1. Challenge   The challenge is to prepare a site investigation report for a major hospital campus. It will require connecting  technical people and their design solutions to what is meaningful for those involved with a major Hospital  Campus, and most importantly, with the patients.     The hospital describes their issue with the campus as follows:   "First-rate health care requires first-rate infrastructure. Unfortunately, the infrastructure is ageing and the physical  layout is limiting the potential for growth and innovation"    Given the campus’ complexity and existing site constraints, the critical path is to develop a strategic planning  process focused on establishing a roadmap to identify, prioritise and resolve conflicting stakeholder demands,  prior to proceeding with design and staged delivery packaging to suit funding streams.    Prior to proceeding with the more traditional elements of the planning process we will collaboratively develop and  implement a strategic stakeholder engagement process, guiding the overall planning process, in order to reach  agreement on precinct service priorities.    The challenge/ objective for the Site Investigation component is how do we:    Capture, collate and ultimately package existing information from multiple asset holders so that it can be  readily understood, easily accessed and used by planning and design consultants;    Adequately inform the required scope for further site investigations.    Define and structure the site investigation so that it:  o  captures the gaps in existing information,  o  can be combined with existing information to form an amalgamated, seamless record of site  infrastructure  o  can be selectively overlaid with additional detail as / when required (i.e. scalable); and   o  is in a consistent format which lends itself to data base, BIM and BMS type modelling  environments    Package all of the above so that it can be provided as a legacy asset/ infrastructure database back to  the hospital, and is able to be used to inform the whole of the campus,  or be accessed and potentially  updated in discrete areas (e.g. by grid) to allow for staged redevelopment and/ or individual stakeholder  use    2. Selection

We will prepare a pilot of the strategic stakeholder engagement process. The primary reason for this pilot is for us  to simply understand how we might approach technical solutions to meaningful things in different ways.  In short, we really want to make a difference.    A taster of design thinking at least - beginning with just a 4 hour pilot session, focusing largely on the first stages  of a, what should be a, far more rigorous and structured process using a variety of tools.   Starting with an overview of the project (it's not just a hospital, it’s a campus and precinct), we will apply 2 Design  Thinking tools to develop a deeper understanding of the problem statement. We will ask why this is a problem? -  and we will ask ‘why’ a number of times. The aim is to grasp everyone's understanding of the problem and to  uncover the root cause of the issues at play.    In an adaptation of the business model canvas tool, we will focus on people and what they do at the hospital    "Who are the end users?"    "What do you think some of their pain points might be ?"    "Empathise with current end users to understand their needs.  What are current end user experiences?"    "What are some of the platforms in place?"    "Describe current operational procedures?"    "Can you describe any end user experiences?"    "Who else might be affected? nurses? patients?"    Recognising that patients, carers, clinicians and operators of the hospital each have a spectrum of needs and  desires, as part of a wider understanding phase we will engage with a broad group of stakeholders to understand  their individual needs and expectations.     Using a combination of survey tools and interviewing we will ensure everyone has a voice to truly understand  today’s challenges – and capabilities     3. Application   During the Pilot we will be undertaking some activities that would be typical of the envisage phase of our design  led innovation approach. We will aim to envisage a future to develop a prototype in the form of a narrative. First  up will envisage two people - today . We called it the current state of two individuals, Paul and Jim.

We will then journey map the interaction these characters with the hospital campus in today’s reality, the ‘What  is?’. This includes events that happen to each person before and after their interaction with the hospital. The  purpose of this exercise is to build empathy with their associated characters and extract key emotions felt by  those characters during the day.    The emotions that will be highlighted by the Pilot members will then be carried into the next activity, the ‘What if?’.  We will try to envisage a future to develop a prototype in the form of a narrative.    Here's the current state, or What is, of two individuals, Paul and Jim. Paul’s story is created as one of the 98,000  Australians treated through our health system today. We envisage Jim as one of the facilities' managers that  keep hospitals ticking, 24/7, every day.    During the ‘What If’ we will focus on the emotions that are highlighted from the ‘What Is’ exercise, and each Pilot  group will be tasked to envisage a future where those emotions were improved upon. If they are negative  emotions, how would that be negated or eliminated? If they are positive emotions how could they be further  improved?    Both groups will be asked not get caught up with solutions that would cause these results – but rather focus on  the results themselves. Focus on how the future would look if these issues were 'magically’ resolved.      4. Insight   The outcome from the Journey Maps together is what they will evolve into and what is the Pilot groups'  interpretation of these new emotions.    We will use a Connect Chart to link the two realities together by firstly listing the initial emotions/ reasons the end  user was feeling a certain way. We will then list the corresponding future emotional results of this initial feelings.  Finally we will link the two realities (present and future) with a main idea.    Our pilot will be set up with some trepidation – aiming to be illustrative of true approach, knowing we'd have to  curtail. Afterwards, the participants are expected to be enthused by the insight of testing the idea that technical  solutions ought to be meaningful for the users of the facility and most importantly, the patients.    Our engineer brains' will ache to provide THE solution, but careful facilitation and application of Design Thinking  tools will have us walking in the shoes of patients and the operators and imagining the future state; and also  imagining the consequences of doing same old same old.    A fascinating taster for those involved, at a time when the project is forming and can benefit. A reminder that the  problem statement set down the challenge to:    Ensure that we have considered all potential uses, and     Ensure the end product does not end up unwieldly and sitting on a shelf unused       5. Approach   Our challenge is now for the wider project team to embrace an end user/experience centric design led innovation process  to solve the problem set.

In a fuller design thinking approach all 5 steps will be visited using various tools. We will seek to find the  questions and answers together, enabling all stakeholders to build new mind-sets to address the future - not just  in this project, but for many years to come.


