!"#$%&'("#)"*+',$+-%$(').

$+/$0,(")&1&+23+4$&)*"+5,)"6)"*7+
8"+9.2:;')2"(%<+8==%2(0,+
Katja Thoring Roland M. Müller
Department of Design Faculty of Business and Economics
Anhalt University of Applied Sciences Berlin School of Economics and Law
Seminarplatz 2a, 06846 Dessau/Germany Badensche Str. 50/51, 10825 Berlin/Germany
+49 (0) 340 5197-1747 +49 (0) 30 85789-387
[email protected] [email protected]

8>?5@8-5+ Since generating creative concepts is one of the core aims

In this article, we analyse the concept of design thinking of design thinking, we try to analyse how this is actually
with its process, the team structure, the work environment, achieved. The first part of this article presents a short
the specific culture, and certain brainstorming rules and overview of the design thinking process, as well as the
techniques. The goal of this work is to understand how the involved artefacts and team members, and the underlying
creative mechanisms of design thinking work and how they principles and guidelines for the process. In the second
might be improved. For this purpose, we refer to the idea of section, we present an overview of the evolutionary theory
creativity as an evolutionary process, which is determined of creativity. Both sections also cover the analysis of
by generation (i.e., recombination and mutation), selection, existing literature in each area. The third section describes
and retention of ideas. We evaluate the design thinking the used methodology, while in the fourth section, the main
process in terms of its capabilities to activate these part of this article, we draw a comparison between the two
mechanisms, and we propose possible improvements. This concepts by mapping the evolutionary theory of creativity
paper contributes to a better understanding of creative to design thinking. Here, we do not only refer to the design
design processes in general and the design thinking process thinking process itself, but also to the role of the work
in particular, and will serve as a foundation for further environment, involved and created artefacts, the role of
research about creative mechanisms. teams, the importance of a specific design thinking culture,
and a set of rules and rituals. Finally, we conclude by
providing a summary and an outlook to further research.
A$<B2%#&+
design thinking; evolutionary creativity; innovation
methods; creative education 49?CFD+5GCDACDF+
Design thinking, originally introduced and shaped by the
design consultancy IDEO [27], is a specific design
CD5@E4!-5CED+ methodology with the aim of fostering creativity. Brown
Although there exists a substantial amount of literature [4] provides the following definition of design thinking:
about the working mechanisms of creative design processes “Design thinking can be described as a discipline that uses
in general and about the evolutionary theory of creativity in the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s
particular, no detailed analysis of creativity in the design needs with what is technologically feasible and what a
thinking process has been conducted thus far. Design viable business strategy can convert into customer value
thinking [4] is a specific design process that has become and market opportunity.”
more and more popular among companies around the world
The following aspects and principles are meant to support
and is being implemented into the curricula of engineering
the creative process in design thinking: a) the design
and business schools [16]. The aim of design thinking is to
thinking process itself with its different process steps and
foster innovation by generating concepts for new products,
ideation techniques, b) a multidisciplinary composition of
services, or digital applications, and to develop solutions to
teams, c) the setting of the work environment, such as the
so-called wicked problems [5, 37].
work space and certain involved and produced artefacts,
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for and d) the specific culture and atmosphere. Although these
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are elements are crucial to every design thinking project, they
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies might differ among institutions or companies. In this
bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise,
to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior
article, the focus is on the design thinking process in an
specific permission and/or a fee. educational context, as it is practiced at the HPI D-School
DESIRE'11, October 19-21, 2011, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (see Figure 1).
Copyright © 2010 ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-0754-3... $10.00

