Design Thinking is not dead
Sorry to disappoint people who had bad experiences with the framework, but Design Thinking isn't 'over.'
The fundamentals of Design Thinking are sound. Solving problems by removing bias and replacing it with user and customer input works. So does rapid prototyping and obtaining feedback about features/capabilities before investing resources into building them. Collaborative decision-making is about as trendy as designers wearing all black--it isn't going anywhere.
IDEO, Frog, and other stellar creative agencies are right-sizing. It is painful to see, but it isn't necessarily bad for the design industry. Companies don't scale down because their method isn't working or delivery is sloppy--that would put them out of business entirely. And Frog, IDEO, and other agencies aren't shutting down.
I hypothesize that we are seeing a transition in the creative marketplace—somewhat due to a broader market correction. The Product/Market/Fit of Design Thinking may have been out of step with buyer preferences. Of course, there is a confluence of factors, many of which will take more than seven minutes of reading to unpack.
I will briefly address the context of Design Thinking, including its origin story. From there, I will step into a framing for the current state of Design Thinking. I will wrap up with thoughts on what's next.
Context
In product development, delivery speed and quality are challenging to balance while driving value. The balance is tricky if you are a hardware, software, or services company. If you are in a soft market with limited competition, speed and quality may not be top of mind, but eventually, competitors will drive urgency.
So what? If outcomes aren't stellar and/or take place slowly, then you need to revisit your process. Look at operations and make improvements. But change is hard, and people tend to get invested in how they work. I get it.
Organizations rarely fall into a Waterfall or, Agile or Continuous Deployment model. It's usually a blend thereof, with a few teams left to their own devices as long as their margins are maintained or they deliver on time. M&As happen; at scale, getting everyone to follow one process is challenging. I'm not a Designer trying to solve that, much less with a single blog post.
Design tends to be either under or over-invested in. It is typically under capacity or has a target on its back due to hiring gone wild. Identifying a target ratio for Design: Development helps estimate capacity. A ratio seems like a hard target, which shouldn't be the case. I recommend a range that varies depending on context (company size, offering type, etc.). But I digress.
Either way, if a company was late at shipping dodgy outcomes, it needed a new delivery process. If this took place in the last decade or so....In came Design Thinking. Company leadership could have read an article, been sold on it by consultants, or just wanted to try something new.
One of the biggest misconceptions of Design Thinking is due to having 'Design' in its title. It may be a branding/marketing issue. To some, it signals that Designers think they have all the answers. To others, it feels like a power grab. In fairness, there isn't a method titled 'Developer <insert fancy word for process>,' so there wasn't a comp, aside from Agile Software Development (which is complimentary).
Definition
Design Thinking is not a process. It is a framework. Design Thinking provides activities that drive outcomes—the outcomes it delivers lead to improved user experiences. The activities are neither sequential nor random. Practitioners may prefer to do things a certain way, which is true of any framework.
Delivery
Design Thinking has become more pervasive in Enterprise software in the last decade. Of course, the outcomes were uneven as it scaled. Business goals may or may have needed to be clarified. Organizational culture is also a factor. There were issues if an organization was 1/4 committed or middle management said one thing and did another. That's just politics, which exists in organizations of any scale.
Saying that things need to be done differently implies a need for more efficiency in the current state. Whatever the new shiny replacement process is will be under pressure immediately. A lot of reasonable and some unreasonable questions arose:
What is the transition plan?
When will all teams migrate to the new process?
Who is in charge?
What will change vs. what will remain the same?
How many questions does it take before someone sounds like they are whining?
A few quickdraw answers included:
Design Thinking is an Agile framework it's not THE Agile framework.
Agile and Design Thinking are complementary.
Design Thinking is not a secret sauce, and when branded '<company name> Design Thinking', it's because an organization's operations require the framework applied in a specific manner.
Design Thinking is not magic only long-bearded and/or tattoo-sleeved Designers can use.
Design Thinking is a specific application of User-Centered Design that has existed for some time.
Design Thinking doesn't slow down delivery, as not all activities are required or take a set amount of time.
Design Thinking is not a fucking workshop, but you may have enjoyed a Design Thinking workshop, not known what to do next, and begrudge a framework for not having an answer.
Sure, it didn't work out for everyone who 'tried Design Thinking.' Just because the framework didn't drive immediate and measurable gains doesn't mean returning to how you did things before is better. I believe some practitioners got overzealous and dogmatic about their approach. Fielding difficult questions about how artifacts led to outcomes is challenging if you aren't a seasoned practitioner.
Yes, And…
If the broader market was/is due to a massive correction, then Design was overdue. I'm not smart enough to call shifts in Design staffing a canary in a coal mine. Still, Designers are the first ones laid off whenever the economy gets wobbly.
Private Equity holding companies and the big four consulting firms went on a Design Agency buying spree about a decade ago. Most companies are divesting talent or nearshoring Design today while maintaining the brand. Some companies are right-sizing and offering leadership retention bonuses, which they are entitled to.
Why? A few root causes are likely. One is that the consulting firms needed to learn how to price or position Design as a premium offering. Or they need to put more effort into integrating design into engagements. It honestly may not have been in their DNA. That doesn't mean people didn't try, either on the business or design side.
Another potential cause for churn is that holding companies may have yet to understand what they bought. The multiplier for a Design Agency is materially different than other investments. Growth isn't going to result in ROI in a significantly different way than other service-based business models.
That said, I do love it when a PE firm can acquire a company that enhances the value of its siblings in their portfolio. I believe that this acquisition strategy has merit in the future for several reasons:
Design as Opex will continue to right-size as companies are held increasingly accountable for profitability.
CapEx spending on Design should increase, but engagements will be more outcomes-focused.
Design is also great at, doing non-traditional design work. An outside-in perspective is great for businesses and designers: context-switching and variety drive learning, which increases skillsets.
I sincerely hope that with increased pressure to drive outcomes, Designers will become less dogmatic about Design Thinking. I hypothesize that Design Thinking will change as well, as it should.
What’s Next
Design Thinking was a delivery method for Design Agencies in the late 90s and early 2000s. Everyone had their 'proprietary' method or approach but it was more/less the same shit. Then, in the early 2010s, large software companies built in-house design teams that leveraged the framework. Now, we are seeing those in-house design teams shrink. And the Design Agencies have as well.
Large agencies are getting smaller, and in-house capacities are shrinking, increasing competition for smaller-footprint Design engagements. Increased competition is better for buyers looking for increased ROI. Smaller agencies with new business models will grow and likely merge or be acquired.
The cycle will start over, but Design Thinking isn't going away--it's likely to change, just like Design Agencies, to meet the demands of buyers and users.
It's as simple as Product, Market, and fit.
