[hliyan]

Isn't design thinking just... thinking? There may be different design methodologies you apply in different domains (e.g. civil, aeronautics, automotive, electronics, software), but once you abstract that away, what you get is thinking. I once attended a design thinking workshop many years ago, and no one there was able to adequately explain what design thinking was, except by means of jargon, metaphor, or example. My understanding of the subject has not advanced much further in the intervening years.

[rrm1977]

Yes, excatly. This is why Nigel Cross descirbe is as the designly way of thinking. Everyone has some kind of design ability, yet (good) designers show better ability to interpret situations and connect the differnet factors to better define the problem and solution. The term is underpinned by the meaning of design. Check Shape of Things: A Philosophy of Design book––I should add this to the list.

Unlike other desciplines, design is looking at the factors from epstimological and constructivism approachs where the meaning of the problem elements is clearly interpreted during the design practice.

So, feel free to call it anything, at the early 20 century, it was never been called design thinking. I usually prefer to design process/acitvity/thinking.

[rukuu001]

Design thinking is a collection of techniques that have been professional-ized into a consulting practice. Hence the mystique.

What I appreciate about a good design thinking session is:

- It externalises the insides of peoples heads in a way that allows other participants to share that knowledge. Individual tacit knowledge becomes shared general knowledge.

- Knowledge elicited during the session is presented in a way that makes it actionable

A design thinking session is doomed to failure if it isn't comprised of:

- Domain experts

- Decision makers

- A facilitator who actually knows what they're doing

[rrm1977]

Yes, I totally agree. Good expertise is crucial indeed.

[atoav]

Well yes, but it is thinking from the other end, usually. The reason why companies may benefit from inviting a designer is that a good designer may both aesthetically and functionally take an entirely new approach from scratch, that has the end user in mind.

This is something certain types of companies and organizationa fail at often, because their daily involvement makws them hyperfocused on certain aspects while they are blind to entire classes of solutions.

That doesn't mean designers can be sprinkeled on every project and drive an evolutionary leap, but it can be a way to explore the solution space.

[rrm1977]

Yes, this is a very good point indeed.

[gnosis67]

I got the same reaction from that “how intelligence agencies think” YouTube video. Come now, “situational awareness”? Who needs a conspiracy to pay attention to their environment? And other mental tricks that people who must be told what to do may not come up with for themselves.

Design however is a highly praiseworthy contemplation. There are those who do it well, and those who best learn to rip off what works as faithfully as means allow.

[rrm1977]

To achieve innovation through design. it needs an organisational mindset and this shift comes with understanding that design culture is applied in strategic, tectical, and operational levels. Check my article What is this Thing Called Design Management? (https://www.designorate.com/what-is-this-thing-called-design...). This application ensures building design driven organisation.

[mcmcmc]

I think you’re doing situational awareness a disservice, and I’m guessing you’ve never worked in a field where it is a trained discipline.

It is not just paying attention to your surroundings, it is actively scanning and evaluating to anticipate changes to your situation. Big difference between standing on a hill taking in the view versus keeping your head on a swivel, identify avenues of approach and egress, all while looking, listening, and smelling for anything out of place.

It is more applicable to the physical world than any software domain.