137
 begins with creating a brainstorming question related to the
Point of View. After the team brainstorming is complete,
the best ideas are selected by team voting. During
Prototyping, the selected idea is built very quickly; e.g.,
with Legos, cardboard, or existing objects; by paper-
prototyping (for digital applications); or performed as a
role-play (for service concepts). Finally, in the Test phase,
Figure 1: The design thinking process at HPI D-School [34] (used the prototype is taken back to the users to gather feedback
with permission from HPI Potsdam, Germany) on the concept. Issues revealed during testing are then fixed
in one or more iteration loops in which either the prototype
is revised or the whole concept is reconsidered. In some
In this model the design thinking process consists of six
cases, it might even be necessary to go back to the research
steps, which are visually connected by curved lines to
phase (steps 1 and 2 of the process) to gather more insights
indicate that these steps can and should be performed in
or to interview different target groups [42].
iterative loops, if it appears necessary to go back to a
previous step. This model is quite rough and bears Besides the design thinking process, there are several more
resemblance to the typical design process as it is known in aspects in design thinking that add to the effectiveness of
the design community since decades. The concept of design the process, such as the team constellation. Design thinkers
thinking, however, is to transfer designerly methods, tools, should be so-called ‘T-shaped’ people, which means that
and processes to other areas. Even if these elements are they have a strong expertise in one area (the vertical bar of
well-known and well-established in the design area for the T), but at the same time they have a broader knowledge
years, still, there are several aspects in design thinking that in neighbouring fields and strong communication skills (the
are usually not covered in classical design. Specifically, horizontal bar of the T). This enables them to connect to
design thinking focuses on solving wicked problems [37], other design thinkers. An ideal team consists of five to six
and is not limited to classical design problems (such as people with different backgrounds. For instance, teams
designing an ergonomic chair). Moreover, the participants could include one designer, one technical engineer, one
in design thinking projects are multi-disciplinary and not software engineer, one businessperson, and one person
designers only. Design thinking uses a certain design related to social sciences or psychology. One of the D-
methodology with tools and processes that have been made School mindsets is called “teach teams with teams”, which
explicit and available for non-designers. However, this is means that in this educational context, the design thinking
not supposed to mean, that anybody can be a designer. The student team is supervised and guided by a team of teachers
scope of design thinking is different: Since it is the main who also have different backgrounds.
goal of design thinking to create innovations (instead of The specific design thinking work environment and
classical three-dimensional design), it involves designers equipment—furniture (whiteboards, tables, and sofas) that
with their unique skills, but also experts from other are on wheels to be moveable and flexible—are also an
disciplines—working together on projects that aim at integral part of the design thinking process. Additionally,
creating innovative solutions to wicked problems. Those there are certain artefacts that support the design thinking
characteristics of design thinking are not visible in the process, such as a ‘Time Timer’, which counts the time
process model provided by the HPI D-School (Fig. 1), backwards and indicates the amount of time left in a
since it is not showing the multi-disciplinary approach nor particular phase (such as the brainstorming). The
is it describing what is actually happening in each substantial use of Post-it notes to capture insights from the
respective step of the process. Thoring & Müller [42] research or ideas, which are stuck to whiteboards and allow
suggest a more detailed model of the design thinking easy rearrangement, provide organizational support for the
process that describes what is actually happening in each of process. For inspiration, there is a D-School library with
the six steps. We provide a short summary, here. related books and a shelf with boxes containing different
While in the first step, Understand, existing information materials for prototyping, such as Legos, cardboard, pipe
about the topic is gathered through secondary research, the cleaners, etc. See Figure 2 for examples.
second step, Observe, is based on a qualitative research
approach that includes interviewing and observing
techniques. The goal of this step is to collect insights about
problems and the users’ needs, of which they are usually
unaware but must be identified by the design thinker. These
insights are then shared among the group through
storytelling and then synthesized into a visual framework
called Point of View (POV), which is like a microtheory
about the problem and reflects the user’s perspective (could Figure 2: Examples of the D-School equipment: Time-Timer,
Post-it notes, moveable furniture, bookshelf, boxes with materials
be a persona, a mind map, a two-axes-matrix, a Venn
diagram, a causal graph, etc.). Next, the Ideation phase

138
The specific D-School culture is also integral to the design evolutionary theory of economics tries to understand
thinking process. Each day starts with a warm-up exercise innovations and economic growth by Darwinian concepts
to enforce team spirit. At the end of each day there is an ‘I [31]. Evolutionary epistemology explains the growth of
like, I wish’ session, which gives every participant the scientific knowledge with evolutionary concepts [7, 35]. In
opportunity to critique or to suggest improvements to the computer science, evolutionary algorithms try to mimic the
process. Additionally, the whole atmosphere at the HPI D- evolutionary process with software for diverse optimization
School is determined by playfulness. A music station in problems [23].
every work space, free drinks, regular get-togethers, and In this paper, we use the evolutionary theory of creativity
many toys and games on hand enhance the creative spirit. [6, 19, 21, 38, 40], which compares the creative processes
The entire approach is guided by some work principles or with the biological evolutionary model [12].
mindsets, such as “think user-centric” and “fail early and
often”. In all these evolutionary theories, the three steps—
generation, selection, and retention—are crucial. The
Rules and brainstorming techniques are another essential working mechanisms for these three steps can be very
component to the design thinking process. Of course, there different between fields:
are also rules that are immanent to almost every kind of
ideation technique, such as brainstorming rules. In design 1) Retention. A pattern of information is stored and
thinking, there are usually seven brainstorming rules, which reproduced. In biological evolution this is accomplished by
include “be visual”, “defer judgement”, “build on the ideas inheritance and breeding. In the creative process, ideas are
of others”, “stay focused on topic”, “one conversation at a retained, either in the mind, written down, or otherwise
time”, “encourage wild ideas”, and “go for quantity” [27]. captured, and communicated.
Specific creativity techniques are also used from time to 2) Generation. There are two mechanisms that can produce
time. Two examples are ‘negative brainstorming’, in which variation, and thus generation, in the stored pattern:
only ‘bad’ ideas that make the problem even worse are to mutation and recombination. In biological evolution, this is
be generated and then reverted to create a positive solution, achieved by genetic mutation or genetic recombination (by
and the ‘dark horse’, in which one of the wild ideas is chromosomal crossover). In a creative process, new ideas
developed and prototyped. can also be generated by idea mutation and idea
In the main section of this article, we describe all of these recombination.
aspects in more detail and present our assumptions about 3) Selection. There are some selection mechanisms that test
their possible influences on the capability to foster the performance or fitness of the pattern in a context. In
creativity. We also offer suggestions on how the whole biological evolution, this is done by natural selection on the
design thinking process could be improved based on some phenotype, as well as by sexual selection. In idea evolution,
deficits that we have identified. this happens through idea selection and idea testing.
+ In biology, the genotype is the genetic information of a
9HEI!5CED8@J+5G9E@J+EK+-@985CHC5J+ creature (DNA), while the phenotype is the actual
Since design thinking is usually performed by a team of representation: the animal. Analogously, an idea in the
diverse people, instead of a single ‘genius’ designer, the creative process can be described as the genotype, and
whole concept of evolutionary creativity seems to be some instantiation of the idea, like a prototype, can be
interesting for analysing the creative mechanisms of design described as the phenotype.
thinking. Evolutionary creativity is well established as an
In literature about evolutionary theory of creativity, two
analysing framework for the evolution of ideas and theories
different evolutionary models were distinguished:
[6, 7, 18-21, 25, 35, 36, 38-40]. It can explain creativity not
Darwinian and Lamarckian evolution [6, 20, 28, 38]. The
only in one person, but is also able to explain and describe
Darwinian evolutionary model can be described as “blind
creativity in teams and systems. Therefore we adhere with
variation and selective retention” [6]. That means that the
this concept and will later use it to analyse design thinking
variations are ‘blind’ for anticipated results. Also, learnings
in terms of its capability to foster creativity.
from the phenotypes will not be stored (inherited) in the
The theory of universal Darwinism [14] claims that the genotype. In the Lamarckian model, however, learnings of
evolutionary theory [12] is applicable not only to biological the phenotype are supposed to be passed on to the next
species, but also to all complex systems that have the genotype. The evolutionary process can be seen as one
characteristics of variation (or generation), selection, and heuristic optimization strategy that tries to find a (global)
retention. Several streams of research apply evolutionary optimum in a very large solution space (see Figure 3). This
ideas to nonbiological fields. According to Memetics, the evolutionary optimization is less likely to be stuck in local
evolution of mental ideas can also be defined through the optima than other heuristic methods like greedy (‘hill-
evolutionary theory [13]. Hereby, memes, which are climbing’) methods [23]. This can be explained by the fact
analogous to genes, represent the mental or cultural that evolution is not always a linear, smooth process but
content. Memes are hosted in human minds, replicate from can include ‘jumps’. These so called ‘punctuated equilibria’
one mind to another, and compete with other memes. The [17] can help to break out of a stable local maximum.

