Design Thinking

REVISITING THE PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

Throughout the design thinking process, you will iterate, or revisit and rework, in order to get a better
understanding of the problem, explore a new aspect of an idea, or get closer to a final solution. We will see
this iteration many times in this course.

Now that you have assembled a team that will work to find a solution to the problem, you should bring that
expertise together to re-investigate your problem. Run through the What, Who, When, Where, Why questions
of problem investigation again to see if your team has deeper insight into the complexities of the problem.
The team members will want to feel confident in their initial understanding of the problem so that they can
begin to pursue research in their area of expertise. As you pursue research, your team will come back
periodically to exchange information and perhaps adjust the team's understanding of the problem
description.

RESEARCH STAGE OVERVIEW

As you've learned, the research stage of design thinking begins with initial problem description and team
formation. Once the team is formed and it has reviewed and dissected the problem description, the team will
list areas of information that are pertinent to solving the problem. They will also need to discuss who will
gather the information and how. Team members will explore their area of expertise to bring back information
or data that is relevant to the problem.
Think back to the 3-circle Venn diagram. Technologists will focus on what is possible; business people will
focus on what is viable; user researchers will work to learn more about the user and their context.
Researchers will also work to identify both explicit and latent needs in these areas. Explicit needs are those
that are understood and defined by the user. Latent needs are revealed during research. These are needs
that the user may not perceive or know how to define, but are important to address for a good problem
solution.

In order for the design team to understand users' needs, they must conduct research. The reason for this is
simple. If you are designing something for anyone other than yourself, you must realize that you are not the
target audience. You then must understand the target audience on an emotional level if you want to come up
with the best solutions. If you are designing new medical equipment for someone who is elderly, you will
need to see and experience the difficulties that the elderly person might have and how it could affect the
design of a product, space, or experience.

There are many different types of user research. In this course we'll focus on generative and evaluative.
Generative research happens at the beginning of the design thinking process and is meant to help you
understand a problem. Evaluative research is conducted in later stages as your team works to select the
solution that works best for your users. Both types of research are conducted in cycles, with the team
meeting periodically to share ongoing research and determine new areas of investigation. This ongoing work
can also reshape the team's understanding of the problem. In continuing cycles of investigation, analysis, and
sharing, the team refines their understanding of the problem, the user, and the user's context.
UNDERSTANDING USER NEEDS AND WANTS

A good solution considers the users' needs and wants, or in other words, what is necessary and what is
desirable. In the previous video, Richard described the impact of the users' emotions when they were using
the camera. The technology was good, but users were embarrassed to be seen with it. A product may solve
the problem and contain all of the latest technology, but if potential users don't find it desirable, the product
will not succeed. As members of the team conduct research, it is critical that you all understand what is
necessary and what is desirable, as this understanding will be what guides your decision making in upcoming
stages.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

Once you have identified the users and their context, you will need to select appropriate research
methodologies. A research methodology is a process used to collect information and data for the purpose of
making decisions about your design thinking problem. The following table describes some of the common
methods used.

Method Description When to Use

Interviews A conversation between a Can be used to get personal information on

research participant and a experiences and perspectives, particularly
researcher that is designed to sensitive information the user may not want
elicit information to reveal in a group

Participant A researcher spends time in the Useful for seeing how users act or situations
Observation users' context to watch users in happen in their context
action

Focus Groups A researcher runs a guided Useful when you need information quickly,
discussion with a small group of and the information isn't potentially sensitive
users or controversial.

In addition to selecting a method based on the information you need and how quickly you need it, you must
ensure that the approach you select is ethical.
USING RESEARCH TO REFRAME THE PROBLEM DEFINITION

Robust user research and a strong analysis of the data are critical for refining and clarifying your
understanding of the user problem. This new understanding of the problem is based on your empathetic
understanding of the users' problem. You will use the story that emerges from your research to communicate
your new understanding of the problem to stakeholders, help the team focus its work in upcoming design
thinking stages, and use it to check against proposed solutions. This is the point where you will reframe your
initial problem description into a more clear and detailed problem definition.

What are the aspects of a solid reframed problem definition?

Provides clear and concise descriptions of deficiencies, inefficiencies, or lack of responsiveness to needs
in the current situation
Identifies the individual or entity most likely to benefit from a strong solution
Describes why the problem matters to users
Describes why previous solutions to the problem did not succeed
Indicates the advantages of the new potential solution(s)
States the most promising opportunities and potential risks

Throughout the rest of the design thinking process, you will come back to the reframed problem definition to
select which ideas and potential solutions are more or less likely to be successful based on your current
understanding of the user research.

CREATING A DESIGN BRIEF

Your goal for the research stage should be to emerge with a clear problem definition. Some companies ask
their design teams to create a design brief. A design brief is a document that summarizes all user
requirements following an extensive research stage and provides a thorough description of the problem the
team is being asked to solve. Design briefs are useful for team members and stakeholders and can be
adjusted over the life of the project to reflect new understandings.

Design briefs generally contain the following elements...

A summary of the research that includes, but is not limited to:

User characteristics
User needs and desires
User context
Any user personas that you have developed
Technology possibilities and feasibility
Business options and viability
Inspirational and competitive benchmarking
A reframed problem definition
The scope and deliverables of the project, including:
Requirements for functionality, aesthetics, and what will be appealing to users
Project timeline
Budget
Other business requirements, such as existing or future product-line needs

Although the design brief is created primarily for the design team as it prepares for project's next steps, the
brief is also reviewed by key stakeholders. The brief is often used as a set of criteria to evaluate solutions as
they are being developed. It can also be used after a solution is achieved to determine how the project met
schedule, budget, and other expectations.

