Reflection – Visualization in device graphics

Challenge & Selection   The first tool I used was the tool of Visualization, or Visual Thinking, to achieve a shared understanding  of a problem space among a diverse group of stakeholders before attempting to identify and define  possible solutions to the problem. I use this approach within organization for talks with cross  functional teams, who are working in different departments working to apply scientific or technology  innovations for pharmaceutical development. I have used the technique of using a device visualization  of a problem domain with a set of details of each part for discussion to allow a diverse group of  stakeholders to learn from each other in the process of defining the scope, boundaries, key elements,  and relationships between elements to consider when identifying device points and opportunities for  improvements or solutions.     Application   I start the process by creating a device graphic of the problem domain. To develop the device graphic,  I draw the device design from existing knowledge on available material to understand the design. The  existing knowledge talks about procedural documents, study results on various tested device, or other  auditing reports.     The design details were not available, then I conduct informal interviews with two of the stakeholders  who serve as my main points of contact on the study initiative. The results were available for four  tested devices. However, the understanding on the data was not being easy for all the involved  stakeholders. Thus, comparative assessment was made simple through graphics, using simple shapes  and icons. Process flow was used along with animations for the visualisation and easy understanding  for different stakeholders including clinical team.     The visualisation approach helped to clarify the doubts of all stakeholders with whom we had  interaction that enable the organization to provide the timely completion of activities.   The template I often start with the rationale, requirements and then design basics that will resolve  the doubts on how to operate the device.     For the activity, we had stakeholders (8-9) each representing a different function or department in  organization or area of interest. Each group received an invite to join the meeting for direct interaction  and also provided sticky notes to make comments.   I have explained them design graphics for 20 minutes and asked for questions to clear the doubts, if  any. Then the major question on clinical aspect and impact on clinical study was discussed and the  doubts were clarified with risk assessment.     Insight & Approach   What I have learned from conducting this exercise with several stakeholders is that while the graphic  – especially the animation for visualisation – is important for easy understanding of the problem that  we are working to solve. The animation gives the diverse group of stakeholders a clear picture on the  facts and data that allows them to share their perspectives and develop insights into potential risk if  any. The more valuable aspect of the activity is the shared insights and shared learning that occurs  while we are working to define the problem space. They can quickly identify where they are in the  graphic – or if they are missing – and can more quickly gain new insights about device design and key  entities of it instead of taking time to identify them. They can also identify variables in the problem  space – that is, it helps them to identify what they don’t know, in what areas they need to obtain  information or data to provide the values for the variables.   Since I discovered that the most valuable aspect is the shared insights and learning, next time I would  use the visualization activity as a starting point for a series of design thinking activities.


Reflection – Visualization in device graphics Challenge & Selection The first tool I used was the tool of Visualization , or Visual Thinking , to achieve a shared understanding of a problem space among a diverse group of stakeholders before attempting to identify and define possible solutions to the problem . I use this approach within organization for talks with cross functional teams , who are working in different departments working to apply scientific or technology innovations for pharmaceutical development . I have used the technique of using a device visualization of a problem domain with a set of details of each part for discussion to allow a diverse group of stakeholders to learn from each other in the process of defining the scope , boundaries , key elements , and relationships between elements to consider when identifying device points and opportunities for improvements or solutions . Application I start the process by creating a device graphic of the problem domain . To develop the device graphic , I draw the device design from existing knowledge on available material to understand the design . The existing knowledge talks about procedural documents , study results on various tested device , or other auditing reports . The design details were not available , then I conduct informal interviews with two of the stakeholders who serve as my main points of contact on the study initiative . The results were available for four tested devices . However , the understanding on the data was not being easy for all the involved stakeholders . Thus , comparative assessment was made simple through graphics , using simple shapes and icons . Process flow was used along with animations for the visualisation and easy understanding for different stakeholders including clinical team . The visualisation approach helped to clarify the doubts of all stakeholders with whom we had interaction that enable the organization to provide the timely completion of activities . The template I often start with the rationale , requirements and then design basics that will resolve the doubts on how to operate the device . For the activity , we had stakeholders ( 8 - 9 ) each representing a different function or department in organization or area of interest . Each group received an invite to join the meeting for direct interaction and also provided sticky notes to make comments . I have explained them design graphics for 20 minutes and asked for questions to clear the doubts , if any . Then the major question on clinical aspect and impact on clinical study was discussed and the doubts were clarified with risk assessment . Insight & Approach What I have learned from conducting this exercise with several stakeholders is that while the graphic – especially the animation for visualisation – is important for easy understanding of the problem that we are working to solve . The animation gives the diverse group of stakeholders a clear picture on the facts and data that allows them to share their perspectives and develop insights into potential risk if any . The more valuable aspect of the activity is the shared insights and shared learning that occurs while we are working to define the problem space . They can quickly identify where they are in the graphic – or if they are missing – and can more quickly gain new insights about device design and key entities of it instead of taking time to identify them . They can also identify variables in the problem space – that is , it helps them to identify what they do n’t know , in what areas they need to obtain information or data to provide the values for the variables . Since I discovered that the most valuable aspect is the shared insights and learning , next time I would use the visualization activity as a starting point for a series of design thinking activities .