139
 Case Challenge Dur. Industry
INNOVATIVE IDEA
(GLOBAL OPTIMUM)
OBVIOUS IDEA
(LOCAL OPTIMUM)
# Partner
1 How might we establish trust 12 Telekom
between friends in lending weeks Germany
People Trusting
People situations? 1 team
(Industry)
Quality of Ideas

2 How might we assure the 12 ZAB

Airport Security security standards at passenger
weeks (Gov.)
airports and increase efficiency 1 team
Figure 3: Optimization problem with a large solution space and convenience of passenger
handling during check-in?
3 How might we help 6 Res
/95GE4EIEFJ+ inexperienced internet users to weeks
Empowering Publica
Our article is mainly based on case studies from the HPI Participatory
make meaningful contributions 2
School of Design Thinking at the Hasso-Plattner-Institute to political debates and teams (NGO)
Politics
processes?
in Potsdam, Germany (HPI D-School). We map these
observations to the theory of evolutionary creativity and 4 How might we design an 6 Francotyp
office system to handle mail weeks
condense them into a theory about the working mechanisms Modern Office
management processes that 2
Postalia
of the design thinking process in terms of its capability to Communication
facilitates the every day teams (Industry)
foster creativity. Therefore, this work can be considered as communication activities of
a theory for analysing (Type I theory) according to Gregor office employees?
[22]. 5 How might we help readers to 6 Elstner-
Book Recom- discover those 50 personally weeks tainment +
Over a period of three years, we observed five student relevant book releases each 2 WDR
mendations
projects of different lengths in a design thinking education year? teams
(Industry)
context and analyzed them in terms of their creative
outcome. Specifically, we observed how patterns were
Table 1. Overview of selected Cases
memorized (retention), how ideas were created
(generation), and how ideas were selected (selection)
among the student teams. 4('(+?2;%0$&+
+ For each step of the design thinking process, the following
?$:$0')2"+23+-(&$&+ data sources were observed and analyzed: the behavior of
We chose five specific projects for our case study (see individual team members as well as interactions within the
Table 1), according to the following criteria: 1) experience team (group and teambuilding activities), verbal
of the students, 2) involvement of industry partner expressions, written output (such as ideas on post-it notes
institutions, and 3) diversity of the design challenges. The or texts in the project wiki), visual output (such as
selected cases were scheduled at an advanced stage of the diagrams, sketches, photos etc.), prototypes, and the use of
study program, when the students already had some the environment (such as whiteboards or post-it notes) as
experiences with short design thinking exercises. The knowledge repositories, etc.
selected 6-weeks projects were scheduled at the end of the +
first semester, and the 12-weeks project were taking place @$&$(%0,+L%20$#;%$+
over the entire second semester. Both types of projects had We conducted the case study based on two independent
external project partners involved who acted as some kind data analysis methods: one researcher acted as a coach and
of client. This realistic setting allowed for a better analysis was therefore involved in the project and was able to
of the role of knowledge than mere test exercises. And extract first hand insights from the team (participatory
finally, the selected cases were representing a broad observation). The second researcher acted as an external
diversity, both in scope, cooperation partners, and also in (independent) observer. He checked the results afterwards
the results (partners were NGOs as well as industry and was therefore able to act as verification. Any possible
corporations, or governmental institutions; results ranged bias caused by the involvement of the first researcher could
from physical products to digital applications). This therefore be compensated to some extend. This research
diversity suggests that specific observations concerning the procedure was split and cross applied: one researcher was
creative output were independent from project topics or the main teacher for one half of the projects and
scopes. All projects were conducted by a team of 5 to 6 additionally acted as an external observer for the remaining
students. The 6-week projects were conducted by two projects, and vice versa.
teams who worked simultaneously on the same challenge in
a competitive manner. This provided the possibility to
crosscheck the observed results. We analyzed 5 projects
conducted by 8 different teams (see Table 1).