Whether you create a design brief or not, you should at least have multiple sources of data for each of the
bulleted items in the list we shared above. Strong research provides support for the important work to come.
The reframing of the problem definition and creation of the design brief is critical, as it directs the next stage
of teamwork, ideation and synthesis. Ideation that is based on an inaccurate or misleading problem definition
will result in solution choices that are not in line with stakeholders' interests. Join us next week to learn about
the ideation stage.

REAL LIFE AND REAL DESIGN THINKING ARE MESSY

When you are learning to do something new, you often start with basic principles. For example, when you
learn to drive a car, you'll likely start with different parts of the car and what they do, and then you might
learn the traffic laws in your area, followed by how those laws are reflected in traffic signs. You'll likely learn all
of these things separately. In practice though, when you are driving, you'll draw from all of the information
simultaneously to react appropriately in complex traffic situations.

The way you will learn and then apply design thinking in this course is similar. We have described the stages
of design thinking as happening in order from problem description to team formation to research to ideation
to prototyping. We've mentioned that you will likely go back to previous stages to check the work you're
doing in later stages. But what design thinking is REALLY like in practice is much less linear. While you'll likely
begin with research, part of the work in that research stage is to practice some of the divergent thinking
strategies described here in ideation. You might conduct more research in ideation and in prototyping. Real
life design thinking is messy. For now, we'll continue to describe the design thinking process as occurring in
distinct stages that move forward in a predictable way.

Research findings and information gathering are fuel for the engine of ideation, which generates ideas in
creative chaos. In this chaos, teams discover ideas to take forward into prototyping.
DIVERGENT AND CONVERGENT THINKING

Now that you've done enough research to feel confident about your understanding of the problem definition,
you will begin to work through cycles of divergent-convergent thinking, or ideation and synthesis. Both
divergent thinking—creating choices—and convergent thinking—making choices—are essential. You cannot
succeed by focusing on one at the expense of the other. And yet many in business tend to focus on the
convergent side of the equation. You must spend time in divergent thinking and ideation to generate robust
responses to the problem.

Divergent thinking, or ideation, is creative and generative. Your job during ideation is to come up with ideas,
not criticize them. Convergent thinking, or synthesis, is analytical. During synthesis you select those ideas
most likely to solve the problem. The criteria you use to make your decisions were defined at the end of the
research stage. You'll then take those few good ideas and use different divergent-convergent strategies to
test these potential solutions according to your criteria. As you continue your diverge-converge work, you
may identify the need for more research or you may discover the need to tweak your understanding of the
problem definition. You may also come closer to a set of ideas that you want to test out in more detail in the
prototyping stage.

PREPARING FOR DIVERGENT THINKING (IDEATION)

Before the design team begins ideation, individual team members have work to do. Each team member must
prepare for ideation by spending some time with the user research, other information gathered relating to
the project, and the criteria established in the reframed problem definition or design brief. You will likely
consider questions such as these:

What questions do I have about the research findings?

What does a research finding remind me of and why might that be significant in finding a solution?
What research findings seem to contradict or conflict with other research findings?
Which are the research findings that would seem to most limit the possibilities of a solution? Which
findings are the least restrictive?
Is there any other information that the team needs to gather?

Write down any preliminary ideas you have. In that first team meeting, you and the other team members will
discuss these and other questions. The work that you do as an individual prior to the team's first ideation
meeting will help ensure that this first meeting is energetic and productive.

SELECTING KEY ROLES

Ideation can be disorganized and unproductive if you do not have a person to provide some structure to this
activity. You will want to select an ideation facilitator to help the team members get in the right frame of
mind, remind people of the task at hand, and encourage new ideas when people feel "stuck." It is likely that
your ideation facilitator will also be your design team or project leader. But whoever it is, you need a
facilitator who has the following qualities:

Can inspire creativity

Has high energy
Is trustworthy and will not shoot down a particularly divergent idea with a sarcastic comment
Is good at moderating a discussion in which the ideas are the star, not the person leading the discussion
Has good people skills and conflict management skills
Has experience leading ideation discussions

You will also want to appoint someone to be a note-taker or records-keeper to capture all of the ideas
generated at this meeting. This person may write down ideas that people say, organize ideas as they are
generated, or be responsible for capturing photographs of all of the ideas after the session is over. This
person's role may be flexible based on your ideation method and ground rules, but it is important to
document the team's results.

IDEATION RESOURCES AND LOCATION

You will need a comfortable place to work and share ideas. Make sure that the space and materials available
to your team support their creative work. Ideally, the team will have a conference room or other space that
they can claim as their own for the duration of their work together. They will need at least one large empty
wall, many sticky notes, markers, writing pads, pens, tape, and any other materials that will facilitate their
work. Display information such as personas, criteria, and key research takeaways on the walls so you can
always refer to these as you ideate. Keeping this work up on the walls between meetings can help your team
jump back to where they left off at the end of the previous meeting.

RECORDING AND VISUALIZING YOUR IDEAS

As you think of ideas, immediately record what you are thinking. Don't stop to edit your writing or self-
criticize. Use a new piece of paper for each idea and use both writing and sketching to capture the essence
of the idea. Whether you are creating a simple sketch of a new product, connecting ideas with shapes or
arrows, or showing how stick figure people engage with your service, visualized ideas are much easier to
convey than expressing ideas with words alone.

You may be thinking "But I'm not an artist!" Design sketching is different than fine art drawing. Sketching is
quick and only includes the impression (look, shape, feel) of the proposed solution. In storyboarding, you tell
the story of the user interacting with the idea by sketching the proposed solution along with the intended
environment and the user.

