TheValueOfImplementingDesignIntoCompanies_E-1

DTHEE VSAILGUENOFTIMHPILNEMKENINTINGGINTO COMPANIES Elisa Briones and Ine Marie Vassøy Oslo School of Architecture and Design Design Management Course , Fall2009 The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

DTHEE VSAILGUENOFTIMHPILNEMKENINTINGGINTO COMPANIESby Elisa Briones and Ine Marie Vassøy There is a communication failure between business and design because there is no common understanding as designers, of how to communicate and integrate design-thinking process into business. What is the real value for companies of integrating design thinking into their strategy? This article explores the value of design thinking for business, and how to communicate it in an understandable language. For real time experience of implementing design strategy in a company that focus on marketing and economic bene ts, and for guidance of how to communicate the process to business we have interviewed Torbjørn Anderssen from Norway Says. We have also been looking at di erent models of design thinking processes including the design process Norway Says communicate to business, and business thinking strategies. With this experience we have integrated relevant parts from the models and created one generic model for the design process, the way we experience it. This will be relevant for us as designer to communicate in a consistent language and for business to understand the value of implementing design into their companies.Design Management Course , Fall 2009

DESIGN THINKING DESIGN THINKING VS. BUSINESS THINKING“Design thinking is thinking as designers” According to articles read from a business pointDesign thinking has slowly become more involved of view, business thinkers associate them self withand appreciated in companies over the past decade. organizational thinkers. This critical thinking processFrom a business point of view the skill of abductive makes decisions based on strategies and models,reasoning is the most crucial tool for a designer to and is an attitude designers often have to touchuse, approaching problems of business. Abductive in collaboration with marketing and economists.reasoning is the skill to nd the balance between Critical thinking is the most frequent strategy usedintuition and analytics, and not by ideology or by business, and is a method where the context ofadministrative decree. Instead of declaring if a judgment consideration to evidence is relevant. Thestatement is true or false, the designer is abductive criteria of making a judgment correct is to evaluatereasoning what could possibly be true. the problem by using theoretical constructions such“What recognizes design thinkers is their ability to as existing methods, models and techniques. Thecreatively and constructively approach di culties by models and techniques that organizational thinkersdeveloping models into a new holistic method. Not to rely on are methods that were made to innovate inchose a model on behalf of other models” the past. From designers point of view it is clear thatRoger Martin, Integrative thinking. these models should change with the continuousIn the article “What is design thinking anyway?” and daily evolution.Roger Martin, professor of strategic management In contrast to organizational thinking, designat the Rotman School of Management, de nes the thinking breaks up models in order to takeword abductive reasoning by dividing it into two advantage of relevant parts, to construct one modelforms of logic, deductive and inductive reasoning. for the particular task that needs to be solved.First, deductive reasoning is the logic of what must Designers challenges models and solutions, and bybe, reasons from the general to the speci c. For doing this we fright organizational thinkers. As weexample, if the general rule is that all cows are black, can see on the gure 1, design thinking increase risk,and I see a brown bird, I can declare deductively that and that is the main frightening part for business.this bird is not a crow. Second, inductive logic is the But at the same time we nurture innovation,logic of what is operate, reasons from the speci c to which leads to economic bene ts. If design andthe general. For example if I study sales per square business merge together, the result of the diversityfoot across a thousand stores and nd a pattern that of perspectives produces combustible resultssuggests stores in small towns generate signi cantly according to Peter Merholz in ”Why Design Thinkinghigher sales per square foot than stores in cities, Won´t Save You”.I can inductively declare that small towns are mymore valuable market.  Figure 1. Relationship of project risk to design strategy. The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

