Design thinking EN

Introduction
As a process for designing
Wicked problems
Problem framing
Solution-focused thinking
Design thinking
Abductive reasoning Connected to: Science Design methods Creativity
Co-evolution of problem–solution
Representations and modelling
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As a process for innovation
Inspiration Design thinking refers to the cognitive, strategic and practical processes by which design concepts
Ideation: Divergent and converg…
(proposals for new products, buildings, machines, etc.) are developed by designers and/or design
Implementation and prototyping
teams. Many of the key concepts and aspects of design thinking have been identi ed through studies,
Application across different design domains, of design cognition and design activity in both laboratory and natural
In business
contexts.[1][2]
In education
In computer science
Design thinking is also associated with prescriptions for the innovation of products and services
History within business and social contexts.[3][4] Some of these prescriptions have been criticized for
Timeline
oversimplifying the design process and trivializing the role of technical knowledge and skills.[5][6]
See also

As a process for designing

References
Further reading (sources
not cited above) Design thinking encompasses processes such as context analysis, problem nding and framing,
ideation and solution generating, creative thinking, sketching and drawing, modelling and prototyping,
testing and evaluating.[7] Core features of design thinking include abilities to:

resolve ill-de ned or 'wicked' problems

adopt solution-focused strategies
use abductive/productive reasoning
employ non-verbal, graphic/spatial modelling media.[8]

Wicked problems
Design thinking is especially useful when addressing what Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber referred to
as wicked problems, which are ill-de ned or tricky (as opposed to wicked in the sense of malicious).[9]
Whereas for "tame" or "well-de ned" problems the problem is clear, and the solution is available
through applying rules or technical knowledge.[10]

Problem framing
Rather than accept the problem as given, designers explore the given problem and its context and
may re-interpret or restructure the given problem in order to reach a particular framing of the
problem that suggests a route to a solution.[11][12]

Solution-focused thinking
In empirical studies of three-dimensional problem solving, Bryan Lawson found architects employed
solution-focused cognitive strategies, distinct from the problem-focused strategies of scientists.[13]
Nigel Cross suggests that 'Designers tend to use solution conjectures as the means of developing their
understanding of the problem'.[14]

Abductive reasoning
The creative mode of reasoning in design thinking is abductive reasoning, rather than the more
familiar forms of inductive and deductive reasoning.[15][16]

Co-evolution of problem–solution
In the process of designing the designer's attention typically oscillates between their understanding of
the problematic context and their ideas for a solution in a process of co-evolution of problem and
solution.[17][18] New solution ideas can lead to a deeper or alternative understanding of the problematic
context, which in turn triggers more solution ideas.

Representations and modelling

Conventionally, designers communicate mostly in visual or object languages to translate abstract
requirements into concrete objects.[19] These 'languages' include traditional sketches and drawings but
also extend to computer models and physical prototypes. The use of representations and models is
closely associated with features of design thinking such as the generation and exploration of tentative
solution concepts, the identi cation of what needs to be known about the developing concept, and
the recognition of emergent features and properties within the representations. [20][21]

As a process for innovation

A ve-phase description of the design innovation process is
described by Plattner, Meinel and Leifer as: (re)de ning the
problem, need nding and benchmarking, ideating, building,
testing.[22] Plattner, Meinel and Leifer state: "While the stages
are simple enough, the adaptive expertise required to
choose the right in ection points and appropriate next
stage is a high order intellectual activity that requires
practice and is learnable." Design thinking example video that presents
design thinking for innovation in business and
The process may also be thought of as a system of society as a process of "Learn from People,
overlapping spaces rather than a sequence of orderly steps: Find Patterns, Design Principles, Make
inspiration, ideation, and implementation.[23] Projects may Tangible and Iterate Relentlessly"

loop back through inspiration, ideation, and implementation

more than once as the team re nes its ideas and explores new directions.[24]

Inspiration
Generally, the design innovation process starts with the inspiration phase: understanding the problem
or the opportunity. This understanding can be documented in a brief which includes constraints that
gives the project team a framework from which to begin, benchmarks by which they can measure
progress, and a set of objectives to be realized—such as price point, available technology, and market
segment.[24]

Empathy
In their book Creative Thinking Tom and David Kelley state the importance of empathy with clients,
users and customers as a basis for innovative design.[25][26] Designers approach users with the goal of
understanding their wants and needs, what might make their life easier and more enjoyable and how
technology can be useful for them. Empathic design transcends physical ergonomics to include
understanding the psychological and emotional needs of people—the way they do things, why and
how they think and feel about the world, and what is meaningful to them.

