IBM Design Thinking Software Development

Framework

Abstract: Software engineering is fully aware of the

significance of comprehending end user requirements and
including them in the software development process. User
feedback has been included into agile software development
processes in a variety of ways. User stories should represent a
user's demands, however they frequently communicate the
product owner's or the software engineering team. To meet the
needs of end users, several studies have looked into
incorporating user-centered design into agile software
development. This study suggests an alternative method that
uses iterative software development and Design Thinking to
meet end-user needs. Five actual software development
projects that were examined for this report used this
methodology.
Keywords: Scrum, Agile Software Development, and IBM
Design Thinking
Introduction
By the use of brief and quick iterations, Agile Software
Development (ASD) has enhanced the software delivery
process. Agile approaches were able to outperform
conventional waterfall projects in terms of success rate by
streamlining software engineering procedures [1]. Although the
Agile Manifesto places a strong emphasis on client
collaboration, this strategy does not ensure that the software
development team will focus on finding the right solution [2].
When projects for software development are centred on
meeting user demands, they have a better probability of finding
the right solution [3]. Scrum and other agile techniques have
already made an attempt to adopt this strategy by embracing
user feedback as part of the requirement process. that must be
addressed, many agile development projects employ a more
straightforward requirements gathering procedure determined
by a single Product. In order to create user stories that
accurately reflect all aspects of customer wants, Cohn [4]
developed a Customer Team that conducts brainstorming
sessions. The author also suggests using personas,
questionnaires, user interviews, observation techniques, and
developing prototypes of user interfaces.
Several agile development projects adopt a simpler
requirements gathering process defined by a single Product
Owner (PO), who may represent the views of various project
stakeholders but may not always represent the needs, desires,
and aspirations of the end-users. This is true even though user
stories can aid in understanding the problem that needs to be
solved. Under these circumstances, the developer team applies
a constrained solution to the issue listed in the product backlog.
In order to comprehend the intentions and motivations of real
users and how to solve everyday problems, Design Thinking
(DT) [6] offers a unique approach of thinking based on
divergence and convergence around those people. Through
collaboration, empowered development teams can swiftly test
ideas with users and incorporate feedback as a crucial part of
the problem-solving process.
The IBM Design Thinking [7] method expands on the original DT
methodology by offering a fresh method for formulating
requirements, setting up teams, and monitoring project
development, including end-user feedback. The majority of
information on IBM Design Thinking is dispersed throughout
numerous documents and videos, which presents a challenge
for readers who want to learn more about it. Moreover, the use
of IBM Design Thinking as a paradigm for software
development is not qualitatively evaluated in these materials,
videos, or the existing DT literature.
The following are the two primary contributions of this paper:
To I give a concise and simple explanation of IBM Design
Thinking and how it differs from DT; and (ii) evaluate the
benefits and drawbacks of utilising IBM Design Thinking as an
ASD based on a survey of the designers and developers of five
actual software development projects.
This paper is broken into the following sections: An
introduction to design thinking is provided in Section 2. IBM's
contributions to DT are shown in Section 3.1 as a software
development framework. A survey of projects that have
embraced IBM Design Thinking SDF is shown in Section 4.
Related works are presented in Section 5. The survey results are
briefly discussed in Section 6. Section 7 concludes with
conclusions and further research.

