Design Sprints Aren’t Inefficient Enough for Some Innovation Projects
Years ago I worked together with Ron Sears of the Design Consortium, a small boutique innovation consultancy that helped firms create the next generation of products critical to their company’s success. The process that Ron had developed took time and resources. Short projects took weeks. Important projects took months. Field resources worked in pairs gathering first hand stakeholder input. Project teams consisted of up to a dozen people over the project’s duration, with at least twice that many more drawn in for specific exercises.
Ron had been applying the process for years when I joined him. Originally, I worried that we were too inefficient and that more efficiency could provide our clients better value. One day I asked Ron, “If we quit doubling up interview teams and shorten our project length, we will still be able to get some innovation done for our clients. We will be much more cost effective and able to do more projects for them for the same amount of fees.”
Ron patiently explained to me, the newbie innovation guy, why that would be a huge disservice to our clients. Innovation, he explained, requires a level of inefficiency.
- More people on the project = more minds capable of aha moments.
- 2 people conducting an interview or observation = more…
