Reflection: Mind mapping

Challenge

I am a communications specialist working for an engineering consultancy and the editor for one of  the markets’ internal newsletter. It is my goal to make the newsletter the single vital source of  information all things related to the industry. We have about 260 recipients on our email list.

Despite having previously conducted informal interviews with several readers on what they would  like to read in an internal market newsletter, it was disappointing to see that since launch, open  rates and click through rates have been hovering below the 50% mark. This is on the lower end of  the scale when compared to open rates for other internal newsletters - historical data indicates  that a 70% open rate is considered a success.

The newsletter has been identified as a key channel in which management can engage directly  with employees, therefore it is crucial that the open rates and click through rates are improved.

Selection and application

I have chosen to apply mind mapping for the “What is” phase. It is a group exercise tool which  helps me identify key themes and clusters from a set of data. It is an effective tool for  communicating large quantity of data in a format that is meaningful and can be easily understood.  It will also help me transition from “What is” to “What if” by drawing out the design criteria for my  revamped newsletter based on the patterns and themes identified.

My data is based on 20 in-depth phone interviews I had conducted with current readers using a  set of questions I had formulated. I had an interview quota of 50-50 for regular readers and  actively disengaged readers.

Application

In the consulting industry, working hours are based on utilisation rate, i.e. most employees have a  set target of hours to be charged to project work – some as high as 90%. Given the current  challenging economic environment, I was unable to gather a cohort to undertake the mind  mapping exercise together as a team due to management’s heavy focus on immediate revenue  generating activities.

I improvised by first doing the ground work of identifying patterns and themes. I would pore over  the interviews and extracted comments that gave key insights and write them on a Post-It note  and then stuck it to a giant A3 Post-it note and slowly watched the themes emerge.

To meet the “group think” criteria, I invited three colleagues to review the mind map to ensure key  themes have been identified and nothing has been overlooked.

While my colleagues all agreed on the themes and patterns identified, the real challenge however  was moving from a “label” to an insight statement. For example, one of the themes identified was  “I want more case studies”. As I dug further the insight statement emerged as “what are new ways  I can share opportunities and demonstrate my thought leadership and expertise in that field”. In  order to reveal the real insight behind a statement, I had to keep asking why. It was also  interesting to see the relationship between clusters emerge, and there were many!

Translating the insight statements into design criteria was easier than expected and it was this  part of the exercise that I could see how mind mapping is a natural segway to “What if”.

Insights

The “aha!” moments came when I had to dig deep to search for the insight statements. When I did  find the ‘meaning’ behind these statements, it became very apparent what my design criteria  would be. Mind mapping also forced me to confront previously held perceptions I had of what  readers wanted.

I also now understand why it was pertinent to do the exercise as a team. Not only does this  prevent confirmation bias when looking for emerging patterns and themes, diversity of thought  and perspective were needed in order to identify different, and less subtle, themes and to  understand different perspective of truth behind statements from interviewees.

Approach

Mind mapping was the perfect introductory tool to Design Thinking for my learning and project. It  helped identify unconscious assumptions I had about the root cause.

If I were to use mind mapping as a tool for another project, I feel it would be helpful to undertake a  scoping exercise before jumping into the “What is”. A scoping exercise would help clarify what the  focal question really should be. For example in this case study, the focal question should be “How  can I inspire problem solving and innovation”, rather than, “How can this newsletter inspire  problem solving and innovation.” The latter focal question assumes that the newsletter is the  correct tool to inspire change. Fortunately in this case, a newsletter is the right tool, but it is not  the only tool.

This exercise helped me understand the value design thinking brings to the innovation process.  There is no right or wrong answers, you need to just keep testing your assumptions. It’s about  incremental changes until you get cut through.

