Design Thinking

Unit-1
1.0. Preface:

GLOBAL INNOVATION INDEX

➢ The global innovation index aims to captures the multi dimensional facets of
innovation and provide the tools that can assists in tailoring policies or promote long
term output growth, improved productivity, and job growth.
➢ The global innovation index is annual report.
➢ It gives the annual ranking of countries by their capacity for and success in
innovation.
➢ Published by Cornell University (New York), INSEAD (business school) and world
intellectual property organization.
➢ Data taken sources: international Telecommunication union, World Bank, world
Economic Forum.
➢ Started in :2007.

Frame works:
Global Innovation Index 2019 rankings

In this contest NITI (National Institution for Transforming India)) Aayog released the
India Innovation Index (III) 2019.

The India Innovation Index 2019 is calculated as the average of the scores of two dimensions
–Enablers and Performance.

The enablers are the factors that underpin innovative capacities, grouped in five pillars.

• Human capital
• Investment
• Knowledge workers
• Business environment
• Safety and legal environment

Performance dimension captures benefits that nation derives from inputs, divides into

• Knowledge output
• Knowledge diffusion
 India innovation ranking for top 10 states (2019)
Top 10 states Rank Enablers Rank Performance rank
KARANATAKA 1 3 1
TAMILANADU 2 5 2
MAHARASHTRA 3 1 3
TELANGANA 4 9 4
HARYANA 5 2 7
KERALA 6 4 8
UTTAR PRADESH 7 15 5
WEST BENGAL 8 11 6
GUJARAT 9 6 9
ANDHRA PRADESH 10 8 10

In this direction government starts working to improve rank in the global index.

➢ On March 2019 prime minister of India said that India is aiming to rank in top 25 of
Global Innovation index in coming 4years through air news.

According to skill India report 2019

➢ In the inaugural function of 107th session of Indian Science congress which was held
in Bangalore on Jan-2020 prime Minister of India urges the young scientists to
“Innovate, Patent, Produce and prosper. These four steps will lead country towards
faster development.”
➢ Based on the skill India Report and government policies the technical and higher
educational institutes take the measurable steps to enhance the framework (human
capital and research) of innovation model for further development.
➢ So, people seeking for innovation globally in all aspects in every domain.
➢ The Department of science and technology within the government of INDIA has
developed the INDIA INNOVATION INITIATIVE (i3) to create an innovation
network, encouraging and promoting innovators and commercialization across the
country
➢ India innovation initiative:
This programme is jointly promoted by the confederation of India industry, the
Department of science & technology, Government of India and the All-India
council for Technical Education (AICTE)
➢ Not only are innovation initiatives underway at the national level, but many
companies have developed innovation centers to drive new product, process, and
service development.
➢ Companies like Microsoft, Procter &Gamble, Accenture, IBM, AT&T, computer
sciences corporation, Qualcomm (wireless technology), Verizon (smart phones,
internet) etc have all opened innovation centers focused on developing key scientific
and technological innovations.
➢ Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) is introducing three new subjects at
class 11 from the session 2020-2021. The CBSE said the subjects ‘Design –thinking’,
physical activity trainer and artificial intelligence have been introduced keeping view
what has been mentioned in the Draft New Education Policy 2019
➢ The Draft national Education policy 2019 prepared by a committee chaired by Dr
.K. Kasturi rangan has been shared by Ministry of Human Resource and
Development for public comments. The policy aims at making India a knowledge
superpower by equipping students with necessary skill and knowledge.
➢ The national Education policy was framed in 1986 and modified in 1992.in this
context that the education sector modifies towards the demands of the 21st century.
➢ Quality, Innovation, and research will be the pillars for this new policy.
➢ The Government had initiated the process of formulating a new education policy
through considering expert opinions, filed experience, empirical research,
stakeholder’s feedback, as well as lessons from best practices.
➢ Meeting with State Education Secretaries of school Education and with state
secretaries of higher & technical Education were held.
➢ Education Dialogue with honorable Mps of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Tamil Nadu,
Kerala, Karnataka, and Odisha

TOP 6 METHODS OF INNOVATION TO COME UP WITH UNIQUE

PRODUCT IDEA ARE:
❖ Innovation is the process of generating new and unique ideas or solutions and
applying them to create value for the service.

1. Brainstorming
2. Six sigma DMAIC
3. DESIGN THINKING
4. Lean Canvas
5. Consumer trend canvas
6. Other methods
1.1. An insight of Design:

Nature Vs human

Plants, animals and human beings are creation of nature and one of the theories of evolution
suggests that life forms began simply and then became more complex. Such a theory
proposes that human beings are possibly a highly evolved creation with the ability to
understand the mysteries and mechanisms of nature.

