Design thinking

Overview

Design thinking has come to be defined as combining empathy for the context of a problem, creativity in the generation of insights and solutions, and rationality in analyzing and fitting various solutions to the problem context.^[2] According to Tim Brown, CEO and president of IDEO, the goal of Design Thinking is "matching people’s needs with what is technologically feasible and viable as a business strategy" ^[3] The premise of teaching Design Thinking is that by knowing about how to successfully approach and solve difficult, multi-dimentional problems, more specifically; effective methods to ideate, select and execute solutions, individuals and businesses will be able to improve their own problem solving processes and skills. There is also significant academic interest in understanding how designers think and design cognition.^[4] The first formal academic research symposium on Design Thinking was organized at Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, in 1991, and has developed into a regular series.^[5]

Origins of the term

(For a detailed evolution, see History, below.)

The notion of design as a "way of thinking" in the sciences can be traced to Herbert A. Simon's 1969 book The Sciences of the Artificial,^[6] and in design engineering to Robert McKim's 1973 book Experiences in Visual Thinking.^[7] Rolf Faste expanded on McKim's work at Stanford in the 80's and 90's,^[8][9] teaching "design thinking" as a method of creative action."^[10] Peter Rowe's 1987 book Design Thinking, which described methods and approaches used by architects and urban planners, was a significant early usage of the term in the design research literature.^[11] "Design Thinking" was adapted for business purposes by Faste's Stanford colleague David M. Kelley, who founded IDEO in 1991.^[12]Richard Buchanan's 1992 article, entitled "Wicked Problems in Design Thinking",^[13] expressed a broader view of "design thinking" as addressing intractable human concerns through design.

Play media

Design Thinking Example Video

Solution-based thinking

Design thinking is a formal method for practical, creative resolution of problems and creation of solutions, with the intent of an improved future result. In this regard it is a form of solution-based, or solution-focused thinking; starting with a goal (a better future situation) instead of solving a specific problem. By considering both present and future conditions and parameters of the problem, alternative solutions may be explored simultaneously. Cross asserted that this type of thinking most often happens in the built, or artificial, environment (as in artifacts).^[14]
This approach differs from the analytical scientific method, which begins with thoroughly defining all the parameters of the problem in order to create a solution. Design Thinking identifies and investigates with both known and ambiguous aspects of the current situation in order to discover hidden parameters and open alternative paths which may lead to the goal. Because Design Thinking is iterative, intermediate "solutions" are also potential starting points of alternative paths, including redefining of the initial problem.

Bryan Lawson Architects vs. Engineers, 1979

In 1972, psychologist, architect and design researcher Bryan Lawson created an empirical study to understand the difference between problem-based solvers and solution-based solvers. He took two groups of students – final year students in architecture and post-graduate science students – and asked them to create one-story structures from a set of colored blocks. The perimeter of the building was to optimize either the red or the blue color, however, there were unspecified rules governing the placement and relationship of some of the blocks.
Lawson found that:
The scientists adopted a technique of trying out a series of designs which used as many different blocks and combinations of blocks as possible as quickly as possible. Thus they tried to maximize the information available to them about the allowed combinations. If they could discover the rule governing which combinations of blocks were allowed they could then search for an arrangement which would optimize the required color around the design. By contrast, the architects selected their blocks in order to achieve the appropriately colored perimeter. If this proved not to be an acceptable combination, then the next most favorably colored block combination would be substituted and so on until an acceptable solution was discovered.^[15]
Nigel Cross concluded from Lawson's studies that scientific problem solving was done by analysis, while "designers" problem solve through synthesis.^[14] Kelley and Brown argue the Design Thinking utilizes both analysis and synthesis.

Analysis versus synthesis

The terms analysis and synthesis come from (classical) Greek and mean literally "to loosen up" and "to put together" respectively. In general, analysis is defined as the procedure by which we break down an intellectual or substantial whole into parts or components. Synthesis is defined as the opposite procedure: to combine separate elements or components in order to form a coherent whole. However, analysis and synthesis, as scientific methods, always go hand in hand; they complement one another. Every synthesis is built upon the results of a preceding analysis, and every analysis requires a subsequent synthesis in order to verify and correct its results.^[16]

Divergent thinking versus convergent thinking

Design Thinkers also use divergent thinking and convergent thinking to explore many possible solutions. Divergent thinking is the ability to offer different, unique or variant ideas adherent to one theme while convergent thinking is the ability to find the "correct" solution to the given problem. Design thinking encourages divergent thinking to ideate many solutions (possible or impossible) and then uses convergent thinking to prefer and realize the best resolution.