COMMUNICATION FAILURE rst need to agree on what is the real core of the design thinking process. We decided to visualize theCompanies are recently having di culties to model in order to use a consistent language, andunderstand the contribution of design in business, creating a generic diagram that explains the designand it is not to be blamed! Roger Martin inductively process. A graphic diagram will help us to talk indeclares that the classic misunderstanding of a common language with business people. Ottodesigners is that the working process is similar Neurath, creator of the Isotype institute said “Charts,to artists, and therefore the di erences are often pictures, models, illustrations can, with a little relatedconfusing. Designers and artists do have many text, show in this symbol language the main factscommon skills, such as the creativity and erratic and explain the important problems for any eld ofworking process towards a product. There is knowledge”. Creating a graphic diagram visualizingalso a resemblance in the open-minded attitude the design thinking process is the best option toconsidering the “yes and…” methodology (designers confront the communication failure.value all ideas, even silly ones, because they might We looked into several existing models to ndbe the start an innovation). With these similarities in the most relevant and appealing information tomind, there is still an important di erence between approach business. After observing and analyzingartists and designers, considering the designers di erent visualizations of the design thinkingprocess that includes methods and the focus on the process and business strategies, we noticed manyuser needs and experience. interesting things. For example in gure 2, we canDesigners and design-full companies are striving see that a very simple visual expression representsto distribute to non-design organizations the our occasionally chaotic and non-structured way ofbene ts of design implementation. The articles and approaching tasks, and how after a big struggle weresearches published about designer’s attribution suddenly get to illuminated ideas and come up withhave convincing ndings, such as increased sales great solutions.and change of market position for the companies.Even though these texts communicates valuesand bene ts, a common trend shows that thedesign thinking processes towards getting thesecombustible results does not communicatethroughout the articles, nor touch the companies.“Every £100 a design alert business spends on design Figure 2. Explaining the design process.increases turnover by £225.”For designers it comes natural to declare deductively, Another good reference is the classic diamondaccording to Roger Martin as mentioned above, diagram, gure 3, which illustrate deadlines in thethat business is not familiar with this “new” way of process, focusing on the concrete steps of develop-thinking. Companies are skeptic of implementing ment of the process. Or as illustrated in gure 3, andesign, so we need to take responsibility and interesting concrete and detailed approach to thecommunicate consistently our working strategy that design process, in part because it refers to a speci cleads business to success and grow innovation. eld of design: interactive and multimedia.OUR APPROACH TO THE INTEGRATIONHow can we improve the communication between Figure 3. Double diamond, design process diagram.business and designers? Speci cally, how tocommunicate our way of thinking and workingstrategy to business? To answer these questions weDesign Management Course , Fall 2009

The created diagram presented in gure 4, illustrates the process. Instead of saying “business goals” wea generic design process. The signi cance is that say “your goals”. Talking in rst person help us asit communicates and refers to industrial, graphic, designers and business people to feel the integrationinteractive, multimedia and service design. In terms of both expertise’s to be natural. We want to beof structure of the diagram we have used a lineal attractive for business, so use of colors is relevant toreading from top to bottom, to follow the order of illustrate our personality and skills in graphic. Thethe design phases. We use an informal language diagram is meant to bee a tool to engage businessto give business the feeling of being involved in with our way of thinking and working. FIRST INSIGHT YOUR BRIEF AND GOALS PREPARATION UNDESRTANDING THE PROBLEM ORGANIZING WE AGREE ON THE FINAL OUTCOME CONCEPT LOOK FOR INSPIRATIONVISUALIZATION TRENDS, STATE OF TECHNOLOGY & ART RESEARCH CONCEPT USER OBSERVATION / create personas DETALING CONTEXT OBSERVATION FINAL WORKSHOPS, MINDMAPS, BRAINSTORMS, MOODBOARDS... OUTCOME WE FRAME THE PROBLEM VALUE JUDGMENT / which problems are important? UNUSUAL CONNECTIONS / placing the pieces of the puzzle ILLUMINATION! sudden emergence of ideas.... STORYTELLING / creating user scenarios VALIDATION / stage a complete & illusionary user experience PROPOSE & DECIDE IDEA we propose and we evaluate together INTERFACE PROTOTYPING / 3d, graphics, screens, ... TESTING WE APPROACH THE PRODUCTION / methods, time, costs evaluation FINAL PROTOTYPING we test the experience FOLLOW UP PRODUCTION YOU ARE A SATISFIED CUSTOMER :)Figure 4. The Generic Model of the Design Process. The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

