When it comes to innovation, business has much to learn from design. The philosophy in design shops is, ‘try it, prototype it, and improve it’. Designers learn by doing. The style of thinking in traditional firms is largely inductive – proving that something actually operates – and deductive – proving that something must be. Design shops add abductive reasoning to the fray – which involves suggesting that something may be, and reaching out to explore it.
Because it’s pictorial, design describes the world in a way that’s not open to many interpretations. Designers, by making a film, scenario, or prototype, can help people emotionally experience the thing that the strategy seeks to describe.
Design thinking is synthetic. Out of the often-disparate demands presented by sub-units’ requirements, a coherent overall design must emerge. Design thinking is abductive in nature. It is primarily concerned with the process of visualizing what might be, some desired future state and creating a blueprint for realizing that intention. Design thinking is opportunistic: the designer seeks new and emergent possibilities. Design thinking is dialectical. The designer lives at the intersection of often-conflicting demands – recognizing the constraints of today’s materials and the uncertainties that cannot be defined away, while envisioning tomorrow’s possibilities.
In fact, design thinking always meant different things to different players. For some it was about teaching managers how to think like designers; for others, it was about designers tackling problems that used to be the preserve of managers and civil servants; and for others still, it was anything said on the subject of design that sounded smart. To most, it is was merely a new spin on design. All its proponents were, however, united by their ambition for design to play a more strategic role in the world than ‘making pretty.’ Who could argue with that?
..
Now in 2023, what is design thinking?
People are gravitated towards different attitudes about design thinking. Some are disappointed by the fact that design thinking fails to produce visible, lasting outcomes. Others pay attention to its unique role in helping people creative. Design thinking might not be a short-term, direct tool, but rather a long-term, indirect mindset.
***
Reference 1
Ackermann, R. (2023). Design thinking was supposed to fix the world. Where did it go wrong. MIT Technology Review.
An approach that promised to democratize design may have done the opposite.
Organizations have sought to adopt design thinking aiming at innovation. However, implementing such a creative problem-solving approach based on designers’ mindsets and practices requires the navigation of obstacles. Corporate structure and culture hinder the adoption course, and cognitive barriers affect non-designer engagement. In this regard, training has been used as a means of easing the process. Although considered a crucial step in design thinking implementation, research on training initiatives is scarce in the literature. Most studies mirror that about d.school boot camp and innovative programs developed by companies globally remain unknown. This practice-oriented paper investigates a training blueprint tailored for LG Corporation in South Korea, targeting R & D personnel working in several affiliates that needed creative problem-solving skills to improve business performance. The study findings unveil a customized initiative that expanded the established boot camp model by adding preceding activities to increase learning opportunities and enable empathetic observation. Fundamentally, the customization strategy aimed to provide participants with customer-oriented tools to solve business problems. In addition, the training program reframed the design thinking steps in order to make it relevant for employees and foster corporate implementation goals. Ultimately, this case study supplies literature describing a training blueprint to disseminate design thinking considering two dimensions: individual adoption and organizational implementation challenges.
Figure 1 The overall structure and time allocation of the d.school’s design thinking training program
One thought on “Evolution of design thinking”
In the initial weeks of the course, I picked the case about the package design for health supplement (http://designmarketinglab.com/archives/1264) as the focal point for my self-introduction assignment. The rationale behind my choice was grounded in the case’s exemplary illustration of the benefits in applying design thinking methods for problem-solving. In this successful case, Yuyu, a pharmaceutical company, whose decision-makers chose to enhance the packaging of its health supplement, thereby improving communication with potential consumers and, consequently, enhancing the overall user experience.
The former package design exhibited notable shortcomings. Information was predominantly presented on the front side in a verbal format, posing challenges for sales representatives. The updated design strategically emphasizes visual elements, incorporating pictograms for instructions and featuring an image of the pill on the box. This not only offers a preview of the actual color and size but also mitigates mix-ups of supplements. Furthermore, it enables individuals averse to swallowing large pills to assess the size of the supplement. Additionally, the redesigned packaging addresses information communication issues through zoning, effectively segregating content between the front and back sides of the package. The above case was inspiring and represented well the kind of work I wanted to be involved in in my future career.
