2013: Framing for Innovation

Framing
for Innovation
Matt Mayfield
Assistant Dean of Academics, IIT Institute of Design
December 2013

A brief talk about a critical step in the process of searching for innovative opportunities.
Presented to the Godrej Group for the IIT Institute of Design India Immersion Program, December 2013.

The problem as
ﬁrst presented is rarely
the problem to solve...
Matt Mayfield . December 2013

Similar to a doctor examining a patient, framing is about looking beyond the symptoms towards the
essence of a condition

FRAMING DEFINED


Framing though, like many design terms, can be vague and open to multiple interpretations

Framing is a part of understanding
• There is something that triggers
an effort which influences how
the project / problem space is
defined.

• However, your starting point is
rarely the most informed and
creative place to think about
opportunities.

“101 Design Methods” Vijay Kumar
Matt Mayfield . December 2013

For this moment, we are talking about framing as a part of understanding a situation. It is a valuable
step in that it creates the robust foundation for a wide range of exploration and invention.

Framing is how you look at a situation
• We are hunting for a way to think

about the problem. The way we
frame a problem sets the boundaries
of what we pay attention to.

• Frames help make sense of

situations, while shaking us free of
established beliefs. This work opens
up and closes down avenues of
inquiry.

• Simply, a frame is a point of view.

Simplistically, framing is a way to think about and understand a situation.

from Mobile Phone...

...to Connected Media Platforms


For example, mobile phones were originally framed around mobility and voice calls. As technologies,
users, and businesses have evolved, mobile phones are now framed as platforms for personalized media
experiences.
images: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone

What other smart people say...
“...the creative act of turning a complicated problem
into a simple one by changing its form and by deciding
what to emphasize and what to overlook”
–John Chris Jones

“Active perspective that both describes and
perceptually changes a given situation”
–Jon Kolko

Others, much smarter than me, have described this framing activity or shift of understanding. The point
here is that framing is a deliberate effort on the part of the investigator. It is not something that
you discover, is it something that you do.

Not as easy as it looks...
• In general, businesses frame

their problems egocentrically

• Problems are often also

framed by pre-established
metrics

“

We are not growing,
we need to grow faster?
Our proﬁt margins are shrinking
how do we stop that trend?
We have capability (technology,
assets, etc), what can we do?

”


In a business context this is challenging. Businesses, as entities themselves, often have difficulty
with framing because they tend to look at everything through their current day-to-day operations.

Framing is not optimization
• Optimization is essentially about

eliminating variation and improving
predictability over discrete elements
in a system

• This is driven by and similar to a root

cause analysis in many quality-driven
processes

• Framing is more divergent than

convergent and looks to try and
capture the totality of the situation


Framing by its nature tends to be divergent and does not mesh well with many other business initiatives
that tend to focus on quality and cost control. Those efforts are valuable and can be innovative, but
they are convergent and focus on minimizing variability which limits their usefulness for
reconceptualizing an area of interest.

Seeing the familiar with fresh eyes
• The goal is to redeﬁne a problem in such
a way that it is open to novel avenues of
thought and potential solutions

• We are aiming somewhere between

wishful thinking

wishful thinking and narrow mindedness

• All the while avoiding near-term focus,
idea anchoring, and attribution bias

narrow mindedness

Ultimately with framing, we are trying to see the world fresh, to set the stage for reinterpreting what
might be possible. And do so in a way that is reliable and grounded in the world, not fanciful thinking
on the part of individual actors.

FRAMING PROCESS


So how do we frame a problem space...

3 steps, a very simpliﬁed approach
1. Abstract Restating the problem as
opportunity (negative is about
eliminating, positive is about creating)
2. Examine Look at stakeholders and
their activities, challenge assumptions
3. Interpret Look to other domains, use
metaphors to open up thinking


Very simply put,
first, we step back from the details and constraints of today,
second, take in a broader set of new information,
and finally, rethink what it might all mean for new opportunities.
Let’s take each step one at a time...

Abstraction
• Designers often leverage abstraction
to “play” with problem boundaries
problem area becomes

• There is not a “right” level, but an

appropriate level depending on the
timeframe and appetite of the team
involved

Abstraction

• The more abstract the larger the

Categories
Accessing healthcare

Experiences
Visiting a doctor

Activities

Queuing in waiting room

Functions
Filling out medical form


First we step back. Technically we call this moving toward abstraction. It is not a step function or a
binary choice. There are different “levels” of abstraction you can work with. The goal is to release us
from the immediate details and constraints to give us room to re-establish those boundaries with fresh
information.

Activities and stakeholders
• Activities are universal places to find
gaps between current offerings and
stakeholder needs

• Similar to benefits, needs, jobs to be

done, this examination of the people
involved can help us challenge
status quo

Some methods...
‣ 5E’s (Compelling Experiences)
‣ Customer Journey
‣ Service Blueprint
‣ POEMS
‣ Ethnographies
‣ Activity Networks
‣ Empathy Maps
‣ Personas
‣ Five Human Factors


Fresh information can come from a lot of places. Typically, activities and stakeholders are the most
informative and actionable places to start investigating. There are many, many methods to examine these
areas. The objective is to get out of our current point-of-view and establish empathy with others that
are involved.

5E’s and Customer Journeys
• A comprehensive inventory of activities that to inspect and understand
• Similar in logic to a traditional value chain


One common method is a Customer Journey. What is shown here is a similar approach called the 5E’s or
Compelling Experience model. By listing out the activities that are happening, the people involved, and
the general sense of strong and weak experiences over time, we can get a fairly comprehensive view
quickly.

