1. Studio
1
Debrief:
Expanding
Mission-­‐Driven
Capacity
A
Simplified
Version
of
Studio
1’s
Experience
in
Birmingham
Several
Quotes
from
Opening
Presentation:
“Distribute
skills
in
a
way
that
local
communities
can
LATCH
on
to…”
–
Charlie
Cannon’s
Opening
presentation
Design:
-­‐Inspiration
-­‐Ideation
-­‐Prototyping

2. Studio
Session
#1:
Friday
Morning
Clients
Speak:
WANT/NEED:
Karen
Rolen,
Community
Fund:
-­‐
make
organization’s
goals
clear
to:
•
partners
•
community
•
Donors
-­‐Fluid
communication
between
all
involved
entities
-­‐Universalize
the
story
of
Community
Fund,
-­‐recognizable,
distinguishable
*Showed
us
material
that
Community
Fund
has
worked
on
Was
astonished
and
surprised
to
hear
that
one
of
our
local
designers
David
Blumberg
had
not
heard
of
Community
Fund.
Re-­‐enforced
her
desire
to
reach
the
community.
The
name
behind
the
great
Railroad
Park.
How
do
we
make
it
too
obvious
to
ignore?
Matt
Leavell,
AL-­‐IE
(Alabama
Innovation
Engine):
How
do
we
make
sure
we
have
impact
to
share
with
our
funders
after
our
two
years?
What
is
our
future,
what
do
we
become?
Overlap
between
both
clients:
1. Need
for
VOICE
2. Fluid
Communication/
Collaboration
3.
Dialogue
between
community
&
community
leaders
How
do
we
fill
the
gap
between
us
and
the
community?
The
gap
between
people
that
can
help
and
those
who
need
help.

3. Discovery
Affinity
Map:
Description:
A
wall
of
our
workspace
was
dedicated
to
organizing
our
thoughts
about
the
previous
day’s
immersion
into
Birmingham.
There
were
several
subcategories
(Railroad
Park,
Prize
2
The
Future,
Main
Street
Birmingham,
Jones
Valley
Urban
Farm,
Vulcan
Park,
AL-­‐IE).
Each
studio
member
was
given
a
stack
of
post-­‐it
notes
and
a
Sharpie.
Each
was
given
the
freedom
to
write
words,
phrases
and
draw
pictures
in
order
to
express
their
impressions
of
the
tour
experience.
After
we
collectively
dumped
our
post-­‐it
notes
under
the
categories
we
organized
the
descriptive
notes
into
subcategories,
separating
the
successes
from
the
shortcomings
of
each
place.
Achieved:
o Untangled
confusion
of
tour
absorption
o mind
dump:
visual
clarity
to
the
overload
of
information
being
acquired
o Identified
the
strengths
and
weaknesses
of
important
community
groups
o Gave
us
an
idea
of
the
interconnectedness
and
overlaps,
common
struggle
o Identify
Common
Themes
o Developed
a
common
language
among
the
members
of
our
group
This
information
set
us
up
to
begin
the
distillation
process.
Stacy
planned
to
refine
these
new
observations
in
order
to
develop
a
concise
and
accurate
mission
statement
for
our
group.
A
solid
mission
statement
based
on
our
own
observations
would
help
us
get
past
the
confusion
of
our
original
brief
from
the
conference
packet
and
really
focus
on
something
to
accomplish.

4.
Discovery
Affinity
Map
Captured:

5. 16.8.4
Description:
Studio
members
were
split
up
into
3
small
groups
to
grapple
with
narrowing
down
our
new
vocabulary
into
a
powerful
mission
statement.
Each
group
of
3-­‐4
was
simultaneously
given
a
very
short
amount
of
time
(about
5
minutes?)
to
develop
a
16
word
statement.
When
time
was
called
everyone
would
walk
around
to
each
other’s
giant
post-­‐it
notes
and
read
the
draft.
After
this
small
reflection
period
the
groups
would
go
back
and
reduce
the
message
to
8
words.
It
was
repeated
once
more
and
the
final
results
were
4
words
each.
Achieved:
-­‐Honed
the
problem
for
the
problem-­‐solving
segment
of
our
work
(Saturday’s
efforts).
Funneled
this
broad
new
assessment
gained
during
the
affinity
activity
into
something
focused,
specific
and
inspiring,
inspiring
and
empowering
enough
to
be
used
in
our
Pecha
Kucha
presentation.

