17 ms·

Author spends a lot of time complaining about Design Thinking, and worrying about it "infecting" education, but he doesn't actually say what is wrong with it. H

by kitd 3y ago

Author spends a lot of time complaining about Design Thinking, and worrying about it "infecting" education, but he doesn't actually say what is wrong with it. He quotes a few woolly phrases that look like the introductory sentences in an Overview section, then extrapolates from those as a detailed description of the whole topic. No wonder it looks vapid to him. I'm not a design expert but AIUI, Design Thinking brings empathy with the user to the forefront of the design process and makes it a first-class factor. My own experience of the outcome of this process (writing software to such designs) is very largely positive.

MPSimmons 3y ago
He also doesn't actually describe what it is. I don't think he knows any more than the people he's complaining about.
- whydoineedthis 3y ago
  He eventually quotes someone as: “It’s an approach to problem-solving based on a few easy-to-grasp principles that sound obvious:‘Show Don’t Tell,’ ‘Focus on Human Values,’ ‘Craft Clarity,’ ‘Embrace Experimentation,’ ‘Mindful of Process,’ ‘Bias Toward Action,’ and ‘Radical Collaboration.’” All of those are pretty sound principals proven to be effective by most innovators though. Screaming at people is easier than actually learning to be effective, and I suspect is the root of his outrage.
- GuestHNUser 3y ago
  Really? I thought it was pretty clear that the author thinks Design Thinking is composed of vague ideas and vapid phrases. Moreover, the author cites a significant number of noteworthy designers that make compelling arguments that Design Thinking is nonsense that produces a skewed picture of the design process. I think your comment dismisses the article without giving a compelling reason why.
qsort 3y ago
Stanford's website is apparently unable to explain it either: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/design-thinking-bootcamp https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/design-thinkin... Judging from the "participant profile", it sounds like the kind of thing you do when you have money to spend before the end of the year.
- mannykannot 3y ago
  No better at MIT/Sloan. The illustration under "Here’s what you need to know to get started" is utterly generic and trite. https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/design-thinking-explained https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/design-thinkin...
- Centigonal 3y ago
  I'm gonna take a stab at this because I don't think it's that complicated. Design thinking is a methodology for designing things, often products. It has 5 steps: 1. Empathize. Find your intended user and try to understand them, their expectations, wants, needs, and fears. 2. Define. Based on understanding your user, what are you trying to actually do? What are the problem(s) you want to solve for the user? 3. Ideate. Get a bunch of people in a room and have a no-judgement brainstorming fest around solving the problem(s) you defined. Come up with a ton of ideas! Then look at them all critically and remove the less priomising ones. 4. Prototype. Make MVPs for a promising idea or ideas. 5. Test. Take your MVP to your target user. See how they react. Go back to prototype and adjust the idea based on feedback, or pick a different idea out of the ideation process if this one is a bust. Repeat until your prototype is good enough that you're confident to scale up. Within each of these steps, there are a few tools/techniques you can learn to structure them more if you like. There are also no shortage of experts and consultants who will take your money to expound on the finer points of each part of the process. You can go as deep into the rabbit hole as is useful.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    Isn't all that just the standard process of design/development? Have I been engaging in "Design Thinking" all these years without even knowing it?
Jorge1o1 3y ago
The problem with Design Thinking is that Design Thinking has become a cargo-cult of meaningless buzzwords and hot air. The same can be said about Agile -- it's just a collection of buzzwords loosely connected into a "framework" or "approach" or "school of thought" but it's certainly difficult to put an exact pin on what exactly DT and Agile entail. But if we can't agree on the specifics -- at least we can agree on the broad points right? - Agile is about iterating quickly, making smaller changes more frequently, etc. - DT is about empathizing with the end user, considering the problem before solving it, and then attempting to fix it and asking for feedback The problem is, once you cut through all the bullshit, you're left with what is really just common-sense wisdom. So they're faced with a choice: - Either you teach the core concept sans-BS, which can't be monetized. - Or you build an entire ecosystem of hot air, buzzwords, tooling, artifacts, blog posts and rituals around your obvious wisdom, which is how we ended up with Stories and Sprints and User Points and Epics and JIRA and Scrum and all the other crap. You can now sell $12,000 bootcamps, $100k software, etc.
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  > Agile is about iterating quickly, making smaller changes more frequently, etc. Agile is about revising the plan frequently to adjust it for reality. All of those things are tools, not the goal; and if you do all of them but still don't revise the plan, you won't get any of the benefit.
  - Jorge1o1 3y ago
    Good point actually, thanks.
    - marcosdumay 3y ago
      Granted, it's even a bit hard to make fast iterations without revising the plan, so it's natural to ignore the difference. But some management structures achieve just that.
- tsunamifury 3y ago
  Agile is clearly defined below Design thinking is letting user requirements and their actual use cases dictate product definition and execution rather than feature cram and technology momentum. It's literally the base of Steve Jobs most famous speech before launching the iPod -- it's not about Mips and Bips, it's about the experience users wants. Something the author of this gets insanely wrong. Like the author, you complain about something rather simple and obvious to understand -- then just sort of... rant.
choonway 3y ago
> Design Thinkers giver their students power without knowledge, “creative confidence” without actual capabilities. this is the problem. a lot of curicculum time has been taken away from basic/fundamental skills in order to do DT.
- heisenbit 3y ago
  And to make matters worse a much better way to learn true design is applying these basic/fundamental skills to problems for real. Opportunity costs matter in education and are swept under the rug by every promotor of new content.

