For this reflection I have chosen to look back on a challenge faced during the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of design thinking.

Challenge

In April 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had forced the world into a global lockdown. Governments around the world looked into solutions to complex problems in how to contain the spread of the virus, but also, how to safely reopen society. As an advisor to one of Canada’s leading behavioural science think tanks, I was asked to join a global expert advisory panel to assess the idea of a Covid tracing application to help better inform the population about their risk of infection and ways to limit exposure to others. Our panel was specifically tasked in assessing the risks associated with the usage of such an application. This presented us with a significant challenge since the problem was a  “wicked” one, with no previous data to base ourselves on, and very limited consensus across stakeholders: government officials, public policy experts, technology experts, and the software engineers developing the solution.

Selection

It was clear to us that in order to assess risk, we needed to achieve a consensus of the facts. However, with limited data to work on, and many perspectives at play in this cross-functional group, we needed to begin by “level setting” everyone on what the facts were. We chose to use visualization as a tool to achieve this objective. Visualization itself is, essentially, to think in a nonverbal way by “visualizing” the problem in our minds: in this case, specifically by asking our stakeholders to visualize the relationship between the application itself and its prospective users. We understood that visualization would allow us to provide each stakeholder with the opportunity to look at the relationship between the application and its user in a new way, and possibly to uncover additional risks that they had not considered either through its usage, or its outcomes. Our goal was that through this exercise we would be able to compile a much more complete, and robust, set of information that would allow us to have a more informed position for the rest of our mandate.

Approach

To achieve this we set up the following exercise for our stakeholders:

1. We set-up a virtual conference in which we explained who we were and the mandate we were presented with, we then explained why we had asked everyone to participate in the conference and what we hoped to achieve through the exercise we were about the present them with;

2. We split the group by stakeholder type;

3. We now provided the group with an on-screen image of a generic user and asked the groups to add virtual sticky notes around the on-screen user of any number of potential ways the application could be used by the user and how those uses could generate risks;

4. Once the group was satisfied with their responses we asked them to then evaluate the potential impact each risk would have on the user and society as a whole should they occur by scoring each one from 1 to “n”, where 1 was had the highest impact and “n” had the lowest;

5. We then asked the stakeholders to again repeat the evaluation process, but this time by evaluating, from their perspective, how likely they anticipated each risk to actually occur, 1 being most likely and “n” being least likely.

Insight

This exercise provided our team with all of the information we needed, in the form of 4 distinct matrices, to then complete our own assessment of the reality of the potential risks this new product would pose to the target users and society more generally. I cannot discuss what our official conclusions were, but I can say that we were able to assess the sustainability of the application from a “social capital” implication and provided our detailed findings, including a formal recommendation to our respective governments. At the time we never discussed our approach in specific “design thinking” details. However, looking back now, I can see that we applied a lot of the core components of visualization in order to solve the specific challenge presented by the wicked problem facing us. Visualization allowed us to bring a cross-functional team of experts, with varying perspectives on the problem/solution, and help find the closest expression of what the reality of the situation was through rich, informative data in the form of a matrix.

Approach

What we specifically found, was that there were a number of surprises in just how large of a gap there was between the varying perspectives (in the form of how they visualized the associated risks to users, but also in how they ranked them) which we likely would have never been able to qualify and quantify through a more generalized interview, group discussion, or literature review. In fact, some of the responses came as a complete surprise to some of the stakeholders themselves! In the end, we were able to demystify a complex problem through the use of visualization. In the future, I anticipate applying a similar approach when faced with such a wicked problem, but it may not be the exact use case for more simple problems, in these cases I may opt to use a different version of the visualization exercise itself, or opt for more of an in-depth interview with a small sample of the target users directly.


For this reflection I have chosen to look back on a challenge faced during the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of design thinking . Challenge In April 2020 , the COVID-19 pandemic had forced the world into a global lockdown . Governments around the world looked into solutions to complex problems in how to contain the spread of the virus , but also , how to safely reopen society . As an advisor to one of Canada ’s leading behavioural science think tanks , I was asked to join a global expert advisory panel to assess the idea of a Covid tracing application to help better inform the population about their risk of infection and ways to limit exposure to others . Our panel was specifically tasked in assessing the risks associated with the usage of such an application . This presented us with a significant challenge since the problem was a “ wicked ” one , with no previous data to base ourselves on , and very limited consensus across stakeholders : government officials , public policy experts , technology experts , and the software engineers developing the solution . Selection It was clear to us that in order to assess risk , we needed to achieve a consensus of the facts . However , with limited data to work on , and many perspectives at play in this cross - functional group , we needed to begin by “ level setting ” everyone on what the facts were . We chose to use visualization as a tool to achieve this objective . Visualization itself is , essentially , to think in a nonverbal way by “ visualizing ” the problem in our minds : in this case , specifically by asking our stakeholders to visualize the relationship between the application itself and its prospective users . We understood that visualization would allow us to provide each stakeholder with the opportunity to look at the relationship between the application and its user in a new way , and possibly to uncover additional risks that they had not considered either through its usage , or its outcomes . Our goal was that through this exercise we would be able to compile a much more complete , and robust , set of information that would allow us to have a more informed position for the rest of our mandate . Approach To achieve this we set up the following exercise for our stakeholders : 1 . We set - up a virtual conference in which we explained who we were and the mandate we were presented with , we then explained why we had asked everyone to participate in the conference and what we hoped to achieve through the exercise we were about the present them with ; 2 . We split the group by stakeholder type ; 3 . We now provided the group with an on - screen image of a generic user and asked the groups to add virtual sticky notes around the on - screen user of any number of potential ways the application could be used by the user and how those uses could generate risks ; 4 . Once the group was satisfied with their responses we asked them to then evaluate the potential impact each risk would have on the user and society as a whole should they occur by scoring each one from 1 to “ n ” , where 1 was had the highest impact and “ n ” had the lowest ; 5 . We then asked the stakeholders to again repeat the evaluation process , but this time by evaluating , from their perspective , how likely they anticipated each risk to actually occur , 1 being most likely and “ n ” being least likely . Insight This exercise provided our team with all of the information we needed , in the form of 4 distinct matrices , to then complete our own assessment of the reality of the potential risks this new product would pose to the target users and society more generally . I can not discuss what our official conclusions were , but I can say that we were able to assess the sustainability of the application from a “ social capital ” implication and provided our detailed findings , including a formal recommendation to our respective governments . At the time we never discussed our approach in specific “ design thinking ” details . However , looking back now , I can see that we applied a lot of the core components of visualization in order to solve the specific challenge presented by the wicked problem facing us . Visualization allowed us to bring a cross - functional team of experts , with varying perspectives on the problem / solution , and help find the closest expression of what the reality of the situation was through rich , informative data in the form of a matrix . Approach What we specifically found , was that there were a number of surprises in just how large of a gap there was between the varying perspectives ( in the form of how they visualized the associated risks to users , but also in how they ranked them ) which we likely would have never been able to qualify and quantify through a more generalized interview , group discussion , or literature review . In fact , some of the responses came as a complete surprise to some of the stakeholders themselves ! In the end , we were able to demystify a complex problem through the use of visualization . In the future , I anticipate applying a similar approach when faced with such a wicked problem , but it may not be the exact use case for more simple problems , in these cases I may opt to use a different version of the visualization exercise itself , or opt for more of an in - depth interview with a small sample of the target users directly .