CONVERGENT THINKING (SYNTHESIS) OVERVIEW

Once your team has come up with many ideas, the ideation facilitator should start to work with the team to
organize and evaluate the ideas. This is the convergent thinking, or synthesis part of the process.

You may find that you do this multiple times within the ideation stage—you ideate (diverge) for a while,
synthesize the ideas (converge), then ideate some more and synthesize again. For example, you can evaluate
the ideas you came up with on your own before the ideation session to see if they are in alignment with the
problem definition and to make sure you are on track before launching into a full ideation session. Then you
can have a dedicated session at the end of the ideation session to group the ideas into common themes and
evaluate all ideas generated.

In the end, convergent thinking, or synthesis, helps you identify the ideas that seem mostly likely to solve
your stated problem.

METHODS FOR INITIAL ORGANIZING AND EVALUATION OF IDEAS

During your ideation session you should have recorded each idea on a separate piece of paper or sticky note
so that it is easy to move around. This is so that later you can physically organize the ideas in meaningful
ways to make them easier to see patterns and evaluate them. It's likely you have already started to pair
related ideas together as you were thinking of them, placing your idea on the wall next to another idea that
shared some related element. Or perhaps all of your ideas are still mixed all together on a wall or table and
still need sorting.

During this stage of the process you will organize or group your ideas so you can evaluate them against the
reframed problem definition and start to filter out ideas you will not proceed with. The following are some
methods you can use, but your team may decide on other ways that better suit your project:

3-Circle Sorting: Draw the 3-circle Venn diagram on a whiteboard or a large piece of paper. Place ideas
where they best fit in the Venn diagram. For example, if an idea fits the user needs and the technology
 for it is already owned by the organization, but it isn't viable for the business from a cost standpoint, the
paper with that idea on it would be placed in the overlap of the User and Technology circles. Ideas that
don't fit anywhere are placed outside the circle and not a good fit for this project. The most promising
ideas are placed in the center and should be considered for prototyping. This method was covered in
the Process Overview video.
Affinity Diagram: Begin with a blank wall or whiteboard and each idea written on a sticky note. Find two
similar ideas and place them next to each other on the blank wall. Take one more idea and decide
whether it is similar to the two on the wall or needs its own separate group. Work through the rest of
the notes, determining whether it is similar to emerging groups on the wall or different, creating new
groupings when that seems sensible. Move notes from one group to another as the group discovers
different ways of thinking about your ideas. Begin to label the groups when that makes sense to you.
Feel free to reorganize groups as you review other ideas. By the end you should have organized all
ideas into themes and/or hierarchies.
Criteria Marking: Determine a color for each of your main criteria from the reframed problem
definition/design brief. You may want to use colored stickers or markers. Place colored marks/stickers
on each idea based on what criteria it fulfills. Move all ideas that have the most colored marks into a
separate pile for further evaluation.
Voting: Similar to the criteria marking method, you can have the team vote on the ideas that best solve
the problem by placing a colored sticker or mark on the idea paper of their choice. Team members each
can have a certain number of vote marks/stickers to use so they can vote for multiple good ideas. You
don't need a consensus, but if the majority of the team is supportive of a solution or idea, it should
further evaluated and likely prototyped.

As you begin to group and organize ideas, you may find that this sparks some new ideas. Record these and
add them to your collection. You can continue to ideate as you are working on synthesis. The repeated cycles
of divergent thinking and convergent thinking is one of the benefits of the design thinking process.

How To Give Powerful Design Critique:

https://uxstudioteam.com/ux-blog/design-
critique/
Design Critiques: Encourage a Positive
Culture to Improve Products
Optimism and critique

TESTING PROTOTYPES WITH USERS

All of the hard work you've put into design thinking finally pays off when you begin to get user feedback on
your prototypes. You may wish to have the same person or people who conducted your initial user research
gather the feedback on your prototypes. Or if you are working independently, you will need to take on this
role. Rather than the generative research conducted earlier in the design thinking process, this research is
evaluative and will help you understand how well your prototypes address the users' problem.

A GENERAL PROCESS FOR TESTING PROTOTYPES

The following are some things you should do when setting up your testing session:

Similar to conducting research, you should test potential solutions with your intended users in the users'
context and ensure that you are ethical in your testing.
Plan to take notes throughout the entire session. Besides writing down general comments about what
you observe, you should record the data specific to the testing criteria and levels/thresholds you
previously established. This is necessary in order to reveal how well the solution performed and what
needs to be done to prepare the solution for the next stage of development.
If you can, also capture photographs and record audio and/or video. This will help when sharing your
findings with your stakeholders and team. Before photographing or recording, you must obtain consent
from your users. Ask your manager about the preferred method for documenting the users' consent.

The following is a general process for testing prototypes with users:

1. Begin the testing session by explaining the problem definition you had.
2. Tell the users this is a rough version of the idea and not all of the functionality/look/etc. is finalized.
3. Tell the users that you are seeking honest, open feedback on what works, what doesn't work, how they
feel, etc. so that you can improve your idea.
4. Let the user explore the prototype in their own way at their own pace first. Do not explain what the
prototype is supposed to be or do at this point. Allowing the user to interact with the prototype without
your direction may provide you with surprising user feedback.
5. Ask the user to complete certain tasks or to answer questions relating to the criteria you developed. Do
not interrupt them or help them unless there is no way to continue without your intervention.
6. Do the same test with multiple users and test different prototypes with the same user.
7. After each session, identify what you can improve for the next iteration and what you should keep about
the current version. After collecting information from multiple sessions, work with your team to decide
on and prioritize changes for the next iteration.

