In a world that gets harder and tougher every day, companies need creative and multifaceted solutions  for facing their challenges, which simultaneously enables them to win over their rivals. Such a need  leads to a method, called Design Thinking, the process of creating new and innovative ideas to solve a  particular problem. The aim of this paper  is to show how design thinking affects Product, Process and Organizational Innovation. The objective of  design thinking is to involve consumers, designers and businesspeople in an integrative process which  can be applied to product, service or even business design.  Based on the information and literature,  the conceptual framework of the research was designed  and hypotheses were developed.  Data from 95 organizations in science park of Tehran, Iran provided  empirical evidence for this survey. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM)  using Smart PLS 3.0 computer software was used to analyze the data. The results of this study  suggested that: Design thinking could be applicable to Product,  Process  and  Organizational  Innovation.  Using  the  various  Design  Thinking  tools,  techniques  and   templates, organizations can apply them to make their innovations come true.      Intro  Innovation  is the  mechanism  by  which organizations  produce  new  products, processes,  and   systems, required for their adaptation to the changing markets, technologies, and modes of  competition. Technological innovations, business model changes and shifting  consumer habits  are  increasingly producing turbulence in and around organizations. To successfully respond to these  dynamics, managers not only require innovative problem-solving practices but also need to turn from a  traditional decision-making attitude for example selecting among predetermined alternatives, toward a  design-creating  attitude i.e. creating new options.  This rapid and accelerating market shift towards integrated products and services has spurred  significant changes in how companies invest in innovation, train their employees and engage with their  customers.  Among these, one of the most visible and arguably, strongest trend is a board-based investment in  design thinking (Roberts et al., 2016). Design thinking, as a concept, has been slowly evolving and  coalescing over the past  decade. One  popular definition is  that design  thinking means  thinking like   a designer.  More concretely, Tim Brown of IDEO has written that design thinking is  a discipline that  uses the designer's sensibility and methods to match people's needs with what is technologically  feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity  (Martin, 2009).  Design  thinking  is promoted  as a  user-centered  approach  to innovation,  it  has been  introduced   as a management  approach that  brings creativity  and user-centeredness  to  organizations  as a  new   way of working (Brown, 2008). It has also started to receive increased attention in business settings.  This is because  the design of products and services is a major component of business competitiveness, to the extent  that  many known companies have committed themselves to become design leaders.  A review of the literature on design thinking suggests that it is a management practice deserving  increased attention from scholars. An examination of both theoretical work and actual management  practice reveals a process that is not only internally consistent and coherent, but also capable of  constituting a distinctive  practice (Andrea, 2014). The authors  believe that design thinking is a  remarkably under-used  tool for  achieving strategic business initiatives, increasingly driven by the need for innovation (Andrea,  2009).

