Why Business will kill Design Thinking
One thing that I keep hearing is the complaint that there is not a “standard” easy to understand definition of Design Thinking. When you go to Wikipedia, you will find a definition that seems to be a compilation of everyone’s ideas on the topic. Read it and see if you can find your favorite!
…”Design thinking is a process for practical, creative resolution of problems or issues that looks for an improved future result.[1] It is the essential ability to combine empathy, creativity and rationality to meet user needs and drive business success. Unlike analytical thinking, design thinking is a creative process based around the “building up” of ideas. There are no judgments early on in design thinking. This eliminates the fear of failure and encourages maximum input and participation in the ideation and prototype phases. Outside the box thinking is encouraged in these earlier processes since this can often lead to creative solutions. In organization and management theory, design thinking forms part of the A/D/A (Architecture/Design/Anthropology) paradigm, which characterizes innovative, human-centered enterprises. This management paradigm focuses on a collaborative and iterative style of work and an abductive mode of thinking, compared to the more traditional practices associated with the traditional M/E/P (Mathematics/Economics/Psychology) management paradigm.”
Or should we look to Tim Brown or Roger Martin as the final word. Not necessarily. Why would their definition be better than Arne van Oosterom or Nicolae or even mine?
The core of the problem is that the primary voices offering a definition are from the creative side of the conversation. They generally don’t like a confining definition of what they do – their “art”. Imagine the artist who gets offended when a potential buyer says ” I see that you paint in the same way that Bernal paints”. The artist will probably choose not to sell to that person.
Creativity is a personal expression for many.
The primary voices asking for a definition at this time are the business leaders. They want a basic, unchanging understanding of how Design Thinking can improve the financial bottom line. Think in terms of Six Sigma, TQM, and other “hot” management approaches to doing things. All of these were exciting and effective at one point, but business leaders are looking for the next big thing.
This dichotomy is producing the standoff as to whether or not there should be standard, plain, (boring) definition of Design Thinking. My thought…
I don’t think so.
That will be the first step in turning Design Thinking into a non-creative endevour that businesses will package and dillute until it has no meaning or effectiveness left within it. Look at the above examples and consider where they are today. Six Sigma? TQM? Anyone…?
Tags: definitions, design thinking
