Design Thinking for the Greater Good
Page 36
Design Thinking for Mobility tool kit, 166
Design TwentyFirst Century, 129
details, attention to, 141, 315
direct observation tool, 71, 85, 269
divergence/convergence, in design thinking, 113
Doherty, Anne, 85
Donnelly, Michael, 127, 128, 131, 136, 141, 145, 300
driver’s licensing system, 17
Durovich, Chris, 218
E
Edinger, David, 13
Edmodo platform, 284–85
EMCM (Emergency Preparedness/Operations and Medical Countermeasures), 117–18, 120–21
empathy/empathy activity, 34, 70–72, 155–56, 164, 172, 266–67, 269, 285, 294, 297, 300–301, 315–16
empowerment, of frontline staff, 43
emptiness, power of, 314
Enabled by Design, 150
engagement: of autistic people, 19, 62; of new voices, 61, 76, 304–5, 311; of stakeholders, 297, 314
entrenched interests, 104–5, 125, 130
Erikson, Erik, 88
ethnographic interviewing/fieldwork, 71, 98, 174, 230–32, 246, 261, 267, 269–71
execution test, 282
F
Facebook, 5, 284
Facebook Messenger, 197, 198
failure, likelihood of, 13
Family 100 Project, 301
far-out suggestions (brainstorming tool), 136
FDA. See US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
federal workshops, 105–6
feedback, 115–16, 284–86
Ferrara, Luigi, 129, 315
flip/flipping (brainstorming tool), 135–36
four-question methodology, 33–39. See also steps, in design thinking tool kit; What if?; What is?; What works?; What wows?
framing/reframing, of question/problem, 6, 63, 99, 120, 165, 172, 177, 221, 243, 296
Freud, Sigmund, 88
FusionSM workshop, 187–91
G
“Gallery Walk” approach, 271, 276
GAO (Government Accountability Office), 3–5
garden example, of top-down management, 21
Garfield Innovation Center, 5
Gates, Bill, 16
Gateway College and Career Academy (GCCA): brainstorming concepts, 276–77; design brief for, 262–63; design thinking at, 20, 254–55; ethnographic research at, 269–71; feedback from stakeholders, 285–86; key assumptions for, 280–83; learning launches at, 285–91; making prototypes for, 283–85; napkin pitches for, 277–79; opportunity identification, 255–58; people plan for, 264–66; process reflections, 292–94; program at, 251–52; project plan for, 264, 269; project scoping at, 268–62; on-ramp design at, 291–92; recruitment/retention at, 253–54; research plan for, 264, 267, 268; student population at, 252
Gaudion, Katie, 64–67, 69–76, 298
goals, tension between, 313
Good to Great (Collins), 307
Google, 5, 152
Government Accountability Office (GAO), 3–5
great, as enemy of good, 267
greater good, challenge to: construction of community, 125; engaging multiple organizations, 103; global/local thinking, 165; inclusion of more voices, 61; intimidation vs. empowerment, 43; reluctance to change, 201; stakeholders, with different needs, 147; successful implementation, 217; at systems level, 79; technology- vs. user-driven innovation, 183
GreenSat/GreenSeeker, 210. See also MasAgro
H
Hancock, Michael, 13
Hawley, Kip, 185, 197–98
Health and Wellness Alliance for Children, 219, 221, 227, 229, 232, 234, 238
health care. See Children’s Health System of Texas; Ignite Accelerator program (HHS); Kingwood Trust; Monash Medical Centre; United Cerebral Palsy (UCP); Whiteriver Indian Hospital
HealthCare InnovationbyDesign initiative, 80, 99, 100
Helen Hamlyn Centre for Design, 64, 310
hesitation, cost of, 13
Hobbs, Huntington (Hunt), 202–3, 208–14
Holman, Read, 44, 47, 51–52, 54–55
“how” in innovation, 10–12
human-centered design: Concept Posters for, 114; at EMCM, 118, 120–21; FDA discussions and, 103–4, 106, 110; IDEO course for, 16; LUMA Institute and, 5, 108; at Monash Medical Centre, 79; risk management and, 198; as starting point, 6; testing activities in, 38
I
idea generation: brainstorming in, 35, 275–76; criteria for, 81, 192, 297; dialogue during, 32–33; in Innovation II, 12; testing and, 279
IDEA Lab, 44–45, 47–48, 51–55, 57–58, 303
ideas considered, size/scope of, 11
IDEO, 5, 16, 58, 185–86, 310
Ignite Accelerator program (HHS), 19, 43–46, 51–55, 57, 162, 303, 311
Imagining Iveragh, 128, 131–33, 139–40. See also Iveragh Peninsula (community project)
