English   Danish

2018/2019  KAN-CBUSV2025U  Designing Business IT (T)

English Title
Designing Business IT (T)

Course information

Language English
Course ECTS 7.5 ECTS
Type Elective
Level Full Degree Master
Duration One Semester
Start time of the course Spring
Timetable Course schedule will be posted at calendar.cbs.dk
Study board
BUS Study Board for BSc/MSc in Business Administration and Information Systems, MSc
Course coordinator
  • Mads Bødker - Department of Digitalisation
Administrativ ansvarlig er Jeanette Hansen (jha.itm@cbs.dk)
Main academic disciplines
  • Information technology
  • Innovation
  • Experience economy
Teaching methods
  • Face-to-face teaching
Last updated on 15-11-2018

Relevant links

Learning objectives
  • Identify and compare the scope and utility of various methods in creative, innovation and design-oriented IT projects
  • Reflect critically on the theoretical foundations of methods used within Interaction Design.
  • Perform user-centred field research in a setting relevant to the project
  • Apply user-centred design methods to build and evaluate a digital prototype of an IT product.
  • Use a digital design tool to device and present functionality and information architecture of a digital product.
Prerequisites for registering for the exam (activities during the teaching period)
Number of compulsory activities which must be approved: 2
Compulsory home assignments
Group activity: Finding 2 peer reviewed articles relevant to the specific project and writing a 1 page summary for each.

If a student cannot hand in due to documented illness, or if a student fails the activity in spite of making a real attempt to pass the activity, then the student will be given an extra attempt before the ordinary exam date. Hereafter there will be no further attempts before the re exam.

Oral presentations etc.
Hand in a summary/slides of 3 presentations of ongoing design work. The presentations are given in class by the exam groups (min 2 people) and is about ongoing work.
If a student cannot participate in the compulsory activity due to documented illness, or if a student fails the activity in spite of making a real attempt to pass the activity, then the student will be given an extra attempt before the ordinary exam date

If a student has not passed the two mandatory activities before the re exam in spite of making a real attempt to pass, or the student has not participated due to documented illness, there will be one extra attempt before the re exam. This extra attempt is a 10 page home assignment which will cover the 2 mandatory activities, as well as reflections on the project domain, theories, methods, and approaches.
Designing Business IT:
Exam ECTS 7,5
Examination form Oral exam based on written product

In order to participate in the oral exam, the written product must be handed in before the oral exam; by the set deadline. The grade is based on an overall assessment of the written product and the individual oral performance.
Individual or group exam Oral group exam based on written group product
Number of people in the group 2-5
Size of written product Max. 15 pages
Assignment type Project
Written product to be submitted on specified date and time.
20 min. per student, including examiners' discussion of grade, and informing plus explaining the grade
Grading scale 7-step scale
Examiner(s) Internal examiner and external examiner
Exam period Summer
Make-up exam/re-exam
Same examination form as the ordinary exam
Description of the exam procedure

The groups must produce a 'product', i.e. a technological IT artefact/prototype. The product must be documented, represented, and reflected upon in the written assignment. A link in the assignment can be used to point to a "live" prototype, but this should not be the only representation of the product in the assignment. The product should be brought to the exam.

The oral exam takes outset in the handed in written product and the artefact produced. The examiner will also ask questions that take outset in the literature for the course.

Course content and structure

The course will feature practical design activities and visualization work as core disciplines for development of digital services and products, and it will equip students to think, visualize, critique, facilitate and present design concepts. It will further focus on a critical, reflective understanding of design methods and their judicious application. 

The course will focus on design-centric research methods drawing on an interaction design framework. This entails visualizing, sketching on paper, developing simple prototypes in software; conducting, analyzing and presenting quick-and-dirty design ethnographies; user-centered design, participatory design, personas and scenarios development and an overall philosophy of rapid, iterative design processes. 

The process of prototyping at early stages in the development process is emphasized in the course. Rapid iterations of lo-fidelity designs or mock-ups will be used extensively in the student design teams to “ask relevant questions” and glean knowledge from the users.

The literature will cover design methods derived from Human-Computer Interaction and Interaction Design methods as well as methodologies and theoretical readings in the humanities and social science. 


Design teams and project work

The outset for all of the coursework and the exam will be a student design project, and practical work is part of the in-class activities as well as workshops. Parts of the teaching will be as lab-based as possible, i.e. entailing engaged group work around the design of a product or service prototype. 

The students will be using a technical prototyping application for their project work (e.g. Axure RP, myBalsamiq or similar, depending on need). It is expected that the students will have gained some competence with the application before embarking on the design project. The typical product is a prototype produced and presented in a particular medium (e.g. on a computer, a device, paper, or video). 

All student design teams will perform a mandatory presentation of their ongoing work 3 times during the course, and prepare relevant questions to ask of their design (this is the “design crit” session, parts of which will be based on a design-space analysis/argumentation method). Doing their project, the students must work in 2-5 (3 or more being ideal) person design teams to be able to cover sufficient ground in the project in terms of data collection for the case context as well as to do timely design critique throughout the project. Interdisciplinary work and bringing different competences to bear is key for good projects. 

