Weekly assignment for Sunday February 7, 2010

Peter Merholz has written “Why Design Thinking won’t save you” in October 9, 2009. He starts by complaining about all the articles about Design Thinking written these past months. For him, these articles are limited. They say that Design Thinking is a solution for businesses that need help concerning innovation. They say that it’s not the MBA-trained business men that could solve problems anymore or add value, but the ones who are “creatives”.

Now, Peter Merholz won’t even try to deny that. He will just say that that kind of dismissal is ludicrous. Design Thinking, although often a good solution, is not sufficient alone. It’s when it is mixed with business thinking that the value is added.

But then again, the author of the article does not limit himself with terms such as “Design Thinking” and “Business Thinking”. He graduated in anthropology and tells us that a big part of “Design Thinking” is “Social science Thinking”. He criticizes the design thinkers when they talk about being “human-centered” and “emphatic”. Actually, that’s exactly how Tim Brown talks about “Design Thinking” applied to governments (see my previous assignment). The design thinker has no agenda and that’s why his solution is often the more innovative and the more appropriate.
The truth is, says Peter Merholz, that it is not until very recently that the design schools teach about customer research.

He continues by talking about journalism and how, in his experience, information gathering and concise reports are keys to a company success. “Journalism Thinking” could definitely benefit to businesses.
He goes further again by evocating “Library Thinking”, “History Thinking” and “Arts Thinking”. After all, the core to “Design Thinking” is “think differently”. Librarian, historian and artists are always bringing up different perspectives. Could these disciplines not benefit businesses as well?
Peter Merholz concludes saying that the dichotomy between “Business Thinking” and “Design Thinking” is absurd. The important point, and I agree completely with him, is we must bring as many viewpoints and perspectives as possible in order to respond to whatever challenges we have in front of us.

Peter Merholz does not criticize “Design Thinking” per se, but the whole enthusiasm behind it. Although it is a nice way to create new opportunities, it is not the only one and certainly not an exclusive. “Design Thinking” is not the answer to our problem. We simply have to broad our perspectives and this “business model” is a part of the way. “Design Thinking” is not the solution but a part of it.

http://blogs.hbr.org/merholz/2009/10/why-design-thinking-wont-save.html