Design 2.0: Diego Rodriguez

Design 2.0: Diego Rodriguez

Introducing our first speaker: Diego Rodriguez. Diego is a professor at the D-School and works at IDEO. He also writes the design blog Metacool. You may remember me writing about his Creating Infectious Action conference a few weeks back.


The Aquarium Analogy

Diego began his talk with a picture of the jellyfish tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. A decade ago, a designer tasked with creating this amazing experience would have thought of what shape to make the glass, how to set up the lighting, and what scenery should go in the tank. Nowadays, a designer would take a much broader perspective. How do people get to the aquarium? Where do they park, where do they stay? Is it enjoyable? The immediate design of the jellyfish tank is but a smaller part of the experience of visiting the aquarium – the point being that a great experience means a great ecosystem fit.



Three approaches to design


The above diagram illustrates the three sets of factors to consider when approaching a design problem. Design thinking traditionally focuses on the human factors, on how to make a product desirable. This is a great way to ensure a product will meet a true user need. However, Diego emphasizes that the other two perspectives must also be considered, in particular the business side which is sometimes overlooked by designers.



4 key characteristics of a successful design thinker

  • * optimism
  • * the mind of a child, the ability to be curious and naive (in a good way)
  • * wisdom, the ability to draw on experience
  • * building to think, prototyping



T-shaped people


T-shaped people is an old concept that IDEO uses to describe its hiring practice. T-shaped people are people with very deep knowledge in one domain (the stem of the T) but some knowledge in a wide variety of other domains (the bar of the T). The idea is that multi-functional teams of T-shaped people form the strongest design teams because each person has some understanding of their teammates’ fields. In Diego’s words, “design thinking is the glue that holds things together”.



Build a fruitfly


For the sake of argument, let us suppose you were tasked with building an elephant. You may think that the best way to do so would be to build a small elephant and let it grow from there. But with a 23 month gestation periods, building even a small elephant takes time. The trick is to instead build a fruitfly, that can evolve and adapt quickly. The same goes for products.



Designing for business to create value

The trick is for the business to make the shift from thinking of itself as the center of the solar system, to seeing itself as a big player in the ecosystem.
Three steps to success:

  • 1 – ensure desirability
  • 2 – balance desirability across stakeholders to create a non-zero-sum game
  • 3 – build fruitflies, not elephants, and iterate quickly

5 comments

Thanks for this post Nick. I know that you are in the reporter role here, but I’m trying to figure out the fruitfly analogy. On the one hand I get it, but maybe I’m getting up on the temporal dimension. Waiting 23 months for the elephant or the eons it will take a fruitfly to evolve to get there isn’t making sense to me (especially from the business perspective). Then throw cloning into the mix and well…

by craig
6-16-3:16 AM

Hi Craig,

Good question. I think the metaphor deserves further explanation, so let me give it a stab

The idea is that it’s going to take you close to two years to build the baby elephant, and then several more until it grows into an adult – and during this time you have very little opportunity to change course or adapt your design.

Fruit flies on the other hand are commonly used by biologists because they breed extremely quickly – so in fact you could evolve your fly over hundreds of generations in the time it takes to build your baby elephant. Each generation is a step to reassess your direction and iterate on the design, which leads to a much better product over time.

Or course like any metaphor, this one has its limits. If your point is that we’re not going to evolve a fruit fly into an elephant in 5 years, you’re entirely correct. As a friend of mine put it, building a fruit fly when the assignment was to build an elephant wouldn’t leave the client very satisfied!

Cheers,

-Nick

6-16-9:35 AM

OK, I thought that’s where this was going. Tom Peters had a similar idea with “fail forward fast.’ And I agree with your friend, the trick is to talk clients into fruit flies unless there’s a VERY good reason for the elephant.

by craig
6-16-11:09 AM

Very nice summary! I really like that you included the simple visuals to help get the points across. I’ll probably link to this from Logic + Emotion

6-16-12:08 PM

Hi there
I think that within this dialogue you are demonstrating the key value design thinking can bring to business. This is the design industries collective ability to take complex intangible information and convert it into something visually tangible, which is easy to understand and can be used to quantify risk.

I my experience you can visualise business propositions and company strategy in ways that allow clients to do just that, before engaging in design& development activities. I have been developing a range of visual strategy tools to do this on live client pojects which work across the whole process, and have had some suprising results.

From the experience of doing this I’ve found that your three circle diagram in spot on, but that generally we as designers often don’t know or don’t fully understand the importance of the business element enough. I think that there is a need to evolve design methodologies to encompass solid knowledge of the principles of business, and that if we do this, the true value design thinking can potentially bring maybe far greater.

Its a two way street. We need to understand business as much as business needs to understand us.

by Joanne Hippolyte
10-19-1:23 AM