Ideation: Divergent and convergent thinking

Ideation is idea generation. The process is characterized by the alternation of divergent and
convergent thinking, typical of design thinking process.

To achieve divergent thinking, it may be important to have a diverse group of people involved in the
process. Design teams typically begin with a structured brainstorming process of "thinking outside
the box". Convergent thinking, on the other hand, aims for zooming and focusing on the different
proposals to select the best choice, which permits continuation of the design thinking process to
achieve the nal goals.

After collecting and sorting lots of ideas, a team goes through a process of pattern nding and
synthesis in which it has to translate ideas into insights that can lead to solutions or opportunities for
change. These might be either visions of new product offerings, or choices among various ways of
creating new experiences.[24]

Implementation and prototyping

The third space of the design thinking innovation process is implementation, when the best ideas
generated during ideation are turned into something concrete.[24]

At the core of the implementation process is prototyping: turning ideas into actual products and
services that are then tested, evaluated, iterated, and re ned. A prototype, or even a rough mock-up
helps to gather feedback and improve the idea. Prototypes can speed up the process of innovation
because they allow quick identi cation of strengths and weaknesses of proposed solutions, and can
prompt new ideas.

Application
In business
Historically, designers tended to be involved only in the later parts of the process of new product
development, focusing their attention on the aesthetics and functionality of products. Many
businesses and other organisations now realise the utility of embedding design as a productive asset
throughout organisational policies and practices, and design thinking has been used to help many
different types of business and social organisations to be more constructive and innovative.[27][4] In the
2000s there was a signi cant growth of interest in design thinking as a catalyst for gaining
competitive advantage within business,[28] but doubts around design thinking as a panacea for success
have also been expressed.[5] Designers bring their methods into business either by taking part
themselves from the earliest stages of product and service development processes[29] or by training
others to use design methods and to build innovative thinking capabilities within organisations.[30]

In education
All forms of professional design education can be assumed to be developing design thinking in
students, even if only implicitly, but design thinking is also now explicitly taught in general as well as
professional education, across all sectors of education. Design as a subject was introduced into
secondary schools' educational curricula in the UK in the 1970s, gradually replacing and/or developing
from some of the traditional art and craft subjects, and increasingly linked with technology studies.
This development sparked related research studies in both education and design.[31][19][32]

New courses in design thinking have also been introduced at university level, especially where linked
with business and innovation studies. A notable early course of this type was introduced at Stanford
University in 2003, the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design, known as the d.school.

In the K-12 education sector, design thinking is used to enhance learning and promote creative
thinking, teamwork, and student responsibility for learning.[33][34] A design-based approach to teaching
and learning has also developed more widely throughout education.[35][36]

In computer science
Design thinking has been central to user-centered design and human-centered design—the dominant
methods of designing human-computer interfaces—for over 40 years.[37] Design thinking is also central
to recent conceptions of software development in general.[38]

History
Developing creativity techniques in the 1950s and new design methods in the 1960s led to the idea of
design thinking as a particular approach to creatively solving problems. Among the rst authors to
write about design thinking were John E. Arnold in "Creative Engineering" (1959) and L. Bruce Archer
in "Systematic Method for Designers" (1965).[39][40]

John E. Arnold was one of the rst authors to use the term 'design thinking'. In "Creative Engineering"
(1959) he distinguishes four areas of design thinking.[39] According to Arnold, design thinking can yield
(1) novel functionality, i.e. solutions that satisfy a novel need or solutions that satisfy an old need in an
entirely new way, (2) higher performance levels of a solution, (3) lower production costs or (4)
increased salability. Thus, according to this early concept, 'design thinking' covers all forms of product
innovation, including especially incremental innovation ("higher performance") and radical innovation
("novel functionality").[41] Arnold recommends a balanced approach: Product developers should seek
opportunities in all four areas of design thinking.