impact, at organizational level, 308–11
impact, at personal level: managing tensions, 314–15; next steps, 315–16; when asking What if? 313; when asking What is? 311–12; when asking What works? 314; when asking What wows? 313–14
Importance/Difficulty grid, 113
inclusion, of new voices, 61, 76, 304–5, 311
individuals, role of, 9
innovation: beliefs about, 24; “big win” thinking, 26; capability for, 8, 10, 307; changing the conversation for, 10–12; changing the organization for, 12–14; construction/management of concepts, 308–9; development process, 27; engagement of new voices, 9–10, 76, 304–5, 311; enlisting partners/buy-in, 25–26, 28; on failure/risk, 29; foundation for, 251; growth mindset in, 30; increasing speed of, 26, 306–7; life experiences and, 27–28; stakeholder research/perspectives, 25, 29; uncertainty and, 27; what is in the way of, 14–16, 18; “where” in, 12–14; “who” in, 9–10
Innovation, Design, Entrepreneurship, and Action (IDEA) Lab. See IDEA Lab
innovation capacities, 31–32
Innovation I/Innovation II shift, 7–13, 20, 23, 27–28, 30–32, 34, 49, 62, 302, 307, 310
Innovation Labs. See United Cerebral Palsy (UCP)
insights, pursuit/identification of, 12, 271–73
inspiration, investment in, 311
Instagram account (TSA), 184, 197–98
Institute without Boundaries (IwB), 125, 127–29, 131–38, 140, 142–43, 145, 300
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), 202–3. See also MasAgro
Ireland, 19, 98. See also Iveragh Peninsula (community project)
Irlandez, Marc, 148–55, 158–61
issues/problems: framing/definition of, 10; reality of messy problems, 12–13; in social sector, 4, 15–16, 23, 31, 315
iterative process, in design thinking, 6
Iveragh Peninsula (community project): brainstorming sessions for, 135–36; creating champions for, 143; evolution of ideas, 139–40; opportunities to explore, 134; process reflections, 144–45; prototyping in, 141; region’s challenges, 126–27; setting timelines for, 142–43; as tourist destination, 126; visualization in, 140–41; working face-to-face, 140; workshop kickoff for, 133–34. See also charrette process
J
Jeskey, Carolyn, 166–68, 170, 173, 180–82, 247
Job Access Mobility Institute (JAMI), 167–70, 172, 175–76, 178–79
jobs-to-be-done (design tool): CTAA use of, 168; in four-question methodology, 269; in manager’s tool kit, 9; at MyChildren’s, 231; What is? stage use, 34, 37
journey mapping (design tool): for Children’s Health System of Texas, 237–38; in CTAA project, 171; as design tool, 88; in manager’s tool kit, 9; of patient experience, 87, 96; at TSA, 191–93
K
Kaiser Permanente, 5
Kania, John, 219
Kaplan, Saul, 219–20, 232
Kastrenakes, Cheryl, 175–76
Kingwood Trust: design thinking at, 63–65; engagement of autistic people, 19, 62; process reflections, 76–77; story of, 62; What if? stage, 72–74; What is? stage, 66–72;
What works? stage, 75; What wows? stage, 74–75
L
Lab@OPM, 3–5, 21, 44, 107, 295, 310
Lean tools/methodologies, 13, 43, 44
learning launches: assessment of, 285; benefits of, 299, 301; in design thinking tool kit, 248; iterations of, 91, 96, 175, 287; as live experiments, 248, 286; medical center example, 238–40; school example, 288–89; term usage, 38, 49; transportation example, 175, 177; value of, 97
learning orientation/mindset, 27, 32
life experiences, benefits of, 86
Life Labs. See United Cerebral Palsy (UCP)
locals, as sources, 312
Lowe, Colum, 63–64, 69, 246
LUMA Institute, 5, 6, 16, 108, 111–15
M
MacDevitt, Barry, 129
MacLaren, Eli, 220–21, 225, 227–30, 235, 242, 246, 267, 300
maker movement, 149–50
mapping tool (stakeholder), 118–19. See also journey mapping (design tool)
Marks, Jill, 258–59
Martin, Carmel, 98
MasAgro: hub system use, 203–9; modern technology use, 210–11; partnership network, 212–13; process reflections, 215–16; progress/success metrics, 214–15; prototyping at, 208; six technologies of, 204; story of, 201–3; traditional systems use, 209–10; value chain, 211–12; visualization at, 208
McAdam, Cathy, 100
McKinsey, 16
Mercer County project, 174–76
messy problems, reality of, 13–14
Mexico. See MasAgro
Miller, Arianne, 21
Miller, Christine, 87, 94, 300