Encountering IDEO’s mission and Tim Brown’s “Design Thinking” is one of the most significant turning points in my education thus far. The idea that design is a panacea to solve all problems has taken root within me, leading me to pursue admission to design graduate schools. Upon completion of the course, has my perspective on design thinking undergone a transformation? To some extent. While I maintain a steadfast belief in the inherent value of design thinking, I also see the importance of embracing its evolutionary nature — welcoming adaptation to new circumstances. As highlighted in this case, “design thinking always meant different things to different players.” This necessitates a profound reflection on my comprehension of design thinking.
Traditional design thinking centers on the specific user or user segment, prioritizing their needs and potential pain points. However, I learned from this course that design thinking is one approach to solving the various types of problems we encounter in this world. Therefore, the course has imparted the insight that a deep-dive, T-shaped approach to researching or understanding users is not the only way to finding a solution. I embrace the evolving nature of design thinking, advocating for a more proactive approach. Designers and business professionals must anticipate the shifting/transforming needs and future challenges of users/customers, rather than solely responding to current or expressed needs. Although this concept is not yet clearly set in my mind, I am challenged to continue organizing my thoughts, exploring how various fields can come together to create new innovative approaches to problem-solving. For instance, design thinking can serve as a means to address the constraints of behavioral economics. As such, the limitations inherent in design thinking, particularly arising from its static approach to research in the swiftly evolving world, can be alleviated through future AI-powered solutions. Artificial intelligence extends beyond addressing the immediate needs of users and empathizing with them; it allows discover of new possibilities.
In the initial weeks of the course, I picked the case about the package design for health supplement (http://designmarketinglab.com/archives/1264) as the focal point for my self-introduction assignment. The rationale behind my choice was grounded in the case’s exemplary illustration of the benefits in applying design thinking methods for problem-solving. In this successful case, Yuyu, a pharmaceutical company, whose decision-makers chose to enhance the packaging of its health supplement, thereby improving communication with potential consumers and, consequently, enhancing the overall user experience.
The former package design exhibited notable shortcomings. Information was predominantly presented on the front side in a verbal format, posing challenges for sales representatives. The updated design strategically emphasizes visual elements, incorporating pictograms for instructions and featuring an image of the pill on the box. This not only offers a preview of the actual color and size but also mitigates mix-ups of supplements. Furthermore, it enables individuals averse to swallowing large pills to assess the size of the supplement. Additionally, the redesigned packaging addresses information communication issues through zoning, effectively segregating content between the front and back sides of the package. The above case was inspiring and represented well the kind of work I wanted to be involved in in my future career.
Encountering IDEO’s mission and Tim Brown’s “Design Thinking” is one of the most significant turning points in my education thus far. The idea that design is a panacea to solve all problems has taken root within me, leading me to pursue admission to design graduate schools. Upon completion of the course, has my perspective on design thinking undergone a transformation? To some extent. While I maintain a steadfast belief in the inherent value of design thinking, I also see the importance of embracing its evolutionary nature — welcoming adaptation to new circumstances. As highlighted in this case, “design thinking always meant different things to different players.” This necessitates a profound reflection on my comprehension of design thinking.
Traditional design thinking centers on the specific user or user segment, prioritizing their needs and potential pain points. However, I learned from this course that design thinking is one approach to solving the various types of problems we encounter in this world. Therefore, the course has imparted the insight that a deep-dive, T-shaped approach to researching or understanding users is not the only way to finding a solution. I embrace the evolving nature of design thinking, advocating for a more proactive approach. Designers and business professionals must anticipate the shifting/transforming needs and future challenges of users/customers, rather than solely responding to current or expressed needs. Although this concept is not yet clearly set in my mind, I am challenged to continue organizing my thoughts, exploring how various fields can come together to create new innovative approaches to problem-solving. For instance, design thinking can serve as a means to address the constraints of behavioral economics. As such, the limitations inherent in design thinking, particularly arising from its static approach to research in the swiftly evolving world, can be alleviated through future AI-powered solutions. Artificial intelligence extends beyond addressing the immediate needs of users and empathizing with them; it allows discover of new possibilities.