Empathy Map and Personas
• A way to examine the stakeholders
involved

• Useful for independent assessments

on each stakeholder group as well as
cross-stakeholder comparisons


For the stakeholders involved, another common method is to map out several key attributes of each. The
Empathy Map is a short set of questions that helps us get to a comprehensive set of attributes. Multiple
stakeholders can then be compared and overlaps or conflicts can be identified. Some put this information
into a profile or persona to help the information from getting too abstract, generalized, or unrelatable.

Interpreting and using insights
• Discussion is essential for rich insight,

there are often multiple interpretations
of a situation.

• Search to understand the essence of the
problem, not the source of the problem.

• De-structure to ﬁnd the elements that

will permit valuable and feasible degrees
of change. Discern what is stable versus
what is in ﬂux.


Once we have had a chance to compile observations and details of stakeholders and their activities, we
can then turn our sights on what it might all mean. This is some of the most challenging work. If the
prior steps have been done well it can feel overwhelming to try and pack it all up into a single
coherent view. One way through this challenge is to leverage your teammates to discuss and articulate
what is important, what is changing, the nature of the situation, etc... (not what to do about
it...yet). Taking the time to reflect is imperative to good interpretation.

Look at other domains for inspiration

Tom Bradley International terminal at LAX airport

JetBlue terminal at JFK airport

Layover as shopping

Layover as luxury dining


Additionally, another technique is to borrow from other domains as metaphors to characterize the nature
of a situation.
Images: http://www.clarkconstruction.com/our-work/projects/lax-tom-bradley-international-terminal,
http://www.dearskysteward.com/check-in-to-gourmet-dining-at-jfk/

Current
view

1. Abstract

New
view

2. Examine

3. Interpret


To sum it up, first take the current view and stand back through abstraction. Then secondly examine
broadly the activities and stakeholders involved. Finally compress those insights into a new view of the
situation. Again much easier to say than to do at times, and it doesn’t always happen in a lock-step
sequence. Sometimes the new view peeks out early, or the current view is so entrenched the heavy lifting
of abstraction can’t happen until most of the examination is completed.

FRAMING POINTERS


Some things to keep in mind during framing work...

Framing & insight are often conﬂated
• “A frame is shaped over the aggregation

of thought and experiences. It is a larger
view of the world and situations that
occur in it” –Jon Kolko

• Framing is a higher level, and holistic
• Framing is best as a culmination of
multiple insights


Framing is more than jumping from (and anchoring on) one individual insight to another. A good frame
aims to incorporate all of the insights uncovered in a holistic way.

Context is critical
• Capabilities, Organizations, Stakeholders
must be equally considered

• What does each provide and what does
each need to be able to provide.

• Need to know the past to understand
the present and imagine the future

“Balanced Breakthrough” adapted from
Larry Keeley, Doblin Inc.


Ultimately meaning is contextual. Understanding the broad influences and history of a domain is
necessary to separate a fundamental shift from a novel fad.

Embrace paradoxes and ambiguity
• We are taught to chase away

ambiguity and avoid paradoxes

• Paradoxes are sources of invention
• Ambiguity keeps us agile, defer the
details as long as possible


Innovation can happen in many ways. A paradoxical situation is often a sign of a mismatch between
current and desired solutions. Not something to shy away from. Ambiguity provides room for multiple
answers each of which may hold a bit of the final solution. What can feel messy or unsolvable at first
glance is necessary to explore.

Avoid jumping to solutions
• Many times we can intuitively see

answers that address the issues we
are investigating. This is good, as
long as you don’t anchor on it.

• In this context, these initial ideas

should be used to explore your
thinking. What do they reveal about
your assumptions and priorities?


As much as we try to suspend or defer looking for solutions we can’t help but be inspired. The work then
is not to ignore these potential answers, but use them as a way to further understand our thinking. Why
did they jump out and what might they mean? One thing they don’t mean is that the work is done, as much as
it may feel that way at the time.

Changing frames
• Changing your frame should be done
as often as the project demands it. As
newly assimilated information
challenges the current frame.

?
?

??

• Ideally, frames should change over the
longer term rather than short term

• Once you get into exploring solutions

changing your frame is risky to staying
on pace.


Over the course of a project a frame can shift and be reworked. In fact, the “re-frame” is a highly
anticipated moment in design work. It’s a threshold towards ideation and the fun of exploring new
solutions. The trick is to make sure a shift is appropriate and useful. Too much changing from one frame
to another will eventually stall out a good investigation.

Having the “right” frame

Does it examine
core assumptions
and established
beliefs?

Does it provide a
holistic umbrella
to think about all
stakeholders’
needs?

Can you imagine
multiple potential
solutions with it
(businesses,
oﬀerings, benefits)?


And finally, there is no such thing as a correct frame. A frame is just away of understanding the
situation to enable insightful and inventive ideas to emerge. There are however stronger and weaker
frames. A good test of a new frame is to make sure it is built on a fresh investigation of key issues
including established beliefs, it is suitably holistic to cover all stakeholders involved, and is robust
enough to inspire multiple solutions at multiple levels.

Thank you
Matt Mayfield
Assistant Dean of Academics, IIT Institute of Design
December 2013
mayﬁeld@id.iit.edu
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mayﬁeld

Best of luck. Let me know how it goes.

2013: Framing for Innovation

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to 2013: Framing for Innovation

Recently uploaded

2013: Framing for Innovation