140
 8D8IJ?C?+EK+49?CFD+5GCDACDF+8--E@4CDF+5E+ expanded, which means that as many options as possible
9HEI!5CED8@J+5G9E@C9?+EK+-@985CHC5J+ are opened up.
In this section, we present a comparison of certain aspects
In the Point of View step, the possibility space is reduced
of design thinking as described in the first section and align
again. The insights from the research are condensed into a
those with the three main concepts of the evolutionary
formal problem statement that determines the future focus
theory of creativity (generation, selection, and retention of
of the project.
ideas) as described before. We then discuss the possible
impact of the design thinking mechanisms on the creative In the Ideation phase, ideas concerning this problem are
outcome. generated by recombination and mutation of the previous
+
insights, usually in the form of a brainstorming session.
4$&)*"+5,)"6)"*+L%20$&&+?'$=&+ This is actually the ‘creative’ step in which the ideas are
Brown [3] describes design thinking as the sequence of the produced and the possibility space is expanded again. Part
diverging and converging of solutions. In the diverging of ideation is also the selection of those ideas that seem to
phase, choices are created, while in the converging phase, have the most potential. In design thinking, this usually
choices are made (see Figure 4). This phenomenon is also happens through a vote by all team members. The team
described, for example, in Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer [33]. decides on a few ideas to be developed further. Sticking to
the evolution metaphor, this type of voting for ideas can be
considered a kind of ‘artificial’ selection. The idea at this
DIVERGE CONVERGE
stage can be compared with the genotype in biology; in
other words, it is the DNA of a possible solution. Voting
reduces the possibility space again and focuses on specific
solutions. Those solutions are then visualized in the
prototyping phase. A prototype can be e.g. a physical
Create Choices Make Choices model, a photo story, a role-play, or a video. The possibility
space is then opened up again (even if only slightly), since
the team is now considering details and alternatives. If time
allows, more than one prototype should be developed. In
the testing phase, the users evaluate the prototype(s) and
give feedback. Here, another concentration of the
possibility space takes place. This kind of selection closely
Figure 4: Diverging and converging in design thinking, adapted resembles evolutionary selection in nature, since the
from Brown [3].
selection is applied to the prototype, which in the
Comparing this image with the concept of evolutionary evolutionary metaphor is the ‘phenotype’, or actual
creativity, we consider diverging as a generation of ideas representation of an idea instead of the conceptual
(creating choices) and converging as a selection of ideas information. Finally, in the iteration phase, the space is
(making choices). If we look at the design thinking process expanded again since alternative solutions and
as a whole, we can see that there is actually a constant improvements have to be figured out. Iteration also means
alternation of generation and selection of ideas. We call this going back to previous process steps and rethinking
the possibility space (see Figure 5). decisions that have been made there. This may even mean
Se starting from the beginning in order to gather more
Se

lec
le

tio ion
information. Therefore, the possibility space is widened
ct

rat
Possibility Space (Amount of Variation)

n
io

on ne Sele
n

erati Ge n ctio ion

Gen atio n rat
Ge
ner Ge
ne again.
UNDERSTAND OBSERVE DEFINE IDEATE SELECT PROTOTYPE TEST ITERATE
As shown in Figure 5, there are at least three steps within
POV IDEAS
the design thinking process in which some kind of a
selection takes place (once the process is iterated, there
might be even more). However, these steps are not
explicitly indicated as a selection, and it is assumed that
Collect Source
Material
Select a
Direction
Create
Genotype
Select Ideas
by Voting
Create Selection by
Phenotype User Feedback
Develop
Alternatives many design thinkers are not fully aware of the significance
Figure 5: Alternation of generating and selecting in the design of specific decisions. Selection is crucial, since the problem
thinking process. in design thinking is usually not the development of a lot of
ideas, but rather the selection of the right one.
In the first two steps of the process (Understand and
Observe), information and insights that can later be used as There are two types of selection errors: selecting a bad idea
a source material for mutation and recombination are and not selecting a good one (equivalent to type I and type
gathered. Ideas rarely emerge from nowhere. As in nature, II errors in statistics). Choosing the wrong idea is not ideal;
a substantial amount of source material (background however, while the idea is tested by users, the problems
knowledge, insights, and experiences) is necessary in order will quickly become evident, thereby allowing the
to enable the generation of ideas. The possibility space is possibility to go back within the process to iterate the idea.

