Sunday, January 26, 2014

Collaborative and Lasting Change

Image from Stefanie Di Russo.

Design, once a specific term to describe creating an object has now become a common term used outside of creative disciplines. Businesses and business schools all over the country are embracing design “thinking” as a way to explore deep seated issues and unmet needs. Even NGOs, governments, and UNICEF are beginning to use the phrase and the methodology.


What does Design Thinking mean? It is a process that begins by framing an issue or problem, talking with people who are affected by the issue, coming up with a number of quick prototype solutions, and refining the prototypes. Or put more succinctly, “inspiration, ideation, and implementation...aimed at getting beyond assumptions that block effective solutions.”(1)


Diagram from Stefani Di Russo
As a methodology for solving problems design thinking has its roots in many disciplines - engineering, urban planning, graphic design and industrial design. How did all these seemingly different disciplines combine to create to what is seen as a “new way of thinking”? Design researcher Stefanie Di Russo created a diagram to make sense of design’s recent history. (2)


Looking at the history of design, what stands out most to me is who is part of the design process and how they are involved. As Di Russo explains, the 1960’s “participatory design” was a tool of science and engineers. They drove the design process with little input from end-users. User-testing was focused on the usability of the product and often disregarded user need and interests. (2)


In the 1980’s “user-centered design” emerged as designers began looking to user needs and interests. They designed with the user in mind. Service design extended the design approach beyond product development to include human interactions. This approach includes looking at how users use products and services and using those insights to create better products or services. (2)


In the late 1990’s Human-Centered Design began to look at products and services as a means to an end. Ideally, products and services would disappear into the background as people’s needs and interest were met. Drawing on curriculum at the Stanford’s d. school, IDEO democratized the design process by breaking Human-Centered Design down into 3 steps - hear, create, and deliver - and created a free toolkit for anyone to use.


For me, the power of design thinking lies in its ability to look at systemic problems with curiosity and invite experts, the people who live with the issue on a regular basis, to participate in crafting the solution.


A good example of what design thinking can offer comes from a story told by Catapult Design at a workshop I attended last summer. An NGO was working in a slum to increase the health of residents through sewage treatment. “Experts” in waste management went in to the neighborhoods to observe how people were informally handling sewage waste. They observed that people went to open areas and used them as open-air communal toilets. Open ditches ran through the neighborhood draining these areas. With these observations in hand, the NGO worked with engineers to create in-house sewage treatment units. They were odorless, efficiently took care of waste and were supplied to household by the NGO. The problem was that no one used them.


Had the “experts” in waste management talked with the residents about their lives and the system that they lived in, they would have discovered that the residents had many competing needs. One of the greatest needs was finding alone time away from families and neighbors in the the crowded slums. Using a toilet outside of the home was one of the few moments each day they had to themselves and it wasn’t something that they were willing to give up.

It is this nuanced understanding of shared human needs and desires that I hope design thinking can address in a way that creates collaborative and lasting change.

10 comments:

  1. Caitlin! YES!!!! I am incredibly excited about your subject matter. As an individual and professional I have deep respect for companies, individuals, agencies and industries that place design-minded thinking at the center of business or life models.

    I 100% agree with your personal belief about design thinking having at it's root a creative and systemic solution developing mechanism. It seems that yes, we can solve any number of problems--or at least seemingly solve. However, the best solution, the ones that truly last seem to be anchored to smart design. Be it intellectual, creative, systemic, philosophical, physical--design--minded approaches allow for solution that are eco, human, atmospheric and social centric.