Designs inspired by nature:

Nature made Man made

Aves Flying suit

Crane bird Crane

Grasshopper Grasshopper structure

 Kangaroo pouch Baby pouch

Snail
Cd track

Spiral climber
Stair case

Medicine capsules
Egg

Human anatomy Pipes

Butter fly Industrial pipe lines

Spider net Fishing net

Basket ball net

Soccer ball net

Pouch bags
Pelican

Sapling

Leaf spring

Joints of Finger (Flexing) Automobile

Closed Fist (Bending)

Elbow joints Machine part joints

Blister on skin Medicine pack

Pen drives pack

Lion fur

Crocodile skin

wrapped baby
Scales
Wrapped suitcase

1.2. Definition of Design:

❖ “The future is best found in the opportunities that go unnoticed in the
present”—peter drucker (Father of Management Thinking)
❖ ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was
listening, everything must be said again.”

According to Dictionary Design means

“A plan or drawing produced to show the look the function or working of a building,
garment, or other object before it is made.”

Design is to design the design of a design.

Noun Verb Noun Noun

General An Plan or Finished outcome

concept activity intention (system, service or
or policy product)

➢ Design (Noun):
Blueprint of something-a plan for change
Under desirable situation (present) + Implemented plan= Desirable situation (future)
• Whether a situation is undesirable and what aspects are desirable depends on matter
of perception
• Whose perception, where it is perceived, and when it is perceived plays important
role.
 ➢ Deign(verb):
• Understanding & solving a problem: termed as Designing
• Problem understanding: process or activities for identifying undesirable
situations and desirable situations.
• Problem solving: Developing a plan with the intent of changing undesirable
situations to desirable situations
• Designing involves both problem understanding and problem solving
• Designing becomes easier when problem is understood thoroughly

Example: cooking

Undesirable situation: food tasteless

Plan: add adequate salt
Implementation: salt added
Desirable situation: tasty food

Example: Electric sockets

Undesirable situation: open sockets accessible to children is unsafe

Plan: to cover the sockets
Implementation: make and use socket cover
Desirable situation: socket covered and safe
What is Design?
Design: plan of a system, its implementation and utilization for attaining a goal (change
undesired to desired)
Designing: How a design is developed (Both Goal and Plan)
Designs can be for: Technical systems, Educational systems, aesthetic systems (logo design,
advertisements), legal systems, social, religious or cultural systems, theories, Models etc.

Design Vs Engineering Design

➢ Engineering is the practical endeavor in which the tools of mathematics and
science are applied to develop cost effective solutions to the logical problems
facing society.
➢ Engineers design many of the consumer products that use everyday life.
➢ Engineering is all about making useful things that work and impact lives
➢ The word “Engineering” derives from the Latin root ingeniere, meaning to
design or to devise, which also forms the basis of the word “ingenious
➢ Engineering is essentially a bridge between scientific discovery and product
applications
➢ Engineers apply their knowledge of mathematics, science, and materials—as
well as their skills in communications and business—to develop new and
better technologies
➢ Engineering is essentially a bridge between scientific discovery and product
applications
➢ Engineers combine their skills in mathematics, science, computers, and
hardware

➢ “Engineer creates the new things and makes the old things better and
better”
Style Vs Technology chart for digital music players:

➢ The above chart shows style on the vertical axis and technology on the
horizontal axis.
➢ This chart provides a frame work to strategically develop innovative
products for a wide range of customers.
➢ In each quadrant is a different digital music player
➢ In the lower left:
The low-style/low-technology is standard affordable player designed for
customers who want just to play music. The player, while not the most
stylish or high technology, provides solid, expected playback of digital
music
➢ In the lower right:
The low style/high tech version is the SwiMP3 player from FINIS. This
player integrates water proof technologies with revolutionary bone
conduction of sound to provide swimmers with clear sound in under water
➢ In the upper left:
The high style/low tech version is a standard player shaped like a Lego
Block, designed for customers who are very style conscious.
➢ In the upper right:
The high style/high tech version is and APPLE I phone for customers who
want the latest technologies along with stylish features.