"Test Your Prototypes: How to Gather Feedback and Maximise Learning

"Prototyping in Design Thinking: How to Avoid Six Common Pitfalls"

ITERATION IN PROTOTYPING

Prototyping is getting information from users, but it is also the work that you do to apply the user feedback
to a new and more finely targeted solution. After testing, you should change or refine the prototype to
ensure that the next prototype incorporates user findings and advances the development until the right
solution is found. Sometimes you will move from a lower-fidelity prototype to a higher-fidelity prototype.
Other times you may need to go back to make a different lower-fidelity prototype to test a different element
of your solution idea or a different variation. This iteration is key in this stage to understand if you solution is
desired by and works for your users.

During iterative prototyping, you may develop an idea or new approach that doesn't work for the current
problem but might be applied to future problems. Keep records of all prototypes, and all tests of both "good"
and "bad" prototypes, for use in future projects.

THE "END" OF THE DESIGN THINKING PROCESS

Once you've reached the end of your testing, you will need to present the work from the prototype stage to
your stakeholders. Be sure to ground your presentation on the research findings and reframed problem
definition communicated to stakeholders earlier in this process. Include data collected on the criteria, levels
set, whether thresholds for success were met or not met, and any new understandings of the problem. This is
where your photographs or recordings can augment your presentation.

When everything is approved by your stakeholders and ready to move forward, it is time to implement your
solution as a real solution in the world. The release cycle associated with your product or service will vary
based on industry, organization, and the problem that you're addressing.

So now your solution is public, your users are happy, and you're done with the design thinking process,
right? No. Think of the release of your product or service as a very finely tuned prototype. You need to
continue to capture user feedback and track the competition to determine when you need to update your
product or service. While the work of the current team may be over, in the context of design thinking and
prototype development, the cycle of innovation never stops.

Next week we will talk about what happens with the team after your solution is released and the activities
that close out this design thinking project. We will also will have our final exam, which will test your
understanding of the entire process.

WEEK 1 SUMMARY: INTRODUCTION TO DESIGN THINKING

Design thinking is a user-centered, creative, and collaborative problem-solving methodology. It is also a set
of attitudes and a way of thinking.

Design thinking is best done in cross-functional teams, with expertise in:

Technology (feasibility, what is possible)

Business (viability, the goals of the organization)
User (desirability, the needs/desires of the user and the context)
Design thinking requires that you place the needs of the user and your understanding of their problem at the
center of your work.

Focusing on real user problems and needs will result in more successful solutions.

Involving users in the process is important, in research, in idea evaluation, and in prototype testing.

The stages and substages of design thinking are:

Research
Initial Problem Description
Research
Reframed Problem Definition
Ideation
Ideation and Synthesis
Visualization and Storytelling
Prototyping
Iterative Prototyping
Testing and Refinement
Iteration happens often, at any stage/substage.

The type of thinking done in design thinking:

Start by being open to all possibilities, refer to research to help you discard some options and make
choices
Don't assume your first idea is the best idea
Be flexible and spend time exploring possibilities

Good solutions have a purpose, fit in the context, and are useful, understandable, honest, sustainable, long-
lasting, compelling, and simple.

WEEK 2 SUMMARY: DEFINING A PROBLEM AND CREATING A TEAM

Design thinking is best done when everyone on the team is invested and participating in design thinking
equally.

You may need to introduce design thinking to your organization before you can begin forming a team and
solving problems. For design thinking to succeed, the organization should:

Encourage new thinking, creativity, and innovation and be supportive of the time the design thinking
process takes
Be committed to learning from the customer
View failure as acceptable and a precursor to innovation
Promote an atmosphere of collaboration and cooperation among members

When design thinking is done well, it can promote an atmosphere of innovation in an organization.

Design thinking starts with a problem that can come from a variety of sources.

Start the design thinking process by finding out more about the problem.

Ask what, who, when, where, why, how questions of the problem
 From these questions, ask what expertise is required and who has that expertise

When building a team, you will need to answer a series of questions regarding personnel requirements and
administrative details.

Design thinking team members should be:

Comfortable with ambiguity

Able to work in a collaborative environment
Constructive with their feedback
Curious, open minded, and non-judgmental
Able to view the situation from multiple perspectives
Empathetic
Open to the process and letting the process work

A design thinking team should be comprised of a diverse mix of people from different levels of the company.

Choosing an experienced team leader is critical for the tea

WEEK 3 SUMMARY: RESEARCH AND REFINE THE PROBLEM

In research, you seek to:

Understand the target user's needs and desires, both explicit and latent
Develop empathy for the target user
Understand the context (environment, circumstances, processes) of the problem and user
Explore the three focus areas = viability, feasibility, and desirability
Collect benchmark information

Iterative investigation, analysis, and sharing helps refine the problem.

Research methods:

Interviews - 1:1 conversation, good for personal perspective on experiences

Participant Observation - watch users, good for understanding actions in context
Focus Groups - guided group discussion, good for quick and non-sensitive information

During research:

Be ethical (respect privacy, allow participants to opt out, be clear in your intentions, etc.)
Conduct research in the user's environment at the time the activity normally occurs
Be open to hearing other people's experiences without judgment
Spend time with users so they feel more comfortable
Avoid leading questions
Allow users time to think
Go in with a goal but let users lead the conversation
Seek multiple perspectives from multiple users
Record audio and video, if possible

After research:

Review and categorize your data

Share findings with stakeholders
Create personas to refer back to throughout the process
 Write a reframed problem definition that includes findings from the research (may also write a design
brief)

WEEK 4 SUMMARY: IDEATION AND SYNTHESIS

Design thinking is not a linear process, there are cycles throughout the stages.

