- A systematic process for imposing structure on ill-structured problems 

- A set of tools for addressing problems 

- A mindset for thinking about problems 

- Exploratory, playful, learning by doing 

We are in a period of rapid change! While this may strike you as a fairly obvious takeaway, as it was a main point of nearly all the readings, I don't think that it should be overlooked. Prior to the start of this class while going about day-to-day life, I never really considered the vast uncertainty of the time we are in. Granted, I have discussed themes such as globalization and rapidly evolving technology throughout my entire education, but that is exactly the point. Change itself has always been normal to me, so I never had to take time to consider what it means in practicality. From these readings, I have taken away that I should be carefully examining how the fact that we are in a period of rapid change informs my decisions. 

As one of the oldest members of Generation Z (1998 baby here!), I have spent my whole life in a period of change. Technology was making leaps and bounds when I was very young, and it still is today.. so that is all I have ever known! Climate change was something I remember discussing in 3rd grade, so while it is a major change in our world, it has never been a major change in terms of my life experience. It is easy for something that is always around to blend into the background (you know how you can't smell your own house, but you can identify the unique smells of other houses?). However, letting something as big as the rapid shift we are going through as a society blend into my background is a dangerously narrow view to take.

While there was clearly an emphasis on taking "little bets," seeing failure as a growth opportunity, and focusing on calculating affordable loses rather than predicting future gains  in all the readings, I had my "a-ha" moment while reading "Delighting in the Possible" about the leadership applications of the approaching uncertainty as an opportunity. The author suggested that we look for leaders with humility. Even though I had already read 5 readings that discussed how in this age of uncertainty is not only okay, but encouraged to fail, it didn't hit me until that sentence that if I want to be this model of a "renaissance manager," then I, too, will have to fail. And that is okay. 

I have always strived to be the smartest and the best that I could be. Grades were always very important to me in school, and impressing my superiors now, at the beginning of my career, is a primary driver for my actions.  Especially as a young female in business, I have often felt that there is pressure (whether real or self-imposed) to be decisive, confident, and (most importantly) correct 100% of the time in order to prove myself. While this may work in the short term for landing jobs, etc., it is ultimately not what makes for the best manager - especially not in today's age of uncertainty. If I want to truly be the best business person I can be, I have to accept that failure is okay not just on a logical level, but I must internalize it on a personal level as well. 

Defining a problem well is the key to solving a problem well.

One place in our reading where this really stuck out to me was the Starbucks Family Day example from the Nomadic Field Manual. This example clearly illustrated to me that failing to define a problem well can lead to a huge waste of time and resources; Starbucks could have continued to pump more and more resources into employee benefits programs, but it would not have helped their employee turnover issue. This takeaway is significant to me going forward, because I have historically been of the mindset that it is advantageous to jump right into problem solving (even in just discussing a problem, I am an external processor... usually, I just start talking and hope that as I go the answer will become clear to me!). I think a lot of individuals hold the belief that it is a waste of time to spend a long period of time defining the problem rather than jumping into solving it, but our reading has shown us through several studies and examples - like Starbucks Family Day - that there is a lot gain from defining a problem well. 

In all of our reading for this class, we have been challenged in the way we look at the world and solve problems.  Even through the first two modules, I believed that, for the most part, creativity is either something you have or you don't. This perception really began to change for me while I was reading Chapter 4 of Little Bets, as Sims began to describe the studies by Limb and Ansari & Berkowitz, where certain regions of the brain were activated or deactivated based on the activities they were completing. The studies also explored the concept that this creativity can grow through practice. Reading all of this led to my "a-ha" moment - establishing the belief that creativity is not just a have or have not trait, but rather something that can be developed through practice and by performing the right tasks in the right environment. In my workplace, I would love to find ways to make this happen. Whether it involves plussing, low-res prototyping, or methods our text hasn't covered. I will move away from this week thinking about how I can build these practices into my work. 