The project (product) is of the students own choosing, and can include work that involves design for (and with) public sector institutions, private enterprise, as well as more exploratory design projects to develop new interaction styles, explore the new and expanding context of computer use or other conceptual work that includes the design of a concrete IT prototype interface to explore viability or experience. 


Note that for any area chosen, the students must identify and use a minimum of 2 peer reviewed research papers, e.g. found using the ACM database (dl.acm.org) (note that you have to go through CBS Library or be on the CSB network to access the ACM database)

It is expected that a group is formed and a project or case is defined as early as possible in the course period, so that work on the product (the prototype) can commence early.

Description of the teaching methods
Feedback during the teaching period
The teacher will give continous feedback.
Student workload
Lectures 24 hours
Prepare to class 100 hours
Workshops 24 hours
Exam and prepare 59 hours
Expected literature

Research articles and perspective


Albrechtsen et al. (2001), Affordances in Activity Theory and Cognitive Systems Engineering, Risø National Laboratory, Technical report, Risø R-1287 (English)

available http:/​/​orbit.dtu.dk/​fedora/​objects/​orbit:88142/​datastreams/​file_7726876/​content


Bødker, S. (2000). Scenarios in user-centred design-setting the stage for reflection and action. Interacting with computers, 13(1), 61-75.


Brandt, E. (2007). How tangible mock-ups support design collaboration. Knowledge, Technology, and Policy, 20(3), 179-192.


Buchenau, M. & Fulton-Suri, J (2000). Experience Prototyping, in Proceedings of ACM DIS, 2000.


Buur, J., & Sitorus, L. (2007). Ethnography as Design Provocation. Proceedings from Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference, Keystone, CO, USA.


Buur, J., Binder, T., & Brandt, E. (2000). Taking Video Beyond “Hard Data” in User Centred Design. the Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, New York, CPSR, December.


Erickson, T. (1995). Notes on Design Practice: Stories and Prototypes as Catalysts for Communication. In Scenario-based design: envisioning work and technology in system development (pp. 37–58). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY, USA.


Fallman, D. (2003). Design-oriented human-computer interaction. Proceedings from Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.


Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural Probes. Interactions, Volume 6.


Hertzum, M. (2003). Making use of scenarios: a field study of conceptual design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(2), 215-239.


Kaptelinen, V. (no date). Affordances (entry 44 in Interaction Design Encyclopedia): https:/​/​www.interaction-design.org/​literature/​book/​the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/​affordances#heading_Introduction:_Why_affordances?_html_pages_128643


Kimbell, L (2009). Beyond design thinking: Design-as-practice and designs-in-practice, paper presented at CRESC Conference, Manchester, September 2009.


Kolko, J (2010) Abductive Thinking
and Sensemaking:
The Drivers of Design Synthesis, Design Issues: Volume 26, Number 1 Winter 2010


Latour, Bruno: “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts”, findes her:


Messeter, J. (2009). Place-specific computing: A place-centric perspective for digital designs. International Journal of Design, 3(1), 29-41.


Millen, D.R. 2000: Rapid ethnography: time deepening strategies for HCI field research, Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques


Mogensen, P (1992): Towards a provotyping approach in systems development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 4(1), 5.


Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38-43.


Peyton, T. & Poole, E. 2014. The Videographic Requirements Gathering Method for Adolescent-Focused Interaction Design, Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, N.20, 2014, pp. 57-69


Salvador, Bell, Anderson, 1999. Design Ethnography, Design Management Journal, Fall, 1999


Stolterman, E. & Janlert, P (2015). Faceless Interaction - A Conceptual Examination of the Notion of Interface: Past, Present, and Future.  Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 6.


Zimmerman, J, Forlizzi, J. and Evenson, J. 2007. Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘07)


Liteature (non-research)


Buxton, Bill (2007) (BUXTON 1): “Sketching User Experiences - Getting the Design Right and the Right Design”, Morgan Kaufmann, 2007 (COURSE BOOK)


Greenberg, Carpendale, Marquardt, & Buxton 2012 (BUXTON2): Sketching User Experiences: The Workbook, Morgan Kaufmann, 2012 (COURSE BOOK)


Fraser, H. M. A. (2009). Designing Business: New Models for Success. Design Management Review, 20(2), 56-65, available at: http:/​/​www.dmi.org/​dmi/​html/​publications/​news/​viewpoints/​09202FRA56.pdf


Martin, R (2009): What is Design Thinking Anyway? Online article accessed Mar. 1, 2011, at http:/​/​observatory.designobserver.com/​entry.html?entry=11097


Nielsen, L. 2007 (ONLINE), 10 Steps to Personas, available at http:/​/​www.hceye.org/​HCInsight-Nielsen.htm


Last updated on 15-11-2018