Design thinking has emerged as a core methodology for innovation and entrepreneurship, providing human-centered approaches to complex problem-solving. Scholarship in this domain, however, remains fragmented and rapidly expanding. This study presents a multi-method quantitative review combining bibliometric mapping and non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) topic modeling to synthesize 1,700 Web of Science-indexed articles. The findings reveal a marked acceleration in publication activity and a concentration of influential outlets, authors, and institutional contributors. Bibliometric analysis identifies the key sources, affiliations, and collaboration patterns that structure the intellectual landscape of the field. Topic modeling uncovers recurrent thematic clusters encompassing (i) organizational practice and capability-building; (ii) design thinking in entrepreneurship and STEM/engineering education; and (iii) innovation applications in product, service, healthcare, social, and digitally enabled contexts, including agile and collaborative modes of working. Synthesizing these thematic structures, the study advances the recombinant innovation logic of design thinking (RILD), a conceptual framework characterizing design thinking in entrepreneurial contexts as operating through three interlocking mechanisms: cognitive reframing of problems and opportunities, iterative boundary-crossing across disciplinary and organizational domains, and empathy-anchored legitimation of novel ventures through stakeholder participation. By integrating bibliometric and computational semantic analyses, this study provides a multi-level, data-driven mapping of the field, clarifies its intellectual architecture and thematic evolution, introduces RILD as a theoretical lens extending dynamic capability and effectuation perspectives in entrepreneurship research, and delineates strategically significant directions for future research on design-driven entrepreneurship and innovation management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pazhouhan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: