Heads Up. We Highlight a Research Project Yielding First-Hand Insights on Design Think- Ing in Large Business Organizations

Strategy

Sean D. Carr, Lecturer, Amy Halliday, Managing Andrew C. King, Research Jeanne Liedtka, Professor, Thomas Lockwood, Darden School of Business, Editor, Batten Institute, Assistant, Batten Institute, Darden School of Business, President, Design University of Virginia, Darden School of Business, Darden School of Business, University of Virginia Management Institute Director of Corporate University of Virginia University of Virginia Innovation Programs, Batten Institute

Heads up. We highlight a research project yielding first-hand insights on design thinking in large business organizations. We’ll keep you posted. For the moment, we share broad themes from this work in progress.

58 The Influence of Design Thinking in Business: Some Preliminary Observations by Sean D. Carr, Amy Halliday, Andrew C. King, Jeanne Liedtka, and Thomas Lockwood

In the spring of 2010, the Design Study design to the topic in the popular business Management Institute and research- The primary objective of this study— press, our intent was to assess the ers at the University of Virginia’s sponsored by DMI and the Batten actual impact that design thinking Darden School of Business launched Institute, a center for the study of was having. We wondered: Was the a multistage research program to entrepreneurship and innovation at increasingly prominent role of design assess the prevalence and impact of Darden—was to develop an under- in business just talk, or could we design thinking in business organiza- standing of the extent to which the observe it in action? To what extent tions. This interim observation report methods, techniques, and processes has design—and designers—been aims to share with DMI’s readers the traditionally associated with design embraced by corporations beyond design and progress of that study, and designers had been adopted with- the traditional design functions? By along with some preliminary findings in established business organizations. gathering information about the pace generated during Phase 1. Spurred by burgeoning attention and process of the adoption of design

thinking in business organizations, Beginning in April, 4. If you were interested in develop- we hoped to inform designers and ing some concrete measures of the practicing managers about how to im- we conducted a series prevalence of design thinking in prove their collaboration and elevate of interviews with business organizations today, what and accelerate their recognition of would you look for? Examples design’s capability to enhance innova- design and innovation might include: tion within their organizations. executives in large a. The creation of a chief design The study was conceived of as officer or chief innovation involving two phases. Recognizing the corporations across a officer role difficulty of developing measures to variety of industries. b. The creation of a department assess the prevalence of design think- devoted to customer ing using quantitative research ap- experience proaches such as surveys, we thought two and how it was evolving in their c. Increasingly prominent roles it important to first develop a deeper own organizations. Questions we played by design consultancies understanding of the language and asked included: d. The hiring of additional practices surrounding design-related 1. To what extent is design think- employees in design work in large business organizations. ing gaining prominence as a management, particularly with To accomplish this, personal inter- management approach in your design backgrounds/prior views with 10 to 15 selected experts organization? Where do you see it experience at the intersection of design and busi- practiced? What form does it take? ness were planned for Phase 1. Based Who is generally involved? In May and June, corporate inter- on these insights, Phase 2 would then 2. What are your thoughts about views continued, and we decided to involve the creation and administra- the progression a firm might go add several design consultants to our tion of a survey to a broader cross- through as it becomes increasingly interviewee list to get their perspec- section of business leaders. sophisticated in its use of design? tive on their clients’ organizations. Beginning in April, we con- How has your firm progressed? All completed interviews were then ducted a series of interviews with Where are you now? transcribed and reviewed, and we design and innovation executives in 3. We are also interested in the held a workshop to discover patterns large corporations across a variety of language used to describe design- and determine key insights. industries. The idea was to start with related work and its aim. How do Although any “findings” from this design advocates who occupied roles these ideas get talked about in your first phase of analysis must be seen as at the interface between designers and organization? Do they show up, for preliminary, we wanted to share with managers and who we felt would be example, as relating to innovation, DMI’s readership a brief overview best positioned to help us to under- organic growth, customers? Who of some of the more interesting stand the relationship between the talks about them? discoveries.

