Purpose – Ever since it was argued that the process of knowledge creation can be modelled [Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995], the literature on designing spaces conducive to innovation and knowledge management has grown tremendously. While most of the theories and models are implemented at organisational level in the companies, the paper examines the applicability of theory to an educational campus. As much as the need for informal interaction has been emphasized upon by various knowledge creation and knowledge management models, as much has it been compromised upon in practice, more so, because of the limited knowledge on how to purposefully create such spaces. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on the assumption that when users are responsible for the design of their environment, they connect better and as a result the spaces produced are used to their maximum potential. Besides creating diverse working environments, it also increases the probability of knowledge creation. It has been proven before that process of design of spaces intentionally for innovation can at times be too obstructive or imposing [2]. Hence, it’s best to let the users shape their working environment as per their needs. To support the argument, the paper evolves a toolkit, which may essentially act as a DIY- Space kit for the design of informal learning spaces. The insights from the research highlight the spatial requirements for innovation across cultures. Originality/value – The paper challenges the traditional assumptions about learning spaces and rethinks over informal spaces as the torchbearers for knowledge creation. It also reviews the growing literature on knowledge architecture, critiques it, and develops some of the research questions that could be explored to contribute to campus planning and to the theoretical perspectives that underpin the literature. As is said, failures are the best teachers. The paper reiterates that the spaces that support failure are the ones that support knowledge creation. Adaptability and flexibility (in terms of space, furniture and technology) have been demonstrated as the two overarching criteria which determine the usability of a space. DIY approach allows users to be the controllers of their environments and shape it to their needs. Practical implications – While knowledge creation model in an organisation restricts the knowledge among the employees of a company or type of company (when the person switches job), the knowledge creation in a campus is all the more dynamic. As people from various disciplines use and shape the space as per their needs. Findings of the research will add to the knowledge and understanding of the subject of knowledge creation through informal interactions on educational campuses. This study should be significant in the sense that it will allow the identification of spatial characteristics of informal spaces in educational campuses, support and enrich campus planning theory and model of learning beyond classrooms. DIY Urbanism has been used as a manifestation of participatory design approach which connects the users to the space. As a user is more conscious of the spatial response generated, he attempts to deliver responsive spaces.