I'm conflicted about design thinking.
One the one hand, it's really established itself as a recognizable design process outside of the design world. Business people have heard of it and respect it, and that's a great achievement.
On the other hand, it just seems very poorly defined. Per the article, it's a process that consists of 5 distinct modes/phases, but it's also a collection of methods, and it's also a way of thinking and a way of working. It's also specific to design, but really anybody can use it. It's a solution-based approach, but it's really good at questioning and for undefined problems. It's about thinking outside the box, but really it's focused on digging deeper via research and about story telling.
It just seems like design thinking has become a generic catch-all term for what the design community thinks makes a good process. It means everything and nothing. My concern is that companies who want to adopt a good design will take this and then just be confused.
Might be a fun exercise to write an article that explains design thinking in a very simple and structured way.
Anyhow, what do you gals and guys think?
Design thinking at this point is just more empty corporate jargon that anyone can fill with whatever pet grievance or agenda they espouse.
That's really unfortunate though. Would be amazing to save the status it has gained and clarify what it is. Otherwise people will always think that design is this mysterious thing that artsy people do.