Crippling indecision, continuous delays (Part 1): The two diamonds fallacy.
A common theme of many organisations is the strict separation of strategy and execution. On one side are executives, managers and subject matter experts who own the business strategy. They determine requirements, define goals and create roadmaps, usually in the form of features, which are then passed on to teams for implementation.
At first glance, this sounds like a clear and structured process. But in reality, especially in conceptual work environments like software and product development, it is the perfect environment for the proliferation of confusion, delays, frustration and gridlock.
“Everyone tries to get things done but none is actually able to deliver.”
– Feels familiar?
The main cause of this is a disrupted information and work flow combined with cultural and organisational dysfunctions and false incentives, which I would like to call the “two diamonds fallacy”.
The two diamonds fallacy
We all probably know the “double diamond”. At least in its most basic form as two diamond-shaped sections for “Understand” on the left and “Execute” on the right. There are many, more detailed versions of the double diamond for specific topics like design thinking or design sprints.
The process described in the beginning is also often presented as a double diamond. With strategy on the left and execution on the right. But there is a problem. It’s actually not a double diamond. It’s just two “diamonds”.
It is not a double diamond because it disregards three fundamental principles: Divergent and convergent thinking, outcome obsession and empowered creativity.
Not following these principles leads to a cascading effect that can eventually derail any progress.
The “two diamonds” chain of events:
Phase 1: Flat beginnings
Managers and subject matter experts create a feature roadmap from a business-driven perspective without input or feedback from users or executing teams.
Phase 2: “Over the fencing”
The roadmap is handed over to a team for execution. Often without a structured opportunity to clarify priorities, dependencies, context or purpose of a feature.
Phase 3: Building confusion
Assumptions remain unchecked and blindspots hidden. Still the team starts developing. But all the inconsistencies and ambiguities keep disrupting their flow. Previously unrecognised dependencies keep popping up and blocking the team’s progress.
Phase 4: Crippling indecision, continuous delays
Open questions and decisions keep piling up. Countless clarification meetings without a clear outcome keep disrupting the team’s schedule.
Phase 5: Overcorrection
In an attempt to rescue the timeline and to mitigate all the disruptions and blockers, stakeholders start re- and de-prioritisation tasks or create additional ones. Teams are reorganised and staff are replaced or replaced.
However, the separation of strategy and execution is still maintained and there is no direct communication and collaboration, leading to even more confusion and frustration.
Phase 6: Showcase celebration
Eventually, people have to accept that their original goal or deadline can no longer be met. However, as failure was never an option, every result must be framed as a success or quietly swept under the carpet.
So we sit in presentations, put on our best poker face and silently think “lipstick on a pig”. Then, after the presentation, everyone goes back to their side and continues with the next two diamond roadmap.
Of course this is a highly exaggerated and simplified version of events. But I am quite sure that one or the other description has awakened memories in some people.
So how would this change with embracing the three basic principles of the double diamond? Divergent and convergent thinking, outcome obsession and empowered creativity?
Let’s start by defining those three principles.
Divergence/convergence
The double diamond is a sequence of divergent and convergent steps.
First we collect information, ideas and opinions with an open mind. Every divergent step is about opening up and creating options.
We then analyse and structure all the collected data to create a shared point-of-view. Convergent steps are about focussing and making choices.
Divergent and convergent thinking is a core human skill like breathing in and breathing out. It is the way we think and solve problems. We are constantly collecting data, weighing up our options and choosing our response.
But even if solving problems is second nature to us, we are flawed as individuals, but exponentially better as a group. Without the input and challenge from others there is a great risk that our divergent and convergent thinking withers to a flat line of linear thinking with assumptions and bias remaining unchallenged and blindspots and misconceptions remaining undetected.
To ensure that our thought process doesn’t fall flat, we need to embrace the second fundamental principle of the double diamond: Empowered creativity.
Empowered creativity
Empowered creativity is often ridiculed by quotes like “There are no bad ideas in a brainstorm.” Empowered creativity also makes people in primarily power- or rule-oriented organisations extremely nervous and sometimes even hostile towards any attempt for enabling empowered creativity.
But actually, empowering creativity is the best, I would say the only, approach to effectively tackling a major human condition: Cognitive bias.
A brief look at cognitive bias
We humans “think” all the time. What is this noise? What should I wear to be accepted in this socio-technical system? Is it safe to cross the street? How can I reach my quarterly goals?
And we make “decisions” all the time. An estimated 33,000 to 35,000 times per day to be precise.
To manage this amount of computing our brain has developed “shortcuts” to make “thinking and deciding” more effortless and efficient.
There are over 180 cognitive biases that interfere with how we process data, perceive reality and make decisions. Many of those biases operate on such a deep subconscious level that they can’t be controlled, bypassed or switched off. Even knowing about them doesn’t prevent them from interfering with our decision making and problem solving process.
If you want to learn more about cognitive bias, I highly recommend the following book, videos and articles:
- Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahnemann
- Design for Cognitive Bias by David Dylan Thomas
- Cognitive bias codex
- The Psychology of Design by Growth.Design
- Mind Traps: The Ultimate Guide to your most common Thinking errors video by Escaping Ordinary
The problem of cognitive bias
Cognitive bias tricks our brain to see patterns and connections everywhere, even with the tiniest amount of information. As a result it often happens that we see patterns and connections where there actually are none. We misinterpret situations. We identify problems that don’t exist or oversee real issues right in front of our eyes.
It would probably destroy our own self-confidence if we realised how often we are wrong or at least off the mark with our assumptions. Luckily, there are also biases that help us “forget” these cognitive errors and instead trick us into overestimating our abilities and level of control.
Addressing cognitive biases with empowered creativity.
The best way to address potential bias is other people and creating an environment and culture that welcomes different perspectives and experiences. For this we also need psychological safety and unbiased facilitation.
Psychological safety is a universal principle that ensures that people can freely exchange divergent ideas and critical thoughts without feeling judged, ignored or at risk. And that everyone treats disagreement and mistakes favourably and respectfully.
Unbiased facilitation creates space and brings structure and focus to the process. It guides participants safely through the wildest brainstorms and ensures that the crew stays on course and doesn’t get lost in a vortex/rabbit hole. A good facilitator also knows that concentration takes a lot of energy. So they give participants time to disconnect and relax and recharge their brains with delicious treats.
“Come for the food. Stay for the experience “
— David Dylan Thomas, Author of “Design for Cognitive Bias”
Outcome obsession
The next basic principle describes the unbreakable desire for a clear, meaningful and measurable result.
Outcome is a very popular but, in my opinion, often misunderstood term. When I say outcome I mean a change in user behaviour that positively impacts our business goals. For example, when customers like a product so much that they become vocal promoters of it. Or a platform that helps employees get things done faster and with higher quality, freeing up more time to think about further improvements or new opportunities.
The double diamond is a problem-solving method that is measured by the outcome it achieves and the impact it creates in the real world. It is therefore only logical that the process itself is rooted in the real world to define this desired outcome and impact.
Let’s recap
Most of what’s presented as a double diamond is actually just two separate “diamonds” because they ignore the fundamental principles of the double diamond: Divergent and convergent thinking, outcome obsession and empowered creativity.
This disconnect between strategy and execution leads to significant disruption in delivery, ultimately leading to insufficient results, diminished impact or even a complete breakdown of the delivery process, often masked by “lipstick on a pig” showcases.
The good news is that there is an alternative which probably is very obvious: We need to start embracing the double diamond.
This is where we will continue in Part 2: Embracing the double diamond.