1 . Challenge The challenge is to prepare a site investigation report for a major hospital campus . It will require connecting technical people and their design solutions to what is meaningful for those involved with a major Hospital Campus , and most importantly , with the patients . The hospital describes their issue with the campus as follows : " First - rate health care requires first - rate infrastructure . Unfortunately , the infrastructure is ageing and the physical layout is limiting the potential for growth and innovation " Given the campus ’ complexity and existing site constraints , the critical path is to develop a strategic planning process focused on establishing a roadmap to identify , prioritise and resolve conflicting stakeholder demands , prior to proceeding with design and staged delivery packaging to suit funding streams . Prior to proceeding with the more traditional elements of the planning process we will collaboratively develop and implement a strategic stakeholder engagement process , guiding the overall planning process , in order to reach agreement on precinct service priorities . The challenge/ objective for the Site Investigation component is how do we :  Capture , collate and ultimately package existing information from multiple asset holders so that it can be readily understood , easily accessed and used by planning and design consultants ;  Adequately inform the required scope for further site investigations .  Define and structure the site investigation so that it : o captures the gaps in existing information , o can be combined with existing information to form an amalgamated , seamless record of site infrastructure o can be selectively overlaid with additional detail as / when required ( i.e. scalable ) ; and o is in a consistent format which lends itself to data base , BIM and BMS type modelling environments  Package all of the above so that it can be provided as a legacy asset/ infrastructure database back to the hospital , and is able to be used to inform the whole of the campus , or be accessed and potentially updated in discrete areas ( e.g. by grid ) to allow for staged redevelopment and/ or individual stakeholder use 2 . Selection We will prepare a pilot of the strategic stakeholder engagement process . The primary reason for this pilot is for us to simply understand how we might approach technical solutions to meaningful things in different ways . In short , we really want to make a difference . A taster of design thinking at least - beginning with just a 4 hour pilot session , focusing largely on the first stages of a , what should be a , far more rigorous and structured process using a variety of tools . Starting with an overview of the project ( it 's not just a hospital , it ’s a campus and precinct ) , we will apply 2 Design Thinking tools to develop a deeper understanding of the problem statement . We will ask why this is a problem ? - and we will ask ‘ why ’ a number of times . The aim is to grasp everyone 's understanding of the problem and to uncover the root cause of the issues at play . In an adaptation of the business model canvas tool , we will focus on people and what they do at the hospital  " Who are the end users ? "  " What do you think some of their pain points might be ? "  " Empathise with current end users to understand their needs . What are current end user experiences ? "  " What are some of the platforms in place ? "  " Describe current operational procedures ? "  " Can you describe any end user experiences ? "  " Who else might be affected ? nurses ? patients ? " Recognising that patients , carers , clinicians and operators of the hospital each have a spectrum of needs and desires , as part of a wider understanding phase we will engage with a broad group of stakeholders to understand their individual needs and expectations . Using a combination of survey tools and interviewing we will ensure everyone has a voice to truly understand today ’s challenges – and capabilities 3 . Application During the Pilot we will be undertaking some activities that would be typical of the envisage phase of our design led innovation approach . We will aim to envisage a future to develop a prototype in the form of a narrative . First up will envisage two people - today . We called it the current state of two individuals , Paul and Jim . We will then journey map the interaction these characters with the hospital campus in today ’s reality , the ‘ What is ? ’ . This includes events that happen to each person before and after their interaction with the hospital . The purpose of this exercise is to build empathy with their associated characters and extract key emotions felt by those characters during the day . The emotions that will be highlighted by the Pilot members will then be carried into the next activity , the ‘ What if ? ’ . We will try to envisage a future to develop a prototype in the form of a narrative . Here 's the current state , or What is , of two individuals , Paul and Jim . Paul ’s story is created as one of the 98,000 Australians treated through our health system today . We envisage Jim as one of the facilities ' managers that keep hospitals ticking , 24/7 , every day . During the ‘ What If ’ we will focus on the emotions that are highlighted from the ‘ What Is ’ exercise , and each Pilot group will be tasked to envisage a future where those emotions were improved upon . If they are negative emotions , how would that be negated or eliminated ? If they are positive emotions how could they be further improved ? Both groups will be asked not get caught up with solutions that would cause these results – but rather focus on the results themselves . Focus on how the future would look if these issues were ' magically ’ resolved . 4 . Insight The outcome from the Journey Maps together is what they will evolve into and what is the Pilot groups ' interpretation of these new emotions . We will use a Connect Chart to link the two realities together by firstly listing the initial emotions/ reasons the end user was feeling a certain way . We will then list the corresponding future emotional results of this initial feelings . Finally we will link the two realities ( present and future ) with a main idea . Our pilot will be set up with some trepidation – aiming to be illustrative of true approach , knowing we 'd have to curtail . Afterwards , the participants are expected to be enthused by the insight of testing the idea that technical solutions ought to be meaningful for the users of the facility and most importantly , the patients . Our engineer brains ' will ache to provide THE solution , but careful facilitation and application of Design Thinking tools will have us walking in the shoes of patients and the operators and imagining the future state ; and also imagining the consequences of doing same old same old . A fascinating taster for those involved , at a time when the project is forming and can benefit . A reminder that the problem statement set down the challenge to :  Ensure that we have considered all potential uses , and  Ensure the end product does not end up unwieldly and sitting on a shelf unused 5 . Approach Our challenge is now for the wider project team to embrace an end user / experience centric design led innovation process to solve the problem set . In a fuller design thinking approach all 5 steps will be visited using various tools . We will seek to find the questions and answers together , enabling all stakeholders to build new mind - sets to address the future - not just in this project , but for many years to come .