Divergent thinking, or ideation, is creative and generative (creating choices).

Prepare for ideation by reviewing user research and noting questions about the findings.
To begin ideation:
Select an ideation facilitator and note-taker
Find a comfortable, open place to work
Gather all the materials you will need
Have the team set ground rules for ideation sessions (defer judgment, encourage wild ideas,
build on other's ideas, be visual, focus on quantity)
Do activities that spark creativity in the team
Move to ideation methods, such as brainwriting, mind mapping, Note and Vote, Worst Possible Idea,
SCAMPER.
Record ideas with words and a sketch to allow the team to visualize solutions.
Simple sketches provide more information than just words
A sketch gives the team something to refer to during the discussion
Sketches provide the look, shape, and feel of the idea
Ideas may be shared as they are thought of or there may be a dedicated time to share ideas.
You are likely finished ideating when:
Everyone has had an opportunity to contribute
Many of the same ideas are being suggested
You have many ideas to choose from
Continuing seems unproductive
Convergent thinking, or synthesis, is analytical (making choices) and helps you identify ideas that are
mostly likely to solve the problem.
Initial evaluation methods include the 3-Circle Sorting, Affinity Diagram, and Criteria Marking.
Critiques of ideas can provide feedback to improve ideas and help narrow down choices for
prototyping.
Further narrowing of ideas can be accomplished using a Decision Matrix Analysis, a Paired
Comparison Analysis, or Strategic Direction Map.
Keep records of all ideas because they may be useful for another problem.
Determine what ideas will proceed to prototyping.
WEEK 5 SUMMARY: PROTOTYPING AND TESTING
Users interact with a model of an idea to provide feedback.
Can be done at any stage, anytime you have an idea or want to explore something with a user.
The time and cost spent prototyping before release will result in better solutions, solutions that actually
solve the problem, better ROI for the organization.
Iterate creating a prototype, testing, and revising. Repeat until the users see value in the solution and
most or all of your criteria thresholds are achieved.
Before testing:
Select criteria for evaluating solutions (what you test) and the threshold levels needed to be met to
call the idea successful
Determine the type of prototype you need based on what you want to test
Different levels and types:
Low fidelity
Examples = sketches, storyboards, wireframes, color/material samples, customer journey map
Attributes = unrefined and inexpensive, goal is speed and quantity
Assess if idea has value
Medium fidelity
Examples = hand or machine fabricated, computer-generated rendering or screen mock-up,
workflow, role play, desktop walkthrough
Attributes = some elements are close-to-final while others are "unfinished"
Assess if idea solves the problem and resonates with user
High fidelity
Examples = complete manufactured version, interactive with all functions included, soft opening
Attributes = full-scale and working
Assess if solution functions as intended in context
During testing:
Go in with a mindset of experimentation and don't be attached to ideas.
Test with real users in context and be ethical in your testing.
First observe the user interacting with the prototype--do not judge or make suggestions for what
the prototype is or should do. Later, ask users to do specific tasks and observe.
Ask users questions related to your criteria and ask them for open feedback.
Take notes. Record audio and video, if possible.
Test with multiple users and test different prototypes with the same user.
 After you release your finalized solution to the public, continue to capture feedback and determine
improvements for future versions.

WHAT IS DESIGN THINKING?

Design thinking is a user-centered, creative, and collaborative problem-solving

methodology. Design thinking also describes a set of attitudes and a way of
thinking about one's own participation in the problem-solving process. This
course will help you learn and practice both aspects.

WHO: While individuals can perform design thinking, it is best done in cross-
functional teams that represent key areas of expertise, as illustrated by the 3-
circle Venn diagram shown below. The key areas of expertise are:

Technology - Knowing what is feasible. The systems, mechanisms, or science

that makes something work. The tools and materials available to work with.
Business - Knowing what is viable. The goals of the organization, or alignment
to organization mission or strategic direction. The financial and human
resource requirements.
User - Knowing the particular needs and wants of a population of users. Also
knowing about their context and how that context affects any potential
solution.

If you are working on a team, you will want to have at least one person from
each area represented. We will talk more about team formation in Week 2. If you
are working on your own, as some designers do, you may find that you need to
play different roles throughout the process. You will still need to gather pertinent
information at the beginning of the process, visualize ideas to properly evaluate
them, and come up with a solution that fits the problem or need.

WHAT: A problem might require many different types of expertise to solve, and
many iterations to target the best solution. The teams that practice design
thinking are more powerful when members have a diverse set of perspectives
and areas of expertise. Design thinking requires that all members of the team
understand user research to uncover the real needs and desires of the target
market. In fact, more than simply understanding user research, design thinking
requires that you place the needs of the user and your understanding of their
problem at the center of your work. Then, grounded in research and fueled by
creativity, teams come up with ideas, create models of those ideas, and critique
those ideas in a cycle of iteration that moves toward a solution.

WHY: Design thinking produces solutions with users and their contexts always in
mind, increasing the likelihood that your solution will be useful, usable, and
desirable. Design thinking is a proven and repeatable problem-solving
methodology that anyone can employ to achieve successful results.

THE DESIGN THINKING PROCESS

This diagram presents a simplified model of the Design Thinking process. This
course covers the generative research elements of the process, beginning with
the initial problem and using research to gain insight to users’ needs, desires,
and preferences (both expressed and unexpressed). The insight gained through
generative research then informs the ideation process, where the team
continues to refine the problem statement, and generates solution ideas based
on and a deeper understanding of users.

