Design Thinking for Innovation – Reflection on the Mind Mapping Tool

1.) Challenge  At my work on a manufacturing site of a consumer electronics company, I am asked to improve the  quality and output quantity of a production line. Design Thinking techniques are rarely known in the  factory, and if people heard about it, they usually associate it with the creative and a bit unrealistic  people from the product design department. A culture of small continuous improvements exists, for  which everyone, from manager to engineer to operator, is responsible. Larger improvements where my  project is aiming for, are more challenging as production reliability might be a affected and multiple  teams are involved. Besides that, when a pre-selected solution has to deal with automation (i.e.  robotics), the sensitive association with cutting jobs is present.

2.) Selection  I started my project with identifying the current state (‘What is’-phase). The people who work directly  with the production line, usually have the best realistic and pragmatic knowledge. But most of all, I  wanted to have them being engaged with the project; they would have a major influence in the concept  selection (as they needed to work with it), and it would improve their work without having to fear for  losing their jobs.   Based on this challenge, I selected the Mind Mapping tool, in order to achieve insights in the current  state of the production line. Getting the involved people engaged is something I want to achieve with  the Tool as well. As described in Module 3 of the Design Thinking course (and within the book Designing  for Growth by Beatriz Tsotetsi & Tommy Hall), with Mind Mapping all relevant aspects of a topic are  visualized and clusters and interdependencies are made. Eventually, the problem description is  sharpened, and the design criteria for developing concepts are established, on which all the relevant  stakeholders have commonly agreed.

3.) Application  For the Mind Mapping session I invited the relevant stakeholders of the production line: the operators,  the maintenance crew, the technical experts and the production planners. On the wall, I had pre-drafted  the production line schematically; we all can walk along it if we were the raw material input moved  towards the finished product output. The first assignment was that each team had its own colour of  post-its and was asked to stick it along the drafted line where he/she was involved. Step 2 was to draw  lines to the other teams when they communicated. When the overview of responsibilities and  communications links was ready, each member was asked to mark the spot of the production line where  most trouble (poor quality, lower output) was caused. In my preparation, I identified one area of the line  where a technical automation solution would be an improvement. This area indeed showed up at the  team session as well. In one clear overview, we could see which teams where involved in that area, and  how that was linked to each other.

4.) Insight  The insight I valued most of the Mind Mapping tool, was that the clustering and prioritizing of problems  took place as a team effort; everyone felt engaged and had the feeling that they as a team identified the  problem, and that thy as a team would also solve it! Moreover, the overview we created of the entire  process, did not only lead to the technical direction I initially was aiming for, but also revealed other  areas of improvement, such as certain communication steps in the process. Considering Design Thinking  from a broader perspective, it helps as a reference or starting point for discussions; it is easy to  physically point on a wall where in the process we are talking about, and how it is linked to other parts,  as the mind alone is not able to keep that structure.

5.) Approach  Next time, I would use the Mind Mapping Tool again the get a clear view of the scope. Getting the total  picture might lead to multiple improvements instead of aiming for just one pre-selected area. Although I  noticed that drawing the current state can be less exciting for the team members if they have done that  multiple times; therefore pre-work from the organizer is crucial. Next time I could already provide a  draft of the production line, with responsibilities and communication lines between the teams, and just  ask them to add or comment on it. Finding the right balance between doing easy work together to get  engagement, versus directly work on defining exciting problems and design criteria is crucial here!


Design Thinking for Innovation – Reflection on the Mind Mapping Tool 1 . ) Challenge At my work on a manufacturing site of a consumer electronics company , I am asked to improve the quality and output quantity of a production line . Design Thinking techniques are rarely known in the factory , and if people heard about it , they usually associate it with the creative and a bit unrealistic people from the product design department . A culture of small continuous improvements exists , for which everyone , from manager to engineer to operator , is responsible . Larger improvements where my project is aiming for , are more challenging as production reliability might be a affected and multiple teams are involved . Besides that , when a pre - selected solution has to deal with automation ( i.e. robotics ) , the sensitive association with cutting jobs is present . 2 . ) Selection I started my project with identifying the current state ( ‘ What is’-phase ) . The people who work directly with the production line , usually have the best realistic and pragmatic knowledge . But most of all , I wanted to have them being engaged with the project ; they would have a major influence in the concept selection ( as they needed to work with it ) , and it would improve their work without having to fear for losing their jobs . Based on this challenge , I selected the Mind Mapping tool , in order to achieve insights in the current state of the production line . Getting the involved people engaged is something I want to achieve with the Tool as well . As described in Module 3 of the Design Thinking course ( and within the book Designing for Growth by Beatriz Tsotetsi & Tommy Hall ) , with Mind Mapping all relevant aspects of a topic are visualized and clusters and interdependencies are made . Eventually , the problem description is sharpened , and the design criteria for developing concepts are established , on which all the relevant stakeholders have commonly agreed . 3 . ) Application For the Mind Mapping session I invited the relevant stakeholders of the production line : the operators , the maintenance crew , the technical experts and the production planners . On the wall , I had pre - drafted the production line schematically ; we all can walk along it if we were the raw material input moved towards the finished product output . The first assignment was that each team had its own colour of post - its and was asked to stick it along the drafted line where he / she was involved . Step 2 was to draw lines to the other teams when they communicated . When the overview of responsibilities and communications links was ready , each member was asked to mark the spot of the production line where most trouble ( poor quality , lower output ) was caused . In my preparation , I identified one area of the line where a technical automation solution would be an improvement . This area indeed showed up at the team session as well . In one clear overview , we could see which teams where involved in that area , and how that was linked to each other . 4 . ) Insight The insight I valued most of the Mind Mapping tool , was that the clustering and prioritizing of problems took place as a team effort ; everyone felt engaged and had the feeling that they as a team identified the problem , and that thy as a team would also solve it ! Moreover , the overview we created of the entire process , did not only lead to the technical direction I initially was aiming for , but also revealed other areas of improvement , such as certain communication steps in the process . Considering Design Thinking from a broader perspective , it helps as a reference or starting point for discussions ; it is easy to physically point on a wall where in the process we are talking about , and how it is linked to other parts , as the mind alone is not able to keep that structure . 5 . ) Approach Next time , I would use the Mind Mapping Tool again the get a clear view of the scope . Getting the total picture might lead to multiple improvements instead of aiming for just one pre - selected area . Although I noticed that drawing the current state can be less exciting for the team members if they have done that multiple times ; therefore pre - work from the organizer is crucial . Next time I could already provide a draft of the production line , with responsibilities and communication lines between the teams , and just ask them to add or comment on it . Finding the right balance between doing easy work together to get engagement , versus directly work on defining exciting problems and design criteria is crucial here !