    The flip--side of this coin, so it would seem, is that design-minded approaches to strategy and solutions can be in the wrong hands. In other words smart design approaches might be the worst things for our environment due to how effective they are. That said! I, like you, am an optimist and proponent of design-minded approaches.
    One component of these models is that of ethnographic and or anthropological research that is grounded in both bath and active inquiry and observation. It through the lens of understanding behavior that ideation and smart design can truly come to be. Thank you so much for tackling this topic. And, if you ever want to start a design-minded company down the road--I'd be all ears!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brian, I think you are absolutely right about design as a tool, one that can be used for good or evil. Let's use it for good!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Caitlin, you taught me what design-thinking is. We hear it so much nowadays, especially at BGI, I never thought twice about it. I loved your personal story at the beginning of your first design post and how you see it as "being resourceful." It totally makes sense. But, instead of an inanimate object like a shirt that needs sewing, human-centered problems and design is so much more complex. Perhaps you could walk us through a problem and how a design-thinker would approach it in future posts. I intend on being a regular reader so thanks for inspiring me. Also, you should share more about your personal experiences and how they have shaped your thoughts around this issue in future posts! I know you've had some amazing experiences so far. Thanks again.

    Kevin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Kevin for the suggestions. I was in need of more post ideas. Part of the inspiration for exploring this topic was to understand a phrase that many people are using, but are using in very different ways. I'm happy to hear I wasn't the only one unsure of what "design thinking" actually means.

      Delete
  4. Caitlin,
    This will prove to be an interesting thread. Your posting mirror the conversations at my own dinner table. My husband is an architect and he bemoans the fact that most people think that what an architect does is "make things pretty." Instead, it is probably one of the first disciplines to really apply systems thinking - since design of buildings and space is about solving complex problems with dozens of variables. And like you toilet story, he continues to educate me about the imapcts of where you put entrances, stairways and windows and how they affect the behavior of the people using the buildings.
    When I was in college my school did a remodel of one of the big open areas in teh center of campus. They cleaned it up, but delayed laying down walk ways - waiting, instead, to see the paths people naturally cut as they traversed the space. Where the dirt was worn by foot traffic is where they put the walk ways. Probably saved the school a lot of maintenance over the course of the campus' life not having to reseed areas worn by feet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marsha, what a great approach to figuring out where to put walkways. People are going to walk where they want to walk, why not make it easy for them (and the maintenance folks)?

      I am continually amazed at how we can design something to affect people's behavior. I bet both you and your husband have some really interesting insights. I'd love to hear more about your experiences.

      Delete
  5. Thanks for tackling this Caitlin. This is definitely one of those terms that a ton of people use yet not everyone is really on the same page as to what it means. I really enjoyed your short retrospective of the concept and how it's employed - both inadvertently (life hacking!) or on purpose with places like IDEO. Just a thought (and I know this is not likely where you are going with this thread) - but I know that recent enthusiasm around design thinking in curriculum comes from the idea that we don't really teach youth any "real" skills anymore (how to be resourceful as you say) and that we've moved way too far towards one edge of the spectrum of academia to very siloed subjects that overlook the very people involved in living them everyday. As design thinking educational approaches gain steam, let's just say that there could be a pendulum swing in the complete opposite direction where we overemphasize the design lens. Just curious what you think that might look like and what sort of outcomes that might have, both positive and negative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a great questions Ashley. Yes, what happens when the pendulum swings too far to one direction? I don't yet have an opinion, but I would love to see this be a dinner "table topic".

      Delete
  6. Hi Caitlin,

    Great blog post and great topic! I think there is a great need for design centered thinking and engineering though I couldn't agree more about the issues that arise when things (products or systems) are designed without the user(s) input and without taking a close look at behavior patterns.
    One interesting approach to this problem involves working with anthropologists during the problem diagnosis phase before jumping to the designing the "solution" phase. I have heard some amazing stories about anthropologists doing field research and conducting tests or carefully and patiently observing behavior patters with the individuals that are actually affected by the problems that are trying to be solved.
    I think that a number of designers always want to "solve" problems that they encounter or that are brought to them, the problem arises when they assume that they fully understand the problem. If they design solutions for inaccurate problems it just doesn't really solve much unfortunately.
    I think it's another example of a situation that can be solved more effectively and efficiently by working with a well composed team of people with a variety of strengths.

    Thank you for sharing your insights! I look forward to reading more of your posts!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maren, what a great perspective about the importance of team diversity. Creating objects, services, or experiences that affect millions of people requires a diverse set of skills that no one person has. It reminds me of the strategy article by Rita McGrath about Transient Advantage that organizations in different growth periods need people with different skills. Thanks for sharing your insights.

      Delete