One example of this is the specific phrasing of the "How Might We...?" question: how each word serves a clear purpose in inspiring creativity. There is a method to the madness of generating creative solutions. Another example is within the brainstorming process: there are specific methods to brainstorming, and the process itself has rules (defer judgement, stay on topic, etc.). 

I never really considered myself a creative person, and the idea of "being creative" seemed very intimidating. I think part of the reason I was so intimidated by this idea is because "being creative" seemed so abstract and out of my comfort zone. When it is broken down into a process with rules, it seems less intimidating than the free-for-all image I had in my mind of idea generation processes. I actually feel like I came up with some pretty creative ideas while brainstorming with my team! 

I know that this week is really the first week that our readings haven't directly addressed this idea, but reading about the next step in the design thinking process helped me realize how accurate our previous weeks' readings really are. The insights gained from getting a clear picture of our user/ her needs (through the persona and POV statement) were pivotal in generating a meaningful How Might We/ answers to the HMW (and eventually, I'm sure, selecting an answer) that really got to the heart of what is important to our user.  It was exciting to see the beginning of a payoff this week of a lesson we learned in past weeks! 

This is so difficult!! It is so tempting when showing a user a prototype to tell them all the great features you developed, but people are much more honest when you stay hands off and refrain from presenting your idea as fully developed. 

I recently noticed this at a wedding I was in. The bride had made a DIY table number sign, where all of the names with table numbers were hanging with clothespins from strings attached to a large frame. It was adorable! When we were setting up the reception area, another bridesmaid and I suggested that we put hand sanitizer near the sign (with COVID, we were putting hand sanitizer near anything that multiple people might tough). The bride told us that she had made such a cute sign that she wanted to keep it and there was no reason for people to be touching it. The other bridesmaid and I shared a glance that conveyed we both thought people were meant to take the card with their name/ number, but the bride was so proud of her DIY project that neither of us mentioned it. Of course, at the actual reception everyone took their number - leaving the bride without her cute project she intended to keep. Had she prototyped her design, or been listening for our honest feedback when we suggested the hand sanitizer, she probably could have designed a table number sign that people would know wasn't meant for interaction. (Of course, she had much bigger things going on, but still!). 

It's important to remember this as we create creative solutions to our personal and professional problems! 

One thing that has caught my attention every single time is has been mentioned in our readings is the fluidity of Design Thinking. Of course, it seems obvious that with such a focus on user feedback, we should be implementing that feedback - and that may mean changing course. However, this is so different from what I have always been taught that it still catches my attention each time it is mentioned. The story of Pixar, told in Little Bets, is particularly compelling - if they had not pivoted their focus to animated filmmaking, they likely would have gone out of business. 

Even in our Aging in Place project, the instructions say that if our user feedback leads us in a different direction. I found that difficult to believe! I have been so conditioned that the "correct" thing to do is quickly find a solution and make it happen. I believe that thoroughly unlearning this will lead to better solutions that more accurately address the needs of my users. 

I am in the process of trying this in a work project. We recently hosted a virtual panel event that involved a lot of pre-planning and preparation. One of the things we planned in advance was what software would be the best option to host the event (Zoom, ON24, etc.). We eventually decided on WebEx, because we felt that it would be the easiest to avoid chaos (participants don't have video or mic access) while still making the event interactive (there is a chat box, a Q&A box, and other features that allow for audience participation). We will be hosting one of these events each month for the entire school year, and this was our first, so we knew we would have room to learn and improve. We learned from our participants that they wished they could have more interaction. Even though we had researched what platform was best, and already spent a significant amount of time prepping the software, we will be pivoting to Zoom for our next event. It is encouraging to implement feedback and know that that doesn't mean we failed before, but just that we're learning now. We also learned that our participants really enjoyed the way we were using the chat box - a Small Win. 

My wallet was designed to fit the problem: “A recent grad/ young professional (my fiancé) needs a way to carry daily essentials in a secure, functional, and attractive way, because he wants to feel elevated in his status and confident that he’s equipped with everything he needs and more.” 

