Ingo Rauth

1.3k total citations · 1 hit paper
10 papers, 751 citations indexed

About

Ingo Rauth is a scholar working on Mechanical Engineering, Strategy and Management and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Ingo Rauth has authored 10 papers receiving a total of 751 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 10 papers in Mechanical Engineering, 6 papers in Strategy and Management and 5 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. Recurrent topics in Ingo Rauth's work include Design Education and Practice (10 papers), Innovation and Knowledge Management (6 papers) and Creativity in Education and Neuroscience (5 papers). Ingo Rauth is often cited by papers focused on Design Education and Practice (10 papers), Innovation and Knowledge Management (6 papers) and Creativity in Education and Neuroscience (5 papers). Ingo Rauth collaborates with scholars based in Sweden. Ingo Rauth's co-authors include Lisa Carlgren, Maria Elmquist, Christoph Meinel, Eva Köppen and Christoph Meinel and has published in prestigious journals such as Creativity and Innovation Management, The Design Journal and Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology).

In The Last Decade

Ingo Rauth

10 papers receiving 678 citations

Hit Papers

Framing Design Thinking: The Concept in Idea and Enactment 2016 2026 2019 2022 2016 100 200 300

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Ingo Rauth Sweden 6 452 282 209 145 91 10 751
Lisa Carlgren Sweden 7 420 0.9× 238 0.8× 222 1.1× 151 1.0× 99 1.1× 15 677
Jill Woodilla United States 6 379 0.8× 247 0.9× 122 0.6× 124 0.9× 68 0.7× 20 696
Tom Kelley United States 7 268 0.6× 201 0.7× 131 0.6× 144 1.0× 61 0.7× 10 725
David Dunne Canada 5 285 0.6× 200 0.7× 120 0.6× 155 1.1× 56 0.6× 8 656
Sarah J. S. Wilner Canada 7 242 0.5× 156 0.6× 191 0.9× 99 0.7× 205 2.3× 12 779
Maaike Kleinsmann Netherlands 15 399 0.9× 185 0.7× 122 0.6× 233 1.6× 63 0.7× 59 853
Thomas Lockwood United States 11 260 0.6× 152 0.5× 142 0.7× 115 0.8× 78 0.9× 33 629
Roger Martin United States 2 253 0.6× 174 0.6× 98 0.5× 132 0.9× 42 0.5× 4 500
Ken Friedman Australia 14 272 0.6× 166 0.6× 49 0.2× 172 1.2× 52 0.6× 54 786
Brigitte Borja de Mozota France 9 290 0.6× 130 0.5× 327 1.6× 222 1.5× 213 2.3× 20 804

Countries citing papers authored by Ingo Rauth

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Ingo Rauth's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Ingo Rauth with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ingo Rauth more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Ingo Rauth

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ingo Rauth. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Ingo Rauth. The network helps show where Ingo Rauth may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ingo Rauth

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ingo Rauth. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ingo Rauth based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Ingo Rauth. Ingo Rauth is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

10 of 10 papers shown
1.
Carlgren, Lisa, Ingo Rauth, & Maria Elmquist. (2016). Framing Design Thinking: The Concept in Idea and Enactment. Creativity and Innovation Management. 25(1). 38–57. 353 indexed citations breakdown →
2.
Carlgren, Lisa, Maria Elmquist, & Ingo Rauth. (2016). The Challenges of Using Design Thinking in Industry – Experiences from Five Large Firms. Creativity and Innovation Management. 25(3). 344–362. 116 indexed citations
3.
Carlgren, Lisa, Maria Elmquist, & Ingo Rauth. (2014). Design Thinking: Exploring Values and Effects from an Innovation Capability Perspective. The Design Journal. 17(3). 403–423. 69 indexed citations
4.
Rauth, Ingo, Lisa Carlgren, & Maria Elmquist. (2014). Making It Happen: Legitimizing Design Thinking in Large Organizations. Design Management Journal (Former Series). 9(1). 47–60. 55 indexed citations
5.
Carlgren, Lisa, et al.. (2014). Exploring the use of design thinking in large organizations: Towards a research agenda. 11. 55–63. 27 indexed citations
6.
Carlgren, Lisa, Maria Elmquist, & Ingo Rauth. (2013). Perceptions of the value of Design Thinking in innovation in large firms. Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology). 2 indexed citations
7.
Carlgren, Lisa, Maria Elmquist, & Ingo Rauth. (2012). Implementing Design Thinking in Large Organizations. Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology). 2 indexed citations
8.
Köppen, Eva, et al.. (2011). The importance of empathy in it projects: A case study on the development of the German electronic identity card. Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology). 31(1). 162–169. 1 indexed citations
9.
Rauth, Ingo, et al.. (2010). Design Thinking: An Educational Model. Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology). 2 indexed citations
10.
Rauth, Ingo, et al.. (2010). Design Thinking: An Educational Model towards Creative Confidence. 124 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026