Reflection – Mind Mapping

Challenge

When I joined the organization, I was a given a list of challenges our customer faces when our customers  want to repeat and reuse the previous marketing campaigns created in our marketing tool. There was  no information on what % of users are facing these problems, how frequently they face these challenges  or what their journey was. There was no information if any of these challenges were interconnected.

Selection

After reviewing the information provided, I came to conclusion that I still need more information to  completely understand the problem space. We decided to talk to a few customers, our sales team and  look at their past marketing campaigns data. We also decided to expand our repertoire by researching  other businesses and industries in the similar situation. We had a lot of similar and conflicting data. We  decided to use Mind Mapping to look for patterns and interconnections between seemingly disparate  ideas. We used the Design Thinking Journey map to chronologically list the current steps and understand  what they were doing and thinking at every step. Based on customer type, and their skill sets we  decided on our Personas. Using Mind Mapping we collated the data into design criteria.  We still had the  challenge to decide what our MVP should look like. We decided on surveying our direct customer and  partners.

Application

We created a cross functions team. We wanted to understand the context of problems and hidden  opportunities. Based on our interviews with a few customers we listed all design criteria that needs to  be solved, and created a list of problem criteria. Engineering team did data analysis, to understand  frequency of the data changes and which customer type are impacted the most. We overlapped these  information with the survey results.

Insights

We put all the information on wall.  As a team we reviewed the patterns, insights and related  information. We were confronted with missing and disconfirming data. We made sure we all are aligned  and have a common understanding of the current reality. We did couple of what if, what will be the  customer impact if the solution will not satisfy 1-3 design criteria.

Approach

We were unable to agree on one solution. We decided to implement multiple solutions satisfying  discrete problem criteria and but were unable to solve the customer problem completely.  After this

Design Thinking for Innovation course, I felt we should have stayed in the problem space a little more. I  completely agree with the Reality Check shared in the course

Reality Check #2: Customers are terrible at envisioning things that don’t already exist.

Reality Check #4: When the ratio of resources invested gets too far ahead of knowledge possessed, bad  things happen

And we made both mistakes. We were challenged by organization’s doubters, to prove using today’s  data that our theories about something that doesn’t exist makes business sense. We were for sure  trapped in “growth gridlock”.

We should have invested in ethnographic research involving close observation of what customers were  trying to accomplish, and not necessarily what they say they want. We should have been closer to our  customer’s lives, to see firsthand their problems and their frustrations. We should have captured their  experiences with help of projective tools – interviewee’s journals, interviewee’s images depicting their  challenges. For our next project we will constantly ask these questions:

  What do we know?

  What do we not know?

  What do we need to know?

  How do we learn what we need to know?

And will use collaboration tool to search for higher ground and not a common ground. We will make  sure that we develop shared insights and ambition among all team members before we try to generate  ideas. We for sure will try to build a shared mind map of the current state and then translate into design  criteria.


Reflection – Mind Mapping Challenge When I joined the organization , I was a given a list of challenges our customer faces when our customers want to repeat and reuse the previous marketing campaigns created in our marketing tool . There was no information on what % of users are facing these problems , how frequently they face these challenges or what their journey was . There was no information if any of these challenges were interconnected . Selection After reviewing the information provided , I came to conclusion that I still need more information to completely understand the problem space . We decided to talk to a few customers , our sales team and look at their past marketing campaigns data . We also decided to expand our repertoire by researching other businesses and industries in the similar situation . We had a lot of similar and conflicting data . We decided to use Mind Mapping to look for patterns and interconnections between seemingly disparate ideas . We used the Design Thinking Journey map to chronologically list the current steps and understand what they were doing and thinking at every step . Based on customer type , and their skill sets we decided on our Personas . Using Mind Mapping we collated the data into design criteria . We still had the challenge to decide what our MVP should look like . We decided on surveying our direct customer and partners . Application We created a cross functions team . We wanted to understand the context of problems and hidden opportunities . Based on our interviews with a few customers we listed all design criteria that needs to be solved , and created a list of problem criteria . Engineering team did data analysis , to understand frequency of the data changes and which customer type are impacted the most . We overlapped these information with the survey results . Insights We put all the information on wall . As a team we reviewed the patterns , insights and related information . We were confronted with missing and disconfirming data . We made sure we all are aligned and have a common understanding of the current reality . We did couple of what if , what will be the customer impact if the solution will not satisfy 1 - 3 design criteria . Approach We were unable to agree on one solution . We decided to implement multiple solutions satisfying discrete problem criteria and but were unable to solve the customer problem completely . After this Design Thinking for Innovation course , I felt we should have stayed in the problem space a little more . I completely agree with the Reality Check shared in the course Reality Check # 2 : Customers are terrible at envisioning things that do n’t already exist . Reality Check # 4 : When the ratio of resources invested gets too far ahead of knowledge possessed , bad things happen And we made both mistakes . We were challenged by organization ’s doubters , to prove using today ’s data that our theories about something that does n’t exist makes business sense . We were for sure trapped in “ growth gridlock ” . We should have invested in ethnographic research involving close observation of what customers were trying to accomplish , and not necessarily what they say they want . We should have been closer to our customer ’s lives , to see firsthand their problems and their frustrations . We should have captured their experiences with help of projective tools – interviewee ’s journals , interviewee ’s images depicting their challenges . For our next project we will constantly ask these questions :  What do we know ?  What do we not know ?  What do we need to know ?  How do we learn what we need to know ? And will use collaboration tool to search for higher ground and not a common ground . We will make sure that we develop shared insights and ambition among all team members before we try to generate ideas . We for sure will try to build a shared mind map of the current state and then translate into design criteria .