The Design Thinking Method Background

Design Thinking, according to Brown [8], is a methodology used
by project teams for creative activities centred on meeting user
demands. DT is an abstraction of the thought process that
designers utilise to come up with fresh concepts.
Figure 1: The Process of Design Thinking, Modified from [10]
In science, the analytical procedure is used to look for a
solution to a particular issue. The DT technique permits study of
problems and their solutions. The method calls for diverging on
a wide range of potential answers and convergent on a narrow
emphasis. Understanding, prototyping, and testing phases
converge on a solution whereas diverging phases like empathy
and ideate diverge the problem area. The major stages of the
DT process are depicted in Figure 1.
Understand Phase: The Empathy mode, a series of actions
designed to better comprehend people in the context of their
difficulties, makes up the first stage of the DT process. The first
task to be completed is to watch how consumers interact with
their surroundings. In order to comprehend the project's
context and the physical and emotional demands of the users,
scenarios are observed from their point of view as users.
Engaging people with questionnaires and interviews offers a
comprehensive grasp of what they believe and feel. The data
collected might then be transformed into insights and concepts
to address user needs [9].
The process' Define mode gives the design space clarity and
emphasis. Its objective is to construct an insightful and practical
problem statement. The obtained data is then examined and
condensed using techniques like empathy maps and personas.
Explore Phase: In order to avoid apparent solutions and so
maximise the possibility for innovation, the Explore Phase
focuses on the creation of novel concepts. In this stage,
brainstorming is frequently utilised as a tool to generate
divergent ideas and solutions. By interacting with one another,
listening to one another, and expanding on one another's ideas,
brainstorming aims to maximise the group's collective thinking.
[6].
Prototype Phase: The prototype phase is the iterative creation
of artefacts meant to provide answers and address the design
issue. In design thinking (DT), prototypes are typically mock-ups
that aid in the development and assessment of product
concepts in order to determine which approaches are
appropriate or inappropriate.

Evaluate Phase: Users are asked for their opinions on the built
prototype throughout the evaluation phase.
Techniques for User Experience (UX) evaluation could be used
to evaluate the prototype.
Micro-tests are a typical method for online prototype
evaluation. Although the development teams can respond
quickly, the time available for finding end users, conducting the
tests, and analyzing and reporting the test results is typically
relatively limited [11].
3. IBM Design Thinking Framework for Software Development

Achieving repeatability in industrial manufacturing processes is

intended to reduce uncertainty. It can be put into practice with
clear specifications and acceptance standards, reliable and
strong tooling, and economies of scale.
This division of design and engineering was viewed as
advantageous in a world of industrial manufacturing processes.
Yet, code is the primary language used to create software.
Software design and software engineering are inextricably
linked, dependent tasks because of the unpredictability of the
medium. Software necessitates close-knit, collaborative
connections between designers and engineers, as contrast to
traditional DT, which frequently divides design from execution.
A software project is more likely to fail if software engineers
aren't on the design team. The objective of the IBM Design
Thinking Software Development Framework is to expand DT
concepts so they can be used to produce software that
captures user needs at the speed and scale necessary for quick
incremental software development, such as on Cloud-based
software. While it has some parallels to other Design Thinking
methodologies, it also differs slightly from them in a few ways,
including three practices that are specific to the framework:
Sponsor users, Playbacks, and Hills [12]. Figure 2 illustrates how
such techniques are incorporated into Design Thinking.
3.1 Roles and Workflow for IBM Design Thinking
Three main roles, each with a unique set of responsibilities, are
defined by IBM Design Thinking. Understanding the market
opportunity and deciding on the product release are the
responsibilities of the product manager. He is in charge of
developing the playback strategy, defining and enlisting
Sponsor Users, and initiating the project. The user experience
and practical design are the Designer's duties.
She is working on the design sprint plan, user research,
mockups, and design artefacts. The technical planning and
execution of the release are the responsibility of the
engineering team. They are in charge of the technical sprint
plan, prototype, and executable code for the project.
Activities under the IBM Design Thinking Software
Development Framework are separated into two primary
phases. By combining user personas, empathy maps, hills, and
story maps with other Design Thinking techniques, the
Visioning Phase is in charge of creating the software
requirements. The software development sprints that make up
the delivery wave are led by interdisciplinary teams that include
sponsors and users, who provide ongoing feedback on the
produced artefacts. The workflow of a sample IBM Design
Thinking project is shown in Figure 3.

3.2 Hills
Hills offer a fresh method for incorporating user desires into
project specifications. Each Hill states a specific objective with a
manageable scope that can be completed in a single release or
over a limited number of releases. The purpose of a Hill must
be to solve a particular, well-defined user problem that is
supported by user research. Despite being written from the
viewpoint of the customer, The Hills nevertheless highlights
significant crossovers between user expectations and corporate
needs. Hills are made up of three components: a who that
identifies the user or group of users; a what that identifies the
issue that has to be fixed; and a wow that specifies a
quantifiable goal for the Hill's completion [7]. A sample Hill is
shown in Table 1.