Conclusion:
➢ Developing technically effective, consumer safe, globally aware and
environmentally friendly product to meet wide range of social, cultural
demands, for that Engineers can think innovatively.
➢ Effective Design through innovation is one of the skills that Engineers will
be acquiring during graduation.
1.3. Difference between Design and Engineering Design
Design Engineering Design

The specification of an object manifested Engineering Design is the process of

by an agent, intended to accomplish goals devising a system, component or
in a particular environment using a set of process to meet desired needs. It is
primitive components, satisfying a set of decision –making process (often
requirements subjected to constraints iterative), in which the basic sciences,
mathematics and Engineering sciences
are applied to convert resources
optimally to meet the stated objective
Design is often used in two different The fundamental elements of the
contexts: Engineering design process include:
Action or understanding (verb) the establishment of objectives and
Physical construct of object of plan (noun) criteria, synthesis, analysis,
construction, testing and evaluation.
There are many ways to define design and The formal definition of engineering
they may depend on a specific context or design depends on the specific
filed of design engineering

❖ The “General Design “process Model.

Design Process Iteration

1.4. Origin of Design thinking:
Design to Design thinking
➢ Design or making, has been classically understood to be a process of turning ideas
into things
➢ In this design process there is a vision or an idea, it can be figured out by some
drawings work with fabrications of crafts and if everything worked out right then it be
materialized.
➢ So, there is a direct correspondence between ideas, drawings, and finished products.
This design process called as Direct Design
➢ This is what most people understand design to be, and what they understand designers
to do that they turn their creative ideas into things.

Idea

Articulate
Direct Design

Make

➢ The primary issue to direct design is preeminence to ideation. The core logic of direct
design is that ideas come first and then making comes after.
➢ While doing the direct design it marginalizes and ignores the agency of things,
environments, users and relations.
➢ In 21st century these direct designs were taught as type of closed design process where
designers have ideas and figure out how to realize separately from a deep engagement
with the world.
➢ It becomes obvious that human making could not effectively happen separate from the
world of users, practices, problems, needs, politics so on.
➢ Direct designs are criticized that these are not responsive to real world conditions.
➢ From an awareness of the power of engagement, a new and expanded form of design
emerged called as Responsive design
➢ Responsive design is just that it begins in a considered response of the world rather
than an idea comes from designers.
➢ Responsive design at its best shifted the focus of design way from the narrow idea of
designers and design as being focused on independently making beautiful things.
➢ Design now becomes about all the interactive processes needed to make anything
come into being. Responsive design came in many from environmental design to
human centered design
➢ In responsive design the most popular form is “Design thinking”
➢ “Design thinking is simply a form of human centered responsive design broad name
“Design Thinking”
➢ The simplest way to understand how responsive design transforms direct design is to
see that it adds a new critical step prior to beginning of direct design called
Consultation. Responsive design does not replace direct design so much subsumes it.
➢ During consultation the design thinking variants of design asks: what are up to? What
are the problems? Then the phase of ideation becomes collective: brain storming,
group improvisation and other collaboration exercise are added to mix.
➢ Then response design works as iterative loop. This loop is significant because it
allows the object to evolve through testing and use and not come out of designers
thought.
➢ Response design has had an enormous impact for good. Environmentally centered
design is of great value as is user centered design
➢ A huge part of design thinking appeals that it claims to be an exceptional source of
innovation

Design
Converts Design Thinking

individual Teams

Products Experience

Design is a combination of Design thinking is a combination

Engineering +science +Art Technology(Engg) +Business+ Humans
1.5. Definitions of Design Thinking:
➢ Design thinking is a methodology that designers use to brainstorm and solve
complex problems related to Designing and Design engineering.
Or
➢ Design thinking is a human- centered approach to innovation that draws from
the designer’s toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of
technology, and the requirements for business success—Tim Brown CEO of
IDEO
Or
➢ There is no general agreement on precise definition of design thinking. There
are variations across disciplinary cultures, and different meanings depending
on its context
Or
➢ A process that results in a plan of action to improve situation
Or
➢ An approach that frames problems creatively and generates innovative
solutions, strategies, systems and paradigms at the nexus of domain
Or
➢ Design thinking is a human centered innovation process that emphasizes
observations, collaboration, fast learning, visualization and rough prototyping.
The objective is to solve not only the stated problems at hand, but the real
problems behind the obvious—Thomas Lockwood

Or

➢ Design thinking refers to creative strategies’ designers utilize during the

process of designing
Or
➢ Design thinking can be described as a discipline that uses the designer’s
sensibility and methods to match peoples’ needs with what is technologically
feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value
and market opportunity---Tim brown.

