The real Double Diamond process of design
The Double Diamond model is often hailed as the gold standard for depicting the design process. Its simplicity and clarity make it an essential framework in the world of design thinking. If you’ve been in the design field for any length of time, you’ve likely encountered it in countless presentations, often accompanied by the familiar steps: Discover, Define, Develop, and Deliver. On paper, it represents a straightforward and idealized journey from problem discovery to solution delivery. However, as anyone who has worked in design will tell you, the reality is rarely so linear. The design process is messy, filled with complexities, setbacks, and, most importantly, resistance. This resistance — manifesting as denial, excuses, delays, and more — often disrupts the smooth flow suggested by the model. In this essay, I’ll explore how the “real” design process incorporates these forces and how they shape the way design solutions are developed and implemented in both agency and in-house settings.
Any model is a simplification of reality. All models are wrong, some are useful. The Double Diamond model is the gold standard for depicting the design process. If you are reading this essay, chances are you have seen this model many many times and you have put it in you Powerpoint decks many many times. It looks something like this:
You all know how the design process is supposed to go: discover the problem, define the problem, iterate possible solutions and deliver the solution. Each step requires a different skill set. Discovery is about seeing the problem, business analysis, strategy. Defining the problem is about the ability to ask creative questions: what are we actually solving here? Once you have the problem by the balls, you can design possible solutions and at the end you build and deliver the solution that was chosen.
For designers working in an agency, this process is pretty accurate. A client comes to you and you take them through these four phases and help them solve a problem. But what happens on the other side of the table? How does the design process look from the customer perspective? After working in a design agency for a long time, I have the good fortune of working at “the customer” side of design at the moment, in an in-house setting working with external consultants in a team and embedded in a big organization. Then, the design process looks a bit different.
The resistance
The biggest thing that is missing from the original Double Diamond model is: resistance.
I want to start out by stating that resistance is neither good or bad, it’s just part of any change process and designing something by definition means something is changing.
To make the Double Diamond model more realistic, I have added some resistance (in yellow) to the original model:
So what happens after someone discovers a problem, after someone sees a problem or a business opportunity? Resistance. The resistance comes in different forms:
Not acknowledging reality
A lot of people inside the organization will not see the problem as you see it, they will not see the business opportunity because they have a different view of reality. Everyone sees the world through their own eyes. Knowledge, skills, focus, experience, character … they all shape how we see the world. As a designer you are trained to see what is wrong with the world and to come up with ways to fix the world. If you are a digital designer, you have knowledge and experience with digital solutions so you see opportunities and problems where other don’t. Others will not see the reality as you see it, so you will have to open their eyes.
Denial
If eyes are opened to the reality of the problem or opportunity, there will be some denial happening. After awareness, fear starts to kick in. Once people become aware of a problem, they will start to wake up to the fact that something might need to be changed, resources might have to be allocated to solving the problem, comfort zones might have to be abandoned. Denial is often a protective mechanism used to avoid facing painful truths or overwhelming emotions. The way to deal with denial is to acknowledge the denial, not judge it, hold space, find the root cause, ask questions, and respect the process. People protect the status quo because they value it. If you can find the underlying values and work from there, you might be able to get through the denial phase.
Excuses
The next step after denial is excuses. If people start to see the reality as you see it and no longer deny it, the next layer of protection is excuses. Yes but … people can come up with very creative excuses of why not to tackle the problem, not to seize the opportunity. Also here, holding space and not judging is key. You may need to address the underlying issues causes the excuses, help to remove barriers, remind people of their accountability, reframe the conversations, or call out limiting patterns. Maybe you can use a Minimimal Viable Product approach to start small to take away some of the excuses, reduce the risk. Realize that change always comes with risk, and reducing the risk by taking small steps and pointing to the cost and risk of not changing might help.
Delay
The final frontier, after you have made people see the reality, worked through denial, eliminated the excuses, is delaying. Now is not the time for this. We do not have the resources right now. There are other things that are more important. There are so many ways one can delay taking action. There is also delay build into large organization. It’s called bureaucracy. Decision making might have to go through hierarchical levels, many people may have to get involved, research may have to be initiated, processes and rules have to be followed, approvals need to be given, resources might have to be allocated, you name it … organization have all kinds of things in place to create delay. Sometimes this is unavoidable but sometimes you can also hack this process a little. Therefore you first have to understand the system. After that you know how to use the system and use escalation to get things moving. Building a personal network also helps to get things done. But in the end, you might also have to break some stuff to get things moving, hack the system a little, do first and ask for forgiveness afterwards instead of asking for permission up front.
Change business processes
If you thought you were done with the resistance, think again. If you have conquered all resistance that leads up to you owning the problem, designing a solution and delivering it, you have one big hurdle to go before the problem is solved and the business value is reaped: business processes need to change. You have designed a new solution that will solve a huge problem and will lead to huge upside but that has to be used for it to deliver the value. Internal ways of doing things might have to change. Customers might have to change their way of working. Assuming that if a solution is improved will be enough for people to change might be dangerous. People stick to patterns they know even if a better one comes along. People are creatures of habit and any change, even if it is a significant improvement will meet with resistance. And bigger changes need to be managed and will take time and resources. Any solution will require some form of change management.
So there you have it: the “real” double diamond of the design process. I hope this model is useful :)
Thank you for taking the time to read this essay. I hope you enjoyed it. If you clap for this essay, I will know I connected with you. If you follow me here on Medium, you will see more essays pop up on your Medium homepage. You can also subscribe to an email service here on Medium which will drop new essays right into your inbox. You can also connect with me on LinkedIn to see new articles in your timeline or chat with me there.
