Delving into design thinking’s most popular methods and tools by drawing on the results of a global survey, with Design Thinking Playbook co-author, Patrick Link, and Patrick Bauen
With the aim of finding out which design thinking tools and methods are used in practice, we carried out a global survey of more than 2,500 individuals with different levels of knowledge about approach. For further details about the survey’s aims, demographics and context, read the first part of this two-part article. Read on for a discussion of the results in terms of user awareness and popularity along the micro cycle of: ‘Understand’; ‘Observe’; ‘Define point of view’; ‘Ideate’; ‘Prototype’; and ‘Test’.
Understand
The first phase centres on learning more about the potential user, his or her wishes as well as problems and tasks that he or she has to perform. The aim is to build empathy for both the user and the stakeholders and capture the problem and situation holistically.
In this phase, the most known methods are: interviews; producing a stakeholder map; and special questioning techniques such as to ask six ‘WH’ questions – who, why, what, when, where and how.
Another good design thinking method at this stage is to look at ‘extreme users’, since the needs and problems of this user group are often easier to identify than those of ordinary users. It’s about understanding the user and his needs as deeply as possible.
Interviews can take many forms, such as an ‘Interview for Empathy’, ‘Explorative Interview’, ‘Problem Interview’ or ‘Solution Interview’. However, the questioning technique in each of these interview forms is crucial to gain deep insights about the user and their needs. There should be as many ‘WH’ questions as possible and closed questions should be avoided. It is also important to ensure that the interviewee speaks as much as possible and that the interviewer listens actively.
Stakeholder maps are another well-known method, yet they are often complex and the exploration of interactions can be laborious. However, they offer very valuable hints when it comes to implementing innovation ideas. Knowing the needs of different people in an organization or ecosystem and who can be helpful in a project is crucial to success, especially in large companies or complex systems.
Surprisingly, the ‘jobs to be done’ (JTBD) framework is less well known among our respondents, although it provides important insights into the tasks to be performed by a user or customer and often explores the real reason why a product is bought or used. One of the elements here is to ask why one ‘hires’ a product. The concept of JTBD-framework was proposed by Harvard Business School Professor, Clayton Christensen, author of The Innovator’s Dilemma.
Observe
In the observing phase, the idea is to fathom real needs and verify our assumptions. Our assumptions and hypotheses must be confirmed in the context of the user. However, ‘field notes’ (which might encompass video and photo documentation)’empathy map’, ‘persona’ and the ‘customer journey’ are particularly suitable methods in this phase.
The customer journey is the preferred method among our survey participants, because it helps in understanding the customer completely and aligning itself optimally to them. It’s all about starting in the right places, i.e. those places that are important for the customer or where a continuous customer experience is interrupted. The evaluation of any product or experience with a company depends on its weakest moment. In the customer journey all touchpoints (both direct and indirect) of a consumer are listed. A negative experience can be enough to lose a customer. It is therefore a matter of creating a consistently positive customer experience.
Among our respondents, the best-known tool in this phase is the persona or the customer profile. This is a fictitious person who reflects the target group. The persona exists in various forms and can be used without a fixed template. It can also be recorded on a scale of 1:1 and supplemented with moodboards or quotations. A customer profile, on the other hand, usually uses a template and contains, in addition to the description of the user, the pains, gains, the job to be done, and often the use cases too (see illustration).
Tools like the ‘Hook Canvas’, the ‘nine windows method’, and the ‘AEIOU method’ are much less well known among our survey participants. The latter finding is quite surprising because the AEIOU method usually helps to bring structure into the first observations. AEIOU is the abbreviation of five categories (‘Activities’, ‘Environment’, ‘Interaction’, ‘Objects’ and ‘User’) which help in the analysis and research of collected data and information, and to recognize correlations.
Better known is the ‘Value Proposition Canvas’, developed by Alexander Osterwalder, which elegantly links the customer profile with the value proposition and also helps to define the transition from observation to defining a point of view.
Define point of view (PoV)
In this phase, the collected findings are evaluated, interpreted and weighted. The result of this synthesis is the new point of view, which can be summarised, for example in a question for the subsequent ideation phase. Synthesis is the key here, as is finding the right focus for the coming ideation phase.
Example methods in this phase include asking ‘how might we…’ questions or defining a PoV in one sentence. Also popular here among our survey participants are the ‘vision statement’ and ‘mind maps’. The mind map, in particular, is a simple tool that helps to structure insights and find a focus topic.
Ideate
Ideation is about finding solutions for a problem. First, ideas are sought through, for example, brainstorming and various other creativity techniques. These ideas are then clustered and the most promising ideas are selected. Idea selection tools like ‘dot voting’ or ‘2×2 matrix’ are used frequently.
Although brainstorming is the best-known method for coming up with ideas, co-creation sessions tend to be the most popular among those with more experience. There are also many other creativity techniques that can be used together with the customer in co-creation sessions, such as SCAMPER.
SCAMPER (substitute, combine, adapt, modify, put to other uses, eliminate, rearrange) is a method by which different lines of questioning are followed to generate new ideas, and a development of the well-known Osborn checklist.
Prototype
The prototyping phase serves to test ideas or solutions with potential users quickly and to learn more about the problem and the needs of the users. A description of different prototypes can be found, for example, in Michael Lewrick, Patrick Link and Larry Leifer’s The Design Thinking Playbook. When building prototypes, you should start by considering what you want to learn and how you want to test them.