1.6. Timeline of Design thinking:

Year context
The idea of using Design as a way of solving complex problems in a
simplified manner in sciences originated in the book ‘The science of
1963
the Artificial’ authored by Herbert A. Simon
The idea of design was achieved for Design Engineering by the book
1973
‘experiences in visual thinking’ authored by Robert McKim
Design methodology is defined by “cross” the study of the principles,
1982 practices and procedures of design are developed .and includes the
study of how designers work and think
Peter Rowes Book Titled “Design thinking” describes methods and
1987
approaches that planners, designers and architects use
The work of Robert Mckim was consolidated by Rolf Faste at Stanford
1980s to 1990s
university during this period
 David M Kelly Founded IDEO and adapt Design thinking to business
1991
interests
The design thinking process itself is human centered, offering methods
2009 for inspiration, ideation and learning to designers --Brown
2012 Apply the study of design thinking principles in engineering.
Verbal protocol analysis, cognitive Ethnography, controlled laboratory
2015 experiments, and other formal methods from cognitive science have
been rigorously applied in engineering
Design thinking reflected in many applications like prototyping,
2017 solution-based method is often useful way to encourage inspiration,
ideation and organization learning and human centered methods.

➢ The term design thinking has been applied in two different approaches related to areas
of conceptual development.
➢ The first established body of knowledge, starting in the late 1960‘s investigates how
designer (architects, industrial designers, graphic artists) perform their craft and seeks
to identify the skills, abilities and knowledge of expert designers.
➢ The second use of design thinking is related to business management. since the mid
1980’s interest within the business community grew in exploring how “designer”
thinking could be applied to business challenges, and be performed by employees and
leaders not trained formally as designers.
➢ Design thinking is a blend of logic, powerful imagination, systematic reasoning
and intuition to bring to generate the ideas that consists to solve the problems of the
clients with desirable outcomes .it helps to bring creativity with business insights.
➢ Design thinking helps to gain a balance between the problem statement and the
solution developed.

1.7. Features of design thinking:

Design thinking provides multi dimensional solutions to the problems.

Features are:

• Finding simplicity in complexities

• Having a beautiful and aesthetically appearing products
• Improving clients and end user’s quality of experience
• Creating innovative, feasible and viable solution to real world problems.
• Addressing the actual requirements of the end users.

Features
1.8. Use of design thinking:
➢ The basic principle of design thinking is that innovation can be disciplined.

Design thinking helps to learn the following

• How to optimize the ability to innovate

• How to develop a variety of concepts, products, services, processes etc for end-users.
• How to leverage the diverse ideas of innovation
• How to convert useful data, individual insights and vague ideas into feasible reality
• How to connect with the customers and end-users by targeting their actual
requirements.
• How to use the different tools used by designers in their profession for solving
customers problems

Design Thinking helps in

Feasibility and viabilty Addressing the needs of
Optimization of capabilites
analysis end users

1.9. Changing paradigms:

➢ Changing paradigms can be essential to achieving and attracting what you desire into
your life.
➢ A paradigm is:’ a typical example or pattern of something’ or a model. Paradigm is a
pattern or programming through constant repetition of a thought, phrase, belief or
habit.

➢ Some paradigms that take place over the last few decades

Components systems

Sensors Smart networks

 Services & experiences
Products

Stand alone system Cloud

Conclusion: all these shifts take place not by Doing the right things but Doing the
things right
Doing the right things shows path to the problem finding ways.
Doing the things right shows path to problem solving ways.
Doing the things right be one of the strategies for design thinking

➢ Design thinking draws upon logic, imagination, intuition and systemic reasoning, to
explore possibilities of what could be and to create desired outcomes that benefit the
end user (customer)
➢ A design mindset is not problem-focused; its solution focused and action oriented. It
involves both analysis and imagination.

To imaging, visualizing,
❖ Thinking of Design dream -up, new
understanding, new practice
and new applications

To consider, expectations,
❖ Thinking about Design capabilities and
collaborations

The ability to use design

❖ Thinking through design methods and principles to
address uncertainty and
complexity
 ❖
Design

Experience
s
Design
Visions
thinking
Systems

Interventions Strategies
 1.10. Venn diagram of Design Thinking:

TECHNOLOGY
DESIGN & MANFACTURING
INTERACITIVITY Engineering analysis, static and
dynamic analysis, electronic &
Mechatronics programming,
Human computer methodology, bio –engineering, Manufacturing
interaction, visual materials, chemical engineering etc technology,
thinking, design manufacturing process,
for sustainability, supply chain
Aesthetics & management, rapid
forms prototyping