milpa system (indigenous farming), 209–10. See also MasAgro
Moholt, Linda, 182
Monash Medical Centre: demand-side analysis, 85–90; design thinking at, 19; five-year vision, 101; general medicine redesign, 81–84; handwashing project, 97; improvements/outcomes, 92–94; journey mapping of patient experience, 87, 96; learning launches at, 91–92; long patient stays, challenge of, 94–97; mental health experience redesign at, 90–91; Monash Watch project, 97–99; process reflections, 100–102; scaling design thinking at, 99–100; supply-side focus, 84; systemic design thinking at, 80; What if? stage at, 81–82, 90; What is? stage at, 81, 90
Monterrey University of Technology and Higher Education, 215
Muinin Project, 138–39
Murrell, Moira, 128–29, 145
MyChildren’s, 227–30, 232–34, 241–42. See also Children’s Health System of Texas
Mycoskie, Blake, 16
MyTSA app, 195–96, 198. See also US Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
N
NAFTA, 209
napkin pitch, 277–79
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 118
need for speed, 26
Neffenger, Peter, 197
network effects, 303
new voices, engagement of, 9–10, 76, 304–5, 311
New Zealand: design thinking in, 17; Family 100 Project, 301; infrastructural supports in, 20; innovation in, 16
next steps, for impact, 315–16
norms, challenging, 13
North Star, design brief as, 262, 264
O
Obama, Barack, 5, 316
observation. See direct observation tool
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 106, 118
Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 3–5, 21. See also Lab@OPM
O’Mahoney, Noreen, 128, 144
100 ideas (brainstorming tool), 136
on-ramp concept/design, 92, 291–92
OPM (US Office of Personnel Management), 3–5, 21
opportunity, area of, 260
opportunity spaces, identification of, 225–27, 255–58
opposing goals, 313
orchestration, of design conversation, 108
order/predictability, need for, 14
organizational capabilities, building of: dealing with complex social systems, 302–4; empowering local capability building, 304–6; increasing speed of innovation, 306–7; managing change, 299–301; producing more creative ideas, 296–97; reducing risk, 298
organizational norms, challenging of, 13
organization level, impact at, 308–11
Ornelas, Martin, 176–81
Osborn, Sue, 63, 76
O’Sullivan, John Joe, 126
O’Sullivan, Noreen, 126, 128, 144–45
P
Pandolfi, Chris, 131
Peak Academy, 13
Peer Insight, 166, 246, 310
people plan, 264–66
personal level, impact at, 311–14
persona tool, 192, 289, 290
politics: in innovation process, 295; presence/reality of, 83–84; reactions based on, 302; in workplace, 4, 306, 316
possibilities: at Children’s Health, 218–20, 300; development of, 12; external partners and, 10; in human-centered design, 103; identifying/generating new, 14, 35, 95, 125, 130–31; implementation of, 145; vs. incrementalism, 309; IwB approach to, 135; learning about, 110; openness to, 122; as overwhelming, 292; reframing problems as, 262; technological, 183, 199, 227–28; in What if? phase, 313
possibility-driven design, 6
posters, creation of, 108–9, 114, 2712
predictability/order, need for, 14
“pre-experience,” 37, 283–84
problems/issues: framing/definition of, 10; reality of messy problems, 12–13; in social sector, 4, 15–16, 23, 31, 315
process methodology, at organization level, 309–11
process reflections: at Children’s Health System of Texas, 240–43; at CTAA, 180–82; at FDA, 122–23; at GCCA, 292–94; in Imagining Iveragh project, 144–45; for Kingwood Trust, 76–77; at MasAgro, 215–16; at Monash Medical Centre, 100–102; at TSA, 198–200; at UCP, 160–61; for Whiteriver Indian Hospital, 55–59
project plan, 264, 269
prototyping (design tool): exploration through, 74; farming example, 203, 208; for GCCA, 283–85; goal of, 283; low resolution/low fidelity, 54, 284; in manager’s tool kit, 9; medical center example, 95–96; as “pre-experience,” 37; as visualization, 141
psychological safety, need for, 14
Q
Quality I/Quality II shift, 7, 9–10
questions, for design thinking, 33–39. See also steps, in design thinking tool kit; What if?; What is?; What works?; What wows?
