-39 / 40-49 / 50-59 / < 60 2.b. Your education: A) Undergraduate / B) Graduate / C) M.Sc. / D) MBA / E) Ph.D. / F) Other: ____ Thank you for your precious time and cooperation! The research results will be used for the scientific purpose only. 42 South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 16 (2) 2021

Journal

South East European Journal of Economics and Businessde Gruyter

Published: Dec 1, 2021

Keywords: Design environment; design orientation; design implementation; transitional countries; management; M310; O310; Z110

There are no references for this article.