Technology
(Feasibility)
BUSINESS

HUMAN VALUES Accounting, finance,

Economic analysis
Psychology, Human &policies, marketing
Anthropology sociology, operations, information
ethnography, need-
values Business technology,
finding (usuabiity (viability) entrepreneurship,
desirability) competition and strategy

ORGANIZATIONAL
BEHAVOUR

Design Management & teams,

de
thinking human resources
organizational
dynamics, negotiation

➢ Desirability tests whether the innovation is solving the customer problem rightly
➢ Feasibility tests whether the innovation strengthens the business or not
➢ Viability tests the value chain for long term sustainability
 ❖ Design thinking & value creation (innovation)

Emotional Process
innovation innovation
Technology
(Feasibility)

Human
values Business
(usuabiity (viability)
desirability)

Innovation sweet Functional

spot or goal innovation
o

Or
➢ Desirable, feasible and viable are three important lenses for innovation
through design thinking
➢ Desirable (people want it), feasible (what can actually do it) and it has to
be viable (don’t go break)

1.11. Design thinking resources:

➢ In order for design thinking to succeed, the right ingredients need to be assembled.
The desirable workspace, the materials often used in design thinking, and finally the
needed integration and cooperation between the design –thinker’s team and the
organization.
➢ The resources are 1. People 2. Place 3. Materials 4. Organization
 1. The individuals that are needed are those who are willing and able
to adopt the design –thinking mindset.
So, the people working on a design thinking are critical to its
success.
2. These people are experts in system or field or area of the business.
They are observant and they listen.
3. They could frame problems and solve them.
People 4. They can think strategically and execute tactically.
5. They are both creative and analytical.
6. They are communicative and comfortable to flexibility.
7. The team that emerges from assembling theses people should have
a spirit of shared purpose, flexibility, collaboration, and mutual
support.
1. A space needs to be located that facilitates collaboration
and imagination.
2. Design thinking produces many physical artifacts. These
artifacts are most useful when they are accessible and
visible.
3. Design thinking requires the content under consideration
Place be visible. This translates to the need for stationary and
mobile white boards, pin boards display screens, storage
buddies and large surfaces on which to hang
4. Flexibility of furniture is essential.
5. According to Lewrick he recommended that 5m2 per
participant be used as sizing parameter for good space
6. Space, like money and tine is often a scare resource
7. The actual size of the space may become a limiting
factor on how large the team and collaborative activities
can be.
1. Making and visual idea transfer are essential elements of
design thinking, for that materials are needed
2. list of materials typically needed
white boards

Materials

pin boards
whiteboard
markers

colored pencils

sticky notes of
various shapes
and colors

colored
adhesive dots

Hanging strings

colored sheets
of paper (A4)

pipe cleaners
flip charts

large rolls of
paper

tape
(cellophane,
masking)

Glue

Lego blocks

Scissors

index cards
audio and video
capture tools
and analyzers

Paper

play dough

popsicle sticks,

foam core

Push pins

Notepads &
pens
 Tooth picks

Laptops

Locating and accessing design thinking people may require the

organizations organization to permit the functional structure to relent and
allow enterprise benefit to supersede design thinking objectives

1.12. Design thinking process Models:

➢ “Some people think design means how it looks. But of course, if you dig
deeper, it’s really how it works” ----Steve jobs, Apple
➢ Models:

1. convergence –divergence
2. 1d.iit-analysis –synthesis model
3. Engine service design (uk)
4. Design chaos
5. Spirit of creation
6. St gallem
7. D. school post dam
8. IDEO (Educator toolkit)
9. D. school stand ford
10. Beckman & Barry
11.Bill Moggridge
 12.Stanford’s modes
13.Jeanne liedtka & tim orgilnie
14.Standford’s necktie flare
15.1d IIT: Vijaykumar

➢ Innovate problem solving = design thinking

Design thinking methodologies:

1.13. Five (5)-Stage d. School Process:
➢ In 1958, four months after Sputnik (first artificial Earth Satellite) launched
and President Eisenhower created NASA, a Stanford Engineering Professor
named John Arnold proposed that Design engineering should be human
centered.

➢ This was a strange thing for Arnold to introduce. It was an era in which
Engineers were largely focused on twin cold war driven goals: the space
race and the optimization of hydrogen bomb.

➢ Inspired by Arnold’s work, Engineering professor Bob Mckim, with the

help of art professor Matt Kahn, created an Engineering Program called
Product Design.

➢ Within this program Mckim and others helped create a design thinking
process that became the foundation for Stanford’s d. school, as well as the
guiding framework for design –driven companies like IDEO.