It is rather interesting to look over the developmental history of any product or family of products
and try to classify the changes into one of the four areas ... Your group, too, might have gotten into a
rut and is inadvertently doing all of your design thinking in one area and is missing good bets in
other areas.
— J.E. Arnold, 1959/2016, p. 119[39]
Although L. Bruce Archer's "Systematic Method for Designers" (1965)[40] was concerned primarily with
a systematic process of designing, it also expressed a need to broaden the scope of conventional
design: "Ways have had to be found to incorporate knowledge of ergonomics, cybernetics, marketing
and management science into design thinking". Archer was also developing the relationship of design
thinking with management: "The time is rapidly approaching when design decision making and
management decision making techniques will have so much in common that the one will become no
more than the extension of the other".[42]

The notion of design as a "way of thinking" in the sciences can be traced to Herbert A. Simon's 1969
book The Sciences of the Arti cial,[43] and in design engineering to Robert McKim's 1973 book
Experiences in Visual Thinking.[44] Bryan Lawson's 1980 book How Designers Think, primarily
addressing design in architecture, began a process of generalising the concept of design thinking.[45] A
1982 article by Nigel Cross on Designerly ways of knowing established some of the intrinsic qualities
and abilities of design thinking that also made it relevant in general education and thus for wider
audiences.[19] Peter Rowe's 1987 book Design Thinking, which described methods and approaches used
by architects and urban planners, was a signi cant early usage of the term in the design research
literature.[46] An international series of research symposia in design thinking began at Delft University
of Technology in 1991.[47][48]

Rolf Faste expanded on McKim's work at Stanford University in the 1980s and 1990s,[49][50] teaching
"design thinking as a method of creative action."[51] Design thinking was adapted for business purposes
by Faste's Stanford colleague David M. Kelley, who founded the design consultancy IDEO in 1991.[52]
Richard Buchanan's 1992 article "Wicked Problems in Design Thinking" expressed a broader view of
design thinking as addressing intractable human concerns through design.[53]

Timeline
pre- The origins of design thinking partially lie in the development of creativity techniques in the
1960 1950s.
The rst notable books on methods of creativity are published by William J. J. Gordon (1961)[54] and
Alex Faickney Osborn (1963).[55]
The 1962 Conference on Systematic and Intuitive Methods in Engineering, Industrial Design,
Architecture and Communications, London, UK, started interest in studying design processes and
1960s
developing new design methods.[56]
Books on methods and theories of design in different elds are published by Morris Asimow (1962)
(engineering),[57] Christopher Alexander (1964) (architecture),[58] L. Bruce Archer (1965) (industrial
design),[40] and John Chris Jones (1970) (product and systems design).[59]
Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall pioneer a 'soft systems' design process for dealing with the problems
of 'everyday life' in their book The Universal Traveler.[60]
Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber publish "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning" showing that
design and planning problems are wicked problems as opposed to "tame", single disciplinary,
1970s problems of science.[61]
L. Bruce Archer extends inquiry into designerly ways of knowing, claiming: "There exists a
designerly way of thinking and communicating that is both different from scienti c and scholarly
ways of thinking and communicating, and as powerful as scienti c and scholarly methods of
inquiry when applied to its own kinds of problems."[62]
The 1980s saw the rise of human-centered design and the rise of design-centered business
management.
1980s Donald Schön publishes The Re ective Practitioner in which he sought to establish "an
epistemology of practice implicit in the artistic, intuitive processes that [design and other]
practitioners bring to situations of uncertainty, instability, uniqueness and value con ict."[63]
The rst symposium on Research in Design Thinking is held at Delft University, The Netherlands,
in 1991.[64]
1990s IDEO design consultancy formed by combining three industrial design companies. They are one
of the rst design companies to showcase their design process, based on design methods and
design thinking.
The start of the 21st century brought a signi cant increase in interest in design thinking as the
term became popularized in the business press. Books about how to create a more design-
focused workplace where innovation can thrive were written for the business sector by, amongst
others, Richard Florida (2002),[65] Daniel Pink (2006),[66] Roger Martin (2007),[67] Tim Brown (2009),
[68]
Thomas Lockwood (2010),[69] Vijay Kumar (2012).[70]
21st
The design approach also becomes extended and adapted to tackle the design of services,
Century
marking the beginning of the service design movement.[71]
2005: Stanford University's d.school begins to teach design thinking as a generalisable approach
to technical and social innovation.[22]
2007: Hasso Plattner Institute for IT Systems Engineering in Potsdam, Germany establishes a
design thinking program.[22]
2015: Jenna Leonardo, Katie Kirsch, Rachel H. Chung and Natalya Thakur from Stanford
University's d.school founded Girls Driving for a Difference[72] to teach design thinking to young
2010s girls across the United States.[73]
2018: Back in the business world, in the Harvards Business Review Jeanne Liedtka claims "Design
thinking works".[74]

See also

References

Further reading (sources not cited above)

Categories

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by contributors (read/edit).

Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

Enjoying Wikiwand?
Give good old Wikipedia a great new look:

Upgrade Wikipedia

Home About Us Press Site Map Terms Of Service Privacy Policy