Prototypes are very simple and non-functional at the beginning of the innovation process (e.g. ‘paper prototypes’) or any functionality is simulated. Prototypes become more functional in later phases, and are sometimes referred to as an ‘MVP’ (minimum viable product). An MVP is a functional version of a product reduced to the most basic functions.
Other methods used in the prototype phase include ‘service blueprints’, ‘role play’ or ‘MVE’ (minimum viable ecosystems), that last of which is based on a combination of systems thinking and design thinking and is increasingly regarded as one of the most important capabilities of companies in the future.
A lesser-known method among our survey participants is the ‘dark horse prototype’. These are prototypes that are very innovative, that you think users don’t want or are technically impossible to produce. If the concept works, however, the return would be very high – as with horse betting. The dark horse allows the team to experiment with crazy ideas.
Test
In the last phase of the micro cycle, prototypes are tested with the potential user, preferably on site. Sufficient time should be allocated for the test phase. Testing helps teams to learn, develop ideas further and improve prototypes until the users are completely convinced.
In general, one should not attempt to carry out as many tests as possible to improve the idea and the prototype in a short time, but as many iterations as possible. Each iteration brings new insights. Of course, huge importance lies in finding the right users/customers for the testing. It is also important that test findings, alongside any user surveys or observations are well documented. This could be in the form of videos, photos or quotations, for example. In this way, findings can be shared with the team or client easily. The test phase, at the same time, returns to the idea of gaining empathy (understanding and observing) and the iterative process, or micro cycle, starts anew.
The most well-known testing methods among our survey participants are ‘testing with potential users’, ‘usability testing’, and ‘storytelling’. But, a method known as the ‘feedback capture grid’ has also shown itself to be good test method, according to our results.
The feedback capture grid comprises four fields: ‘I like’, ‘I wish’, ‘questions’ and ‘ideas’. It is very easy to use and gives a helpful structure. This kind of constructive feedback helps to generate a positive energy.
Another method, A/B testing, is only used at a later point in time. Meanwhile, our results indicate that online feedback tools are much less popular than other tools. Certainly, direct contact with the user during testing is worthwhile, especially in the early phases.
Reflect
At the end of each iteration, it is advisable to reflect on the results and procedure so that the process and cooperation can be improved. The popular agile framework, Scrum, encompasses a retrospective so that a team can learn from the past together. Team members analyse what went well and what went badly and try to understand the reasons and causes to derive measures for improvement.
For this purpose, the tools ‘lessons learnt’ and the feedback capture grid we have already mentioned are often used by our survey respondents.
The ‘retrospective board’ is less well known and less standardized. This is a method with a strong focus on the process. Elements that could be included on the board might be ‘what went well’, ‘what can be improved’, ‘start doing’, ‘stop doing’ and ‘action items’. Retrospective Boards are easy to use and provide a good structure for team discussion.
When it comes to reflecting and summarizing the contents and results, the Lean Canvas created by Ash Maurya and, at a later stage in the innovation process, the Business Model Canvas first developed by Alexander Osterwalder are suitable.
While the Business Model Canvas is very well known, the similarly-structured Lean Canvas is less well known. In our opinion, the Lean Canvas is much better suited for the early phases of the innovation process, especially when it comes to understanding and visualising the problem, the customer needs, the solution and the value proposition.
Summary
Design thinking is a problem-solving approach that achieves the greatest benefit in an interdisciplinary team when it comes to developing new products, services, and business models, or in the optimisation of processes. The approach works in all environments, from startup and industrial company to service company and public administration.
Design thinking also promotes ‘out of the box’ thinking and the generation of new, radical ideas. The individual solutions found are quickly tested with the user and improved or discarded over the course of iterations. In the end, various partial solutions are combined and further developed. Design thinking, especially when it is applied in combination with traditional approaches, helps to find new and better solutions. To do this, the right tools need to be selected and used.
In applying design thinking to digital transformation, traditional analytical tools, such as stakeholder maps, systems thinking and hybrid models (combining design thinking and data analytics) will continue to be used. However, we expect that design thinking and its respective methods and tools will gain in popularity because the interdisciplinary collaboration it encompasses helps to visualize complexity, as can be seen in the Lean Canvas or the Business Ecosystem Canvas.
Not surprisingly, the better-known tools tend to be the more popular ones (see illustration). It can also be said that the simpler and more user-friendly the tool, the more frequently and likely they are to find their application in the field.
The challenge lies in selecting the right tools for the respective context from the multitude of those available. It is in our nature that tools known either by the facilitator or within the team are used more frequently. However, we’d like to see greater joy in experimentation and a new failure culture to break new ground and try out new tools, even if that means failing using a new tool. Of course, this should not be seen as ‘failure’ but as a learning experience. Tools should be tried out, adapted and further developed to match one’s needs.
Love it! Change it! Or leave it!
Have fun experimenting, trying out, learning and innovating.
That’s what design thinking is all about.
Patrick Link is Professor of Product Innovation at the Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts (LUASA) in the Institute for Innovation and Technology Management (IIT). He is co-author of the bestseller, The Design Thinking Playbook.
Patrick Bauen is studying for an MSc in engineering at the Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts (LUASA). He assists Patrick Link on the realisation of the Design Thinking Toolbook.