➢ The Stanford d. school, more formally called the hasso plattner institute of
design at Stanford, is an academic collaboration between hasso plattner
institute in Potsdam, Germany and Stanford University in Stanford,
California.

➢ The Stanford d. school was one of the first d. schools or design schools
formed around design –thinking approaches to design.

➢ Their process model has changed from 6 stage model of understand,

observe, point of view, ideate, prototype, and test to a 5-stage process
model of Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype and test.

➢ The stages of understand and observe were consolidated to Empathize

according to Lewrick. The stage titled point of view was adjusted to
become define in 5-stage model

➢ Design thinking brings everyone into the process, not just designers: using
the design process helps companies to solve the wicked problems with
clear eyes

➢ Design thinking is making organizations think about how to move faster

…with iterative speed

➢ The organizations that use the toolset of design thinking can confidently
create better, human-centered user experiences and disruptive products.

➢ The design thinking process is not necessarily linear nor is there one
canonical way to approach it. It is an iterative system with many variations.
However, stand ford’s d. school teaches a framework that can help to
start the process for almost any problem
 Stanford d. school 5stage process model

• In the Stanford d school’s process model, the stages have the following
objectives

Empathize The stage is oriented towards understanding the intended users and the
problem from their viewpoint by observation, engagement and immersion.
At this stage the needs and insights discovered in empathize are transformed
Define into an actionable problem statement or design vision tailored for the users.

Within the context of the problem statement, the team generates many
Ideate radical design alternatives that explore the solution space

At this stage, promising design alternative are made tangible with which the
Prototype team, users and others will experience and interact

Prototypes are placed into appropriate contexts of user’s lives the goal of
Test gathering thoughtful feedback, learning and refining solutions.

➢ Beyond suggesting the 5-stage process model, Stanford d. school advocates for six
attributes of the design-thinking mindset.

➢ Those are

• Human centered
• Bias towards action
• Radical collaboration
• Culture of prototyping
• Show, don’t tell
• Mindful of process.
 It is the idea that design thinkers should identify with the users
Human centered challenges and develop solutions that address their needs.

It directs design thinkers to solve problems instead of finding

additional ones. Team members should prototype to learn
Bias towards action insights instead of expressing self –important personal opinion.

It suggests breakthroughs come from a team consisting of

Radical collaboration members with diverse view points, education and experiences.

It is related to the notion that solutions will arise from trying

Culture of prototyping out concepts and getting users input early and often.

Emphasizes the need to communicate visually rather than

Show, don’t tell verbally

It encourages teams to be aware of stage the project is in, and

Mindful of process what needs to accomplish in the current stage.

❖ In addition to the above mind sets views the following points are also considered
for good designing thinking process

Those are

➢ Improve and learn from failure

➢ Creative confidence
➢ Growth mindset
➢ Beginner’s mindset
5 stages of Stanford:

1 2 3 4 5

Empathize Define Ideate Prototype Iterate

Test
 Supporting points of Stanford d school framework.

Design thinking is toolkit for creating problem-solving. The process does not have to be
linear. It can jump from one phase to any other phase based on need.

Perform Have end users

empathy work experience the
interviews, prototype, test it
observations, out and provide
EMPATHIZE research etc to feedback to help
gain a deep bring light new TEST
understanding understandings to
of end users make the
and challenges prototype better

Sketch as many
ideas as possible at
the start. Focusing
on quantity and
IDEATE then choose the
most intriguing and
optimal ideas to
move forward in
making them into
reality

Identify needs Create

and insights prototype an
from the experimental
information model, that end
gained from the users
empathy work experiences and
DEFINE to develop a test, and elicits
problem PROTOTYPE
feedback that
statement can use to
improve
prototype
Some more light on 5stage Stanford
❖ The more discussion on the above steps will learn on the subsequent chapters
1.14. Application of Design thinking:

➢ Design thinking is a problem solving that focus on users and their emotional needs
while experiencing products and services.

➢ Design thinking approach is useful for Designers, Engineers, planners, Managers,

strategists, Economists, Teachers and many other Professions

Design thinking having wide

range of applications across
different domains:

➢ Automobile

➢ Health care

➢ Architecture

➢ Software

➢ Education

➢ Digital

➢ Retail

➢ Art and culture

➢ strategy

Applications of DT
❖ Business:

➢ Design thinking helps in business by optimizing the process of

product creation, marketing, and renewal of contracts.

➢ All these processes require a companywide focus on the customers

and hence, design thinking helps in these processes immensely.

