Paper detail

The Developers' Design Thinking Toolbox in Hackathons: A Study on the Recurring Design Methods in Software Development Marathons

Hackathons are time-bounded collaborative events of intense teamwork to build prototypes usually in the form of software, aiming to specific challenges proposed by the organizers. These events became a widespread practice in the IT industry, universities and many other scenarios, as a result of a growing open-innovation trend in the last decade. Since the main deliverable of these events is a demonstrable version of an idea, such as early hardware or software prototypes, the short time frame requires participants to quickly understand the proposed challenge or even identify issues related to a given domain. To create solutions, teams follow an ad-hoc but effective design approach, that many times seems informal since the background of the participants is rather centered on technical aspects (e.g., web and mobile programming) and does not involve any training in Design Thinking. To understand this creative process, we conducted 37 interviews (32 hackathons winners and 5 hackathon organizers) with people from 16 countries. We aimed to identify the design processes and recurring design methods applied by winners in these events. Also, we conducted a focus group with 8 people experienced in hackathons (participants and organizers) to discuss our findings. Our analysis revealed that although hackathon winners with IT background have no formal training on Design Thinking, they are aware of many design methods, typically following a sequence of phases that involve divergent and convergent thinking to explore the problem space and propose alternatives in a solution space, which is the rationale behind Design Thinking. We derived a set of recommendations based on design strategies that seem to lead to successful hackathon participation. These recommendations can also be useful to organizers who intend to enhance the experience of newcomers in hackathons.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.