On Design Thinking and the Innovation Theater
Design thinking as a codified design approach first swept across the technology and business landscape during an age when Silicon Valley seemed to lay claim over the very concepts of innovation and disruption. First developed by renowned design firm IDEO as a way to emphasize humanistic elements and an iterative design approach, the term has since been co-opted by firms ranging from aspiring startups, to public sector organizations, to multinational corporations bent on harnessing creativity to produce better products and services.
It is actually rather difficult to nail down a concrete definition of design thinking, which takes on many different forms and interpretations depending on the organization or the individual. Not simply relegated to the product design process, the term frequently crops up in the context of engineering, marketing, data science, policy, education, or even finance. For some designers, there may a level of bewilderment at the reframing of long-established design principles, now standardized and operationalized, even mandated by the highest levels of management. In today's data-rich, information-heavy, metric-driven business environment, attempts by management to uncover, codify, and control the often invisible elements of the creative process (the "thinking" part) may actually hinder the process in some cases.
In 2017, Jim Hackett took the reins as CEO of Ford Motor Company, promising to revive the struggling automotive giant by injecting empathic business principles and a design thinking mindset, which he had honed while working closely with members of IDEO. In the face of mounting competition from rideshare companies and the murky promises of autonomous vehicles, Hackett was optimistic about Ford's prospects, offering:
In many contexts, the proliferation of design thinking has proven it to be, essentially, an (exceedingly successful) branding exercise. Utilized incorrectly, design thinking feeds into the spectacle of corporate "innovation theater" - attempts to signal a culture of innovation (via design thinking principles, innovation labs, hackathons, accelerators, etc.). Such initiatives often fail to produce any meaningful innovations or ideas due to the formulaic nature of the approach. Successfully cultivating a culture of innovation does not necessitate the adoption of design thinking per se, though any attempts to will require a critical lens and thoughtful approach to the problem solving and ideation, one that is mindful of individual nuance and organizational complexity.
It is actually rather difficult to nail down a concrete definition of design thinking, which takes on many different forms and interpretations depending on the organization or the individual. Not simply relegated to the product design process, the term frequently crops up in the context of engineering, marketing, data science, policy, education, or even finance. For some designers, there may a level of bewilderment at the reframing of long-established design principles, now standardized and operationalized, even mandated by the highest levels of management. In today's data-rich, information-heavy, metric-driven business environment, attempts by management to uncover, codify, and control the often invisible elements of the creative process (the "thinking" part) may actually hinder the process in some cases.
In 2017, Jim Hackett took the reins as CEO of Ford Motor Company, promising to revive the struggling automotive giant by injecting empathic business principles and a design thinking mindset, which he had honed while working closely with members of IDEO. In the face of mounting competition from rideshare companies and the murky promises of autonomous vehicles, Hackett was optimistic about Ford's prospects, offering:
Nearly two years later, there is little praise to be offered for the espoused benefits of design thinking; Ford's performance remain lackluster, its profit margins even dipping below levels before Hackett his role. (Hackett, however, has recently claimed that Ford is on the cusp of a turnaround)."I think the understanding of humans in our product is an advantage...isn’t design about great translation?"
In many contexts, the proliferation of design thinking has proven it to be, essentially, an (exceedingly successful) branding exercise. Utilized incorrectly, design thinking feeds into the spectacle of corporate "innovation theater" - attempts to signal a culture of innovation (via design thinking principles, innovation labs, hackathons, accelerators, etc.). Such initiatives often fail to produce any meaningful innovations or ideas due to the formulaic nature of the approach. Successfully cultivating a culture of innovation does not necessitate the adoption of design thinking per se, though any attempts to will require a critical lens and thoughtful approach to the problem solving and ideation, one that is mindful of individual nuance and organizational complexity.
Comments
Post a Comment