6.
Pecha
Kucha
The
Pecha
Kucha
as
a
mid-­‐way
report
I
think
was
very
successful.
It
forced
our
group
to
function
as
a
collaborative
unit
under
stress.
A
lot
of
progress
was
made
in
a
very
short
amount
of
time
in
preparation.
Everyone
quickly
found
the
way
they
would
best
contribute
to
a
successful
group.
Some
would
be
presenters,
others
would
work
behind
the
curtain,
some
prepared
the
visual
portion.
The
process
also
allowed
us
to
spend
some
time
reflecting
objectively
on
our
experience
thus
far
so
that
we
could
share
with
the
other
groups
a
story
that
felt
intact.
We
learned
more
about
ourselves
in
this
way.
The
presentation
itself
went
very
well.
The
ability
to
have
something
presentable
after
only
two
days
of
knowing
each
other
was
liberating
and
a
bonding
experience
for
everyone
involved.
Everyone
felt
like
this
was
proper
closure
and
reason
to
celebrate
the
end
of
our
problem-­‐defining
process
and
the
beginning
of
goal-­‐oriented
work.
Because
of
the
Pecha
Kucha
format,
not
only
did
we
now
know
more
about
our
own
group’s
experiences
but
we
could
compare
ourselves
to
other
groups.
At
first
I
thought
maybe
paying
too
much
attention
to
other
groups
would
cause
a
distraction
for
our
own
group.
Instead
our
group
members
responded,
acknowledging
that
our
final
goal
is
much
more
abstract
than
that
of
all
of
the
other
studios.
Our
group
is
dealing
with
something
much
more
complex
and
layered.
With
this
acceptance
we
understood
Saturday
would
be
very
important
and
that
we
were
expected
to
formulate
a
concrete
prototype.
(Entire
Pecha
Kucha
attached
to
email)

7. Saturday:
Morning
Session
A
second
mind
dumping/
ideation
was
performed.
Our
ideating
thought
was
focused
towards
a
tangible
goal.
Therefore,
put
into
consideration
were
things
such
as:
-­‐Brand
-­‐Timing
-­‐Feasibility
-­‐Capacity
-­‐Gaps
-­‐Dependency
How
would
these
ideas
be
useful
to
our
clients??
We
put
lots
of
thought
into
yesterday’s
work
and
what
kind
of
overlapping
assets
of
different
local
organizations
could
benefit
in
our
creation.
We
came
up
with
three
metaphorical
topics
based
on
a
conversation
we
had
with
our
clients
that
guided
everything
from
the
completion
of
ideation
and
our
eventual
concepts.
THE
DINNER
TABLE:
WHERE
INDIVIDUAL
PROBLEMS
ARE
IDENITFIED
THE
FEAST:
WHERE
COMMUNAL
PROBLEMS
ARE
SHARED
THE
BULLETIN
BOARD:
WHERE
COMMUNAL
PROBLEMS
CAN
BE
CATALOGUED,
DOCUMENTED,
ACCESSED

8. Saturday:
Afternoon
Session
The
first
thing
to
say
about
the
afternoon
session
is
that
it
was
entirely
dedicated
to
prototyping
and
finding
some
sort
of
tangible
solution.
Stacy
posted
a
large
post-­‐it
sheet
that
said:

9.
Valuable
Client
Conversation:
As
a
group
we
helped
the
clients
realize
that
one
major
issue
in
being
a
non-­‐profit
organization
and
working
for
the
community
is
the
constant
struggle
to
work
for
funders
and
the
funded
at
the
same
time.
Often
times
an
organization
devotes
all
of
its
capacity
to
getting
funding
and
doesn’t
interact
enough
with
the
community.
On
top
of
that
funders
want
to
know
about
the
successes
of
the
projects
they’ve
funded.
Both
Karen
and
Matt
felt
that
it
is
very
difficult
and
fruitless
to
collect
quantitative
data
that
can
be
presented
as
evidence
of
progress
to
stakeholders.
They
feel
there
needs
to
be
a
better
way
to
capture,
document,
catalogue
and
internalize
the
things
they
are
hearing
from
the
community
and
the
way
the
stakeholders
are
hearing
about
the
projects
that
depend
on
them
for
funding.
Maybe
the
community
can
help
us
gain
information
and
create
a
knowledge
base
we
can
tap
into.
Our
methodology
we
developed
captures
the
passion
of
the
community
in
a
way
that
it
will
organically
feed
itself
as
the
process
can
be
repeated
again
and
again
in
different
projects,
and
hopefully
gaining
a
more
synchronized
effort
in
Birmingham.

10.
THE
3
KEYS:
1. Bulletin
Board:
(metaphorically
a
bulletin
board,
a
place
for
community
members
to
post
their
wishes
for
improving
their
own
communities)
2. Knowledge
Base:
a
shared
and
communal
database.
It
will
be
where
everything
that
is
posted
on
the
bulletin
board
can
be
documented
and
possibly
championed
by
an
organization.
A
place
for
information,
pictures,
statistics,
funding
numbers,
partnerships
etc.
to
be
collected.
To
be
accessed
so
organizations
can
more
easily
collaborate
and
position
themselves
strategically.
It
will
also
be
a
way
to
report
back
to
stakeholders
about
what
is
going
on
in
the
community.
*For
Matt
Leavell
and
the
AL-­‐IE
it
can
be
a
great
way
to
delegate
the
responsibility
of
managing
and
maintaining
the
intake
of
community
requests
and
the
projects
and
co-­‐operations
that
come
out
of
the
knowledge
base.
In
this
way
Matt
can
strategically
position
his
own
team
becoming
more
of
a
facilitator
and
curator
than
a
manager.
For
Karen
and
the
Community
Fund
such
a
knowledge
base
is
a
place
she
could
tap
into
in
order
to
get
a
holistic
view
of
what
is
being
done
and
what
could
still
be
done
with
or
without
the
help
of
other
organizations.
3.
Broadcast:
We
had
already
gone
through
the
process
of
listening
to
the
community
and
developing
ways
to
approach
the
problems/opportunities.
Now
the
community
needs
to
hear
about
what
is
being
done
so
that
they
can
be
included
and
find
inspiration
through
the
success
of
current
projects.
We
hope
that
community
members
will
be
empowered
to
start
their
own
projects
and
organically
replenish
the
cycle
of
Listen,
Capture,
Act.

11.
Some
Random
Thoughts
A
way
to
guide
and
usher
creative
design,
creative
want,
breed
opportunities.
BUT
NOT
TAKE
TOO
MUCH
CONTROL!
Facilitate,
convene,
but
not
micro-­‐manage
and
maintain.
Put
the
AL-­‐IE
in
a
position
where
it
can
collect
and
catalogue
the
useful
progress
(Qualitative
and
Quantitative
data)
in
order
to
document
proof
of
success.
-­‐-­‐
Managing
and
maintaining
a
project
that
is
meant
for
the
community
is
not
only
stretching
the
capabilities,
reach
and
capacity
of
AL-­‐IE,
it
is
also
taking
outside
of
the
community.
Our
job
is
to
plant
something
with
firm
roots
and
allow
it
the
space
and
nutrients
to
grow.
-­‐-­‐
Is
AL-­‐IE
a
tool
itself
to
be
loaned
out?
OR
does
AL-­‐IE
create
useful
tools
to
be
utilized
by
communities/organizations?

