What Design Thinking, Innovation, and Leadership Have In Common?

The thing that Design Thinking, Innovation and Leadership have in common, is the fact that these 3 concepts have so many meanings, that now it is difficult to understand what people are talking about when they use these terms.

People usually confuse Design Thinking with:

1. User-centered Design (UCD)
2. Human-centered Design (HCD)
3. Agile
4. Innovation
5. Lean Startup
6. Design methodology
7. Creative problem-solving
8. Lean Design
9. Rapid Prototyping
10. Design Sprint
11. Brainstorm
12. Discussion meeting
13. Workshop
14. Strategy
15. Requirements Elicitation
16. Service Design
17. Industrial Design
18. Experience Design
19. Systems Thinking
20. UX Design
21. Project Management
22. Customer/User interviews
23. UX Research
24. etc

In my opinion the cause of this confusion, calling everything as "design thinking", is the eagerness to sell it. Do you remember Crossfit? Crossfit was a very hot name in the fitness and wellness world. If the crossfit name were not protected by copyright, it would loose its meaning pretty quickly. But they have standards, they have certifications, anyone that use the brand must pay an annual fee/license and the meaning was clear. They have a culture, no matter if you like it or not.

But Design Thinking has no standards. Has no certification. Has no intellectual property. Anyone can use it and call it as they prefer. They can create flavors of design thinking, including flavor such as startup-tropical, sprint-berry, discovery-melon and so on.

The lack of precision reached such high levels, that now nobody knows what it is, causing what linguists call "collapse of the construct". When you mean everything, in fact you mean nothing.

Innovation also is a confusing term

Another example of an expression with mixed and sometimes contradictory meanings is the term "innovation." Innovation is a widely used term that is often used to describe new and creative ideas, products, or processes. However, the term innovation is often used in many different contexts, and can have a wide range of meanings, depending on the context in which it is used. Some people use the term innovation to describe a small incremental change, while others use it to describe a major breakthrough or a complete overhaul of an existing system. Additionally, the term innovation can be used to describe the process of creating something new, the outcome of that process, or the impact that it has on society. This wide range of meanings and interpretations can lead to confusion and misunderstandings when the term innovation is used in different contexts.

Leadership became a blurry concept

The term "leadership" is also problematic. Leadership is a widely used term that is often used to describe the qualities and actions of individuals who are able to inspire and guide others towards a shared goal. However, the term leadership can mean different things to different people and can take on a range of interpretations depending on the context in which it is used. For example, some people view leadership as a set of specific skills or traits that can be developed, while others view it as an innate ability. Additionally, leadership can be thought of as a top-down approach to management, where leaders dictate the direction and goals of an organization, or as a more collaborative approach where leaders engage and empower their followers. This diversity of interpretations can lead to confusion and misunderstandings also.

Bad consequences

So, the confusion around these expressions and Design Thinking makes it difficult to reach agreement and enable all kinds of bizarre consequences such as:

• People believe they can be like "designers" if they "think" like designers.
• Schools can sell courses that have no value, but students can't explain why.
• Consultants sell advice sessions, charging per hour, to give empty advice, that is difficult to evaluate since is full of "design thinking jargon".
• Facilitators "help" people to do "design thinking" in meetings, for the sake of doing it.
• "Agile" coachs teach employees to use "design thinking" to find solutions for problems in teams, for conflicts of interest, to deal with power struggles.
• Authors write books describing how "design thinking" can create a competitive advantage, even without empirical evidence.
• Users debate for hours in discussion forums or social media about what "design thinking is and what is not, an in the end nobody is convinced.
• Design Thinking "gurus" invent histories about how they were successful using the design skills to make a big transformation in the organization, without mentioning that the real change was caused more by HR, marketing and IT.

The consequence of confusion

So, differently than some people think, "design thinking" is not inoffensive. It has been used to mask, to hide harmful behaviors and intentions, under a one-size-fits-all expression that confuse people and make them feel embarassed. After all, if they don't understand what is design thinking maybe is because they are dumb or have limited understanding. They think that people will call them stupid if they say that have no idea what is really "design thinking".

Don't worry. You are not dumb. You are not stupid. Maybe you are just feeling scared seeing so many people pretending that they understand an empty idea, while you don't fall in this trap.

In the land of corporations that love business fads, who has the single eye of design thinking is a king. But who have one single eye, hates the people that have two eyes, the ones that realize DT is a waste of time.

My advice? Find others that have two eyes, that see that design thinking is a fad, get closer and walk with them. If you read this text, probably you are one of these people that see better.