141
Not choosing the right idea, however, might have severe and a donkey). If this metaphor is applied to design
consequences. If the potential of an idea was not realized in thinking, it means that experts from different areas are
the first run, the idea might get lost. This indicates the needed in order to avoid monocultures that will not
demand for the good communication of ideas, since some generate enough innovative diversity. However, we also
ideas might just not be understood by everybody, and also need people that are able to communicate and exchange
the need for some time to recapitulate the concepts. Also, ideas. If everyone thinks and talks in his or her own expert
the ability to store the ideas that were not chosen for terminology, the communication might fail.
possible later use is crucial to ensure retention. This is where the T-shaped people come into play [2]. As
In design thinking, the emphasis lies on the voting described in the first section, T-shaped people are experts
mechanism. In the evolution metaphor, this mechanism is in one specific field, are very open-minded and have strong
an ‘artificial’ selection determined not only by democratic communications skills, and also possess some basic
parameters, but also by the subjective and personal tastes of knowledge in adjacent fields. Therefore, they can connect
the team members. In nature, however, the selection occurs with other experts and exchange their knowledge to create
differently: it is determined by the environment. The new ideas. This means that T-shaped people are able to
“survival of the fittest” [12] means that only those species recombine their knowledge better than other experts. This
survive that are best adapted to the environment. In design fact not only adds to the generation of ideas, but also
thinking, this could be compared with the testing phase. fosters retention since these communication skills allow for
The prototype that receives the best feedback by the users a better knowledge transfer. See Figure 6 for an illustration.
is going to survive. In fact, the users, not the design
thinkers, select the prototypes. The selection of prototypes INTER-DISCIPLINARY EXPERTS MONO-DISCIPLINARY EXPERTS
(“T-SHAPED“ PEOPLE) (ONE-TRACK SPECIALISTS)
is actually better than the selection of ideas since it is
difficult to judge raw ideas instead of real products.
Therefore, the ideas need to become more tangible (or
turned into the actual representation—the phenotype) in
order to be judged by the environment, i.e., the users. The
testing of prototypes leads not only to a binary survival
decision, but also qualitative feedback about why a
prototype is not satisfactory is gathered. This feedback can are able to combine
their knowledge no interconnection
be used in the next idea iteration. Therefore, design
thinking can be described as a Lamarckian evolutionary
process. The whole concept of selection of the prototype, Figure 6: T-Shaped People vs. One-Track Experts
however, is not consciously thought through in design
thinking and could be given more emphasis.
Another concept of the HPI D-School is to “teach teams
As described earlier, there is a third important aspect in with teams”, which means that not only the student teams,
evolution: retention. In the design thinking process, there but also the supervising teachers are supposed to be T-
are several steps in which knowledge is being stored or shaped experts from different fields. This ensures the
transferred to other team members. During storytelling inclusion of even more different perspectives that can add
(which is part of the Point of View phase), insights and to the possibility of recombination and mutation, as well as
findings from the research are shared among the team improve the variation of the outcome.
members. These insights are then condensed into a +
framework or a persona, which presents a compressed and 9".)%2"1$"'+("#+8%'$3(0'&+
codified form of knowledge, making it easier to store and As described in the first section, several interesting and
transfer this information and increasing retention. The same special aspects about the D-School’s work environment and
applies for prototyping, in which knowledge about a equipment contribute to design thinking, such as furniture
possible solution is stored into the physical form of a model on wheels, sofas, different model-making materials, a
(or video, or role-play, etc.) [29, 30, 41], which can later be library, Post-it notes, and the Time Timer. While a direct
recalled by other team members or users. relation to creative mechanisms is not evident for some of
+ these, we offer suggestions on the functioning principles of
5$(1&+ the following items.
One of the core elements of design thinking is the
The library offers a wide range of inspirational books about
multidisciplinary nature of the team members. This could
design-thinking-related topics as well as other relevant
be compared with different species in biology. Only
societal topics. These can be utilized as external influences.
animals from the same species are able to reproduce, but
In natural evolution, some influences activate mutation,
not with a lot of variation, resulting in monocultures. For
such as radiation or toxics. Books are a means to activate
the most part, animals from different species cannot
mutation, since they provide external inspirations.
reproduce at all, or if they can, their offspring are unfertile
(like the mule as the result of the reproduction of a horse

142
Post-it notes, which are also known as sticky notes, are verbal form and can later be accessed by other team
very flexible tools and are widely applied in design members. That way, the retention of ideas and concepts
thinking. They are used to verbalize or visualize ideas or (genotypes) is ensured. Moreover, the presence of
insights, which helps to communicate insights or ideas and, visualised material in the workspace might activate
therefore, fosters retention. Sticky notes also support the inspiration and ‘cross-pollination’ between different teams.
recombination of ideas, since they allow for the easy +
combining of separate notes and the building of clusters. -;:';%$+
Finally, they also help to select ideas, because they can be The specific culture described in the first section is not
arranged and grouped according to specific requirements immanent to design thinking in general, but more to the
and priorities. Hence, Post-it notes are a very powerful tool specific atmosphere at the HPI D-School. However, it is
to enhance the creative process on all three levels of worth to analyse how this culture can support the
evolutionary creativity: generation, selection, and retention generation of ideas in the context of evolutionary creativity.
of ideas.
The warm-up exercises at the beginning of each day are
The value of the Time Timer is somewhat ambiguous. In perceived very differently among design thinkers. For
natural evolution, time is a very important factor. New some, it is the highlight of the day, while others feel
species emerge over millions of years. Of course, the whole uncomfortable by the pressure to act in a strange way.
comparison of evolution and creativity is only a metaphor, Besides the fact that these games allow participants to get
and the two are characterized by totally different conditions ‘creatively warm’, these exercises have the additional effect
and prerequisites. However, ideas also need time to grow. of getting rid of the concern about feeling foolish [26]. This
Everyone working in creative areas knows that ideas allows participants later in the ideation phase to be unafraid
sometimes do not come in brainstorming sessions, but to express ‘wild ideas’ or to make mistakes. Therefore, in a
rather during a lunch break after the completion of the way, warm-up exercises foster mutation. The same applies
brainstorming session, or even on vacation when the entire to games, toys, and music. They lower the barrier for
project is already completed. Also, research shows that a expressing wild ideas and act as external influences that
specific state of relaxation can support the creative “flow” may also foster mutation.
[10, 11]. Therefore, reconsidering time management in
design thinking, in particular scheduling systematic The ‘I like, I wish’ session at the end of each day is a kind
thinking breaks, is necessary. On the other hand, the Time of ritual that aims for reflecting on the process and
Timer may also have the capability to activate the above- suggesting improvements, which may help to iterate the
mentioned ‘flow’—a strict sequence of focused cycles, whole design-thinking process. This is a kind of
followed by a specific amount of relaxation time, might be metaevolution (the evolution of the process).
the perfect time frame to get into the creative flow. Finally, specific mindsets in design thinking deserve a
However, better understanding of the impact of time closer look. For example, the slogan “Fail early and often”
management in design thinking in order to be able to aims at accelerating the whole cycle of the design thinking
systematically apply the Time Timer more purposefully is process. The sooner an idea is prototyped and tested, the
still needed. sooner the (eventually negative) feedback can be
The purpose of the moveable furniture seems to be mainly considered and turned into an iteration of the concept. To
practical. Since the demands for the work space change continue the evolution metaphor, the selection is being
from day to day (depending on the presence of visitors, the conducted at an earlier time in order to identify those
working schedule, or occasional presentations), the concepts that will not survive. Interestingly, in school and
furniture needs to be carried away from time to time in at the job, people are often taught not to make mistakes.
order to clear the space. Nevertheless, the sofas allow a The problem with this mindset, however, is that it reduces
space for the occasional break from work in order to find the willingness to take risks. Those who are afraid to take
some time to relax. This is very helpful concerning the risks are less likely to come up with something new and
creative flow, as described above. Interestingly, at the innovative.
School of Design Thinking in Stanford/USA—a partner “Think user-centric”, on the other hand, is one of the core
institution of the D-School in Potsdam/Germany— principles of design thinking. The goal is not designing for
designated thinking and relaxation spaces have been oneself, but rather solving the problems of other people.
implemented, which have given the design thinker even The constant attempt to put oneself into the position of
more space to withdraw from the busy D-School somebody else generates new findings and allows for the
atmosphere, if needed. Allowing more time for breaks is a recombination of ideas. Also, the feedback from the users
very promising concept and warrants further development. is valuable information and is used as a basis for the
The design thinking workspace contains moveable selection of concepts.
whiteboards where pictures, drawings, and Post-it notes can +
be attached. These whiteboards serve as a knowledge C#$(')2"+@;:$&+("#+5$0,")M;$&+
repository where ideas and findings are stored in a visual or In this section, some general brainstorming rules and
techniques that are not limited to design thinking alone are

