As I reflect on my design thinking of the past few weeks, I was first surprised about the level of interest on my learning topic when interviewing the users from the empathy phase.  My problem of practice is online collaboration is a challenge for teams in the Future of Work (FoW).  From my own experience as a Human Resources professional, I knew this problem of practice was experienced by many organizations, especially those I support in HR consulting.  When interviewing other stakeholders on their challenges with collaboration as part of the empathy phase, I was thankful for the abundance of perspectives and insights shared with me.  

I was able to ideate solutions very quickly and go back to the same stakeholders to present solutions based on my own experience on how to improve online collaboration in teams.  Their feedback was that although my contextual information was well synthesized, my solution was too linear, not innovative, and not completely addressing the real issues.  I believe now that when working for so long in the same environment, it may be difficult to innovate (Svihla, 2017).  

Subsequently, further contextual insights and experiences were shared with me, and other users were referred for supplementary input.  Although, I was thankful for the additional data, I was challenged with synthesizing all this information, and then rethinking a new design solution without leveraging my own experience, which led to an assignment extension. As Dam & Siang (2018, para. 16) pointed out, “the most obvious solutions are the ones hardest to come by because of the self-imposed constraints we work within”, which in my case, was the timeframe I was working with while dealing with work issues.  

I reread my notes from the empathy phase multiple times, extracting key words until fortunately, the words ‘tangible’ and ‘tactical’ created this Eureka moment that led to a new design solution. 

My ideation process for the new solution was an interesting experience too.  I mind mapped my new design solution on a napkin while having lunch while the evening before, I stared at my screen for a few hours with little creative ideas. I agree with Dam and Siang (2018) that innovating can be perplexing because we naturally lean into our own knowledge, and we struggle to find solutions when most often, the most obvious answers are the ones hardest to come. Additionally, the creative process may occur when it is the least expected, and time and place are factors influencing it (i.e., walking dogs, early morning coffee). 

I discussed my new design solution with my users, and they were intrigued and interested in the tools and resources to build a collaboration mindset. However, they felt I was not addressing the insight they first provided on leadership fatigue with lack of motivation to make the change from the empathy phase.  I did my third reiteration of the ideation phase to include a Leader Future of Work Discovery session for an enhanced design solution. I received one of the users’ feedback and thankfully, it was positive.  Subsequently, I appreciated our professor’s feedback on keeping the learners in mind, not just the stakeholders in the ideation phase. In my design solution, I had focused solely on fixing the problem for the stakeholders without thinking that perhaps there are good stories about virtual collaboration that could be shared and leveraged as best practices.  So, back to the drawing board!  When working for so long in the same environment, it may be difficult to innovate (Svihla, 2017). Very true!

Below is the new design solution after three reiterations (and most likely more to come) and prototype scope:

Leader FoW Discovery

I’m thankful for the time I received from the stakeholders and their feedback.  This design thinking experience was revealing, especially the iterative process (Dam and Siang, 2018).  I have a better appreciation of the time and energy involved in the creation of learning resources. Design thinking is a humbling experience because your product is subject to multiple loops of feedback, leading you back to the drawing board knowingly that you may go back again, and again.  

References:

Dam, R., & Siang, T. (2018). What is design thinking and why is it so popular? Interaction Design Foundation. http://athena.ecs.csus.edu/~buckley/CSc170_F2018_files/What%20is%20Design%20Thinking%20and%20Why%20Is%20It%20So%20Popular.pdf

Svihla, V. (2017). Chapter 23. Design Thinking and Agile Design. In R. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology (1st ed.). https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/design_thinking_and_agile_design