Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection

Learning Launch for India IIT(ISM Unit In-processing

Challenge      I am currently a Battalion Staff member within the LVMH. We have been

struggling recently with our Soldier in-processing system. Whenever a new Soldier shows up to  an Army unit, after their initial entry training (think Basic training), they go through a system  known as in-processing. This is some sort of checklist or procedure where the new Soldier  checks in with all of the staff sections (the civilian equivalent to areas such as HR, operations,  tech support, office managers, orientation, on-boarding, etc.) and important unit  locations/people/sections to give them their name and information so they can be added to the  necessary systems, and then that section can introduce themselves and provide the new Soldier  with all of the necessary information to successfully inculcate into the unit.    The problem lies in the fact that in an under-staffed unit, the people responsible for in-

processing these Soldiers also have a multitude of other duties that often pull them out of the  office for hours on end. Vehicle maintenance, meetings, coordination with external units, you  name it – we can’t be present in the office at all times. Consequently, these in-processing  Soldiers fall through the cracks and begin their daily life in the unit without having been  properly on-boarded to all the necessary systems, and then they aren’t being tracked. Our  challenge is to develop a system that can ensure all these Soldiers receive the on-boarding they  require, but leave the staff sections with the flexibility to not feel tied down to the office. Also,  to make it even more complicated, none of these new Soldiers have computer accounts, so  leveraging technology is not an option. We need to innovate a solution with little to no tech  involvement – we need to pull this value out of the tools and systems that we already have in  place.    Selection      The Digital Dialogues does not have the luxury of a financial bottom-line to drive efficiency

and success at the unit level. All improvements are derived straight from the character, hard  work, and fulfillment of duty of those who serve. The most applicable tool discussed in this  course is definitely the learning launch. It fits for a couple of key reasons.    First, we do not have a lot of time, energy, focus, money, or resources to devote to this

problem. The problem is just big enough to cause an organizational/operational inconvenience,  but nobody gets hurt, and the issues get found and corrected eventually, so it also doesn’t raise  enough flags to become the target of a Commander who has the power to act quickly and  correct the problem swiftly.

Second, we have a constant stream of users that can be individually tracked. We have

probably an average of two to seven new Soldiers show up to the unit every week. This means  that we have a consistent source for user-driven feedback, and we can make many small  changes after each new Soldier provides feedback until the feedback levels out at our most  efficient solution.

Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection

Lastly, there are many areas of the in-processing checklist that could be changed or

improved. This means we need a large data pool to find the inefficiencies.

All of these factors point to the learning launch. It will be a user-driven, iterative, fail-

fast-and-cheap way to work out the kinks of the in-processing system without losing any  productivity, letting any Soldier get seriously misguided, and all for the cost of about 15  minutes of my time reviewing the Soldier’s notes about the in-processing checklist.    Application    As previously stated, we needed a quick and easy way to address this problem. Our

product in this scenario is the in-processing checklist, a sheet of paper that guides the Soldier to  the right locations, informs them of the right people and systems they need to check in with,  and then closes the loop by requiring signatures from each of these locations so that they can  prove they completed it.    Our application of this learning launch was simple – we made the checklist more of a

conversation – more interactive. We added areas for feedback throughout the checklist, so the  Soldier could take notes of the most important points of friction or helpful things throughout  the process. When a new Soldier arrived, I sent them out with the checklist and let them  interact with it, conversing with each section, giving and receiving what each party needed, and  then asked for comments about their experience.    Although not as glamorous as other innovations, this implementation of the learning

launch was very effective.    Insight

With each new Soldier that came back into my office, I would quickly open the Word

document, make the adjustments recommended by the previous Soldier, and then send the  next Soldier out with the improved document. This costed me almost no time – all and all  probably 30 minutes of updates per week. If a Soldier came back and had missed something  due to a hole in the system, it only took me 5 minutes to walk them over to the correct location  and manually correct the error, before permanently correcting it on the sheet for the next  Soldier.

This iterative process for the learning launch was critical – it allowed us to fail quickly

and fail very small. Improvements were made over time, and the product will never be perfect,  but this is where we leveraged one of the last points made by Professor Liedtka – be  comfortable with leaving things unfinished. Our application of the learning launch leaves room  for this continual improvement – and ensures it always stays the best it can be. If we become  obsessed with a final product – we will establish one of these iterations as the final product,  and then it stops getting better, which is the last thing we want.    Approach    I think because of what I have described above, any future attempts to improve this

system should also utilize the learning launch or a similar process. It is by far the best way to  improve a system such as this one. The implementation can be improved, however, in the  following way.

Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection        One of the biggest problems with the original checklist was lack of user interaction. It

made an inherently human process inhuman. Shaking hands, saying hello, and seeing faces  became a piece of inanimate paper. I think to further improve the system, we need a learning  launch of a system that re-integrates the human into in-processing. It is the Soldier’s first  experience at the unit, and it sets the tone for everything else. A survey is not the warmest  welcome. I think to take it a step further even, combining the learning launch and the  storytelling strategies to humanize the process could be an interesting experiment.


Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection Learning Launch for India IIT(ISM Unit In - processing Challenge I am currently a Battalion Staff member within the LVMH . We have been struggling recently with our Soldier in - processing system . Whenever a new Soldier shows up to an Army unit , after their initial entry training ( think Basic training ) , they go through a system known as in - processing . This is some sort of checklist or procedure where the new Soldier checks in with all of the staff sections ( the civilian equivalent to areas such as HR , operations , tech support , office managers , orientation , on - boarding , etc . ) and important unit locations / people / sections to give them their name and information so they can be added to the necessary systems , and then that section can introduce themselves and provide the new Soldier with all of the necessary information to successfully inculcate into the unit . The problem lies in the fact that in an under - staffed unit , the people responsible for in- processing these Soldiers also have a multitude of other duties that often pull them out of the office for hours on end . Vehicle maintenance , meetings , coordination with external units , you name it – we ca n’t be present in the office at all times . Consequently , these in - processing Soldiers fall through the cracks and begin their daily life in the unit without having been properly on - boarded to all the necessary systems , and then they are n’t being tracked . Our challenge is to develop a system that can ensure all these Soldiers receive the on - boarding they require , but leave the staff sections with the flexibility to not feel tied down to the office . Also , to make it even more complicated , none of these new Soldiers have computer accounts , so leveraging technology is not an option . We need to innovate a solution with little to no tech involvement – we need to pull this value out of the tools and systems that we already have in place . Selection The Digital Dialogues does not have the luxury of a financial bottom - line to drive efficiency and success at the unit level . All improvements are derived straight from the character , hard work , and fulfillment of duty of those who serve . The most applicable tool discussed in this course is definitely the learning launch . It fits for a couple of key reasons . First , we do not have a lot of time , energy , focus , money , or resources to devote to this problem . The problem is just big enough to cause an organizational / operational inconvenience , but nobody gets hurt , and the issues get found and corrected eventually , so it also does n’t raise enough flags to become the target of a Commander who has the power to act quickly and correct the problem swiftly . Second , we have a constant stream of users that can be individually tracked . We have probably an average of two to seven new Soldiers show up to the unit every week . This means that we have a consistent source for user - driven feedback , and we can make many small changes after each new Soldier provides feedback until the feedback levels out at our most efficient solution . Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection Lastly , there are many areas of the in - processing checklist that could be changed or improved . This means we need a large data pool to find the inefficiencies . All of these factors point to the learning launch . It will be a user - driven , iterative , fail- fast - and - cheap way to work out the kinks of the in - processing system without losing any productivity , letting any Soldier get seriously misguided , and all for the cost of about 15 minutes of my time reviewing the Soldier ’s notes about the in - processing checklist . Application As previously stated , we needed a quick and easy way to address this problem . Our product in this scenario is the in - processing checklist , a sheet of paper that guides the Soldier to the right locations , informs them of the right people and systems they need to check in with , and then closes the loop by requiring signatures from each of these locations so that they can prove they completed it . Our application of this learning launch was simple – we made the checklist more of a conversation – more interactive . We added areas for feedback throughout the checklist , so the Soldier could take notes of the most important points of friction or helpful things throughout the process . When a new Soldier arrived , I sent them out with the checklist and let them interact with it , conversing with each section , giving and receiving what each party needed , and then asked for comments about their experience . Although not as glamorous as other innovations , this implementation of the learning launch was very effective . Insight With each new Soldier that came back into my office , I would quickly open the Word document , make the adjustments recommended by the previous Soldier , and then send the next Soldier out with the improved document . This costed me almost no time – all and all probably 30 minutes of updates per week . If a Soldier came back and had missed something due to a hole in the system , it only took me 5 minutes to walk them over to the correct location and manually correct the error , before permanently correcting it on the sheet for the next Soldier . This iterative process for the learning launch was critical – it allowed us to fail quickly and fail very small . Improvements were made over time , and the product will never be perfect , but this is where we leveraged one of the last points made by Professor Liedtka – be comfortable with leaving things unfinished . Our application of the learning launch leaves room for this continual improvement – and ensures it always stays the best it can be . If we become obsessed with a final product – we will establish one of these iterations as the final product , and then it stops getting better , which is the last thing we want . Approach I think because of what I have described above , any future attempts to improve this system should also utilize the learning launch or a similar process . It is by far the best way to improve a system such as this one . The implementation can be improved , however , in the following way . Design Thinking for Innovation – End of Course Reflection One of the biggest problems with the original checklist was lack of user interaction . It made an inherently human process inhuman . Shaking hands , saying hello , and seeing faces became a piece of inanimate paper . I think to further improve the system , we need a learning launch of a system that re - integrates the human into in - processing . It is the Soldier ’s first experience at the unit , and it sets the tone for everything else . A survey is not the warmest welcome . I think to take it a step further even , combining the learning launch and the storytelling strategies to humanize the process could be an interesting experiment .