Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Evaluating the Impact of Design Thinking in Action III

1,553 views

Published on

Professor Jeanne Liedtka and Associate Professor Kristina Jaskyte Bahr unpack the results and learnings from design thinking impact assessments and offer the tool again so you can participate if you missed out the first time.

Published in: Design
  • Today's dogs suffer from a lack of mental stimulation and quality time spent with "their" people. The resulting boredom and anxiety can lead to no end of physical and behavioral problems. Brain Training for Dogs is the solution! In a clear and concise manner, Adrienne Farricelli walks owners through a series of puzzles and exercises that will challenge and entertain dogs of all abilities. ■■■ https://tinyurl.com/rrpbzfr
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Evaluating the Impact of Design Thinking in Action III

  1. 1. INDUSTRIES TOP 3 ROLES TOP 3 SENIORITYEMPLOYEE RANGES WEBINAR AUDIENCE BREAKDOWN
  2. 2. Why Design Thinking? REPORTING ON RESULTS FROM A NEW MEASUREMENT TOOL
  3. 3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the actual organizational practices in use that constitute “design thinking” 2. What kinds of outcomes are DT practitioners observing, related to its use? 3. What if any, are the significant relationships between particular DT practices and DT outcomes? 4. Does the organization type and level of experience with Design Thinking practice influence the relationship between DT practices and DT outcomes?
  4. 4. MEASURING DT’S IMPACT IS COMPLICATED
  5. 5. 1. Allows us to tie DT to behaviors not just financial flows 2. Encourages us to think about the metrics we need, rather than the ones we’ve got 3. Shows us what deep DT done well should look like in action 4. Gives us a vehicle for measuring direct before & after on things we care about 5. Connects us to decades of existing research in the social sciences OUR APPROACH: DECONSTRUCT ELEMENTS OF DT WHY?
  6. 6. DECONSTRUCT THE OUTCOMES ELEMENTS PRODUCE
  7. 7. SURVEY: SECTION 1. DESIGN THINKING PRACTICES 11 ITEMS
  8. 8. SURVEY: SECTION 2. DESIGN THINKING OUTCOMES 41 ITEMS
  9. 9. • 3 Waves of data gathering: - 104 Responses / 75 Surveys completed (DTDC meet-up group/ Stanford D-School trainers) - 325 Responses / 231 Completed (corporate clients of MURAL virtual software) - 221 Responses / 165 Completed (graduates of Darden DT Online courses) • Organization type: Business (N=250), Nonprofit (N=68), Government (N=59) • Level of participants’ expertise in using Design Thinking process: None (1.1%), Some (15%), Moderate (50.4%), Extensive (33.5%) SAMPLE DETAILS
  10. 10. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the actual organizational practices in use that constitute “design thinking”
  11. 11. DISCOVERY AND IDEATION Followed a structured process Done user research using ethnographic tools (e.g., interviewing and observation, journey mapping, job-to- be-done, etc.) Focused your problem definition on the user's perspective rather than the organization's Created a set of design criteria that described an ideal solution, based on user research Generated a diverse set of ideas based on your user research TEAM FORMATION AND FUNCTIONING Formed a diverse team Emphasized active listening among team members in order to find shared meaning PROTOTYPING AND EXPERIMENTATION Created prototypes of your ideas (e.g., storyboards, videos, mock-ups of offerings) Moved multiple ideas into prototyping and testing Got feedback from users and other stakeholders on the prototype Executed real world experiments to test your ideas DESIGN THINKING PRACTICES EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS RESULTS
  12. 12. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the actual organizational practices in use that constitute “design thinking” 2. What kinds of outcomes are DT practitioners observing, related to its use?
  13. 13. DT outcomes Improved Implementati on and Adaptation Individual Psychological Benefits Increased Solution Quality Network Capability and Resource Enhancement Trust building DESIGN THINKING OUTCOMES EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS RESULTS
  14. 14. Factor 1: Improved Implementation and Adaptation Factor 2: Individual Psychological Benefits Factor 3: Network Capability and Resource Enhancement • Enhanced your ability to pivot when initial solution didn't work • Improved the likelihood of the implementation of new solutions • Made it easier to discard solutions that didn't work as planned • Encouraged shifts in organizational cultural that made it more customer-focused • Encouraged changes in organizational culture that made risk-taking more acceptable • Kept people motivated to work on a project to achieve impact • Broadened organization's definition of what innovation is • Increase a sense of ownership and acceptance of a solution • Increased appreciation for use of data to help drive decisions • Created a sense of safety to try new things • Gave