Abstract
The Design Thinking methodology is one example of a design methodology that supports the creation of innovative products or services. For that purpose, the Design Thinking methodology suggests a repertoire of design phases, design activities, and design methods that can be used to solve wicked problems in terms of innovative solutions. However, since the Design Thinking methodology does not prescribe any order of design phases, activities, and methods, applications of design phases, activities, and methods lead to different shapes of the Design Thinking methodology in practice. We hypothesize that these shapes of Design Thinking at work consist of different characteristics depending on the kind of design project that has been conducted. Understanding these characteristics, their influence on the design flow itself, as well as their impact on the outcome of the design project is of major interest to managers, innovators, and researchers.
In this chapter, we report on the result of a case study that we conducted to investigate different shapes of the Design Thinking methodology in practice. As a result of our case study, we conclude that different shapes of Design Thinking methodologies exist in practice. We describe the identified characteristics and their purpose.
Keywords
- Design Phase
- Design Activity
- Design Project
- Design Team
- Design Flow
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Notes
- 1.
http://hpi.de/school-of-design-thinking.html (last access: October 15th 2015).
References
Beyhl T, Berg G, Giese H (2013a) Connecting designing and engineering activities. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—building innovation eco-systems, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 153–182. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-01303-9_11
Beyhl T, Berg G, Giese H (2013b) Towards documentation support for educational design thinking projects. In: Lawlor J, Reilly G, Simpson R, Ring M, Kovacevic A, McGrath M, Ion W, Tormey D, Bohemia E, McMahon C, Parkinson B (eds) International conference on engineering and product design education, Dublin, Ireland. Design Society, Glasgow, pp 408–413
Beyhl T, Berg G, Giese H (2013c) Why innovation processes need to support traceability. In: Proceedings of 7th international workshop on traceability in emerging forms of software engineering. IEEE, San Francisco, pp. 1–4. doi:10.1109/TEFSE.2013.6620146
Beyhl T, Giese H (2015a) Connecting designing and engineering activities II. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—building innovators, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 211–239. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-06823-7_12
Beyhl T, Giese H (2015b) Traceability recovery for innovation processes. In: Proceedings of the 8th international symposium on software and systems traceability. IEEE, Piscataway, pp. 22–28. doi:10.1109/SST.2015.11
Beyhl T, Giese H (2016) Connecting designing and engineering activities III. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—making design thinking foundational, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 265–290. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19641-1_16
Brown T (2009) Change by design. HarperCollins, New York
Edelman JA, Leifer L (2012) Qualitative methods and metrics for assessing wayfinding and navigation in engineering design. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—measuring performance in context, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 151–181. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_9
Kress G, Sadler J (2014) Team cognition and reframing behavior: the impact of team cognition on problem reframing, team dynamics and design performance. In: Leifer L, Plattner H, Meinel C (eds) Design thinking research—building innovation eco-systems, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 35–48. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-01303-9_3
Lindberg T, Jobst B, Gumienny R (2008) Is there a need for a design thinking process? In: Design thinking research symposium 8. DAB Documents, Sydney, pp 243–254
Meinel C, Leifer L (2011) Design thinking research. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking understand—improve—apply, understanding. Springer, Heidelberg, pp xiii–xxi
Menning A, Beyhl T, Giese H, Weinberg U, Nicolai C (2014) Introducing the LogCal: template-based documentation support for educational design thinking projects. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on engineering and product design. Design Society, Glasgow
Menning A, Scheer A, Meier BH, Nicolai C (2015) Designing as weaving topics: coding topic threads in design conversations. In: Proceedings of the international association of societies of design research. IASDR, Brisbane
Plattner H (2010) Bootcamp bootleg. Institute of Design at Stanford. http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct 2015
Plattner H, Meinel C (2009) Design thinking—Innovation lernen—Ideenwelten öffnen. mi-Wirtschaftsbuch, Finanzbuch Verlag GmbH, München
Sadler J, Leifer L (2015) TeamSense: prototyping modular electronics sensor systems for team biometrics. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—building innovators, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 87–100. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-06823-7_7
Scheer A, Menning A, Helldorff E, Rhinow H, Nicolai C (2014) The knowledge handling notation: building an interface to enable design conversation diagnosis. In: Proceedings of the design thinking research symposium 2014. Purdue University, West Lafayette. doi:10.5703/1288284315945
Skogstad P, Leifer L (2011) A unified innovation process model for engineering designers and managers. In: Meinel C, Leifer L, Plattner H (eds) Design thinking—understand—improve apply understanding Innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 19–43. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13757-0_2
Sonalkar N, Mabogunje A, Pai G, Krishnan A, Roth B (2016) Diagnostics for design thinking teams. In: Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (eds) Design thinking research—making design thinking foundational, understanding innovation. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 35–51. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19641-1_4
Acknowledgements
We thank HPI School of Design Thinking for supporting our research by providing design project documentation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Beyhl, T., Giese, H. (2016). The Design Thinking Methodology at Work: Capturing and Understanding the Interplay of Methods and Techniques. In: Plattner, H., Meinel, C., Leifer, L. (eds) Design Thinking Research. Understanding Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40382-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40382-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-40381-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-40382-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)