by kitd 3y ago

MPSimmons 3y ago

He also doesn't actually describe what it is. I don't think he knows any more than the people he's complaining about.

whydoineedthis 3y ago
He eventually quotes someone as: “It’s an approach to problem-solving based on a few easy-to-grasp principles that sound obvious:‘Show Don’t Tell,’ ‘Focus on Human Values,’ ‘Craft Clarity,’ ‘Embrace Experimentation,’ ‘Mindful of Process,’ ‘Bias Toward Action,’ and ‘Radical Collaboration.’” All of those are pretty sound principals proven to be effective by most innovators though. Screaming at people is easier than actually learning to be effective, and I suspect is the root of his outrage.
GuestHNUser 3y ago
Really? I thought it was pretty clear that the author thinks Design Thinking is composed of vague ideas and vapid phrases. Moreover, the author cites a significant number of noteworthy designers that make compelling arguments that Design Thinking is nonsense that produces a skewed picture of the design process. I think your comment dismisses the article without giving a compelling reason why.

qsort 3y ago

Stanford's website is apparently unable to explain it either: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/design-thinking-bootcamp https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/design-thinkin... Judging from the "participant profile", it sounds like the kind of thing you do when you have money to spend before the end of the year.

mannykannot 3y ago
No better at MIT/Sloan. The illustration under "Here’s what you need to know to get started" is utterly generic and trite. https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/design-thinking-explained https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/design-thinkin...
Centigonal 3y ago
I'm gonna take a stab at this because I don't think it's that complicated. Design thinking is a methodology for designing things, often products. It has 5 steps: 1. Empathize. Find your intended user and try to understand them, their expectations, wants, needs, and fears. 2. Define. Based on understanding your user, what are you trying to actually do? What are the problem(s) you want to solve for the user? 3. Ideate. Get a bunch of people in a room and have a no-judgement brainstorming fest around solving the problem(s) you defined. Come up with a ton of ideas! Then look at them all critically and remove the less priomising ones. 4. Prototype. Make MVPs for a promising idea or ideas. 5. Test. Take your MVP to your target user. See how they react. Go back to prototype and adjust the idea based on feedback, or pick a different idea out of the ideation process if this one is a bust. Repeat until your prototype is good enough that you're confident to scale up. Within each of these steps, there are a few tools/techniques you can learn to structure them more if you like. There are also no shortage of experts and consultants who will take your money to expound on the finer points of each part of the process. You can go as deep into the rabbit hole as is useful.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  Isn't all that just the standard process of design/development? Have I been engaging in "Design Thinking" all these years without even knowing it?

Jorge1o1 3y ago

The problem with Design Thinking is that Design Thinking has become a cargo-cult of meaningless buzzwords and hot air. The same can be said about Agile -- it's just a collection of buzzwords loosely connected into a "framework" or "approach" or "school of thought" but it's certainly difficult to put an exact pin on what exactly DT and Agile entail. But if we can't agree on the specifics -- at least we can agree on the broad points right? - Agile is about iterating quickly, making smaller changes more frequently, etc. - DT is about empathizing with the end user, considering the problem before solving it, and then attempting to fix it and asking for feedback The problem is, once you cut through all the bullshit, you're left with what is really just common-sense wisdom. So they're faced with a choice: - Either you teach the core concept sans-BS, which can't be monetized. - Or you build an entire ecosystem of hot air, buzzwords, tooling, artifacts, blog posts and rituals around your obvious wisdom, which is how we ended up with Stories and Sprints and User Points and Epics and JIRA and Scrum and all the other crap. You can now sell $12,000 bootcamps, $100k software, etc.

marcosdumay 3y ago
> Agile is about iterating quickly, making smaller changes more frequently, etc. Agile is about revising the plan frequently to adjust it for reality. All of those things are tools, not the goal; and if you do all of them but still don't revise the plan, you won't get any of the benefit.
- Jorge1o1 3y ago
  Good point actually, thanks.
  - marcosdumay 3y ago
    Granted, it's even a bit hard to make fast iterations without revising the plan, so it's natural to ignore the difference. But some management structures achieve just that.
tsunamifury 3y ago
Agile is clearly defined below Design thinking is letting user requirements and their actual use cases dictate product definition and execution rather than feature cram and technology momentum. It's literally the base of Steve Jobs most famous speech before launching the iPod -- it's not about Mips and Bips, it's about the experience users wants. Something the author of this gets insanely wrong. Like the author, you complain about something rather simple and obvious to understand -- then just sort of... rant.

choonway 3y ago

> Design Thinkers giver their students power without knowledge, “creative confidence” without actual capabilities. this is the problem. a lot of curicculum time has been taken away from basic/fundamental skills in order to do DT.

heisenbit 3y ago
And to make matters worse a much better way to learn true design is applying these basic/fundamental skills to problems for real. Opportunity costs matter in education and are swept under the rug by every promotor of new content.