Get Your Hands Dirty in Innovation and Design

Reflections by Satu Wilson and Huong Thai

We discovered various definitions related to Design Thinking (DT) and Innovation Affairs. As Katja said, we recalled Rick Rubin’s message in his book:

Everyone is a Creator.

In our research, we discovered a new term, ‘Designerly Thinking’, which had not been mentioned in the contact sessions. According to Ulla Johansson-Sköldberg, Jill Woodilla, and Mehves Çetinkaya (2013, 121–146), the concept of Design Thinking has evolved through multiple interpretations across disciplines. Their study critically examines the discourse surrounding Design Thinking and identifies two primary streams: “Designerly Thinking” and “Design Thinking”.

Figure 1 outlines the key distinctions between these two discourses.

We learned about the evolution of the Design Thinking from Design Thinking 1.0’s focus on product design, to Design Thinking 4.0’s systemic, sustainable and AI-enhanced DT. Kolko’s article is from 2015, Design Thinking 2.0-era, where DT is seen as a way of dealing with organizational life and the designer’s role has become more strategic in enabling a design-centric organization culture. Katja explained that some of the tools for aiding the designer in this journey, such as frameworks and design models, can be designed for the client organization to reflect their identity, hence making them more likely to utilize and embrace the change. We got the chance to design our own DT process model, which was fun as we were designing against the clock! Our team always keeps in mind the “making questions” approach.

We had a mini workshop on practicing the design thinking process. Besides the learning process, we had a chance to experience the teamwork spirit as a service designer. It was great to get the feedback from other teams at different stages of the design process. This is an important part of the innovation process, as Kolko (2015) states, you rarely get things right on the first go.

During the feedback session, we discussed the way to finance our design prototypes, and had some great ideas from the team. Lovlie, Downs, and Reason (Lockwood ed. 2010) discuss the struggle of measuring the value of design in service sector, and give good insights on how to validate the quality and the return on investment. With these insights, it would be possible to prove the value of the new designs.

After these two days, we are all excited to get ‘our hands dirty’ and try out the new methods in the organizations we work with. However, as we learned from Katja and the authors Kolko (2015) and Lockwood (2010), design is not the answer to everything. Design methods are at their best when used with the ‘wicked’ or ‘fuzzy’ problems, but there are situations when other methodologies such as lean or agile are best suited.

“The fact is, if you wanna innovate, you gotta design.”

Lockwood (2010, 47)

To conclude, we believe this is just the beginning of further study for SID students. Beyond Design Thinking, Lockwood (2010) highlights Design Strategy, Design Management, and Design Leadership as key directions of sustainable innovation within organizations.

REFERENCES

Johansson-Sköldber, U., Woodilla, J. and Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design Thinking: Past, Present and Possible Future. Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 22, Nr. 2. 121-146. https://www.academia.edu/11617520/Design_Thinking_Past_Present_and_Possible_Futures

Kolko, J. (2015). Design thinking comes of age. The approach, once used primarily in product design, is now infusing corporate culture. Harvard Business Review September 2015, 66-71https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age

Lockwood, T. (ed.) (2010). Design thinking: integrating innovation, customer experience and brand value. New York: Allworth Press. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/laurea/detail.action?docID=1052350.

Rubin, R. (2023). The Creative Act: A way of being. London: Canongate Books.

Posted

in

, , , , ,

by

Huong Thai

Tags:

, , , , , , , ,

Comments

5 responses to “Get Your Hands Dirty in Innovation and Design”

  1. eduardo.solorzano.tejeda Avatar
    eduardo.solorzano.tejeda

    It’s nice to read about your recent experience and the knowledge you’ve uncovered with curiosity, I could feel your excitement through the text!

    I found it interesting to see the comparison between Design Thinking and Designerly Thinking. The definition of “creation of meaning” (Krippendorff) stood out to me, since in my experience, meaningful products and services have a much higher chance of succeeding and spreading.

    I think, meaning is often harder to uncover within an audience. I believe we first need to understand users by observing and asking the right questions. But even with resources and commitment, meaning can remain a sensitive aspect of a service. Context, background, and psychological factors all play a role, and in many cases intuition matters more than rational facts and data.

    What feels meaningful to one person can be completely irrelevant to another.
    My point is that, uncovering useful information demands time and effort, as you said “get your hands dirty”.

    Reply
  2. baonguyen88846a90cc Avatar
    baonguyen88846a90cc

    Great reflection! I like how you guys connected the “Designerly Thinking” with the bigger evolution of Design Thinking from 1.0 to 4.0. I think it showed how the Design Thinking concept has moved from focusing on tangible products to addressing complex cultures and systems. I also found your point about designing frameworks for clients really interesting, making the process to reflect the identity of the organisation, is a really clever way to increase adoption.

    I also agree with your note that design is not always the best answer as Katja, Kolko (2015) and Lockwood (2010) pointed out, Design Thinking is most valuable when tackling complex and tricky problems, but in other cases, lean or agile methods can be more effective. I think this balance between choosing the right way to approach is something that make Service Design both fun and challenging.

    In the end, it is all about knowing when and how to “get your hands dirty” in Innovation and Design.

    Reply
  3. julietlealruokonen Avatar
    julietlealruokonen

    “Everyone is a Creator”, the relative meaning of our living existence is to create in order to survive. Your emphasis on the statement  reminds us that as we journey and open up ourselves in the Design Thinking world, we get to contribute extensively.

    Your post clearly defined the term Design Thinking and Designerly Thinking and their distinct approach as seen in your diagram. In a simpler term, we can say that Design thinking is the method while Designerly Thinking refers to the mindset. This brought me back to what Katja Tschimmel mentioned  during our lecture that surprisingly, schools and religions are among the intuitions that rarely, if not, adapt Design Thinking, which gave me the curiosity to know the reason for these realities. Could it be that the challenge of measuring the value of design is one factor that institutions or even businesses are not fully adapting  Design Thinking? 

    How the business views  design and how design is given importance determines the success of design.The measurable characteristic of design that is embedded in every touchpoint, translates into financial value when business leaders learn to understand the design process. Thus, service designers have the important role of communicating the value of design and its impact in achieving business goals.

    Reply
  4. lindaneig Avatar
    lindaneig

    The end sentence of your blog was a good reminder of how design thinking methods are not best for all needs. Did you come across any suggestions for when to use a design thinking method and when others?

    It would be good to have some kind of a starter-kit of methods; maybe a chart where you have questions or features of your business problem (e.g. what makes a problem wicked) and then different methodologies that would suit best different situations.

    If you find this kind of a approach, I’d be happy to see it or maybe we could do one as a course work at some point during our studies. 😊

    Reply
  5. Cindy Nguyen Avatar
    Cindy Nguyen

    Your final takeaway and quote, “The fact is, if you wanna innovate, you gotta design,” I find to be extremely true. It is inspiring to see your team bring these methods into real life through physical trials. When practicing the design thinking process, it is important to use the habits of innovators. Such as questioning, experimenting, and networking. Thinking outside of the box often comes from ideas within your own area of knowledge and the ones who give you different perspectives. Innovators go out and observe and ask questions that go beyond their imagination.

    Reply

Leave a comment