This paper aims to consider how applying design thinking behaviors allows one to focus on the  problem, the issue and the user, letting him/her find the means for solutions. For many, this approach   combines different  viewpoints  and  customer-centric  concepts,  increasing  their  innovation  speed.   This  study investigates the nature of the relation between design thinking and innovation, particularly  with the purpose  of examining the relation between design thinking and product, process and organizational innovation.  It starts with the background as well as the issues of design thinking,      1.  Problem-Solving in Design Thinking  Design  Thinking  is  a  method  of  understanding  problems  and  producing  innovative  and   compelling solutions (Thienen et al., 2014). It is seen to inherently include questions concerning the  way the problem is represented  (Boland &  Collopy, 2004), looking beyond the immediate boundaries  of  the problem to ensure that the right question is being addressed (Drews, 2009), thus it goes beyond  what is obviously stated to see what lies behind the problem (Zaccai in Andrea, 2010). Identifying,  framing and reframing the  problem to be solved are regarded as equally important as solving the problem or finding an  appropriate solution (Beckman & Barry, 2007). The process of challenging the original problem is not  limited to the beginning of the process, but is ongoing, incorporating the findings already gained to re- phrase the problem.  There are problems that require creativity in order to find multiple workable solutions. Wicked Problems  is a common phrase and many papers have been return in this regard. According to Kimbell (2011),  design thinking  is appropriated  for a  variety of  professions e.g.  business  and sciences,  to  solve  disciplinary problems in seemingly new ways. In the same context, Piotrowski explains that businesses  are seeing that  the process of design can bring innovative thinking to problem-solving within the corporate  environment, a methodology which is known as design thinking (Piotrowski, 2011). Muratovski goes on  to propose that design has  developed from  a purely  stylistic  trade, centered  around creating   beautiful objects into  an industry with complex problem-solving at its core (Muratovski, 2015).  In  Wicked  Problems  in  Design  Thinking,  Buchanan  (1992)  posed  the  idea  that  designers   frequently encounter complex, wicked problems. The skill of developing multiple varied solutions in an  effective way that is at the heart of design thinking. In addition, Buchanan suggested that designers’  thought process allowed them to deal with complex, multi-faceted wicked problems.            Hypothesis    The  term design  thinking is  often used  as  a unique  approach  to solve  problems  in innovative   ways. Researchers from various disciplines use the principles of design to solve problems. Tim Brown  in his book Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation  (2009) has explored design thinking. Accordingly, design thinking, based on the same principles used  by designers to produce innovative solutions for engineering problems, is  considered by Brown to be  the paradigm  for  solving complex problems regardless of the field of activity. Also, he adds that:  Design thinking has its  origins in  the training and  the professional practice  of designers, but these are  principles that  can be  practiced by everyone and extended to every field of activity (Brown, 2008).

Insights into real users’ needs have been perceived to help innovation teams go beyond their usual  problem and solution frame. Studies show that design thinking has been used in the area of  incremental innovation or continuous improvement. The central promise in the literature is the  contribution of design thinking to innovation (Brown, 2008; Martin, 2009). However, while the view on  innovation ultimately affects how design thinking is evaluated, innovation as a term is usually not  problematized and is discussed mainly as short-term gains for instants creativity boost or a way to  come up with great ideas i.e., invention rather than innovation (Cruickshank, 2010).    Method  1. Survey Development and Sample  To test the research questions, a survey instrument was developed. The design process for the  questionnaire involved two stages. In the first, an extensive literature review was conducted, which got  further assisted through identification of model's constructs. Afterwards, the items associated with each  of the constructs got directly adopted or slightly modified. Since the questionnaires were administered  in Iran, two scholars  were asked to translate the initial English questionnaire into Persian. The Persian version was then  back-translated into English by two other scholars and both English versions were checked for any  discrepancies to  ensure consistency.  Ultimately the  Persian  questionnaire was  employed. In  the  second  stage,  three academics with relevant working experience in Iran reviewed the draft  questionnaire and identified any awkward or inapplicable items. Further revisions and refinements were  made, based on their feedbacks, to ensure that the survey would be highly understandable and  relevant to the practices in Iran. An internet survey  was administered and  targeted at  companies  located  in the  science parks  of Tehran,  Iran. The questionnaires were emailed to the members of top  management in each company with a cover letter that explained the purpose  of the  survey and  provided an assurance of  confidentiality. Previous  researches suggested that members of top  management are more familiar with ideas and values within organizations  putting them in the best  position to respond to the questionnaire (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Out of the 250 invitations,  emailed  to the respondents, as  many as 95 usable  output was received, representing  a  response rate of approximately 24%.    2. Constructs in the Model  Table 1 gives the variables, used in this study. The respondents were requested  to indicate the  level  of agreement on each of the statements from 1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree. The items for  the design thinking came from Blizzard et al. (2015) and Brown (2008). The respondents were asked to  answer the expressions. The  items for  product, process and organizational  innovation were  derived  from Jimenez- Jimenez et al. (2008). Respondents were asked to rate the level of each of the items,  using a  five-level  response format with 1: strongly below competitors up to 5: strongly above competitors.