143
presented. The brainstorming rules are derived from Kelley The same applies to “one conversation at a time”.
and Littman [27], while negative (also called reversed) Additionally, this rule supports the inheritance of ideas
brainstorming [15, 24] and the dark horse concept [8, 9] are because it ensures that everybody in the group gets a
specific creativity techniques. In Table 2, the impact of chance to express their ideas and that no ideas are lost.
these different rules and techniques on evolutionary “Encourage wild ideas” supports mutation because it
recombination, mutation, selection, and inheritance are encourages the generation of stupid, crazy, unrealistic, and
compared. even dangerous ideas. However, if ‘sane’ or ‘appropriate’
ideas are the only ideas that are developed, these will most
Ideation Rules Recombi- Mutation Selection Retention likely be predictable and ordinary. The wild ideas
and Techniques nation especially can offer hooks for something new. Those
Be visual + + + mutated ideas might not be applicable immediately, but
they might have the potential to turn into something
Defer judgment + – innovative.
Build on ideas of + + + “Go for quantity” enhances the mutation and recombination
others of ideas. The more ideas that are developed, the more they
Focus on topic + can be recombined and modified. As in nature, a substantial
amount of source material is needed for mutation and
One conversation + + recombination. This rule encourages the production of
at a time
quantity instead of quality. At the same time, this rule also
Encourage wild + influences selection and inheritance in a negative way. An
ideas
information overload makes it difficult to distinguish
Go for quantity + + – – between important and unimportant information. The more
Negative + – ideas that are developed, the more difficult it becomes to
brainstorming select the right one, which also complicates transferring the
Dark horse + + good ideas to other team members.
“Negative brainstorming” (sometimes called “reverse
brainstorming”) has a similar impact as the “defer
Table 2: Overview of ideation rules and techniques and their
impact on evolutionary creativity judgment” rule, since it supports mutation and encourages
taking risks and making mistakes [15, 24]. “Negative
brainstorming” also complicates the selection process
The rule “be visual” addresses the communication of ideas because the resulting (bad) ideas have to be turned into a
and findings. Verbal descriptions should be supported by constructive solution before they can be selected.
sketches or pictures. This rule influences recombination,
The “dark horse” is a technique that can be compared with
selection, and also inheritance in a positive way. Ideas and
the above-mentioned “encourage wild ideas” rule, as its
concepts that are communicated in a better way can also be
main purpose is to foster mutation [8, 9]. However, the
combined more easily and quickly, sorted and selected
“dark horse” is developed farther than just a “wild idea”. It
better, and transferred to other team members.
is already a more detailed prototype of the wild idea: the
The rule “defer judgment” supports mutation, since it phenotype. Therefore, it can be used for testing the concept,
encourages taking risks and making mistakes, which can which supports selection as well.
result in exceptional and innovative ideas. On the other
It is remarkable that the “dark horse” and “negative
hand, this rule might complicate the selection process
brainstorming” are the only variations from the usual
because selection requires judgment. It might be difficult to
standard brainstorming techniques used in design thinking.
distinguish between the ideation process (in which
Other creative techniques, such as brainwriting, TRIZ [1],
judgement is forbidden) and the selection step (where
or Osborn’s Checklist [32], have not been considered at the
judgment is inevitable), and then to change your position
HPI D-School so far. Here, we see the potential to improve
accordingly.
the ideation process in design thinking.
“Build on the ideas of others” supports the recombination,
Most of the above-mentioned brainstorming rules focus on
mutation, and retention of ideas. The intention of this rule
the creation of ideas, while there are no rules explicitly for
is to mix different ideas, to take one idea and modify it, and
the idea selection process. Team members often vote for
to pass ideas on to other team members for reinterpretation
their own ideas or for those they find most intriguing.
and modification.
However, these are not necessarily the good ideas. Voting
To “focus on topic” pertains mainly to the selection of is usually conducted spontaneously within 30 minutes after
ideas. This rule prevents the group from losing scope. To the brainstorming session. There are no rules or guidelines
keep the focus means to select a specific direction to follow such as “vote for those ideas that are most useful for the
and to neglect others. user”, or “vote for those ideas that can be implemented in