The arrows in the diagram represent the iterative nature of the design thinking
process. They point back to the research element of the process to remind the
team that users should be engaged throughout the process. As the team
generates concepts and solutions, they will begin to use evaluative research
methods, which will be discussed in the Prototyping and Usability testing class in
the RITx Design Thinking MicroMasters program.

This alternate process overview diagram is another way to show the iterative
nature of the Design Thinking process, and reminds the team that research
provides not just User information, but other inputs into the Ideation process.
 Research findings and information are fuel for the engine of ideation, which
generates ideas in creative chaos. In this chaos, teams discover ideas to take
forward into prototyping.

You can learn about each stage by taking other courses in the RITx Design
Thinking MicroMasters program.

USEABLE, USEFUL, DESIRABLE - EMPATHIZE WITH CUSTOMER SEE THINGS IN THEIR

PERSPECTIVE

DESIGN THINKING IS CREATING NEW THINGS YOU WILL BE SURPRISE OF - YOU DON’T DO
THIS PROCESS TO SOMETHING YOU ALREADY KNOW

What does it mean to empathize with the user?

User research will help you see your product or service from an outside perspective. in the
problem space that drove the need for it in the first place. Instead, you should expand
your inquiry to understand their current experience. When you focus on a holistic
understanding of your users experiences, you can gather deep insight about their
authentic persistent needs.

Deep user insight helps you challenge your assumptions about what your users need. Is
what you're delivering actually relevant and desirable for your users?

This kind of deep insight can help you develop solutions that fully support your users and
deliver long-term satisfaction and loyalty.

Is what you're delivering actually relevant and desirable for your users?

Telling a Complete Story with Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research

Meet 87-year-old Pola Levin. Levin's had a difficult life.

She survived a heart attack in her 60s, breast cancerin her 70s, and most notably, she
survived the Holocaust as a child. Levin, who's Jewish, was 14 years old and living in Poland
when the war broke out.

I had a wonderful childhood. I would say privileged childhood.

But then all of a sudden, everything stopped. Levin's experiences could be added to a
large database and summarized statistically quantitatively.
For example, each year, 365,000 women suffer a heart attack. 227,000 are diagnosed with
breast cancer, and it's estimated that only 5,000 Jewish teenagers in Poland out of 1 million
survived the Holocaust. But for Dr. John Creswell, an applied research methodologist at the
University of Nebraska, neither life nor research is simply about numbers.

There are stories to tell, and qualitative research focuses on such detail. Qualitative
research now in the United States is becoming more and more accepted as a way of doing
research. Quantitative gives us a large general surface picture. Qualitative gives us the in-
depth picture. Now, you've got to say that both pictures are probably valuable.

During the war, Levin's father was separated from his family and eventually killed, but he
had obtained false identities for his wife and child, and he persuaded a non-Jewish family
in the community to introduce them to others as Christians. He had lots of Polish friends,
and I knew how to-- I used to go to church with them, and I used to go-- I knew how to
play that role, but it wasn't easy. This was not that usual, the way I survived with my mother
because we were under assumed names. We played dead for 2 and 1/2 years. The mailmen
in that town in Poland wore uniforms. Every time the mailmen would come,

I was sure that somebody's coming to get us, you know? I was in constant fear-- constant
fear, nonstop.

You'd be able to hear the tone of their voice, be able to feel the emotion of the
experience. Those are all rich details. You'd never get that in quantitative research.

Studying Holocaust survivors and other very small populations present challenges.

Small sample sizes are definitely something pushing people towards more qualitative
means of gathering data. Research used to be just advancing our knowledge or testing our
theories. Now we've got a whole different set of reasons for doing research.

It may be to lift up the voices of people that haven't been heard. That may be just as
important, to have their voice heard, as advanced knowledge.

We asked Creswell to watch a portion of an interview Levin did with the Shoah Foundation
in 1996 and to suggest how a qualitative researcher might compare these two interviews
done 16 years apart. I would probably get a transcript of exactly what she said.

I would then go through and start coding that to see what were some reoccurring themes
that she might have talked about.

My mother didn't like anything being handed to her, you know? She just wanted to be
independent more. She was very strong and very life-smart because she always used to
say she lived through the First World War, so she was much more aware of things to come.

And people like us, my husband and I, probably should never have had children because
after the war, after what's happened to us, I didn't think that we were qualified to be
parents. So at times, obviously, I'm very grateful, and I'm happy most of the time.
But you can't help when you go through what I've been through to think that way
sometimes. They had two children, each of whom became a psychotherapist, and four
grandchildren, each of whom was very close to their grandparents.

Levin has been widowed since 1995. And in 2001, Levin returned to her hometown in
Poland for the first time since the war and had an emotional reunion with the daughter
from the family that had helped her to live as a Christian.

Levin had kept his childhood photo of her friend. I love using pictures in qualitative
research. Pictures in qualitative research are what we call devices to elicit comments. The
value of qualitative is being able to get that detailed perspective.

And then we talked to several Holocaust survivors. Now you have multiple perspectives.
Creswell, it should be emphasized, is not at all opposed to quantitative research. In fact,
he's pioneered a combination of qualitative and quantitative fields called mixed methods.
And baseball, surprising as it may seem, is one good way of illustrating mixed methods in
everyday life.