12.
Conclusive
Decision:
We
are
here
using
design
methods
to
brainstorm
new
solutions
to
existing
problems.
What
we
can
leave
is
a
new
methodology
that
the
community
will
eventually
be
able
to
take
ownership
of
(solving
old
problems)
and
become
influential
participants.
(Photo
Below)

14.
Towards
the
end
of
our
final
day
Stacy
approached
me
and
we
began
to
think
of
ways
to
develop
a
visual
representation
of
our
entire
process.
It
will
attempt
to
tie
together
the
passing
of
time
over
our
three
days
of
work
and
the
designer’s
working
progress.
We
have
some
very
early
and
rough
sketches
that
we
hope
to
continue
work
on
and
use
as
a
way
to
keep
the
studio
group
involved
and
connected.
We
hope
the
end
result
will
be
something
used
as
an
educational
tool
and
a
visual
aid
to
group
members
who
would
like
to
report
and
share
their
experience
in
Birmingham
and
a
way
of
spreading
word
about
the
opportunity
to
design
for
good.

15. Stacy
Reinhardt’s
Facilitating
Commentary:
1. Discovery Affinity Map
Purpose & Goals
This purpose of this exercise was to collectively assess the information we
gathered during immersion (client challenges and site-specific organizational
struggles). The goal was to synthesize that experience in to high-level learnings.
Desired Outcome
This type of activity is intended to provide the team with a common level of
understanding within the problem space and helped identify the underlying
themes of issues we were presented with.
Unexpected Outcome
Informally it provided a forum for team building using an activity that required
each individual be participating and engaged.
Additional Commentary
Our particular project brief required our team to deeply consider multiple
dimensions of a broad problem. This exercise allowed us to look at the problem
in context of the of the places and people we encountered to help identify
common threads.
Timing: Ideally less time is spent on this activity, but I felt it was necessary
given our broad problem.
2. 16-8-4
Purpose & Goals
The purpose was to accelerate the process of defining a concise problem
statement. The goal of this was to set our focus for exploring potential solutions.
Desired Outcome
Create consensus, clarity and ownership of the problem.
Unexpected Outcome
Excitement combined with an optimistic sense of progress gave the team
confidence and momentum to move forward.
Additional Commentary
Loved it. First time I ever used this activity and thought it very appropriate for
both clients and creatives to actively engage.
Timing: Timing was perfect.
3. Progress Checkin PechaKucha (the stresses/reliefs, what it helped
achieve)
Purpose & Goals
The purpose was to give visibility into our progress by communicating the
discovery process and problem/mission statement within the constraints of a
PechaKutcha. The goal of the PetchaKutcha is to work within the constraints to

16. focus on key areas as talking points.
Desired Outcome
Allow team members to share with other participating teams our process and
formalize our own agenda.
Unexpected Outcome
While our presenters lacked some of the charisma of the other teams, it gave the
participating presenters a chance to embellish the story in their desired style.
Additional Commentary
I will set constraints next time, appoint a deck builder early on and dictate the
tool be something that can be easily shared (aka Keynote).
Timing: Appointing someone early on and creating a framework for the
presentation would have allowed us to be more efficient with our time.
4. Freeform Ideation
Purpose & Goals
The purpose is to explore solutions that meet the criteria of our defined problem
statement. The goal to to generate a breadth of ideas that can then be
prioritized for further refinement.
Desired Outcome
Create viable solutions that address the core of our problem statement.
Unexpected Outcome
I did not expect to have a heavy role in lead and contributing to the actual ideas
themselves. The team needed some kickstarting by just simple throwing stuff out
there and encouraging everyone to draw pictures to visualize their ideas.
Additional Commentary
I would have ideally had a much larger amount of time dedicated to the ideation,
and used some other lateral thinking exercised (posters) to push the limits of this
ideation.
Timing: Timing was perfect for this, but a desire for other ideation methods was
desired.
5. Prioritization & Development of Key Concepts
Purpose & Goals
The purpose was to identify the concepts that were most viable, desirable and
had the most impact in the problem space defined. The goal was also to take
these key concepts and develop them in to more fully articulated ideas that that
looked various aspects of the solutions/concepts. This involved a definition of
Who is this relevant for (audience), What is the essential elements of the idea,
When (how does this change over time), Where (embodiments of the idea such
as web, physical location, service, etc.), Why (how does this solve the problem
and support the goals of the clients) and How it will be realized (next steps,
etc.).
Desired Outcome