3.3 Supporters
Personas and other user archetypes can only represent a
portion of what users require to be understood [14]. The
remaining insights to enhance user experience are obtained by
participation with actual users. A Sponsor User is a genuine
person who is able to express their opinions and experiences. A
product's current customers or potential customers for a future
product may be chosen as sponsor users. Selecting users with
radical viewpoints who can provide non-trivial insights is a
smart strategy. On the Scrum process, sponsor users will play a
role roughly akin to that of a PO, but they will act by giving
specific information about their actual needs. A large amount of
time is invested by a Sponsor User. They will participate in
every stage of product development. Early on in the project,
representatives of the Product Management and Design teams
will interview Sponsor Users. They will take involved in
reviewing project deliverables, Hills, and Design prototypes
throughout the release process.

3.4 Replays
Playbacks are checkpoints where the project team and Sponsor
Users gather to discuss the project's status and choose the next
course of action. Playbacks are a secure setting for giving and
receiving criticism. Playbacks are performed at the conclusion
of each project development phase and have various
objectives.
Company Objectives A preliminary business case and initial
market point of view are established through playback. The
goal of this meeting is to better understand users through user
research techniques, identify Sponsor Users who can help with
project development, and define key user demands. The
purpose of this meeting is to bring the team together on the
finalised Hills and the user experience needed to achieve them.
A Customer Journey Map [15] should be used for Playback Zero
to present a diagram of the Hills from a person's perspective of
his experience using the service or product that is being built.
Iterations of the timebox employ hills. Each hill is implemented
by a diverse team that is self-sufficient. The Product Manager
establishes a maximum number of hours that could be spent on
each Hill during Playback Zero.
Teams have full authority to complete the Hills, within their
allocated budgets, and to make the necessary trade-offs. A
Playback Zero that is successful will have the team and
stakeholders agreeing to deliver each Hill.
Meetings between the product development team and the
Sponsor users are known as Delivery Playbacks, and they serve
to show off an actual, functional solution for a Client. When
offered solutions do not meet technical feasibility
requirements, the design and engineering team members work
together to develop workable solutions. The team should
determine whether to release the project to actual users after
the Delivery Playback. These users may be seen making course
modifications as soon as the programme is made available.

4. Survey on Design Thinking

The use of IBM Design Thinking in actual software development
initiatives at IBM was surveyed. By defining the methods used,
project structure, and phases, as well as project outcomes, our
study aimed to better understand how those teams had used
DT on their projects. This survey was created using the
standards outlined by [16] and is cross-sectional because
participants were contacted at a single fixed point, in this case a
two-week period.
Our self-administered questionnaire, which includes both open-
ended and closed-ended questions, is available at
http://bit.ly/2a3qRr0. We have requested precise information
regarding the use of the IBM Design Thinking Framework on 10
Product Managers and Software Architects in charge of
software development projects. Since IBM Design Thinking is
still relatively new and hasn't been deployed in many projects,
the sample of participants was selected based on convenience.
The information compiled from the five survey replies is
summarized in Table 2.
4.1 Outcomes of the Design Thinking Survey
The ScrumAlliance's 2015 State of Scrum Survey found that
meeting user needs is the top business concern for Scrum
projects [17]. The additional work put forward during the
Design Thinking Visioning Phase has aided, according to the
results of our survey.