Design thinking as a process for problem-solving

Unlike analytical thinking, design thinking is a process which includes the "building up" of ideas, with few, or no, limits on breadth during a "brainstorming" phase. This helps reduce fear of failure in the participant(s) and encourages input and participation from a wide variety of sources in the ideation phases. The phrase Outside the box thinking has been coined to describe one goal of the brainstorming phase and is encouraged, since this can aid in the discovery of hidden elements and ambiguities in the situation and discovering potentially faulty assumptions.
One version of the design thinking process has seven stages: define, research, ideate, prototype, choose, implement, and learn.^[6] Within these seven steps, problems can be framed, the right questions can be asked, more ideas can be created, and the best answers can be chosen. The steps aren't linear; can occur simultaneously and be repeated. A more simplified expression of the process is Robert McKim's phrase; "Express-Test-Cycle".

Define

• Decide what issue you are trying to resolve.
• Agree on who the audience is.
• Prioritize this project in terms of urgency.
• Determine what will make this project successful.
• Establish a glossary of terms.

Research

• Review the history of the issue; remember any existing obstacles.
• Collect examples of other attempts to solve the same issue.
• Note the project supporters, investors, and critics.
• Talk to your end-users, that brings you the most fruitful ideas for later design.
• Take into account thought leaders' opinions.

Ideation

• Identify the needs and motivations of your end-users.
• Generate as many ideas as possible to serve these identified needs.
• Log your brainstorming session.
• Do not judge or debate ideas.
• During brainstorming, have one conversation at a time.

Prototype

• Combine, expand, and refine ideas.
• Create multiple drafts.
• Seek feedback from a diverse group of people, include your end users.
• Present a selection of ideas to the client.
• Reserve judgement and maintain neutrality.
• Create and present actual working prototype(s)

Choose

• Review the objective.
• Set aside emotion and ownership of ideas.
• Avoid consensus thinking.
• Remember: the most practical solution isn't always the best.
• Select the powerful ideas.

Implement

• Make task descriptions.
• Plan tasks.
• Determine resources.
• Assign tasks.
• Execute.
• Deliver to client.

Learn

• Gather feedback from the consumer.
• Determine if the solution met its goals.
• Discuss what could be improved.
• Measure success; collect data.
• Document.

Although design is always influenced by individual preferences, the design thinking method shares a common set of traits, mainly; Creativity, Ambidextrous thinking,^[9] Teamwork, User-Centerdness (Empathy), Curiosity and Optimism.
An alternative, five phase, description of the process, as described by Hasso Plattner, is;

• (re)Define the Problem - Design Never Ends

• Needfinding and Benchmarking - Understand the users, design space

• Bodystorm - Ideate

• Prototype - Build

• Test - Learn

The path thru these process steps is not strictly circular. Plattner states; "While the stages are simple enough, the adaptive expertise required to chose the right inflection points and appropriate next stage is a high order intellectual activity that requires practice and is learnable."^[17]

Attributes of design thinking

Rules

Plattner asserts that there are four rules to Design Thinking;^[18]

• The Human Rule: All Design Activity Is Ultimately Social in Nature
• The Ambiguity Rule: Design Thinkers Must Preserve Ambiguity
• The Re-design Rule: All Design Is Re-design
• The Tangibility Rule: Making Ideas Tangible Always Facilitates Communication

Wicked problems

Design Thinking is especially useful when addressing what Buchanan referred to as "wicked problems". Wicked problems which are ill-defined or tricky, as opposed to wicked in the sense of malicious.^[19] With ill-defined problems, both the problem and the solution are unknown at the outset of the problem-solving exercise. This is as opposed to "tame" or "well-defined" problems where the problem is clear, and the solution is available through some technical knowledge.^[20]
For wicked problems, the general thrust of the problem may be clear, however considerable time and effort is spent in order to clarify the requirements. A large part of the problem solving activity, then, consists of problem definition and problem shaping.^[11]

The A-Ha moment

The "A-Ha Moment" is the moment where there is suddenly a clear forward path.^[21] It is the point in the cycle where synthesis and divergent thinking, analysis and convergent thinking, and the nature of the problem all come together and an appropriate resolution has been captured. Prior to this point, the process may seem nebulous, hazy and inexact. At this point, the path forward is so obvious that in retrospect it seems odd that it took so long to recognize it. After this point, the focus becomes more and more clear as the final product is constructed.^[22]

Resistance, fear and the devil's advocate

There are factors which can slow or halt the Design Thinking process; Fear, Resistance and Playing the Devil's Advocate. These attitudes introduce destructive negativity.
Fear of failure or criticism may prevent someone from even beginning apply methods and processes to achieve their goals. Both have psychological effects which divert someone from focusing on solutions and shifting their focus to doubts of self-worth, anxieties of "will it be good enough," or procrastination..."^[23]
Resistance can inhibit Design Thinking by reprioritizing the main goal and shifting efforts to other tasks which may need to be done. ^[24] Donald Schön talks about the resistance of students towards their professors and the resistance of professors towards students in the learning process.^[25]
Playing the "Devil's Advocate" is constant nay-saying; making authoritative assertions as to why every proposed solution will not work. It is an embodiment of negative criticism. Devil's Advicates kill projects by shifting the focus from potential solutions to hypercritical issues with ambiguous effects. The goal is to stop further ideation towards a solution, which, according to Tom and Dave Kelley, ought to be "banned from the room".^[26]