employees more confidence in their own creative abilities • Helped people interested in trying new things to connect and support each other • Encouraged people's open- mindedness to try new things • Built new relationships locally that continued after the initial project was completed • Expanded access to new resources for individuals and teams • Helped pool resources for greater impact • Enhanced other stakeholders' willingness to collaborate on new solutions Factor 4: Increased Solution Quality Factor 5: Trust Building • Helped teams see the problems in new ways, resulting in solving more promising problem • Increased engagement of employees involved in the Design thinking process • Allowed new and better solutions, not visible at the beginning of the process, to emerge during it • Fostered the inclusion of user input • Helped people involved to examine their own biases and preconceptions • Built trust among team members • Built trust between problem-solving teams and other stakeholders
  15. 15. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the actual organizational practices in use that constitute “design thinking” 2. What kinds of outcomes are DT practitioners observing, related to its use? 3. What if any, are the significant relationships between particular DT practices and DT outcomes?
  16. 16. Research Question 3: What are the relationships between the tools/activities and the outcomes? Are particular outcomes associated with particular tools/activities? DT Practices Improved Implementation and Adaptation Individual psychological benefits Network Capability and Resource Enhancement Increased Solution Quality Trust building Followed a structured process Formed a diverse team X X X X X Emphasized active listening X X X X X Done user research X negative Focused problem definition on user’s perspective X X X Created a set of design criteria X X Generated a diverse set of ideas X X X Created prototypes Moved multiple ideas into testing Got feedback from users X Executed real world experiments X X X X
  17. 17. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the actual organizational practices in use that constitute “design thinking” 2. What kinds of outcomes are DT practitioners observing, related to its use? 3. What if any, are the significant relationships between particular DT practices and DT outcomes? 4. Does the organization type and level of experience with Design Thinking practice influence the relationship between DT practices and DT outcomes?
  18. 18. • Formed a diverse team (a significant predictor of all 5 Design Thinking outcomes) • Emphasized active listening (a significant predictor of all 5 Design Thinking outcomes) • Executed real world experiments (a significant predictor of 4 out of 5 Design Thinking outcomes) • Focused problem definition on user’s perspective (a significant predictor of 3 out of 5 practices) • Generated a diverse set of ideas (a significant predictor of 3 out of 5 practices) FIVE “SUPER PRACTICES” IDENTIFIED
  19. 19. Expertise-related Movements with significance DT outcome from no experience to limited experience from limited to moderate level from moderate level to extensive experience Improved implementation and adaptation Individual psychological benefits Network capability and resource enhancement Increased solution quality Trust building DATA SUGGESTS THERE ARE THRESHOLDS FOR THE VALUE OF INVESTING IN INCREASING EXPERTISE
  20. 20. AND SO…PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS • There exists a widely shared set of practices that operate under the umbrella of “Design Thinking”. The use of those practices, in general, did not vary significantly across business, nonprofit, and government organizations. • An exploratory factor analysis produced a three factor Design Thinking Practices solution, with three focusing on Discovery and Ideation, Team building and functioning, and Prototyping and experimentation. • An exploratory factor analysis produced a five factor Design Thinking Outcomes solution, with five factors focusing on Increased solution quality, Individual Psychological benefits, Improved implementation and adaptation, Network capability and resource enhancement, and Trust building. • The use of specific 11 Design Thinking practices correlated with each of the five Design thinking outcomes. Five “super” practices - Formed a diverse team, Emphasized active listening, Executed real world experiments, Focused problem definition on user’s perspective, and Generated a diverse set of ideas - were among the most frequent significant predictors of DT outcomes. • The value of experience appears to have thresholds for most factors.
  21. 21. Q&A
  22. 22. 1. Begin to systematically think thru the possible universe of outcomes 2. Identify where you are currently performing well to tell your story 3. Identify where you are missing opportunities for impact 4. Utilize pre-test/post-test measures to demonstrate impact HOW CAN YOU USE THE NEW MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT?

×