A FEW MONTHS BACK DURING a Facebook Live Interview with a news correspondent Dr Nattha Komolvadhin on the topic of design thinking, I had alluded to the similarities between notion of problem-finding and solving of design thinking and of Buddhism. Ever since I have been asked by a few colleagues to explain in details. Specifically, I talked about how similar between the "Four Noble Truth" and the problem-understanding/defining/solving process of design thinking.
Let me begin with the specific quote from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Sloan School of Management defines the "four steps" of design thinking: At a high level, the steps involved in the design thinking process are simple: first, fully understand the problem; second, explore a wide range of possible solutions; third, iterate extensively through prototyping and testing; and finally, implement through the customary deployment mechanisms. These four steps are almost universally known in the design thinking communities to be, sort of, conventional steps.
There're many names: Understand the problem > Explore the possible solution > Iteration > Implementation; Define > Ideate > Prototype > Test; Clarify > Ideate > Develop > Implement; Discovery > Interpretation > Ideation > Experimentation; Etc.
Xerox (yes, the company whose name almost becomes synonymous with photocopying) has its 6 Steps to Lasting Improvement, which contains: Step 1: Recognize the Need; Step 2: Consider Your Options; Step 3: Gain Insight; Step 4: Take Action; Step 5: Make It a Habit; and, Step 6: Overcome Setbacks As you can say, these 6 steps are pretty much the same as the 4 steps or the 5 step of design thinking above (and below in the diagram). Xerox's Step 4 is the prototype step.
The additional Step 6 is the evaluation step that, argues Xerox, could lead to better improvement of its products, services and experiences. Despite different terms used, they're similar aspects in these approaches to problem solving. The key, for all of these, is the identification of the "real problem," and not to create another problem as a result of trying to solve a problem.
As I have written about earlier, one of the most potential ways of seeing such a "real problem" is to not let your "expertise" determine too quickly what it is that you are supposed to do. For instance, a couple weeks ago I was giving a design thinking workshop at Chiang Mai. One of the audiences had a noodle stall and she wanted to use design thinking to create a new competitive advantage for her small business.
Having an teenage child, she's completely fixated on the idea that her noodle shop was outdated, and had to appeal to younger people; and, therefore it must look more "hip and cool." Many participants in the workshop, who're in the interior design business, gave this noodle stall's owner a lot of advice on interior design, and how might she attempt to "evolve" the decoration of her noodle shop to fit the 21st century Chiang Mai.
But the obvious question (AKA "the elephant in the room") is shouldn't we be asking the most basic question: Is your noodle delicious? This is a great example of an instance in which if we only have a hammer all problems will be nails.
In Without and Within: Questions and Answers on the Teachings of Theravada Buddhism, (available for free as a PDF file) the Venerable Ajahn Jayasaro writes the following about the meaning of Buddha's Four Noble Truth (Disclaimer: I am not an expert on Buddhism although I have recently expanded my reading list to cover a huge amount of work on the subject as a result of my seeing a deep connection between the ways of understanding problems in Buddhism and design industries): There is dukkha -- a chronic unsatisfactoriness of unenlightened existence; There is a cause of dukkha.
It is dependent upon certain causes and conditions; There is a cessation of dukkha; and, There is a path leading to the ending of dukkha. Now, to me, I think that is quite obvious the similarity between the 4-fold process of design thinking and the 4-fold process of the Four Noble Truth.
I particular like the idea of Dukka (Pli; Sanskrit: dukha; Tibetan: ) !% being "a chronic unsatisfactoriness of unenlightened existence" (also translated as "the lack of true happiness." I mean, how many times that we have complained about a product, service, and experience that cause us some kind of chronic dissatisfaction? As someone who constantly looks for good design, this is the dukka that I have to deal with daily.
Even though I m no perfectionist, I constant see "bad designs" from the moment that I walk out of my door. From the design of the public pavement, to the lack of coordination of signage in the metro system, to the toiler paper dispenser in a public toiler, I am constantly bombarded with dukka.
I need to keep in mind two very important Buddhist/Stoic thoughts: I can only control my value and opinion, and there is a true nature of the way things are (and which you have no power to change) Noted that in Buddhism, there's only one source of dukka: Our constant and insatiable desire to be stimulated by things that are external of us. Instead of being content with our own existence, we consistently seek better food, better clothes, better awards, better praises, better places to visit, and so on.
And after achieving one, you have to constantly set a new goal to achieve the next, relentlessly and ceaselessly. So, what's the solution? In short, the Four Noble Truth is to reconnect us with the way of the nature. Naturally, we don't crave a Louit Vitton bag, a Pulitzer Prize, and a fried banana with Icelandic caviar (the last item is made up by me). The "Eightfold Paths" to end all dukka begins with having the "right view," followed by right intention, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and, eventually, concentration.