➢ Design thinking helps the design thinkers to develop deep empathy

for their customers and to create solutions that mach their needs
exactly.

❖ Information technology:

➢ The IT industry makes a lot of products that require trials and proof
of concepts.

➢ The industry needs to empathize with its users and not simply
deploy technologies.

➢ IT is not only about technology or products, but also it is process.

➢ The developers, analysts, consultants, and managers have to brain

storms on possible ideas for solving the problems of the clients.
This is where design thinking helps a lot.

❖ Education:

➢ The education sector can make the best use of design thinking by
taking feedback from students on their requirements, goals and
challenges they are facing in the classroom.

➢ By working on their feedback, the instructors come up with

solutions to address their challenges.

❖ Health care:

➢ Design thinking helps in health care as well as the expenditure on

healthcare. The cost of healthcare facilities is growing day by day.

➢ Experts worldwide are concerned about how to bring quality

healthcare to people at low cost

➢ Using design thinking, the efficiencies in the system and the

perennial crises were addressed
1.15. Design thinking for Engineering:
➢ Design thinking and Engineering systems thinking are two complementary
approaches to understanding cognition, organization, and other nontechnical
factors that influence the design and performance of Engineering systems

➢ Design thinking methods have been applied to industrial design and product
development, while engineering systems thinking is used in professional
systems engineering practice and large-scale, complex system design.

➢ System dynamics is a foundation method in system engineering –an

interdisciplinary field of formalized approaches for designing and managing
large-scale, complex engineered systems throughout the life cycle.

➢ Systems engineering methodology offers a process for technical management

of sophisticated quantitative techniques are used to organize and coordinate
work activities, evaluate technical systems interactions, and assure system
quality and performance.

➢ Systems engineering has drawn from operations research and management

science to develop mathematical models of human performance. Example of
classical quantitative approaches to management includes Markov analysis,
linear /dynamic programming, decision theory, and game theory etc.

➢ Systems engineers are well-trained to manage technical system consolidation,

but the associated between social and organizational are more difficult to
govern in practice.

➢ Existing analytical methods hard OR methodology is in applicable or

ineffective for solving problems associated between social and organization.
Nonetheless, systems engineering are expected to play ambidextrous roles and
have the professional responsibility of “system thinking” i.e designers who
manage technical as well as social and organizational constraints in
dynamic environments

➢ Understanding how systems engineers evaluate technical and social

relationships- and leverage this information to successfully design and manage
complex systems – is a challenge in modern systems engineering practice.

➢ Engineering systems thinking shares a foundation with systems science, thus

values and applications bear strong resemblance to those of general systems
theory, cybernetics, and systems dynamics.

➢ Systems receive inputs from the environment, execute processes that

transform theses inputs into outputs, and send these outputs back into the
environment in feedback loop.

➢ Engineering systems thinking is system-centered, i.e it is used for

conceptualizing systems, their individual components, and interactions
between those components to help designers anticipate emergent features and
design robust and resilient systems.
 ➢ Contemporary research in Engineering system thinking seeks to make the
approach more human-centered (design thinking approach)

Concept models for comparing design thinking and engineering systems

thinking:
❖ Design thinking and engineering systems thinking are using four general themes:
history, values, applications, and methods.

❖ By organizing these themes into models called “concept models”.

❖ Concept models visually represent different perspectives on the relationship between

design thinking and engineering systems thinking.

❖ The models are

I. Distinctive concept model

II. Comparative concept model
III. Inclusive concept model
IV. Integrative concept model
➢ The Distinctive concept model, positions design thinking (DT) and Engineering
system thinking (EST) as separate concepts, each with unique history, set of
values, practical application and methods

➢ The comparative concept model, suggests that design thinking(DT) and

Engineering system thinking(EST) are similar underlying concepts with
different applications and methods

➢ The inclusive concept model describes engineering systems thinking as a specific

application of design thinking, in which design thinking principles, methods and
processes are applied to complex systems design problems.

➢ Integrative concept model suggests that design thinking might be the critical skill
for design at both the product and system level and the Engineering system
thinking might (EST)not be practically distinguishable from design thinking
(DT)

➢ These models do not suggest single correct representation of the design thinking
and Engineering system thinking relationship. Further research and studies are
going on these models.
The Distinctive Concept Model:
➢ The distinctive concept model of design thinking and engineering systems
thinking describes two unique concepts with different histories, values,
themes, and applications.