17. Identify and create the most viable solutions that address the core of our
problem statement. Splitting into smaller teams allowed multiple concepts to be
further developed simultaneously and each member could invest in their concept
of choice.
Unexpected Outcome
The teams were not focusing on further development of the concepts
themselves, but a framework helped them structure the activity (WWWWH?).
This framework brought forth an actionable process that began to reveal an
overarching theme that existed within the conceptual directions that were being
explored.
Additional Commentary
More time to define the experience from a user or stakeholder's perspective
would have been added color that would have brought our ideas in to a more
tangible form.
Timing: Prioritization was fine on timing, but more time to develop key concepts
would have been nice.
6. Final Presentation
Purpose & Goals
Express the key user values of the concept that was demonstrated through
storytelling. Present key concepts in a envision how these can be realized in a
creative, but digestible format.
Desired Outcome
Create an artifact that contained enough direction for the client to move forward
with.
Unexpected Outcome
Not enough time to pack in enough information for the client to move forward
with.
Additional Commentary
Same challenges and things I would do differently as noted on the PetchaKutch.
(appoint a deck builder, use a common tool, etc.)
Timing: Same comment from presentation on day 2.

18.
Valuable
Assessment
from
Studio
1
member
Philip
Hawthorne:
Alabama Design Summit
Studio One Methodology
Facilitate
Connect
Empower
Change
On day 2 of the design thinking process, Studio One team members were looking for a
structure that tied the common elements of each of the 3 major project proposals into an
execution/action plan outline – something that would give the clients a framework around
which to begin assessing project feasibility beyond the high concept mission statement we had
finally resolved at the end of day one.
The key discovery coming out of the team discussions was that the “continuous dialogue”
concept was not broad enough to include the notion of “action” – that the idea of ongoing

19. communication did not automatically translate into the concepts of “facilitate” or “change” that
had culminated in the closing slide of our initial Pecha Kucha (Kama Sutra) presentation.
Doug, Mark, and I (other breakout group provided insights and Karen joined later) - worked as
a group to flesh out the “who, what, where, when, why, how” matrix that Stacy had suggested
as a framework to build on. Initially the goal was to highlight the distinct elements of the 3
projects (“chalkboard”; “food for thought”; “information bank”) each on a separate line
horizontally. As we dug in it became clear that there were action similarities and overlaps
between projects, and that more logical horizontal categories could be defined as LISTEN,
THINK2
(Catalog & Analyze) and ACT (Speak) – with a continuum of project related activities
moving down the matrix from top to bottom – ultimately completing a regenerating cycle of
continual engagement; data capture & analysis; coordinated action; community
feedback/reinforcement and ongoing process improvement:
We used this high-level lifecycle diagram in the final presentation, but in retrospect, felt that it
oversimplified the more complex structure we had built, which gives a detailed picture of how
each project feeds a part of the cycle - and the different communities, tools and actions that
must be engaged at every stage.
We did not have time to complete the “when” column, but the sense was that activities could
be grouped into short, medium and long term categories, best illustrated in a relational Gantt
chart to reinforce the notion that important activities should be executed in parallel for
maximum, coordinated forward movement.
-­‐-­‐