the problem to be solved to be better understood by all of the

teams. The majority of end customers reportedly said the
solution was valuable and met their usage requirements,
according to the product managers' reports. We assume that
the time invested on the Design Thinking Visioning Phase helps
to improve the delivery of services and ASD goals.
We have observed that IBM Design Thinking initiatives typically
had a longer initial work period than other ASD projects. Yet, all
initiatives save Project 1 spent less than 30% of their total time
on the Design Thinking Visioning Phase. As demonstrated in
Figure 4, the proportion of the total project time spent on the
visioning phase was unaffected by the number of Sponsor Users
involved.
Participants from Projects 1 and 3 reported that it took them
several hours each week to manage Sponsor Users. The teams
chose to film videos in order to collect feedback later on
because certain Sponsor Users were unable to attend the
product demonstration meetings in person. Sponsor Users
provided critical insights for the product development,
according to all of the project teams questioned.
5. Companion Works
ASD and User Centered Design (UCD) both place an emphasis
on users and clients. The two techniques differ about the
necessity for upfront project and design as well as how teams
should be organised. Prior to the start of the product
development, UCD pushes the team to understand their users,
whereas ASD methodologies like Scrum and Extreme
Programming are typically against an upfront study and
documentation [18].
Creating UX tasks as part of User Stories and setting up a
parallel Sprint to allow design teams to work one Sprint ahead
of development teams are two common ways to integrate UCD
into Agile techniques [19]. Since users aren't actively
participating in the software development process, these
approaches limit user feedback [20]. Lean UX, Design Sprints,
and IBM Design Thinking are just a few of the new Agile
techniques based on DT principles that have been suggested to
enhance end-user collaboration.
Lean UX is a quick framework for user-centered software
development that draws on DT, ASD, and Lean production
ideas. The goal of the Lean UX approach is to create a product
that satisfies customer needs as quickly and with as little
resources as feasible [21]. Each iteration's beginning includes
the specification of the development goals. The assumptions
and the problem are first defined in the iterative process. Then,
proto-personas are developed with a solution hypothesis. After
that, ideation and drawing exercises result in a prototype that is
further developed over subsequent iterations to yield an MVP
(Minimum Viable Product). Every week, user reps assess the
MVP, which includes user micro-testing and interviews [22].
Whereas both IBM Design Thinking and Lean UX are built on
the same concepts, they use different approaches to carrying
out the process. Together with the usage of personas, IBM
Design Thinking also involves Sponsor Users who offer
comments on formulating requirements Hills and offer
feedback and user testing during Delivery Playbacks.
Knapp [23] suggests that before the team begins working on a
software development project, a Design Sprint be created to
set strategic goals and define the product scope. A Design
Sprint is a time-limited framework that makes use of DT to
assist teams in developing a new good, service, or feature [24].
Five distinct phases make up a design sprint: Discovers the
market opportunity, the target market, the competition, the
value offer, and success metrics;
Converge: regardless of practicality, researches, develops, and
iterates inventive solutions to the issue; Diverge: discovers
concepts that are appropriate for the upcoming product cycle
and elaborates on them through storyboarding; Prototype:
creating and putting together models that can be tested by
users; Test: carries out user testing with a primary target
market in mind.
Unlike Design Sprints, IBM Design Thinking offers a framework
where those activities are integrated as part of the Different
phases of the software development process rather than a
single Design Sprint to comprehend the user research problem
and offer a solution to a design problem.

6. Discussion
The composition of the project team is a recognized restriction
of the IBM Design Thinking process. If the business does not
alter how it approaches problem-solving, the process will not
work. Using IBM Design Thinking necessitates such teams to
reorganize and reassess their work model and functional roles,
same as IT departments had to do to transition from command
and control Waterfall structures to agile teams.
The creation of interdisciplinary teams made up of designers,
engineers, product managers, and users that collaborate to
drive a vision of software development is important in order to
successfully apply the SDF.
Teams that are dispersed might easily get out of sync, which
can result in the loss of crucial feedback.
SWOT Analysis
Strength Weakness
•Provides a clear roadmap for software •May require additional training to understand
development projects how to effectively use the framework
•Helps to manage complex projects and •Not suitable for smaller projects
keeps them within scope •May require additional resources to
•Enables users to innovate and develop implement
creative solutions
•Integrates with existing tools and platforms
•Provides a structured approach to problem-
solving

Opportunities Threats
•Can be used on a wide range of projects •Competition from other software
•Can help to reduce costs and improve development frameworks
efficiency •Can be difficult to integrate with existing
•Can help to foster collaboration between systems
teams •Can be difficult to maintain and update
•Can improve the quality of software
development

Conclusion
In the past, a software's potential market share was largely
bound by its ability to distribute products, but today, an
offering's growth is based on how well it meets customer’s
demands. In all iterations, IBM Design Thinking incorporates
upfront analysis and user feedback, improving understanding of
the issues that must be resolved and the ideal solutions to
meet user goals.
According to our survey, which used a rating scale with a range
from very low to very high, 80% of the respondents said that
end users were really satisfied with the projects that were
completed.