144
the given time”. Some of the brainstorming rules even and to systematically trigger creative leaps. The work
influence the selection process negatively. “Go for presented in this article provides this understanding and
quantity” and “defer judgment” are very important for might help design thinkers (mainly students but also
generating ideas, but they make the selection process even practitioners) to enhance their creative output.
more difficult. Still, those rules have their purpose for +
generating ideas; however, specific selection rules within E;':226+
the design thinking process are needed. In our case study we also identified potential for
+ improvement. In particular, the time management, the
-ED-I!?CED+ ideation techniques, and the active idea selection (voting)
Creativity is more than just idea generation. This article need some revision and warrant further research.
refers to an evolutionary theory of creativity, which is Concerning the generation of ideas, we suggest
determined by three main aspects: generating ideas implementing different classical creativity techniques (e.g.,
(through mutation and recombination), selection of ideas, TRIZ, Osborn’s checklist) into the ideation step of design
and retention of ideas. We compare the concept of design thinking, and then evaluating their impact on generation,
thinking—including the process, the team structure, the selection, and retention of ideas. The effectiveness of such
work environment, the specific culture, and brainstorming techniques, compared with the brainstorming as it is
techniques—with these three aspects of evolutionary usually executed in design thinking so far, could be
creativity. Design thinking involves many different evaluated in an experiment. Further, the impact of time
principles, rituals, and artefacts that are somehow adapted management, and especially the effectiveness of breaks and
from professional designers and design consultancies, most relaxation on the generation of ideas needs investigation.
notably from IDEO. However, most of the people who
conducted design thinking in the observed case (the HPI Regarding the selection process, we identified a lack of a
School of Design Thinking) were not fully aware of the controlled voting mechanism in the ideation phase. The
working mechanisms of these principles. The goal of this goal for future work is to create such a set of voting rules—
work is to analyse how these design thinking principles similar to the existing brainstorming rules—that control the
function in terms of supporting the creative process, and selection process and provide structures to better judge
how the process can be improved. ideas.
The findings show that the three aspects of evolutionary Moreover, the whole concept of retention seems to be not
creativity can indeed explain the effectiveness of most of very well understood. Further research is needed to analyse
the design thinking principles: the design thinking process and explain the specific knowledge transfer mechanisms
is determined by alternating phases of generation and that are involved in the design thinking process, and how
selection, the environment and equipment are designed to these support the generation, selection, and retention of
preserve knowledge and to foster retention, the teams are ideas.
able to recombine their respective expertise, and the overall Finally, these findings could help to design collaborative IT
culture encourages mutation of ideas and reduces the fear support for the design thinking process by highlighting the
of making mistakes. The rules and techniques for the challenges of generation, selection, and retention of ideas.
ideation itself are quite elaborate and support the creative
process from different angles, some by stimulating
mutation and recombination, others by providing a basis for I)1)'(')2"&+
retention or later selection of ideas. Interestingly, the This article is based mainly on observations within one
Lamarckian evolutionary model, which has been proven institution—the HPI D-School in Potsdam, Germany—
false in biology, seems to fit better to the evolutionary which limits the representativeness of the work somehow.
concept of creativity in design thinking, because qualitative However, the presented cases are still significant for design
feedback from the prototype (phenotype) is incorporated thinking in general, since both HPI D-Schools (in
into the next ideas (genotypes). Stanford/USA and later in Potsdam/Germany) were among
the first educational institutions for design thinking, and the
We see the main contribution of this article in providing a curricula were developed in coordination with IDEO, who
detailed explanation of the creative mechanisms of the introduced the concept of design thinking. Therefore, the
specific design thinking method. Especially in educational HPI D-Schools can be considered pioneers in design
contexts, students tend to apply given methods or execute thinking. Still, further research, perhaps in a corporate
specific process steps, without really understanding why context of design thinking or within other educational
this is important or what the impact of their actions might institutions, is needed.
be. Since for most of the team members theses processes
are new, it is crucial for them to understand the reason Nevertheless, the work represented in this article
behind specific rules, rituals, and methods. A thorough contributes to a better understanding of the working
understanding of the working mechanisms would give them mechanisms of design thinking, which might help
the chance to avoid mistakes, to execute the process better, practitioners, students, and researchers to cope with the
requirements of working in the field of design thinking.

