For years, we have been trying to get past the hexagon-based visualization of the design thinking process. Yes, the one we popularized almost 10 years ago. You might wonder why. “Isn’t that like Nike abandoning the swoosh? Like Coca-Cola jettisoning the classic red ribbon? Like a zebra trying to ditch its stripes?” Au contraire, mon frere.

There are many reasons — too many people treat it like a recipe; it's really only one way of visualizing what we're trying to do; it doesn't really capture everything (hello, mindsets…), anyway; it breeds confidence despite incompetence; to name a few… — and the fact that folks ask such questions only reinforces our bristling at being pigeonholed into a particular visualization.

That said, we are pleased to be working on a new visualization. (Cue ironic crowd gasp).

The reality is, new learners do appreciate a reference point that provides way-finding as they navigate the learning experience. And to say, “Have a bias towards action! Talk to people! Try stuff! Reflect!” isn’t sufficiently convincing, or specific, to be particularly useful…

We have been test driving our new visualization for a few classes and programs over the past year, and it’s way better! And way worse! Which is to say, we are still working out the kinks, but rest assured we won’t rest until we get it right. Until it’s not right anymore, and then we’ll definitely change it.

One of the major insights that drove the thinking behind the most recent visual is the realization that when folks are doing design, 1) they are really only working on two things — their problem, or their solution — at any time, and 2) they’re really only working in two ways — focusing, or flaring — at any time. Which yielded a nifty little 2x2 that tickled my inner management consultant. It also delivers big time on the notion that there is no prescribed sequence of events (as there’s no left-to-right reading of the visual), and in emphasizing the importance of taking action to advance one’s thinking.

The big downside, though, is that design thinking isn’t only about “doing design;” the thinking part — or what we might call “assessment and reflection” — is just as important, and critically, determines what kind of doing is appropriate to continue to advance our work. We rightly emphasize the doing for sure, but the 2x2 model really only mentions doing/action, and fails to capture the importance of thinking/reflection. For all our belief that doing should inform planning — and despite our great concern that planning often usurps doing, to the detriment of many projects — yet any visual which fails to account for careful consideration of what one learns by doing surely fails to capture all we do when we design. The reality is that meaningful design work (the action!) is informed by thoughtful consideration of fundamental questions.

So the next visualization builds on the 2x2 model, while foregrounding the questions that define the search parameters for how to act, and which quadrant of the 2x2 to draw tools from. We are calling this most recent round of iteration, “Inquiry-Driven Action.”

Our expectation is that even though future learning experiences will continue to follow particular sequences of activity (for important learning reasons, not formulaic in nature), by foregrounding the questions that drive the particular actions we choose, our learners’ competence to engage the tools of design in a non-formulaic way will grow immensely.

Click here to subscribe to Paint & Pipette, the weekly digest of these daily posts.