60 The Influence of Design Thinking in Business: Some Preliminary Observations

Emerging themes Our conversations with The ownership of design is hotly We began the study with a loosely contested in some organizations. held hypothesis that design thinking the design executives We found significant tension over was in fact growing in influence in surfaced a different set the territory of design coming from business organizations and that its a subset of interviewees. “Everybody trajectory would follow that of other of issues than we had wants to own design; everybody influential approaches as its value anticipated—issues wants to be a design expert; every- was recognized more broadly and body wants to do what designers it entered mainstream management that sometimes seemed do,” one said. Around the topic of in- thinking. We took total quality man- to have little to do novation, there appeared to be “many agement (TQM) as a process likely hands in the pot.” Responsibility for to be analogous. The progression of with our hypothesis. innovation seemed to be increasingly TQM, as we understood it, moved distributed across many groups in the from promulgation by W. Edwards organization: R&D groups (which Deming and other early thought lead- experts: in other words, a distributed sometimes experienced internal ers, continued to the development of and shared commitment. conflict between applied and blue- specific techniques (such as fishbone A fascinating thing happened sky work); newer “innovation” groups diagrams), and eventually gelled into as we progressed through the Phase (one example is the IBM model of a standard business practice sup- 1 interviews. Our conversations emerging businesses); and business ported by a cadre of highly trained with the design executives surfaced unit managers with P&L responsibil- experts. Over time, the approach a different set of issues than we had ity. Truly, all these groups could have was systematized and taught, at a anticipated—issues that sometimes benefited from a design skill set to do basic level, to a broad cross-section seemed to have little to do with our their work, but instead they often op- of managers. TQM experts retained hypothesis. Rather than talk about erated in silos that did not communi- control over the certification of the prevalence of design thinking per cate or collaborate with one another. competencies (the “black belts” in Six se, interviewees wanted to talk about Interviewees in the companies Sigma, for instance) and continued a deeper set of questions: Who owns that were experiencing turf battles to handle difficult quality issues and design? How much design think- were concerned about the need to determined organizational standards ing should managers be encouraged protect the design function against and processes, but quality became a to do? How do you sell design to incursions by others. They spoke of a central focus and entered the vocabu- business executives? Even the very drift toward decentralization caused lary of all managers. In fact, quality definition of design thinking emerged by placing designers on business unit is often referred to as existing only in as a contentious issue. teams, reporting not to the design organizations in which it is owned Here are some of the highlights function but to operating managers. by managers rather than by quality of what we heard: Those in organizations with a more

61 Design Thinking—Design Management Methods and Processes

collaborative environment seemed less Within our group skills; they also thought it was a bad concerned about this issue and more idea to encourage them to even try. open to embedding designers within of design executives, They suggested that managers should the business itself. we found some stark learn to appreciate the value of design, We noted a high degree of rather than try to practice it. Indeed, emotion accompanying this discus- conceptual divides over they framed this as a practical mat- sion; clearly, there is a lot of interest, the very definition of ter: Designers acquire their skill set concern, opportunity, and even pain through particular training followed by out there on the part of design leaders design thinking... specific on-the-job experience. Manag- as the industry evolves. ers receive different training; a man- ager trying to do design thinking was Defining and differentiating between aspects of what they saw as a rigorous likely to lower the quality and credibil- design and design thinking is a prime approach: customer ethnography, vi- ity of design in the organization. One source of contention. sualization, pattern finding, ideation, interviewee noted, “Whether it’s R&D, Within our group of design execu- and rapid prototyping. To those who engineering, or marketing, [managers] tives, we found some stark conceptual shared this view, design thinking can often admire the outputs of designers divides over the very definition of be applied to any business problem, but don’t understand or appreciate design thinking, with some defining whether or not it is product-related. the tools, approaches, and processes it as simply “what designers do.” A And because this problem-solving designers use to get those outcomes.” belief that there is no design process methodology can be uncoupled from We also heard the opposite view: that can be considered apart from the the design function, it can be scaled Managers not only could become field itself dominated this perspec- throughout an organization. design thinkers but should—so tive; thus, there was no meaning- powerful is that process for finding ful distinction to be made between Teaching design thinking to managers innovative solutions to all categories design and design thinking. Design is a very good—or a very bad—idea. of business challenges. One of our thinking is, by this definition, about From this basic conceptual divide interviewees explained that in his how designers use the techniques around definitions emerged a related experience, teaching the design think- and methodologies taught in design set of views about who should employ ing approach to executives actually school to solve design problems. design thinking. Not surprisingly, increased designers’ visibility and On the other hand, other inter- those who defined design thinking clout: “You mean, my designer has viewees insisted on a distinction be- as something trained designers do been trained in this and has been tween design and design thinking. To did not see it as a useful tool set for doing this for 15 years? I need more them, design thinking was a distinc- managers to acquire. These intervie- of that! Now I understand when they tive way of solving problems. Many wees not only doubted that it was bring me these things where they got in this group described the discrete possible for managers to acquire such them and where they came from.”

62 The Influence of Design Thinking in Business: Some Preliminary Observations

You don’t sell design in business If design thinking succeeds as a best interests of design as a field? Of organizations by telling managers to popular managerial tool, how might designers? Of business performance? think like designers. it influence the credibility and clout It would also be interesting to Despite differences in definition and of design managers and designers, explore the relationship between at- ownership, one nearly universal point and of the design function within titudes about who “owns” design and of agreement emerged—the term organizations? organizational context and culture. “design thinking” was fraught with Will efforts to protect the integ- Stay tuned. n problems in all but the most design- rity of design by keeping it in-house Reprint #10213LIE58 savvy organizations. Managers, we as a separate function succeed? What were told, found the term confusing is the best way to integrate design and and off-putting. Many of our inter- design thinking? Which path is in the viewees noted that executives often hear the word “design” and think only of the aesthetics of a physical object, or even the final stage in the development of a product—cake decoration, as one interviewee described it. So how do you sell design, we asked? “Talk like a strategist, not a designer,” we were told. Adopt business language; talk about business outcomes. Speak to customer impact, brand, revenue growth, and return on investment—things that are on managers’ minds. Tell stories of design’s successes, and develop metrics to demonstrate them.

Phase two As we look to Phase two of the study with the business executive commu- nity and the development of a more structured approach to studying our original questions, we are faced with additional ones: by Will Ayres & Scott Lerman