We get the quantitative measures-- statistics-- from Pittsburgh Pirates play-by-play

announcer Greg Brown. 35-year-old Jason Grilli ended up making 28 appearances with the
Bucks and a 248 ERA and in 33 innings struck out 37 batters. But now, consider New York
Mets starting pitcher R. A. Dickey. He's 38 years old, he salvaged his career by learning to
throw a knuckle ball, and midway through the 2012 season, he was the only major league
starting pitcher regularly throwing it.

Pirate color analyst and former pitcher Steve Vlast gives some qualitative input. People ask,
why don't more pitchers use it? Because it's not that easy a pitch to master, both in making
it do what it's supposed to do and then throwing it for strikes if you do make it dance.
Why did they put two commentators in that booth telling those different stories? Obviously,
one story by itself would not give you the entire picture. You see the fingernails in the ball,
and you'll see the ball coming in. And that looks a lot straighter than it was.

Sports has been doing mixed methods for years, and now research has just caught up. I've
always argued that the best researchers in our world are those that have a pretty large
toolkit of approaches for understanding problems.

And the strategies in the toolbox are being used widely everywhere from health care to
social sciences to education settings, and the belief is that mixed methods approaches will
become dominant in the years to come.

A Framework for Organizing the Tools and Techniques of Participatory Design

UNGRADED ACTIVITY: DEVELOPING A RESEARCH STUDY

During this course, you can take the opportunity to develop your own “user research
project” and share your ideas and results with other learners. This project is optional and
ungraded but will give you a chance to practice some of the skills you’ll learn about in this
course. You might also end up with a portfolio piece you can share with current or future
employers.

Here are some things to consider when deciding to participate in this project:

When you identify the topic that you would like to research during the course,
remember that you will have to engage with people who have experience with the
topic. For example, if you want to learn about the experiences of professional chefs,
you will need to be able to interview and observe professional chefs. If you don’t have
access to these people, you might want to consider a user group you have easier
access to, such as parents that cook every day or serious amateur cooks.
For this course, you should not plan to study children or other individuals who cannot
give consent. We’ll look at the reasons for this in Unit 2.
Research will include interviews, observations, and other techniques, so you’ll need a
plan to engage with at least three research participants and be able to visit or
otherwise observe the locations where they carry out the activities you want to
research.
You may also have to provide supplies for visual tools and methods. These are covered
in Unit 4.

You'll share your work in discussion forums throughout the course. In addition to sharing
your work, please take the time to look at the work of your fellow learners and provide
feedback.

In the discussion, you can also share your thought process and what you learned as you
completed this part of the project. Include anything that surprised you as well as questions
or concerns you may have as you move to the next step.

As you select a topic, think about:

Do you have interest and curiosity in the topic?

Do you have access to qualified participants?
Does your question have room for some observation and artifact analysis?
Can your questions be answered with words, not numbers?

If you are interested in participating in this project, go to the next page to talk about what
you'd like to research. If many learners are interested in the same topic, we may create
dedicated discussion forums to share ideas and results.

If you choose to participate in developing a project, please provide feedback on your

fellow learners' work as well.

The Research Team

A multidisciplinary team is important during all phases of the design thinking process, and
research is no exception. Here, Jennifer Englert talks about her experiences and how
different groups approach the problem differently.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Watts‐Englert, Jennifer, and David Woods. (2009). Cooperative Advocacy: An Approach for
Integrating Diverse Perspectives in Anomaly Response. Computer Supported Cooperative
Work. 18. 175-198. 10.1007/s10606-008-9085-4.
In this paper, Jennifer and her colleagues examine the importance of having
multidisciplinary teams in NASA's space shuttle mission control.

Watts‐Englert, Jennifer, Margaret Szymanski, Patricia Wall, and Mary Ann Sprague. (2014).
Collaboration for Impact: Involving Stakeholders in Ethnographic Research. International
Journal of Business Anthropology. 5. 55-69.
In this article, Jennifer and her colleagues illustrate the benefits of involving stakeholders
throughout a research project.

One of the strengths of design thinking is the ability to integrate multiple diverse sources
of information to create a useful report, product, or service. The design thinking process is
stronger when the project includes multi-disciplinary teams. This way, team members with
different backgrounds can bring different insight and ideas to the project. Our study of
space shuttle mission control showed that multi-disciplinary teams create a robust problem
solving process. During the STS-76 mission, the space shuttle system began to leak as the
shuttle ascended into space. This kicked off a series of meetings to determine how to
respond to the leak. The meetings included people from the engineering community, the
operations community, which is mission controllers, as well as crew representatives. One of
the benefits of this approach is that multiple perspectives helped the group consider more
alternatives than a single person might think of on their own. During the anomaly response
process, the engineers wanted to run tests that would maximize the information they could
gain so they could fix the system. The operations community wanted to maximize safety.
Their discussion of these issues allowed the team to consider alternatives that would satisfy
both goals.

In the context of a corporate design environment, teams can include members with
business and marketing expertise, design and development skill, manufacturing and
production, as well as any other groups. When the design process accounts for all of the
phases of the lifecycle, the design is more robust and requires fewer do overs.

Creating a multi-disciplinary design team can also help ensure a buy in by different
sections and levels of the organization because they've been involved and have had input
from the beginning.

While it may be impractical to have all of these disciplines represented in the core working
team, there are techniques that can be used to incorporate these perspectives, and avoid
problems as the design is developed. One of these techniques is an advisory board, which
meets periodically to review the design and provide feedback. My paper, "Collaboration for
Impact Involving Stakeholders and Ethnographic Research," illustrates some of the benefits
of this approach to collaboration.
You can also invite people from different disciplines to contribute to the research planning
process, shadow the research, and participate in workshops. We will talk more about how
to do this as the class continues.

