the value of implementing design thinking into companies

THE VALUE OF IMPLEMENTING

DESIGN THINKING INTO COMPANIES

Elisa Briones and Ine Marie Vassøy Oslo School of Architecture and Design

Design Management Course , Fall2009 The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

THE VALUE OF IMPLEMENTING

DESIGN THINKING INTO COMPANIES

by Elisa Briones and Ine Marie Vassøy

There is a communication failure between business and design because there is no common understanding as designers, of how to communicate and integrate design-thinking process into business.

What is the real value for companies of integrating design thinking into their strategy? This article explores the value of design thinking for business, and how to communicate it in an understandable language. For real time experience of implementing design strategy in a company that focus on marketing and economic benefits, and for guidance of how to communicate the process to business we have interviewed Torbjørn Anderssen from Norway Says. We have also been looking at different models of design thinking processes including the design process Norway Says communicate to business, and business thinking strategies. With this experience we have integrated relevant parts from the models and created one generic model for the design process, the way we experience it. This will be relevant for us as designer to communicate in a consistent language and for business to understand the value of implementing design into their companies.

Design Management Course , Fall 2009

DESIGN THINKING

DESIGN THINKING VS. BUSINESS THINKING

“Design thinking is thinking as designers”

According to articles read from a business point of view, business thinkers associate them self with organizational thinkers. This critical thinking process makes decisions based on strategies and models, and is an attitude designers often have to touch in collaboration with marketing and economists.

Critical thinking is the most frequent strategy used by business, and is a method where the context of judgment consideration to evidence is relevant. The criteria of making a judgment correct is to evaluate the problem by using theoretical constructions such as existing methods, models and techniques. The models and techniques that organizational thinkers rely on are methods that were made to innovate in the past. From designers point of view it is clear that these models should change with the continuous and daily evolution.

Design thinking has slowly become more involved and appreciated in companies over the past decade.

From a business point of view the skill of abductive reasoning is the most crucial tool for a designer to use, approaching problems of business. Abductive reasoning is the skill to find the balance between intuition and analytics, and not by ideology or administrative decree. Instead of declaring if a statement is true or false, the designer is abductive reasoning what could possibly be true.

“What recognizes design thinkers is their ability to creatively and constructively approach difficulties by developing models into a new holistic method. Not to chose a model on behalf of other models” Roger Martin, Integrative thinking.

In the article “What is design thinking anyway?”

Roger Martin, professor of strategic management at the Rotman School of Management, defines the word abductive reasoning by dividing it into two forms of logic, deductive and inductive reasoning.

First, deductive reasoning is the logic of what must be, reasons from the general to the specific. For example, if the general rule is that all cows are black, and I see a brown bird, I can declare deductively that this bird is not a crow. Second, inductive logic is the logic of what is operate, reasons from the specific to the general. For example if I study sales per square foot across a thousand stores and find a pattern that suggests stores in small towns generate significantly higher sales per square foot than stores in cities, I can inductively declare that small towns are my more valuable market.

In contrast to organizational thinking, design thinking breaks up models in order to take advantage of relevant parts, to construct one model for the particular task that needs to be solved.

Designers challenges models and solutions, and by doing this we fright organizational thinkers. As we can see on the figure 1, design thinking increase risk, and that is the main frightening part for business.

But at the same time we nurture innovation, which leads to economic benefits. If design and business merge together, the result of the diversity of perspectives produces combustible results according to Peter Merholz in ”Why Design Thinking Won´t Save You”.

Figure 1. Relationship of project risk to design strategy.

The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

COMMUNICATION FAILURE Companies are recently having difficulties to understand the contribution of design in business, and it is not to be blamed! Roger Martin inductively declares that the classic misunderstanding of designers is that the working process is similar to artists, and therefore the differences are often confusing. Designers and artists do have many common skills, such as the creativity and erratic working process towards a product. There is also a resemblance in the open-minded attitude considering the “yes and…” methodology (designers value all ideas, even silly ones, because they might be the start an innovation). With these similarities in mind, there is still an important difference between artists and designers, considering the designers process that includes methods and the focus on the user needs and experience.

Designers and design-full companies are striving to distribute to non-design organizations the benefits of design implementation. The articles and researches published about designer’s attribution have convincing findings, such as increased sales and change of market position for the companies.