Design thinking Engineering systems thinking

• Origins: Industrial design, • Origins: cybernetics,

Engineering management science,
design/product operation research, system
development, psychology engineering

• Capture human process: • Captures system process:

inspiration, ideation, and inputs , outputs, and
implementation. feedback loops

• Values: practicality, • Values: interaction,

empathy, innovation emergence, interdependent

➢ Design thinking has origins in psychology, industrial design, and product

development, and is a method for generating innovative, user-centered
products and services. Empathy is a key driver of the design thinking process.

➢ Systems thinking, on the other hand, originated from cybernetics and

operations research and are intended to capture stock and flow structures and
feedback loop dynamics. It is system focused and used for identifying
potential interactions between system elements that might result in unintended
system performance.

The Comparative Concept Model:

➢ Design thinking and Engineering systems thinking positions the two concepts
as distinct, but with several major overlaps.
 Engineering systems
Design thinking : thinking: open
closedsystems - systems with
bounded with set of interaction,
parameters . interdependence,
prototype-driven. emergence .
linear cause and effect. abstraction-driven.
human-centered. cyclic cause and effect.
solution oriented. system -centered.
problem oriented

➢ Require similar cognitive skill set (e.g

analogy, ability to overcome fixation)

➢ Require empathy/ faculty for human

relations

➢ Similar inquiry: at individual/team

level in engineering, business, and
education

➢ While DT and EST have different origins, applications and approaches, both
require a similar cognitive skill set in practice.

➢ Design thinkers and engineering systems thinkers alike must be creative,

flexible, curious, and emotionally intelligent.

➢ Design thinkers and engineering systems thinkers both utilize divergent and
convergent thinking strategies, use analogical, visual, and spatial reasoning,
and embrace ambiguity and emergence.

The Inclusive Concept Model:

➢ The inclusive concept model suggests that engineering systems thinking
might not be a standalone methodology.
 ➢ the specific application of design thinking principles to the design of large
scale, complex engineering systems such as software enterprise systems,
aerospace vehicles, or nuclear power stations etc

➢ DT and EST are both approaches for addressing design complexity,

defining and solving wicked problems, and understanding the role of
cognitive and social processes on system design and performance.

➢ The key distinction here is the emphasis placed on abstraction,

interdependence, and emergence in EST, versus tangibility, prototyping,
testing, and redesign in DT.

➢ It is important to note that EST is included as a subset of DT and not the

other way around.

The Integrative Concept Model:

➢ The philosophies of design thinking and engineering system thinking might be better
understood as part of a single overarching framework.

Design thinking/ Engineering systems thinking:

• Design thinking: required for successful design, of

consumer products, complex systems etc.

• Similar inquiry, definition, purpose, cognitive/social

process

• Findings from empirical studies on designer thinking

likely apply to engineering system and its design
 ➢ Design thinking could be the fundamental skill required for design across all contexts
and levels of complexity; engineering systems thinking might not be distinguishable
from design thinking in practice.

Conclusion:
➢ Design thinking and engineering systems thinking are similar frameworks for
exploring principles and processes of engineering design.

➢ Exploring contemporary applications and methods is useful for identifying

opportunities to share knowledge and tools between communities in the future.

Summary
➢ Design thinking is more than a methodology; it represents a philosophy that places
end users firmly at the centre of innovation process and the development of new
products and services.

➢ This is a win-win scenario. Where the end users benefits, so too does the creative
organization. Importantly design thinking has a powerful strategic element, which
needs to be firmly aligned with an organization’s culture and brand.

➢ The concept of design thinking can be applied across diverse disciplines. From
education, law, and medicine to ICT, business management, human resource
management and design it, design thinking principles enable and empower a
professional to approach the problem statement in a step-by-step manner and take into
account all the necessary factors for arriving at the best solution.

➢ The entire flow of design thinking is generally broken down into five components.
These components are:

• Empathize or Understand
• Define
• Ideate
• Prototype
• Test or Verify
➢ In Empathize stage, the design thinker puts himself or herself into the shoes of the
end user and tries to understand the needs of the customer.

➢ The Define stage helps to frame the problem definition. Problem shaping occurs in
this phase itself

➢ In the Ideate phase, a design thinker brainstorms on the ideas suggested by others
and also brings forward his/her own ideas

➢ In the Prototype phase, a design thinker focuses on testing the ideas on the grounds
of feasibility and viability.
 ➢ In the Test phase, the prototype or the model is presented to the customer and the
customer experiences it completely on a full scale

➢ The concept of iteration is hence central to the process of design thinking.

Design thinking not only helps to come up with innovative solutions, but also helps to
address the exact problems faced by the customer and target the customer’s requirements in
the best possible manner.