In a world that gets harder and tougher every day , companies need creative and multifaceted solutions for facing their challenges , which simultaneously enables them to win over their rivals . Such a need leads to a method , called Design Thinking , the process of creating new and innovative ideas to solve a particular problem . The aim of this paper is to show how design thinking affects Product , Process and Organizational Innovation . The objective of design thinking is to involve consumers , designers and businesspeople in an integrative process which can be applied to product , service or even business design . Based on the information and literature , the conceptual framework of the research was designed and hypotheses were developed . Data from 95 organizations in science park of Tehran , Iran provided empirical evidence for this survey . Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling ( PLS - SEM ) using Smart PLS 3.0 computer software was used to analyze the data . The results of this study suggested that : Design thinking could be applicable to Product , Process and Organizational Innovation . Using the various Design Thinking tools , techniques and templates , organizations can apply them to make their innovations come true . Intro Innovation is the mechanism by which organizations produce new products , processes , and systems , required for their adaptation to the changing markets , technologies , and modes of competition . Technological innovations , business model changes and shifting consumer habits are increasingly producing turbulence in and around organizations . To successfully respond to these dynamics , managers not only require innovative problem - solving practices but also need to turn from a traditional decision - making attitude for example selecting among predetermined alternatives , toward a design - creating attitude i.e. creating new options . This rapid and accelerating market shift towards integrated products and services has spurred significant changes in how companies invest in innovation , train their employees and engage with their customers . Among these , one of the most visible and arguably , strongest trend is a board - based investment in design thinking ( Roberts et al . , 2016 ) . Design thinking , as a concept , has been slowly evolving and coalescing over the past decade . One popular definition is that design thinking means thinking like a designer . More concretely , Tim Brown of IDEO has written that design thinking is a discipline that uses the designer 's sensibility and methods to match people 's needs with what is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity ( Martin , 2009 ) . Design thinking is promoted as a user - centered approach to innovation , it has been introduced as a management approach that brings creativity and user - centeredness to organizations as a new way of working ( Brown , 2008 ) . It has also started to receive increased attention in business settings . This is because the design of products and services is a major component of business competitiveness , to the extent that many known companies have committed themselves to become design leaders . A review of the literature on design thinking suggests that it is a management practice deserving increased attention from scholars . An examination of both theoretical work and actual management practice reveals a process that is not only internally consistent and coherent , but also capable of constituting a distinctive practice ( Andrea , 2014 ) . The authors believe that design thinking is a remarkably under - used tool for achieving strategic business initiatives , increasingly driven by the need for innovation ( Andrea , 2009 ) . This paper aims to consider how applying design thinking behaviors allows one to focus on the problem , the issue and the user , letting him / her find the means for solutions . For many , this approach combines different viewpoints and customer - centric concepts , increasing their innovation speed . This study investigates the nature of the relation between design thinking and innovation , particularly with the purpose of examining the relation between design thinking and product , process and organizational innovation . It starts with the background as well as the issues of design thinking , 1 . Problem - Solving in Design Thinking Design Thinking is a method of understanding problems and producing innovative and compelling solutions ( Thienen et al . , 2014 ) . It is seen to inherently include questions concerning the way the problem is represented ( Boland & Collopy , 2004 ) , looking beyond the immediate boundaries of the problem to ensure that the right question is being addressed ( Drews , 2009 ) , thus it goes beyond what is obviously stated to see what lies behind the problem ( Zaccai in Andrea , 2010 ) . Identifying , framing and reframing the problem to be solved are regarded as equally important as solving the problem or finding an appropriate solution ( Beckman & Barry , 2007 ) . The process of challenging the original problem is not limited to the beginning of the process , but is ongoing , incorporating the findings