WEEK 1 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Merriam, Sharan B., and Elizabeth J. Tisdell. (2015). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design
and Implementation, 4th Edition. John Wiley and Sons.

Sanders, E. B. N. (2003). From user-centered to participatory design approaches. In Design

and the social sciences (pp. 18-25). CRC Press.

Sanders, E. B. N., and P. J. Stappers. (2008). Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design.
CoDesign. 4 (1). 5-18. 10.1080/15710880701875068.

Schutt, R. K. (2011). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. Pine
Forge Press.

Watts‐Englert, J., M. H. Szymanski, and P. Wall. (2016). Collaboration for impact: Involving
stakeholders in ethnographic research. In Collaborative Ethnography in Business
Environments (pp. 72-91). Routledge.

Watts‐Perotti, J., and D. D. Woods. (2009). Cooperative Advocacy: An Approach for

Integrating Diverse Perspectives in Anomaly Response. Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (CSCW). 18 (2-3). 175-198. 10.1007/s10606-008-9085-4.

Watts-Perotti, J., and D. D. Woods. (2007). How anomaly response is distributed across
functionally distinct teams in space shuttle mission control. Journal of Cognitive Engineering
and Decision Making, 1 (4), 405-433.

WEEK 2 - Study Planning - OBJECTIVES

This week we’ll look at laying the groundwork for a research study by looking at the
elements of a research plan.

After completing this week, you will be able to:

Describe the elements and function of a conceptual framework

Describe an effective problem statement
Distinguish between research questions and study questions
Explain how to select study participants that will deliver the insight you need
Describe ways to introduce rigor into your qualitative study methods
Describe basic ethical considerations for human research
List the elements of a project brief

While design research should be an iterative, open-ended process, it's important to go into
it with a clear plan of what you're trying to find out and what you will deliver as a basis for
ideation. This week, we'll look at that planning process. It starts with a conceptual
framework. This is a visual representation of the user landscape that you're going to
explore. Developing the conceptual framework doesn't have to be overly formal. And the
framework itself may change as you learn more. But it provides a touchstone for the team
throughout the process.

Next, you need to define your question or problem statement.What exactly are you trying
to find out? Your question can be broad, like how do teenagers use mobile phones? Or
narrow, such as what do people like least about cleaning up after dinner?

But it should provide a focus for what you're trying to find from participants. Then we move
on to the research participants themselves. Who should they be? How do we describe
them? How many should we engage? And how do we find them? An important part of your
planning is developing a rigorous process. And we'll look at ways to help ensure your
results will be valid. We'll also touch on ethics and making sure that you treat your
participants respectfully and appropriately.

Finally, we'll put together the project brief, a document that lists all of these pieces to
guide your research process.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK EXAMPLES

As seen in the video, conceptual frameworks can take different forms and show
different levels of detail. The important thing is that they capture the range of
topics that the study will examine. Let’s take a closer look at a few.

This diagram shows three interrelated ways that pictures were used by young
adults. We created the diagram in preparation for a study exploring how people
in generation Y were using digital images. We’ll learn more about this study in
Week 4.
As our study progressed, we learned more about each of the three areas and
developed expanded frameworks, as seen by this early expansion on Sharing.
However, we kept the overall framework in mind throughout the study, because it
reminded us to look at how the three topics were interrelated.

This next conceptual framework shows factors that influence Language Arts
teachers. The factors are grouped by State, District, and Local categories, and all
of the factors seem to have an equal influence on the teacher.
This revised version of the previous framework rearranges the influencing factors
to reflect which factors had a direct impact on teachers and which factors were
filtered through the principal.

The two previous examples are from Miles, Huberman, and Saldana's Qualitative
Data Analysis, published in 2013.

This diagram was created in preparation for a study of how office work was
changing. The branches off the central spine list some of the possible drivers of
this change. These branch off further, listing trends, technologies, or just
characteristics that the team wanted to examine. The framework summarizes
topics and findings derived from the team's literature review. The goal of the
study was to explore these topics further and see how the topics took shape in
participants' lives.
These examples illustrate that there is no single format or structure for a
conceptual framework. The best ones find a way to portray the study space
clearly and concisely.

You can read more about creating conceptual frameworks in this book:
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage.

Elements of a problem statement

The context of the study

The main topic you are interested in

What you know about it (via research, experience)

The gap in the knowledge base

What do we not know about this topic?

The significance of the problem

Why is it important to know about the knowledge gap?

Purpose statement

What your research will accomplish

Examples of Problem Statements

How experienced teachers account for learners’ emotional states in their

teaching practices

Context: Studies have identified 16 emotions that can affect learning in children.
Gap: Few studies have examined how adult educators account for emotions in their
teaching.
Purpose: To better understand the practices of experienced teachers in reading and
responding to learners’ emotional states.
Significance: This study will allow us to provide training and recommendations for new
or developing teachers.

Research questions

How do experienced educators detect emotional states?

How do they respond to different emotional states?
What challenges do they encounter?

How self-directed learning affects health care practices in older adults

Context: Growing numbers of older adults are placing increasing demands on medical
systems. This has led to health-care policy changes that limit access to health care, like
pressures on doctors to offer shorter visits.
Gap: Little is known about how older adults are using self-directed learning to access
health info and how this affects their health care.
Purpose: To understand the role of self-directed learning in older adults' health care.
Significance: This study can inform the development of more effective policies, tools,
and programs to support health care in older adults.

Research questions

What motivates older adults to engage in self-directed learning (or not)?

What tools are effective in supporting self-directed learning?
How does self-directed learning affect one’s personal health care?