Make Room for Thinking

Lately, I’ve noticed something curious: more and more teams are rebranding themselves as the "design doing" group, as if “thinking” is something that slows down innovation. At the d.school, we constantly advocate a “bias towards action,” so much that you could call me a professional evangelist of do-to-think.

But to imply that we need never think — and I hesitate before saying this — is to belittle a very important part of the innovation process.

The fact that this needs to be said is somewhat troubling. It is true that research has demonstrated that the more experienced folks are, the more they tend to default to planning rather than doing, and further, have a general disdain for doing-to-learn. Such people should be taught the value of an experiment-driven approach in creating data that enable better decisions.

To the “design doing” folks’ credit, it is entirely possible that the rebranding effort is only a matter of positioning, so that the uninitiated don’t get the wrong idea about what’s happening. But I think this movement belies a subtle but dangerous error. I fear that proselytes of “design doing” might be in danger of despising the need for deep thinking and prolonged consideration.

Here’s the classic model of creative thinking:
Preparation, Incubation, Illumination, and Verification.

This model is relevant to this discussion because, in my opinion, I the trendy emphasis on the “sprint” (which I love, and use myself!) has largely implied that incubation is unnecessary.

Nothing could be further from the truth! Incubation is an essential prerequisite of illumination. Some have argued — none more convincingly than James Webb Young (see below) — that it’s only when you feel hopeless that you have sufficiently courted the muse.

As Howard, Culley, and Dekoninck express in their 2006 International Design Conference article, Information as an Input into the Creative Process, “Unlike routine idea generation where ideas can be forced, creative idea generation relies on the incubation period and the information accessed during this period. For creative problem-solving the incubation period is essential. Total immersion in the problem without the incubation period will lead to fixation or lack of stimulation resulting in (merely) routine idea generation.”

It’s why procrastination is a legitimate strategy. It’s why diversions and hobbies help. It’s why an idea quota is a useful tactic. All of these time-tested techniques are unnecessary if thinking is optional.

Sprints are a fantastic tool to drive innovation with efficiency. But sometimes you’ve got to be inefficient in order to create effectively.

Design doers, don’t stop thinking. Pause your sprint if necessary.

Related: A Technique for Producing Ideas
Related: Test the Marshmallow
Related: On Hopelessness in the Creative Process
Related: Appreciate Feeling Stuck
Related: Be Inefficient

Join over 24,147 creators & leaders who read Paint & Pipette each week