Nature gives us just enough what we need to live a good life. In other words, in the words of the creative company IDEO founder David Kelly himself, he thinks the Tibetans are right to use the term "nature" in lieu of "technology," "innovation" and "creativity." A true technology, innovation, creativity do no less than connecting us with our nature. That is, the path to inner peace and calm ("tranquility" for the Stoics) is to not let your life depend on external stimulus.
The Venerable Ajahn Jayasaro (In Thai ) also writes: We seek happiness in things that inevitably disappoint us; we avoid things that would lead to our long-term welfare. In short, we are our own worst enemy. Dukka in this sense, is a "problem" that a design thinker faces. Let's see if we can unpack the notion of the Four Noble Truth to help those design better.
And this could be anything from an overly-complicated remote control that causes the users "a chronic unsatisfactoriness of unenlightened existence," a noodle stall that doesn't seem to be attracting its customers despite its awesome broth and handmade rice noodle, or a life that doesn't seem to give the sense of satisfaction. So, let's see if we can use the simplicity of Four Noble Truth to a tackle a design problem. There is dukkha -- a chronic unsatisfactoriness of unenlightened existence.
Let's say that in design, dukka is our dissatisfaction with whatever "conditional problems" that we think we can use design to solve. In this case, "conditional problems" have to do with the conditions of a particular situation. Something that works in one place/context/operation might not work in others because of such different conditions. So, keep that in mind.
We might call this process an "exploration." There is a cause of dukkha. It is dependent upon certain causes and conditions.
Now that we know that there is a design dissatisfaction, the next thing that we must do is to find out what is the real causes and sources of that condition. This is where you'd need more than yourself to help you think. As I wrote in my previous post, you need more diverse eyes to help see and understand what might lie at your blind spot.
In design splint, we conducted ethnographic research, brainwrite, and brainstorm to find the true causes and sources of the problem along with thinking about practical solutions. Let's call this process "define and ideation."; There is a cessation of dukkha. Yes, bad designs should not even be called designs and should come to end. It's we who will put an end to it. But how? In the previous post, I discuss the Stoic's use of the "show me" approach to design.
So, instead of endlessly discussing how we are going to put an end to a bad design, we might as well "just do it." This is when we use rapid prototype to test out the ideas. It must be kept in mind that the "cessation of dukkha" is the main goal here. Let's call this process "prototyping (a series of problem- solving potentials." There is a path leading to the ending of dukka. In Buddhism, this is when the "Eightfold Path" comes in.
To have all the "right" things in place (i.e., action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, concentration), dukka cannot find it form in your consciousness. But how do we know that what we do is "right?" Exactly. The point here is to constantly and mindfully observe your action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, concentration; so that they will constantly and consistently be right. Enough or Buddhism, what about for design thinking? We, too, need to constantly and mindfully observe our own deign process.
accepting the possibility of having to return to repeat the previous steps should they been done too abruptly or too mindlessly. We need to accept the chaotic nature of a design process and accept that the "right" design process is that one that involves complexity and not a straight line of progress.
Whatever you thought you have done right from the first step could be wrong or misleading; so, instead of fixating on your "perfect" prototypes, you must observe the process and be able to make the decision constantly return to the precious process to enhance your design in order to arrive at an implementable product, service, or experience. Let's call this process "design implementation." Now, finally, I have to admit that I have been using this Four-Noble-Trust-disguised-as-design-thinking-process to deal with many problems in life, together with Stoicism.
The most important point here is to never let your fierce emotion or the automatically hot System One take over at any point in the process. Your fierce emotion and System One are likely to push you away from the design path that you have designed for yourself.
For instance, I realized about two years ago that the source of my chronic pessimism about the world -- my dukka -- was not that the world was going to hell but actually the news about the inhumanity in the world that journalists liked to report. I didn't know what to do. I felt as though I had lost all the hope in the world; and only wanted to move to a distant place so that I would not have to deal with the society again.
I also became distrustful of many people around me. I became paranoid of those who wanted to come close me. I closed myself in and only spoke in a small number of people. Can you believe that which was actually what I thought of as a sound solution? Thanks to Steven Pinker's book The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined, I learned that we are living in the most peaceful time in the history of humankind.
Pinker emphasizes that it's the journalists that give us the "availability bias" by bombarding us with news about the horror of humanity that, sadly, sell. So, my solution? Since the source of my dukka is not the world -- but the news -- I simply stopped watching news, closing all my social media platforms, and engage with people in the real world without any availability biases. Since then I have become a much more optimistic and happy person.
On Design Thinking Part 8: Dealing with Criticisms