When Design Thinking Doesn’t Work

with real-world examples

I have to admit that for me, was a kind of dogma that never failed. Until recently. Lately, I’ve been facing a lot of obstacles when applying this methodology. And here are the reasons why:

I. Lack of empirical data
Design thinking is not based on empirical data and lacks scientific rigor. While design thinking is often used to develop new digital products or services, it may not be suitable for solving complex problems that require a more analytical and evidence-based approach.

Case in point: One of the products (a marketplace in a nutshell) I once worked on was incredibly complex and can be categorized as B2B2B2C. Our users were business owners providing services to their own clients using our product, individual entrepreneurs, developers, and marketers. Our “client” was quite difficult to define in the traditional sense.

We could not hang personas around the office, and the JTBD methodology didn’t help either… The research team worked tirelessly to provide as much data as possible to understand our users. However, the heterogeneity of our clients, their diverse requirements, and most importantly, the secrecy of work and user data and the inability of our clients to show and tell about all their work cases, created a significant lack of empirical data and complicated the second phase of design thinking known as “Define”.

II. Design thinking emphasizes the importance of empathy and understanding the needs and desires of the user. However, argue that this can rather than on underlying problems. In addition, empathy alone may not be enough to solve complex problems that require a more systematic and analytical approach.

Case in point. The already mentioned heterogeneity of our users and the inability to practically study their workflow from start to finish makes it impossible for us, designers and researchers, to exhibit much empathy. Instead of empathy as a result of long-term immersion in the lives and concerns of users, we have a few quick interviews with experts, where we get only a superficial understanding of their needs.

III. Lack of flexibility
The design thinking methodology tells us to do things at a low level of precision, test quickly, learn from the results, and repeat the process. This way, we are constantly looking for a balance between the product and our users.

But the business world is full of competitors, tight deadlines, and the need to deliver results here and now. The reality of the design process, especially in large companies, is quite far from the theory of applying design thinking.

Case in point: When Apple suddenly introduced a new algorithm for collecting user data, all the principles on which marketing companies had previously based their decisions were overturned. The value of those products dropped. And the designs they had developed, tested and launched became irrelevant in a jiffy. Companies had to keep their customers, so designers and developers had to reconstruct part of the product to meet Apple’s new requirements in a very short time, under conditions of complete uncertainty and with no empirical data. The methodology is therefore particularly poorly suited to solving problems in areas of rapid change or high uncertainty.

The conclusion is actually very simple: Design Thinking as a human-centered problem-solving methodology has its clear advantages and can be successfully applied. In practice, however, it is applied in a piecemeal fashion and in combination with other methodologies, where Design Thinking becomes only an auxiliary tool and critical and rational analysis remains the mainstay in the search for and making decisions.

Design thinking doesn’t work here:

• When time is of the essence and there’s no room for a proper design thinking process.
• When the issue is highly technical or requires specialized expertise that designers may not have.
• When the problem is extremely complex and requires multiple stakeholders and perspectives to solve.
• When the project involves sensitive concerns that may not be suitable for a collaborative design approach.
• When the work is urgent and should be done quick, and a tactical solution is required, rather than a more holistic, strategic approach.

Thank you for reading!
If you found this or any of my articles useful, you can support me on my or by 🤗