already gained to re- phrase the problem . There are problems that require creativity in order to find multiple workable solutions . Wicked Problems is a common phrase and many papers have been return in this regard . According to Kimbell ( 2011 ) , design thinking is appropriated for a variety of professions e.g. business and sciences , to solve disciplinary problems in seemingly new ways . In the same context , Piotrowski explains that businesses are seeing that the process of design can bring innovative thinking to problem - solving within the corporate environment , a methodology which is known as design thinking ( Piotrowski , 2011 ) . Muratovski goes on to propose that design has developed from a purely stylistic trade , centered around creating beautiful objects into an industry with complex problem - solving at its core ( Muratovski , 2015 ) . In Wicked Problems in Design Thinking , Buchanan ( 1992 ) posed the idea that designers frequently encounter complex , wicked problems . The skill of developing multiple varied solutions in an effective way that is at the heart of design thinking . In addition , Buchanan suggested that designers ’ thought process allowed them to deal with complex , multi - faceted wicked problems . Hypothesis The term design thinking is often used as a unique approach to solve problems in innovative ways . Researchers from various disciplines use the principles of design to solve problems . Tim Brown in his book Change by Design : How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation ( 2009 ) has explored design thinking . Accordingly , design thinking , based on the same principles used by designers to produce innovative solutions for engineering problems , is considered by Brown to be the paradigm for solving complex problems regardless of the field of activity . Also , he adds that : Design thinking has its origins in the training and the professional practice of designers , but these are principles that can be practiced by everyone and extended to every field of activity ( Brown , 2008 ) . Insights into real users ’ needs have been perceived to help innovation teams go beyond their usual problem and solution frame . Studies show that design thinking has been used in the area of incremental innovation or continuous improvement . The central promise in the literature is the contribution of design thinking to innovation ( Brown , 2008 ; Martin , 2009 ) . However , while the view on innovation ultimately affects how design thinking is evaluated , innovation as a term is usually not problematized and is discussed mainly as short - term gains for instants creativity boost or a way to come up with great ideas i.e. , invention rather than innovation ( Cruickshank , 2010 ) . Method 1 . Survey Development and Sample To test the research questions , a survey instrument was developed . The design process for the questionnaire involved two stages . In the first , an extensive literature review was conducted , which got further assisted through identification of model 's constructs . Afterwards , the items associated with each of the constructs got directly adopted or slightly modified . Since the questionnaires were administered in Iran , two scholars were asked to translate the initial English questionnaire into Persian . The Persian version was then back - translated into English by two other scholars and both English versions were checked for any discrepancies to ensure consistency . Ultimately the Persian questionnaire was employed . In the second stage , three academics with relevant working experience in Iran reviewed the draft questionnaire and identified any awkward or inapplicable items . Further revisions and refinements were made , based on their feedbacks , to ensure that the survey would be highly understandable and relevant to the practices in Iran . An internet survey was administered and targeted at companies located in the science parks of Tehran , Iran . The questionnaires were emailed to the members of top management in each company with a cover letter that explained the purpose of the survey and provided an assurance of confidentiality . Previous researches suggested that members of top management are more familiar with ideas and values within organizations putting them in the best position to respond to the questionnaire ( Hambrick & Mason , 1984 ) . Out of the 250 invitations , emailed to the respondents , as many as 95 usable output was received , representing a response rate of approximately 24 % . 2 . Constructs in the Model Table 1 gives the variables , used in this study . The respondents were requested to indicate the level of agreement on each of the statements from 1 : strongly disagree to 5 : strongly agree . The items for the design thinking came from Blizzard et al . ( 2015 ) and Brown ( 2008 ) . The respondents were asked to answer the expressions . The items for product , process and organizational innovation were derived from Jimenez- Jimenez et al . ( 2008 ) . Respondents were asked to rate the level of each of the items , using a five - level response format with 1 : strongly below competitors up to 5 : strongly above competitors .