Design Thinking: The Expert's Point of View

Last month, Katia Gutknecht-Botti and I introduced design thinking, which focuses on deep understanding as opposed to the immediate rush to actions/solutions.

This month, we gave the floor to an expert trainer in design thinking to share some nuggets with you: Alexandra Marcoin-Karacsonyi, MBA .

How did you discover design thinking?

Eight years ago, Stanford University was looking for trainers and made a call for applications among alumni. I was staffed on design thinking, but without really knowing what it truly was. However, I already had 15 years of experience in marketing and analysing customer needs under my belt.

I learned in a rigorous way from a Stanford professor and it allowed me to fill in the gaps of my 15 years of marketing, to go beyond what I thought was the right answer, beyond biased focus groups, and to dive deep into customer needs. I immediately saw the potential of this approach for my clients, and for me.

?“It makes sense but nobody does it”

Why is design thinking important for everyone?

We are too solution-oriented by our society, our education… And we have a 9 out of 10 chance of falling short by putting the cart before the horse. This analogy speaks to everyone.

Design thinking is an approach, a state of mind, more than a rigid method. It is a toolbox that allows us to answer the following question: what is the other experiencing? But it requires admitting that we don't have the science infused: this is why it is not always easy to apply and is often used in parallel with change management approaches.

?

What are the best practices to keep in mind?

o?Even if it may seem strange at times, you have to keep a completely open mind and go in search of what is important to the client: a questioning – in particular of existing beliefs – may therefore sometimes be necessary. Anyway, it is not recommended to delegate a design thinking approach because it is up to your teams and you, not to an external, to meet your customers, even if it is uncomfortable and/or time-consuming,

o?Attitude is also fundamental: wanting to help customers. We will therefore start with the problem that we express from our point of view, without hesitating to change things if the priorities of the customers are different. Flexibility and agility are preferred. For example, we will evolve from ‘we want to solve xyz’ to ‘we want to help our customers’.

o?Even if it is not recommended to delegate the exercise, it is difficult to be judge and judged: take an external facilitator to guarantee the proper application of the design thinking process (such as respect for the right principles or the right state of mind…, see the “police” if necessary). However, it is not responsible for the content.

o?Better to do a little than not at all. If everything is not concrete at the start, it does not matter: if it is important, you will fall back on it.

o?Design thinking puts people at the centre. However, meeting human needs is sometimes a source of discomfort because we are more used to thinking about processes…

o?Everyone sees reality through their own filter (especially in a company, between departments): there is neither right nor wrong, just different realities. We therefore favour multidisciplinary teams in design thinking, but not hierarchical: we leave the titles outside. This makes it possible to discover the reality of others and to break down silos.

?

Do you have examples of successful (or not) use of this approach?

o?In 2018, in a public IT context, I trained 45 employees in design thinking. The computer culture being very binary (0 or 1), with little room for emotions and empathy, the challenge was interesting. The approach made such sense for 6 participants that they became self-proclaimed ambassadors of the method internally. We opened the door for them and thus allowed a better understanding of needs, a development of targeted IT solutions and therefore a better use of public money.

o?In a consumer goods company, in 2021, I intervened when a product was ready to be launched (the production machines were already built) after 3 years of R&D. This company wanted to check 5 European markets before the launch. 100 interviews were conducted in total. A final conclusion emerged: there was no need for this product. An immediate shutdown (even if late) has been decreed for the project in order to limit damage and save millions.

?"I have not failed.?I've just found ten thousand ways that won't work."

Thomas Edison

o?In the public sector, with a fairly rigid structure and marked political games, a truncated approach was decided: the people to be interviewed were imposed on the team and they were forbidden to go to the public who were the end user (whether for interviews or to ask them for feedback on a prototype). Despite the good will of the people to be coached, we faced an insurmountable ingrained belief: that of not being able to offer a draft concept to the public as only completed and finished items are to be shared. This meant that the iterative feedback process with design thinking was not possible. Such a blockage also occurs in the private sector: seeking learning and enrichment, questioning oneself are attitudes that require a lot of self-awareness.

?“Seeking learning and enrichment, questioning oneself are attitudes that require a lot of self-awareness”

If you want to know more about this powerful tool and thus cull the 70% of projects that fail, do not hesitate to contact Alexandra Karacsonyi.

See you soon for a new article!

Debbie Brown and Katia Gutknecht