
Design thinking myths — inclusion doesn’t mean everyone has a seat at the table
I want to continue to tease apart common misperceptions about what design thinking is and how to pull together smart teams.
Design thinking is not just a methodology, it’s a way of thinking about problems that creates solutions. These are not abstract solutions. If you’ve identified the right problem, the solution has business benefits. That’s a real solution.
This is how design thinking drives value.
Often people think they just have to toss together a group of people from different parts of an organisation to get a smart outcome.
This undisciplined approach applies imaginary design thinking principles rather than genuine ones and it tends to backfire.
One such idea, a wrong one, is that design thinking means you have to include everyone in the process.
There are two problems here -
1. Inclusion is interpreted as having a seat at the table
2. People create project teams with one person from every part of the business.
This is a waste of time and effort.
You are better served having the right people at the table and including the broader organisation in other ways, like undertaking the process in a transparent space, where people can see and hear about what is going on without being directly involved.
Think specifically about the problem you want to solve
You need every point of view that is useful to crack the problem open.
This means having lots of mini conversations before a design workshop to figure out what you are trying to solve and who needs to be in the room.
The team that comes together must contain people with all the skills, points of view and influence necessary to tackling the problem.
It means you -
1. Ask the right questions
2. Of the right people
3. In the right way
4. At the right time.
Which disciplines or divisions are at the table depends on what the problem is, why you are doing it and what you hope to achieve together. It is not unbridled inclusion.
So, how do you pull the right team together?
Old vs new
It is important when pulling together a solution-finding team, I call a smart team, to think about the history with the product or customers or business.
People who have been around for a long time and bring a strong understanding of the issue may be constrained by an ingrained point of view, ‘been there done that’. I say ‘may’ because they also have war wounds and can share why previous attempts failed, was a process inadequately analysed for example, was it an issue of leadership, execution?
However, bringing new blood or an external point of view can be very helpful because there’s a freedom to consider novel ideas.
Different mindsets
The way people think is also important.
In my experience, people are either human or systems first thinkers. Both are important.
Some will go to the people-end of the problem and others about the processes relating to the problem.
You need technical experts to tell you if the solutions you identify can work or how to make them work. You also need those who advocate for your customer and can push for solutions that may be possible but are harder or just haven’t been thought about.
It’s good to include challengers who put everything through the wringer, but you also need those with a view at the cultural level of the organisation, who can identify the people and pathways required to make it work.
A person represents more than just a subject or topic, you must know that they have perspective and that their perspective is valued.
What kind of a problem is it?
Cross disciplinary teams can be better for solving complex problems but there are some problems where they’re only necessary at the start to create a central viewpoint, after which, you can leave the specific technical experts to work their way through it.
The right level of influence
Pulling together a team without influencers who can sponsor the change is a flaw.
A core sponsor team must have skin in the game and cover the perspectives that are relevant to that problem.
A sponsor team must -
1. Understand important aspect of the business system
2. Know who should be involved
3. Have the authority to bring those people together
4. Have a stake in the outcome
5. Have the mandate to ensure decisions can be implemented.
Build a system
A design thinker stands in the middle of this collection of people and asks — have I built a system? Are there different vantage points? Is there different functional capacity? Different mindsets? And are they the right ones to tackle what is before us?
Including only those who can contribute to the answer is a sign of respect for everyone’s time. Doing so in an open way ensures that everyone is included, but not everyone is involved in everything.
If you want to find out more about design thinking or design workshops please stay in touch at Comsen.