145
@9K9@9D-9?+ Models in paleobiology, Freeman Cooper, San
1. Altshuller, G., Shulyak, L. and Rodman, S. 40 Francisco, 1972, 82-115.
principles : TRIZ keys to innovation. Technical 18. Findlay, C.S. and Lumsden, C.J. The creative mind:
Innovation Center, Worcester MA, 1997. Toward an evolutionary theory of discovery and
2. Berger, W. CAD Monkeys, Dinosaur Babies, and T- innovation. Journal of Social and Biological Systems,
Shaped People: Inside the World of Design Thinking 11, 1 (1988), 3-55.
and How It Can Spark Creativity and Innovation. 19. Gabora, L. The Beer Can Theory of Creativity. in
Penguin Press, London, 2009. Bentley, P. and Corne, D. eds. Creative evolutionary
3. Brown, T. Change by design: how design thinking systems, Morgan Kauffman, San Francisco, CA, 2002,
transforms organizations and inspires innovation. 147-161.
Harper Business, New York, 2009. 20. Gabora, L. Creative thought as a nondarwinian
4. Brown, T. Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, evolutionary process. The Journal of Creative
86, 6 (2008), 84-92. Behavior, 39, 4 (2005), 262-283.
5. Buchanan, R. Wicked problems in design thinking. 21. Gero, J.S. Creativity, emergence and evolution in
Design Issues, 8, 2 (1992), 5-21. design. Knowledge-Based Systems, 9, 7 (1996), 435-
448.
6. Campbell, D.T. Blind variation and selective retention
in creative thought asin other knowledge processes. 22. Gregor, S. The nature of theory in information
Psychological Review, 67 (1960), 380-400. systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly,
30, 3 (2006), 611-611.
7. Campbell, D.T. Evolutionary epistemology. in
Schilpp, P.A. ed. The Philosophy of Karl Popper, 23. Holland, J.H. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial
Open Court, La Salle, IL, 1974, 413–463. Systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor,
1975.
8. Carleton, T. and Cockayne, W., The power of
prototypes in foresight engineering. in Proceedings 24. Holt, K. The role of the user in product innovation.
from the 17th International Conference of Engineering Technovation, 7, 3 (1988), 249-258.
Design (ICED), (Stanford, CA, USA, 2009). 25. Hybs, I. and Gero, J.S. An evolutionary process model
9. Carleton, T. and Leifer, L., Stanford’s ME310 Course of design. Design Studies, 13, 3 (1992), 273-290.
as an Evolution of Engineering Design. in Proceedings 26. Johnstone, K. Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre.
of the 19th CIRP Design Conference–Competitive Theatre Arts Books, New York, 1979.
Design, (Cranfield University, 2009). 27. Kelley, T. and Littman, J. The art of innovation:
10. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Creativity. Harper, New York, lessons in creativity from IDEO, America's leading
1996. design firm. Currency/Doubleday, New York, 2001.
11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Flow: The Psychology of 28. Martindale, C. Darwinian, Lamarckian, and Rational
Optimal Experience. Harper and Row, New York, Creativity. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 4 (1999), 340-
1990. 341.
12. Darwin, C. On the origin of the species by means of 29. Müller, R.M. and Thoring, K., A Typology of Design
natural selection: or, The preservation of favoured Knowledge: A Theoretical Framework. in AMCIS
races in the struggle for life. John Murray, London, 2010 Proceedings, (Lima, Peru, 2010), AIS.
1859. 30. Müller, R.M. and Thoring, K., Understanding Artifact
13. Dawkins, R. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Knowledge in Design Science: Prototypes and
Press, Oxford, 1976. Products as Knowledge Repositories. in AMCIS 2011
14. Dawkins, R. and Bendal, D.S. Universal Darwinism. Proceedings, (Detroit, USA, 2011), AIS.
in Evolution from Molecules to Men, Cambridge 31. Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. An evolutionary theory
University Press, Cambridge, 1983, 403-425. of economic change. Harvard University Press,
15. Dobson, M. Creative Project Management. McGraw- Cambridge, MA, 1982.
Hill Professional, York City, 2010. 32. Osborn, A.F. Applied Imagination: Principles and
16. Dunne, D. and Martin, R. Design Thinking and How It Procedures of Creative Thinking. Scribeners and Sons,
Will Change Management Education: An Interview New York, 1963.
and. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 33. Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Leifer, L. Design
5, 4 (2006), 512-523. Thinking. Springer, Berlin, 2011.
17. Eldredge, N. and Gould, S.J. Punctuated equilibria: an 34. Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Weinberg, U. Design
alternative to phyletic gradualism. in Schopf, T.J. ed. Thinking. mi-Wirtschaftsbuch, Munich, 2009.

146
35. Popper, K.R. Objective knowledge: An evolutionary 40. Simonton, D.K. Origins of genius: Darwinian
approach. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1972. perspectives on creativity. Oxford, New York, 1999.
36. Radnitzky, G., Bartley, W.W. and Popper, K.R. 41. Thoring, K. and Müller, R.M., Creating Knowledge in
Evolutionary epistemology, rationality, and the Design Thinking: The Relationship of Process Steps
sociology of knowledge. Open Court, La Salle, 1987. and Knowledge Types. in Proceedings of IASDR2011,
37. Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M. Dilemmas in a the 4th World Conference on Design Research, (Delft,
general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4, 2 NL, 2011).
(1973), 155-169. 42. Thoring, K. and Müller, R.M., Understanding Design
38. Simonton, D.K. Creativity as blind variation and Thinking: A Process Model based on Method
selective retention: Is the creative process Darwinian? Engineering. in International Conference on
Psychological Inquiry, 10 (1999), 309-328. Engineering and Product Design Education, (City
University, London, UK, 2011).
39. Simonton, D.K. Donald Campbell’s model of the
creative process: Creativity as blind variation and
selective retention. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32, 3
(1998), 153-158.

147