R
“Ready Steady Make” workshops, 74
reasons to use design thinking. See design thinking contributions; greater good, challenge to reflections. See process reflections
Remind.com, 279, 284–85
repertoire, benefits of broad, 86
research plan, 264, 267, 268
Ring of Kerry, 19, 125–26, 132, 143. See also Iveragh Peninsula (community project)
risk, reduction of, 298
Rivera, Marliza, 45–49, 55, 57–59, 162, 246, 297, 298, 303, 307
roadmap, for workshop facilitation, 109
Roberts, Peter, 218–19, 222, 232–34, 238–40, 242–43, 305, 307
Rolling Stone, 198
Rose, Thorn, Bud (design method), 111, 113
Ross, Aftin, 118, 120–21
S
safety, psychological, 14
Samuelson, Michael, 219
Sapient, 187–88, 190–91, 195, 304, 310
Sapient process. See Sapient
“satisficed” solutions, 105–6
say-do gap, 228, 287
scale test, 282
Scarantino, Josef, 149–50, 152–53, 158–61, 163–64, 310
Schrage, Michael, 283
Schwartz, Suzanne, 118, 298
scoping your project, 258–62
Scully, Jim, 164, 312
secondary research, 191, 266, 268
self-sustaining cycles, 28, 30, 307
Shirley, Giles, 62
Shirley, Stephanie, 62, 63
Silicon Valley, 5
silver bullet, searchi
ng for, 313
Simon, Herb, 106
Singapore, innovation in, 16
Skellig Kerry project/concept, 137–39, 142–43. See also Iveragh Peninsula (community project)
Skodacek, Ken, 104, 106–10, 114, 116–17, 120, 122, 246, 303
small, as beautiful, 313
Small Business Administration (SBA), 155
social entrepreneurs/entrepreneurship, 16, 220
social innovation start-ups, 6, 16, 31
social media use, 197–98, 200, 211
social sector, issues/problems in, 4, 15–16, 23, 31, 315
social technology, 18, 302
South by Southwest Conference, 150
Sprint Relay, 155
stakeholders: design tools and, 312; engaging diverse set of, 14–15; feedback from, 285–86; immersing in needs of, 315; mapping of, 118; role of, 9
Statement Starters (problem framing approach), 112, 113
steps, in design thinking tool kit: first step, identifying an opportunity, 255–58; second step, scope your project, 258–62; third step, draft your design brief, 262–63; fourth step, make your plans, 264–69; fifth step, do your research, 269–71; sixth step, identify insights, 271–73; seventh step, establish design criteria, 273–74; eighth step, brainstorm ideas, 275–77; ninth step, develop concepts, 275–77; tenth step, create napkin pitches, 277–79; eleventh step, surface key assumptions, 280–83; twelfth step, make prototypes, 283–85; thirteenth step, get feedback from stakeholders, 285–86; fourteenth step, run your learning launches, 286–88; fifteenth step, design the on-ramp, 291–92; graphic of, 248, 257
Stockman, Keith, 80–81, 85, 95–96, 98–100, 102
storyboards/storyboarding, 37, 65, 135, 156–57, 270, 272, 281, 283–84, 286
strategy, vs. design, 217
sustainability test, 282
Sweatman, Tom, 190, 195
T
team composition: for FDA workshop, 109; in Innovation I/II shift, 7; for Job Access Mobility Institute, 169
tensions, management of, 314–15
testing, of assumptions, 26, 48, 281–82, 314
Texas. See Children’s Health System of Texas
Texas Coastal Bend project, 176–80
ThinkPlace, 21, 164, 301, 306, 312
Thomson, Chris, 163
ThoughtWorks (design consultancy), 86