Methods and process

Design methods and design process are often used interchangeably, but there are significant differences between the two.
Design methods are techniques, rules, or ways of doing things which are employed within a design discipline. The methods for Design Thinking include interviewing, creating user profiles, looking at other existing solutions, creating prototypes, mind-mapping, asking questions like the "Five-Whys" and situational analysis.
Because of Design Thinking's parallel nature, there are many different paths thru the phases. This is part of the reason Design Thinking may seem to be "fuzzy" or "ambiguous" when compared to more analytical, Cartesian methods of science and engineering.
Some early Design Processes stemmed from Soft Systems Methodology in the 1960s. Koberg and Bagnall's wrote The All New Universal Traveller in 1972 and presented a circular, seven-step process to problem-solving. These seven steps could be done lineally or in feed-back loops.^[27] Stanford's d.school developed an updated seven step process in 2007.^[28] Other expressions of design processes have been proposed, including a three-step simplified triangular process (or the six-part, less simplified pyramid) by Bryan Lawson^[15] and Hugh Dubberly's e-book How Do You Design: A compendium of models.^[29]

The use of visual analogy in design thinking and learning

Ill-defined problems often contain higher-order and obscure relationships. Design Thinking can address these thru the use of analogies. An understanding of the expected results, or lack of domain-related knowledge for the task, may be developed by correlating different internal representations, such as images, to develop an understanding of the obscure or ill defined elements of the situation. The process involves several complex cognitive mechanisms, as the design task often has elements in multiple cognitive domains; visual, mathematical, auditory or tactile, requiring the usage of multiple "languages", like visual thinking.

Differences from science and humanities

Although many design fields have been categorized as laying between Science and the Arts and Humanities, design may be seen as its own distinct way of understanding the world, based on solution-based problem solving, problem shaping, synthesis, and appropriateness in the built environment.
One of the first Design Science theorists, John Chris Jones, postulated that design was different than the arts, sciences and mathematics in the 1970s. In response to the question 'is designing an art, a science or a form of mathematics' Jones responded:
The main point of difference is that of timing. Both artists and scientists operate on the physical world as it exists in the present (whether it is real or symbolic), while mathematicians operate on abstract relationships that are independent of historical time. Designers, on the other hand, are forever bound to treat as real that which exists only in an imagined future and have to specify ways in which the foreseen thing can be made to exist.^[30]
Design can be seen as its own culture in education, with its own methods and ways of thinking which can be systematically taught in both K-12 and higher education. Nigel Cross sets out to show the differences between the humanities, the sciences, and design in his paper "Designerly Ways of Knowing". He observed that:

The phenomenon of study in each culture is

• in the sciences: the natural world
• in the humanities: human experience
• in design: the artificial world

The appropriate methods in each culture are

• in the sciences: controlled experiment, classification, analysis
• in the humanities: analogy, metaphor, evaluation
• in design: modeling, pattern-forming, synthesis

The values of each culture are

• in the sciences: objectivity, rationality, neutrality, and a concern for 'truth'
• in the humanities: subjectivity, imagination, commitment, and a concern for 'justice'
• in design: practicality, ingenuity, empathy , and a concern for 'appropriateness'^[14]

The language of design

Designers communicate in a visual^[31] or an object language.^[14] Symbols, signs, and metaphors are used through the medium of sketching, diagrams and technical drawings to translate abstract requirements into concrete objects. The way designers communicate, then, is through understanding this way of coding design requirements in order to produce built products.^[32]

Design thinking in business

Design thinking has two common interpretations in the business world:^{[citation needed]}

1. Designers bringing their methods into business - by either taking part themselves in business process, or training business people to use design methods.
2. Designers achieving innovative outputs, for example: 'the iPod is a great example of design thinking.'

The first has been described by Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, at a TED lecture,^[33] though his blog^[34] also considers an element of the second.
The limits of the first kind of design thinking in business are also being explored. Not all problems yield to design thinking alone, where it may be a 'temporary fix'.^[35] Design thinking companies including IDEO and Sense Worldwide are responding to this by building business thinking capabilities.^[36]
In organization and management theory, design thinking forms part of the Architecture/Design/Anthropology (A/D/A) paradigm, which characterizes innovative, human-centered enterprises. This paradigm also focuses on a collaborative and iterative style of work and an abductive mode of thinking, compared to practices associated with the more traditional Mathematics/Economics/Psychology (M/E/P) management paradigm.^[37]
Companies that integrate the principles of design thinking in their innovation processes often share a certain mindset or are striving to cultivate a more creative and human-centred company culture.