Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

From Design Thinking to Design Intelligence - How the Sharing Economy Can Benefit From Utilizing a New Design Framework?

479 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Slide deck of my presentation at the 3rd International Workshop on the Sharing Economy, Southampton University, UK, September 15-16, 2016

Publicado en: Empresariales
  • Sé el primero en comentar

From Design Thinking to Design Intelligence - How the Sharing Economy Can Benefit From Utilizing a New Design Framework?

  1. 1. Raz Godelnik | Parsons School of Design | @godelnik 3rd International Workshop on the Sharing Economy, September 15-16, 2016 Winchester, UK Sharing Economy 3.0 How the Sharing Economy Can Benefit From Utilizing a New Design Framework?
  2. 2. • �• • A • • " " "e/ e • • • � H H ' f '
  3. 3. The Challenge “It is not impossible to build systems that will incorporate the social into the economic. It depends on what firms do, it depends on what NGOs do, it depends on what policy do, but it is a critical requirement we build systems that reincorporate the social into the economic.” —Yochai Benkler
  4. 4. The Design Thinking Trap
  5. 5. Design Thinking “Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” —Tim Brown, President & CEO VIABILITY (BUSINESS) DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) INNOVATION FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SOURCE: IDEO.COM
  6. 6. What’s wrong with Design Thinking? User, not human centered. “Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people users, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” —Tim Brown, president and CEO VIABILITY (BUSINESS) DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) INNOVATION FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SOURCE: IDEO.COM
  7. 7. What’s wrong with Design Thinking? The platform as an algorithm. “Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities dominance of technology, and the requirements for business success.” —Tim Brown, President & CEO VIABILITY (BUSINESS) DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) INNOVATION FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SOURCE: IDEO.COM
  8. 8. “neutral technological platform, designed simply to enable drivers and passengers to transact the business of transportation.” - Barbara Ann Berwick v. Uber
  9. 9. What’s wrong with Design Thinking? Putting shareholders first. “Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business [as usual] success.” —Tim Brown, president and CEO VIABILITY (BUSINESS) DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) INNOVATION FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SOURCE: IDEO.COM
  10. 10. What’s wrong with Design Thinking? Limited framing: What type of innovation? “Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” —Tim Brown, President & CEO VIABILITY (BUSINESS) DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) INNOVATION FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SOURCE: IDEO.COM
  11. 11. Moving to Design Intelligence We take a more holistic and systemic approach, fusing design thinking with economic rationality, business logic, and organizational reality, and emphasizing realignment of all the parts of the organization, not just its innovation processes. DESIRABILI TY (HUMAN) VIABILIT Y (BUSINESS ) FEASABILI TY (TECHNICAL) SUBSTAINAB LE INNOVATION EXTERN AL (RESILIENCE ) CONTEX T INTERNA L
  12. 12. Taking a systematic approach
  13. 13. Sharing Economy Model MINDSE T CULTUR E VALUE CREATION VALUE DELIVERY VALUE CAPTURE “A business model describes the rationale of how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value.” – Alex Osterwalder & Yves Pigneur
  14. 14. Sharing Economy Model 1.0 MINDSET (CREATIVE DESTRUCTION) CULTURE (SILICON VALLEY) VALUE CREATION (GREAT UX) VALUE DELIVERY (ALGORITHM) VALUE CAPTURE (SHAREHOLDER PRIMACY) PROS INNOVATIVE SCALE CONS EXPLOITATIVE UNSUSTAINAB LE ORIENTATIO N: PROBLEM SOLVING
  15. 15. CO-CREATIVE PROCESS Sharing Economy Model 2.0 MINDSE T (COLLECTIVE) CULTURE (GENUINE SHARING) VALUE CREATION (SOCIAL VALUE) VALUE DELIVERY (PLATFORM CO- OPS) VALUE CAPTURE (FAIRNESS) PROS PEOPLE- CENTERED PROGRESSIVE CONS EXCLUSIVE LIMITED $$ ORIENTATION: SENSE MAKING
  16. 16. Sharing Economy Model 3.0 MINDSE T (RESILIENCE) CULTURE (TRANSFORMATIV E) VALUE CREATION (LIFE CENTERED) VALUE DELIVERY (DIVERSE PLATFORMS) VALUE CAPTURE (EQUITABLE) PROS SYSTEMIC PEOPLE- CENTERED INNOVATIVE CONS DIFFICULT TO ASSESS EXPERIMENTA L CO- CREATIVE PROCESS ORIENTATIO N: EMBRACING CHAOS Adapt and transform – creating resilient organizations that help make society more resilient, i.e. reducing vulnerabilities and increasing capacities, enhancing its ability to withstand shocks and recover rapidly when necessary.
  17. 17. Why do we need a resilient mindset?
  18. 18. What is a resilient mindset? Resilience, when referred to socio-technical systems, means the system’s capacity to cope with stress and failures without collapsing and, more importantly, learning from the experience. Resilient systems are characterized by diversity, redundancy, feedbacks and continuous experimentation. They are built up with a multiplicity of largely independent and very diverse sub-systems, and are the ground on which new and alternative solutions constantly appear. Source: Culture of Resilience (CoR) Book 1, University of the Arts London
  19. 19. Content vs. Context “The ultimate test of resilient enterprise is not whether it is flexible and creative enough to survive and beat the competition for a while longer as things fall apart around it. The truest test of resilience is whether the transition fosters wider circles of resilience that cascade into a world that becomes more just, decent and durable, which is to say life-centered.” – David Orr, Resilient by Design (author: Joseph Fiskel)
  20. 20. Sharing Economy Model 3.0 MINDSE T (RESILIENCE) CULTURE (TRANSFORMATIV E) VALUE CREATION (LIFE CENTERED) VALUE DELIVERY (DIVERSE PLATFORMS) VALUE CAPTURE (EQUITABLE) PROS SYSTEMIC PEOPLE- CENTERED INNOVATIVE CONS DIFFICULT TO ASSESS EXPERIMENTA L CO- CREATIVE PROCESS ORIENTATIO N: EMBRACING CHAOS Adapt and transform – creating resilient organizations that help make society more resilient, i.e. reducing vulnerabilities and increasing capacities, enhancing its ability to withstand shocks and recover rapidly when necessary.
  21. 21. Designing for the next context “Always design a thing by considering it in its next larger context – a chair in a room, a room in a house, a house in an environment, an environment in a city plan.” Eliel Saarinen (1873-1950)
  22. 22. The Path Forward DESIGN THINKING DESIGN INTELLIGENCE COMPETITION COLLECTIVE RESILIENCE SHARING ECONOMY RESILIENT ECONOMY
  23. 23. Questions for further research 1. What does a resilient society look like? 2. What is the best framework to assess the impact of SE platforms on the resilience of society? 3. How might we co-create effectively for resilience? 4. How do you change the mindset from “creative destruction” and “collective” to “resilience”? 5. What is the role of policy makers in this transition? 6. How a Design Intelligence framework could help different stakeholders? 7. How the resilience narrative changes from one place to another?
  24. 24. Next steps 1. Co-creating a resilience assessment framework for p2p marketplaces (inspiration: B corps) 2. Working with 2-3 platforms that will go through the assessment 3. Bringing together different stakeholders to reassess the framework 4. Presenting preliminary outcomes
  25. 25. Thank you! godelnir@newschool.edu twitter: @godelnik

×