The Best Framework
It always strikes me when teams express their concerns about synthesizing data in design thinking projects. While many of our students and clients seem to genuinely enjoy interacting with other people and their needs, they seem to have a hard time to carve out meaning from their interactions.
I believe that a lot of this has to do with the way we apply frameworks. Frameworks are great for as long as we don’t confuse them with a template or list we feel obliged to fill out. If we behave like this, we are -what DeMarco et al. describe as template zombies:
The project team allows its work to be driven by templates instead of by the thought process necessary to deliver products.
I often hear the question about what kinds of frameworks teams should apply in projects. We naturally look for industry standards that could help us prepare for team sessions, but this is not the way sense making works. Therefore, my dissapointing answer is this:
The best framework is the one you as a team will design while you are in this thought process. It is the framework that allows you to let your data respond to you in an inspiring way. A meaningful framework illuminates gaps and opportunities in -and in between- data points.
Whether or not the patterns you see will actually allow for the creation of useful designs is yet to be proven. At this stage all that matters is that you can engage in a conversation about what you can agree and about what you need to disagree on.
In our trainings and projects we go through the various stages of what this answer implies. We know from research about experienced-based learning (Kolb 2015) that filling out standardized frameworks is only an educational entry point (see image below).
The second level would be to play with data while applying various frameworks. The idea is to explore the varieties of meaning that can be derived from data points. The data points remain the same while you constantly change your perspective on them. Compared to user research -more a craft than play- the synthesis of qualitative data ought to be playful.
Whenever possible I aim to bring our design thinking teams to a third level of data synthesis. As soon as you grasp the idea of frameworks as changing perspectives on data points, you can begin to design your own frameworks. Framworks that allow for meaningful conversations -if not arguments- within teams and within the context of your project.
Our learning approach needs time. It is more relevant for coaches and project managers than for team members. At best, teams can develop their skills in real projects with multiple iterations. However, we have seen some decent learning progress in trainings in which teams practiced on all three levels within only a few days.