Even though these texts communicates values and benefits, a common trend shows that the design thinking processes towards getting these combustible results does not communicate throughout the articles, nor touch the companies.

first need to agree on what is the real core of the design thinking process. We decided to visualize the model in order to use a consistent language, and creating a generic diagram that explains the design process. A graphic diagram will help us to talk in a common language with business people. Otto Neurath, creator of the Isotype institute said “Charts, pictures, models, illustrations can, with a little related text, show in this symbol language the main facts and explain the important problems for any field of knowledge”. Creating a graphic diagram visualizing the design thinking process is the best option to confront the communication failure.

We looked into several existing models to find the most relevant and appealing information to approach business. After observing and analyzing different visualizations of the design thinking process and business strategies, we noticed many interesting things. For example in figure 2, we can see that a very simple visual expression represents our occasionally chaotic and non-structured way of approaching tasks, and how after a big struggle we suddenly get to illuminated ideas and come up with great solutions.

“Every £100 a design alert business spends on design increases turnover by £225.”

Figure 2. Explaining the design process.

For designers it comes natural to declare deductively, according to Roger Martin as mentioned above, that business is not familiar with this “new” way of thinking. Companies are skeptic of implementing design, so we need to take responsibility and communicate consistently our working strategy that leads business to success and grow innovation.

Another good reference is the classic diamond diagram, figure 3, which illustrate deadlines in the process, focusing on the concrete steps of development of the process. Or as illustrated in figure 3, an interesting concrete and detailed approach to the design process, in part because it refers to a specific field of design: interactive and multimedia.

OUR APPROACH TO THE INTEGRATION How can we improve the communication between business and designers? Specifically, how to communicate our way of thinking and working strategy to business? To answer these questions we Figure 3. Double diamond, design process diagram.

Design Management Course , Fall 2009

The created diagram presented in figure 4, illustrates a generic design process. The significance is that it communicates and refers to industrial, graphic, interactive, multimedia and service design. In terms of structure of the diagram we have used a lineal reading from top to bottom, to follow the order of the design phases. We use an informal language to give business the feeling of being involved in

FIRST INSIGHT

the process. Instead of saying “business goals” we say “your goals”. Talking in first person help us as designers and business people to feel the integration of both expertise’s to be natural. We want to be attractive for business, so use of colors is relevant to illustrate our personality and skills in graphic. The diagram is meant to bee a tool to engage business with our way of thinking and working.

YOUR BRIEF AND GOALS UNDESRTANDING THE PROBLEM

WE AGREE ON THE FINAL OUTCOME

PREPARATION

LOOK FOR INSPIRATION TRENDS, STATE OF TECHNOLOGY & ART RESEARCH USER OBSERVATION / create personas CONTEXT OBSERVATION WORKSHOPS, MINDMAPS, BRAINSTORMS, MOODBOARDS...

ORGANIZING CONCEPT VISUALIZATION

WE FRAME THE PROBLEM VALUE JUDGMENT / which problems are important?

UNUSUAL CONNECTIONS / placing the pieces of the puzzle

ILLUMINATION! sudden emergence of ideas....

STORYTELLING / creating user scenarios VALIDATION / stage a complete & illusionary user experience

PROPOSE & DECIDE IDEA we propose and we evaluate together

CONCEPT DETALING

INTERFACE PROTOTYPING / 3d, graphics, screens, ...

TESTING WE APPROACH THE PRODUCTION / methods, time, costs evaluation

FINAL PROTOTYPING we test the experience

FINAL OUTCOME

FOLLOW UP PRODUCTION

YOU ARE A SATISFIED CUSTOMER :)

Figure 4. The Generic Model of the Design Process.

The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

DESIGNER’S RESPONSIBILITY IN BUSINESS For business, design is a small, but important part in the business process. As it is showed in figure 5, design is not presented in the early stages of the project. Design is the step after the marked analyses are done and economic decisions and directions are taken. Most resent designers usually do not take part of the final decision either. But designers have more to contribute to than just developing a nice product.

We should work together through the whole process, integrating design and business strategies to benefit for the company.

Figure 5. The design process from a client organization point of view “design” is one small part of an overall process.

A good example for an unexpected attribute of design thinking in business is Norway says in the collaboration with LK Hjelle. Norway Says was engaged in 2002 to develop seating products for the furniture production company. From that very first meeting Norway Says have changed the direction of the company’s strategy, and developed products that are more appealing to the urban costumers.