The prototype: The outside is black with a singular gold logo. The wallet is made of a waterproof faux leather material, with a hard plastic flip cover to keep contents secure as well as hard plastic reinforcements to keep the corners from fraying. The inside of the wallet features two slits for cash across the top, as well as two flaps displaying the same gold logo. The focus on cash and the stylish gold logo are designed to elevate my partner’s sense of status upon opening the wallet. The flaps have zippers, to create a space for coins or hair ties (something my partner often carries in his wallet). Under the left flap is a clear plastic space for an ID card, and under the right flap are slits for credit cards/ other cards. (A picture of my prototype is attached to this post).

This was definitely a unique experience, and not the way I would have tackled the challenge “design your partner’s ideal wallet” had I been left on my own. I think the biggest difference is that I would have been incredibly eager to start designing, so I would have had a very minimal interview process - if I had an interview process at all. I am so glad that I went through a deep interview, because it allowed me to get a sense of what really matters to my partner in a wallet, which ultimately inspired me to create a design I never would have thought of otherwise. For example, in the interviews I uncovered that my partner would never want to find that he had a limited amount of cash in a wallet, he carries his wallet everywhere because he always wants to feel prepared, and he likes the look of a logo because it makes him feel an elevated level of status. Once I realized it was important for my partner to feel elevated by the cash/ design of his wallet, I came up with the idea for the inside look of the wallet to only be money and logos. I came up with many potential sketches of how to make this happen, but with my partner’s feedback, I ultimately  achieved this by including two cash folds and the 2 logo flaps that cover the ID and credit cards.

It was intimidating to immediately put my ideas into practice, and to present unfinished work. As I shared in my last discussion board post, I often put pressure on myself to do things “perfectly.” In designing a wallet for my fiancé, I wanted it to impress him, because his opinion is important to me. While that is obviously a different context than the workplace, it could be translated to the pressure to perform for a client or boss, wanting to present only the best ideas to seem impressive. However, I was surprised by the benefits of presenting many different sketches in the “Generate Ideas” phase. I found that what I would have preferred was often not what my partner preferred. By presenting a wide variety of ideas, and gathering his feedback at every stage of the process, I was able to better create something suited to his needs.

Surprisingly, I found it almost freeing to work so quickly. By putting a time deadline on the different stages of design, I didn’t have time to question or criticize my own designs. I also did not have time to refine my designs in the ways that make sense to me based on my life experiences. All of the questioning & refining fell to my partner, making the process more about his needs than my own imposed ideas of what is best. My key takeaway from the entire experience is that there is tremendous value in listening before speaking, and taking that listening a step further by being continuously curious.

I thoroughly enjoyed this design thinking bootcamp! I will be eager to apply principles I learned here to my personal and professional life.

If Design Thinking is all about being empathetic and addressing the needs of the user, then we need to be able to truly understand what the user wants, thinks, and feels. I think this is important for me, specifically, because I am often a full steam ahead kind of person. I think taking the time to truly listen, and creating spaces where honesty is possible, will be tremendously helpful considerations to remember as I implement design thinking in my personal/ professional life, and as we complete our project throughout the remainder of this class.

Last week, we were introduced to the concept of "little bets." This week, we learned about growth mindsets, which gave a broader context for the concept of little bets. I believe that I have historically operated with a fixed mindset: If I fail, I usually believe it is because what I did wasn't good enough. HBR recently published an article titled "Maybe Failure Isn't the Best Teacher (Links to an external site.)," that described how when people fail they usually block out their failures, rather than learning from them. Reading that article at the same time I was doing our weekly readings led me to believe that failure is a huge source of missed opportunity for me. If I trained myself to become open to failure, and to welcome it as an opportunity for growth, then I believe I would unlock a tremendous amount of insight about my work that I am currently blocking out. 

I think steps in doing this include: learning the practices of design thinking, thinking of my work as drafts of a final product, incorporating asking for feedback into my regular tasks, placing reminders around my workspaces to develop a growth mindset, and by sharing incomplete projects.