Design Thinking: Don't Blame the Framework. Blame the Execution.

WELCOME TO THE FUNERAL

With every new shiny object, soundbite or development, we have the tendency to throw out the old and enthusiastically jump on the new. Recently, there's been a lot of buzz about design thinking being useless and dead. The criticisms seem to stem from badly executing design thinking as an approach to problem solving rather than with the framework itself. Like strategy, agile, brainstorming, design thinking is not a silver bullet nor a formula. Just applying the rules, will not get you to a magic place. It can't be done by just anyone.

Common criticisms include:

'It dilutes design into a structured, linear, and clean process. Critics argue that real design is messy, complex, and nonlinear, it isn't derived from a stack of Post-It notes and a few brainstorming sessions.'

'Design thinking is?too general a framework and too ideation-based: it's more focused on generating new ideas than understanding how they might actually work. It often underestimates the strategic context of how specific industries and markets really work.'

None of these see design thinking as a framework but formulaic process set in stone. The beauty of frameworks is that they are by definition pliable. Following a paint by the numbers will leave practitioners disappointed, pissed and living on 'innovation island.'

FRAMEWORK vs. FORMULA

A framework is a system of rules, ideas or beliefs that is used to plan or decide something. A framework mindset makes room for the necessary and appropriate adjustments to the presenting situation at hand.

A formula mindset says if it works in one place it should work in all places. There’s no need for adjustments. This is at the center of most design thinking critiques. So with design thinking, don't trash the framework, reconsider the execution.

We need to build on principles and adapt, adapt, adapt. It seems like a no brainer to include business strategists, developers, product managers, researchers and generally cross disciplinary thinking to bear on a problem all at once. The team needs to address the business context, real constraints and external factors in generating new ideas for business and customer value. (big forehead slap here!)

THE FRAMEWORK IS MESSY

There is really no way to answer this aspect of design thinking critiques except to say, YES IT IS.

THE FRAMEWORK IS MORE THAN EMPATHY AND CUSTOMER CENTRICITY

Being only customer or human centric is one of the faulty interpretation of design thinking practitioners and fans. Yes, just said that. Any solution that does not integrate business thinking is pure philanthropy. That is why at the heart of design thinking, the human perspective is the Desirability part but not the only one. When business factors are not considered, efforts of teams will not get budget, recognition nor respect.

Value generating initiatives need to be Desirable (do people want it), Feasible (can we make it) and Viable (can we make money on it, meaning is the value created worth paying for).

Any 'start' into using the framework benefits from a hypothesis of what opportunities might be leveraged or what problems might be solved. Starting with a deep dive into needs is a starting point but must include a sanity check: can we build it, do we have the needed capabilities, if not, where can we get them? Considering viability is critical. Too often customer centricity neglects to consider that it is actually good for business to do well.

THE FRAMEWORK DOES NOT NEGLECT EXECUTION UNLESS YOU DO

One added way for shape and adapt the design thinking framework is the idea of scale. Well conceived ideas need execution and implementation at scale. The entire design journey can begin again on a new level of actually building and selling with a different lens.

If you want to rescue your team off 'innovation island' find a way to transition from prototype to product with a powerful go to market approach.

IT'S A STRETCHABLE FRAMEWORK

• products and services can be designed
• customer journeys can be designed (remember your last IKEA walk)
• behaviours can be designed (remember Fun Theory)
• organisations can be designed (remember the Spotify agile model)
• processes can be designed

'If someone says I’m providing you with a framework, yes using the word framework, you should take a second or even a third look.

Look at how what they are offering to provide you with the “shell” that you use to put your “parts” into.

Think of a car. Imagine someone gave you the shell of a car and gave you the luxury of putting your own touches to it. You’ll end up with a car but you’ve made it?suit your needs.'

That’s how a framework should work. That’s what you need.