They have started a new product category called “contemporary”, in addition to the exiting one named “classic”. Today their role in the furniture company has completely changed. Since they started to collaborate 2002, the designers have continued to attribute as strategic partners for the furniture company.

Design Management Course , Fall 2009

“Designers often work better when they are developing products that is not described in the given design brief from a company” Torbjørn Anderssen, Norway Says.

The main target the producer communicated in the given brief was to develop products that would fit into the company’s existing collection. The design brief was not easy to follow according to Torbjørn Anderssen, considering Norway Says values as being contemporary. The distance between their products personalities were much different to LK Hjelles existing collection. Norway Says chose to develop products towards a different direction, focusing on the younger and urban costumers. They suggested for the furniture company to change the strategic direction, and start developing a new collection in addition to the existing one. LK Hjelle was vulnerable at the time, because of an increased competition in the Norwegian furniture industry. In contrast to what was, the furniture industries have expanded. There is now more import of furniture from other countries and the costumers has become more conscious of design and quality. LK Hjelle looked at this suggestion of changing direction towards a new category for urban products, to be an opportunity to become more stabile in the furniture industry. Two years later Norway Says and LK Hjelle introduced their new furniture collections, two product categories, “classic” and “contemporary”. The sales in both categories are increased, because the contrast of these categories attracts more costumers to the company. People in the furniture industry refer to this change as being a tiny revolution for the Norwegian furniture industry. This is in a business organizations point of view, a great example of an unexpected positive effect of a designer’s unexpected approach to business strategy. Since that first meeting, receiving the brief, they have continued to collaborate in a management processes. Now they got an important role in the furniture company, working as strategic partners guiding them to what they should produce in further collections.

THE VALUE OF IMPLEMENTING DESIGN The real value of design for business lays on its alignment, on its integration. The value of implementing design in business will be significant, and it will show up in the quality, innovation and profit. When we developed the generic model, from the beginning to the end of the design thinking process, we worked aligned with the business strategy. We agree with the business driven companies on what are our common goals, and what is the final outcome, deadlines, costs, etc. The generic model is a transparent process, showing the methods and steps we go through.

This is our way of integrating and engaging the company with what we do. The evidence of the design process of development are important to communicate in large organizations, learning from Torbjørn Anderssens experience. In contrast to these large organizations, in collaboration with smaller industry it is not always necessary with models that articulate each step of the developing process, because the collaboration is much more informal.

In these situations the generic model will function more as a designers tool, a checklist of when and what to do. Evaluating the generic model with the process Norway Says communicate to business, we find similarities in the language we use in the process. This is a good reference because they use the model to communicate their design process in collaboration with business companies, and it works!

What differentiate the generic model from other existing models is that the visual language makes it easy understandable for non-design organizations to understand the structure of slowly sliding over to next phase when we are ready, and it is easy to go back a step if its needed. This diagram is a tool that will help us to communicate the holistic design process to business in an understandable language, and the article just made business understand and value of design thinking!

The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

REFERENCES Best, Kathryn. Design Management (managing design strategy, process and implementation) Switserland, AVA Publishing SA, 2006.

Lawson, Bryan. How Designers think (The designprocess demystified) fourth edition. Great Britain, Biddles Ltd, 2005.

Naumeier, Martin. The designful company (How to build a culture of nonstop innovation) USA , peachpit, 2009.

Martins, Roger. The design of business (Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage). USA, Harvard business school publishing, 2009.

Bounford, Trevor. Digital Diagrams (Graph statistic).

United Kingdom, Casell & Co press, 2000.

Boyle, Griff. Design project management. England, Ashgate editorial, 2003.

Anderssen, Torbjørn. (2009, November 6) Interview, Designers value in business.

Rieple, Alison. (2004 Winter). Understanding why your new Design ideas get blocked.

Breen, Bill. (2007 December 19). The business of Design. Fast company.

Merholz, Peter. (2009, October 9 ). Why Design Thinking Wont Save You. Harvard Business Publishing.

Neurath, Otto. (Survey Graphic, vol. 26, no. 1January 1937) Visual Education, A New Language. www. newdeal.feri.org/survey/37025.htm Ana Amorim. Ana-lytical (interaction design. design strategy). www.ana-lytical.com

Design Management Course , Fall 2009