References
[1] VersionOne (2016) annual survey on the state of agile
development.
[2] D. A. Norman (2013). A revised and expanded edition of the
book The Design of Everyday Things.
simple books
[3] The authors are Marques, A. B., Cavalcante, and Luiz (2015).
utilising design thinking to raise the quality of a mobile
application. Brazilian Software Quality Symposium.
[4] Cohn, M. (2004). Use of user stories in agile software
development. Professional Addison-Wesley.
[5] R. Pichler (2010). Making Products That Customers Enjoy
Using Agile Product Management and Scrum. Professional
Addison-Wesley.
[6] T. Brown (2009). Planned change Collins Company.
[7] Azis, M. (2016a). Design thinking at IBM. Obtainable at:
http://design.ibm.com/thinking/
[8] T. Brown et al (2008) design reasoning. 86(6):84 in the
Harvard Business Review.
[9] H. Plattner (2010). a manual for the design thinking process.
Stanford's Institute of Design: Stanford.
[10] Wagner, C. Meinel, and T. Lindberg (2011). A useful notion
for it development, design thinking? Pages 3–18 in Design
thinking. Springer.
[11] L. Nielsen and S. Madsen (2012). An empirical investigation
of international patterns and new practices reveals the usability
expert's phobia of agility. Creating Meaning through Design,
pages 261-264, Proceedings of the Nordic Conference on
Human-Computer Interaction. ACM.
[12] Azis, M. (2016b). IBM's adoption of design thinking.
Accessible at: ibm.co/1T8psiW.
[13] M. Gothe (2016). utilizing IBM design thinking to generate
solutions.
15] Maiden, N., Sharp, H., and Chamberlain, S. (2006). towards
a framework for combining user-centered design and agile
development. Pages 143–153 of the International Conference
on Extreme Programming and Agile Methods in Software
Engineering. Springer.
[15] A. Richardson (2010). Customer experience can be
enhanced by using customer journey maps. 15. Harv Bus Rev
[16] B. A. Kitchenham and S. L. Pfleeger (2008). individual
opinion polls. Pages 63–92 of Guide to Advanced Empirical
Software Engineering. Springer.
[17] ScrumAliance (2016). (2016). 2015 State of Scrum
[18] T. S. da Silva, M. S. Silveira, and F. Maurer (2013). Ten
things can be learned from combining agile development and
interaction design. p. 42–49 in Agile Conference. IEEE.
[19] T. S. da Silva, A. Martin, F. Maurer, and M. S. Silveira
(2011). A rigorous review of agile approaches and user-
centered design. the pages 77–86 of AGILE. Citeseer.
[20] S. Bordin and A. De Angeli (2016). Focus areas for a more
user-centric approach to agile development. pages 3–15 of the
International Conference on Agile Software Development.
Springer.
[21] L. A. Liikkanen, H. Kilpio, L. Svan, and M. Hiltunen (2014).
The newest iteration of user-centered agile development is
lean ux. Fun, Quick, Foundational, pages 1095–1100 in
Proceedings of the Nordic Conference on Human-Computer
Interaction. ACM.
[22] J. Gothelf and J. Seiden (2013). Lean UX: Improving user
experience by using lean principles. O’Reilly.
[23] Kowitz, B., J. Zeratsky, and J. Knapp (2016). Sprint: How to
test new concepts and solve complex problems in just five days.
Schuster and Simon.
[24] Wax, C. T. Lombardo, and R. Banfield (2015). Design Sprint:
A Real-World Manual for Creating Outstanding Digital Products
O’Reilly.