DESIGNER’S RESPONSIBILITY IN BUSINESSFor business, design is a small, but important part “Designers often work better when they are developingin the business process. As it is showed in gure 5, products that is not described in the given design briefdesign is not presented in the early stages of the from a company” Torbjørn Anderssen, Norway Says.project. Design is the step after the marked analyses The main target the producer communicated in theare done and economic decisions and directions are given brief was to develop products that would ttaken. Most resent designers usually do not take part into the company’s existing collection. The designof the nal decision either. But designers have more brief was not easy to follow according to Torbjørnto contribute to than just developing a nice product. Anderssen, considering Norway Says values asWe should work together through the whole being contemporary. The distance between theirprocess, integrating design and business strategies products personalities were much di erent to LKto bene t for the company. Hjelles existing collection. Norway Says chose to develop products towards a di erent direction,Figure 5. The design process from a client organization point of view “design” is focusing on the younger and urban costumers. Theyone small part of an overall process. suggested for the furniture company to change the strategic direction, and start developing a newA good example for an unexpected attribute of collection in addition to the existing one. LK Hjelledesign thinking in business is Norway says in the was vulnerable at the time, because of an increasedcollaboration with LK Hjelle. Norway Says was competition in the Norwegian furniture industry. Inengaged in 2002 to develop seating products for the contrast to what was, the furniture industries havefurniture production company. From that very rst expanded. There is now more import of furnituremeeting Norway Says have changed the direction from other countries and the costumers has becomeof the company’s strategy, and developed products more conscious of design and quality. LK Hjellethat are more appealing to the urban costumers. looked at this suggestion of changing directionThey have started a new product category called towards a new category for urban products, to“contemporary”, in addition to the exiting one be an opportunity to become more stabile innamed “classic”. Today their role in the furniture the furniture industry. Two years later Norwaycompany has completely changed. Since they Says and LK Hjelle introduced their new furniturestarted to collaborate 2002, the designers have collections, two product categories, “classic” andcontinued to attribute as strategic partners for the “contemporary”. The sales in both categories arefurniture company. increased, because the contrast of these categories attracts more costumers to the company. People in the furniture industry refer to this change as being a tiny revolution for the Norwegian furniture industry. This is in a business organizations point of view, a great example of an unexpected positive e ect of a designer’s unexpected approach to business strategy. Since that rst meeting, receiving the brief, they have continued to collaborate in a management processes. Now they got an important role in the furniture company, working as strategic partners guiding them to what they should produce in further collections.Design Management Course , Fall 2009

THE VALUE OF IMPLEMENTING DESIGNThe real value of design for business lays onits alignment, on its integration. The value ofimplementing design in business will be signi cant,and it will show up in the quality, innovation andpro t. When we developed the generic model,from the beginning to the end of the designthinking process, we worked aligned with thebusiness strategy. We agree with the businessdriven companies on what are our common goals,and what is the nal outcome, deadlines, costs,etc. The generic model is a transparent process,showing the methods and steps we go through.This is our way of integrating and engaging thecompany with what we do. The evidence of thedesign process of development are important tocommunicate in large organizations, learning fromTorbjørn Anderssens experience. In contrast to theselarge organizations, in collaboration with smallerindustry it is not always necessary with modelsthat articulate each step of the developing process,because the collaboration is much more informal.In these situations the generic model will functionmore as a designers tool, a checklist of when andwhat to do. Evaluating the generic model with theprocess Norway Says communicate to business,we nd similarities in the language we use in theprocess. This is a good reference because they usethe model to communicate their design process incollaboration with business companies, and it works!What di erentiate the generic model from otherexisting models is that the visual language makes iteasy understandable for non-design organizationsto understand the structure of slowly sliding overto next phase when we are ready, and it is easy togo back a step if its needed. This diagram is a toolthat will help us to communicate the holistic designprocess to business in an understandable language,and the article just made business understand andvalue of design thinking! The Value Of Implementing Design Thinking Into Companies

REFERENCESBest, Kathryn. Design Management (managingdesign strategy, process and implementation)Switserland, AVA Publishing SA, 2006.Lawson, Bryan. How Designers think (Thedesignprocess demysti ed) fourth edition. GreatBritain, Biddles Ltd, 2005.Naumeier, Martin. The designful company (Howto build a culture of nonstop innovation) USA ,peachpit, 2009.Martins, Roger. The design of business (Why designthinking is the next competitive advantage). USA,Harvard business school publishing, 2009.Bounford, Trevor. Digital Diagrams (Graph statistic).United Kingdom, Casell & Co press, 2000.Boyle, Gri . Design project management. England,Ashgate editorial, 2003.Anderssen, Torbjørn. (2009, November 6) Interview,Designers value in business.Rieple, Alison. (2004 Winter). Understanding whyyour new Design ideas get blocked.Breen, Bill. (2007 December 19). The business ofDesign. Fast company.Merholz, Peter. (2009, October 9 ). Why DesignThinking Wont Save You. Harvard BusinessPublishing.Neurath, Otto. (Survey Graphic, vol. 26, no. 1January1937) Visual Education, A New Language. www.newdeal.feri.org/survey/37025.htmAna Amorim. Ana-lytical (interaction design. designstrategy). www.ana-lytical.comDesign Management Course , Fall 2009