20.
Alabama Design Summit
Quick process impressions:
• Preparation materials were good balance of background data without
preempting necessity for in-person fact finding to establish and build individual
team insights.
• Team make-up:
o ideally 8 -12 members with a complement of locals (by location or
specialty) to provide background context
o mix of design and other disciplines is valuable – builds on common
approaches and broadens team insights, and at the same time positions
AIGA as driving catalyst of Design for Good process.
o Inclusion of majority of geographically or technically (as related to client
focus) diverse team members for fresh outside view is critical
• Client discovery process should include – where possible – the opportunity to
directly engage with clients’ end-customers/users, or at least representatives
that mirror major end-user demographics. This will provide team members with
a sense of real connection to affected community members and help minimize
sense of social tourism. Studio One team members did not meet with anyone of
color during the discovery process, even though they make up a
disproportionately large segment of our clients’ target community groups.
• Consider whether providing option for teams to work in isolation is benefit or
barrier – does beneficial energy of cross-pollination outweigh drawbacks of
potentially homogenized concepts and presentations across teams.
• The role of the facilitator is probably more critical than team makeup. However,
matching team members to types of clients that might best serve their local
chapter environments is valuable process.
• Facilitators should have a common set of training/tools at their disposal –
check-ins with their counterparts during the process are a valuable on-site
support mechanism.
• Examine the level of influence a facilitator should have on the team – is it to
provide a framework and guide the discussion and findings forward, or to
impose an additional layer of analysis leading to more overt team direction.
• Pecha Kucha is a very useful mid-point status check for both organizers and
participants
• Final presentation could be more structured or formatted – to include setup and
conclusion templates or guides – with room for individual team variables or
presentation options in the middle. This may help allay the sense of
incompleteness by the teams post-presentation, and leave clients with a more
defined set of takeaways. A more delineated construct would also free up
valuable concept development time otherwise consumed by attempts to
develop appropriate presentation models.
• Consider the possibility of adding another half day on day 3 for team wrap-up
and feedback with clients. This would be an opportunity to capture and record
client testimonials which will be a valuable “marketing tool” in promoting the
Design for Good process and to help recruit like-minded clients in other chapter

21. locations, and to engage clients as evangelists for the process to their
colleagues with organizations in other regions.
• Consider providing teams (or maybe best for scribes?) with
lightweight/sponsored video technology – enables quick accumulation of visual
reference material for team presentations that becomes a resource library for
clients to communicate back to their organizations and for future promotion of
Design for Good process across media (comes with need/constraints of
permissions paperwork).
• More formally describe or explain the expectations of ongoing relationships with
clients – at what point/how should team members’ continued engagement
beyond the confines of the exercise be translated into paying work
opportunities.

22. Notes
From
Scribe
Debrief:
-­‐
Where
do
the
individual
studios
align
with
each
other?
-­‐
Importance
of
infrastructure,
a
driving
vehicle
for
change
-­‐
Organizations
finding
their
niche
and
role
in
comparison
to
other
org’s
in
order
to
develop
a
cohesive
vision
for
Birmingham
-­‐
Give
organizations
a
thing
to
center
themselves
around
-­‐
COHESION
-­‐
Daring,
Revolutionary
in
creativity
-­‐
How
do
we
record
qualitative
data
so
that
stakeholders
are
pleased/
enticed?
-­‐
Can
the
way
we
document
qualitative
data
be
a
part
of
re-­‐
branding
the
Birmingham
effort?
-­‐
Divisional
conflict
between
clients
learning
and
professionals
(AIGA)
learning
-­‐
Get
graphic
designers
to
step
out
of
their
shell,
do
work
that
needs
to
be
done,
not
just
work
that
is
chosen
to
be
done

23.
Please
also
see
all
documents
corresponding
to
Studio
Group
#1
attached
to
the
email:
1. Pecha
Kucha
2. Final
Group
Presentation
Collected
and
Organized
by
ZEV
POWELL
Email:
zev.powell@wustl.edu
Cell:
612.708.6180