Article: Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry #design-thinking


Frank Guerino
 

Hi All,

For those interested, the article “Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry” discusses the formal adoption of DT by KM as a means of reinvigorating KM by providing it with clear frameworks, practices, and tools that it currently lacks.


I hope you find it interesting.

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)


Arno Boersma <arnovation@...>
 

Thanks, Frank. Would certainly be great if the worlds of DT and KM were more integrated for mutual benefit. In case you missed it, we had a SIKM discussion on this after a recent presentation of mine, check slides here: https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/SIKM/design-thinking-for-knowledge-management 
Kind regards,
Arno

On Mar 27, 2017, at 21:32, Frank Guerino frank.guerino@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Hi All,

For those interested, the article “Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry” discusses the formal adoption of DT by KM as a means of reinvigorating KM by providing it with clear frameworks, practices, and tools that it currently lacks.


I hope you find it interesting.

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)


Frank Guerino
 

Hi Arno,

I did go through your presentation after I missed that specific SIKM meeting.  I remember thinking that you see what I see.  I had to go back to find it but I believe slide #3 tells an interesting story.  I wish it had a longer time range because DT has been around a lot longer than formal KM and, while DT has been relatively ignored for many decades, it seems to be slowly finding its way past the KM industry.

NOTE: I would add that, in addition to what you already cover in your deck, the KM community could benefit by adopting DT as a “teachable” framework.  In other words, KM professionals can go into an enterprise as DT educators, with the expertise to teach DT to people/teams within that enterprise.  DT can be another piece of the KM portfolio of offerings.

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)


From: SIKM Leaders <sikmleaders@...>
Reply-To: SIKM Leaders <sikmleaders@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 9:11 AM
To: SIKM Leaders <sikmleaders@...>
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] Article: Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry

 

Thanks, Frank. Would certainly be great if the worlds of DT and KM were more integrated for mutual benefit. In case you missed it, we had a SIKM discussion on this after a recent presentation of mine, check slides here: https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/SIKM/design-thinking-for-knowledge-management 
Kind regards,
Arno

On Mar 27, 2017, at 21:32, Frank Guerino frank.guerino@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Hi All,

For those interested, the article “Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry” discusses the formal adoption of DT by KM as a means of reinvigorating KM by providing it with clear frameworks, practices, and tools that it currently lacks.


I hope you find it interesting.

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)


Matt Moore <innotecture@...>
 

Frank,

Let me start off by saying that I agree with you that there is a lot of value in the design thinking movement for knowledge managers. I have looked at the work of IDEO, d.school and Roger Martin with a lot of interest and applied some of it where I can over the years.

Two suggestions to bolster the credibility of your position:

1. There are already people with cross-over experience of both knowledge management and design thinking techniques out there. In Australia I immediately think of Zaana Howard and James Dellow. Zaana did a PhD on this stuff (and now has a senior role @ McKinsey). You might want to link to the work of others in what you are proposing.


2. I think you need to be careful about your definition of design thinking. Much like KM, there is a lot of ambiguity about this term. The best, simple intro to this topic is probably this post that compares different processes: https://experience.sap.com/skillup/introduction-to-design-thinking/

In your article, you put the d.school / IDEO processes together with the IF4IT SAF framework. To me, the d.school/IDEO processes are very different to approaches like IF4IT SAF. You would use each in different contexts to achieve different goals - N.B. I am not saying that either are right or wrong per se. I suspect that your definition of "design thinking" is different to many people associated with that label and if that is the case, you need to be more explicit about that.

Regards,

Matt


Frank Guerino
 

Hi Matt,

Re. #1: I’d be happy to take a look at any of their published works.  Do you have links to them?  So far, the attempts I’ve seen by KM pros to adopt DT as part of their portfolios has been at small silo-ed levels (e.g. individual private practices).  It would be interesting to see such attempts at more macroscopic levels.

Re. #2:  I read the link and I would suggest you not give it much attention.  It presents a very limited in its views on DT.  There are many DT frameworks.  Some focus on Emotion more than others.  Some focus on large scale problems more than others.  Some focus on specific domain areas more than others.  I’m involved with work with a number of colleges and universities and deal with professors who teach DT concepts and you’ll hear the same things if you talk w/ them.  The big example I always get from them are the comparisons between IDEO and Double Diamond.  They fit into different types of domain spaces and serve different purposes, with significant overlap.

I’m also always reminded that DT concepts have been around for a very long time.  Most people are familiar with other more historically established names (e.g. Rapid Prototyping, Rapid Application Design, Spiral BPI, eXtreme, P2P, etc.).  “Design Thinking” is just the cool new label.

Re. #3:  This is a longer conversation.  Suffice it to say that just like there are many DT frameworks in the response to #2, the SAF represents a different DT framework for getting to viable solutions.  IDEO, for example, is a nice framework.  However, IDEO does very little to accurately guide you through what it means to develop a competent complex business strategy that solves the problem of a big change in government regulation(s), or what it means to change one very complex system, or what it means to simultaneously implement and change many hundreds of complex systems.  SAF is a framework that is more targeted and guides the user through the types of things that raise the probability of success for more complex but targeted efforts.

In short, the DT framework we would use to solve a complex marketing problem is probably not the same DT framework we'd use to put a person on Mars.  Certain complex problems require much higher levels of formal and very focused rigor than others.  The creativity spirals for these more complex problems are also far wider, requiring such rigors to help keep them in check and from spiraling out of control.

All this being said, I do believe that the KM industry has a real opportunity, here.  It can continue to struggle to be noticed and stay afloat or it can catch and ride the DT wave, which fits quite nicely into what it means to develop, manage, and test knoweldge.

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)



On 3/29/17, 6:31 PM, "Matt Moore" <innotecture@...> wrote:

Frank,

Let me start off by saying that I agree with you that there is a lot of value in the design thinking movement for knowledge managers. I have looked at the work of IDEO, d.school and Roger Martin with a lot of interest and applied some of it where I can over the years.

Two suggestions to bolster the credibility of your position:

1. There are already people with cross-over experience of both knowledge management and design thinking techniques out there. In Australia I immediately think of Zaana Howard and James Dellow. Zaana did a PhD on this stuff (and now has a senior role @ McKinsey). You might want to link to the work of others in what you are proposing.


2. I think you need to be careful about your definition of design thinking. Much like KM, there is a lot of ambiguity about this term. The best, simple intro to this topic is probably this post that compares different processes: https://experience.sap.com/skillup/introduction-to-design-thinking/

In your article, you put the d.school / IDEO processes together with the IF4IT SAF framework. To me, the d.school/IDEO processes are very different to approaches like IF4IT SAF. You would use each in different contexts to achieve different goals - N.B. I am not saying that either are right or wrong per se. I suspect that your definition of "design thinking" is different to many people associated with that label and if that is the case, you need to be more explicit about that.

Regards,

Matt

_______________________________________________
Actkm mailing list


Frank Guerino
 

Hi James,

You made the statement: “And yes, there is as much ambiguity in design thinking as there is in KM.

With DT, everyone knows it to be one thing and one thing only, which is broad description for approaches to solving problems.  It has clear frameworks, each with clear activities that have purposeful intent, and even clear tools like templates.  Can we say any of these things about KM?

My Best,

Frank
Frank Guerino, Managing Partner
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)

From: James Dellow <james.dellow@...>
Reply-To: "ActKM Discussion List <actkm@...>" <actkm@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 11:26 PM
To: "ActKM Discussion List <actkm@...>" <actkm@...>
Subject: Re: [Actkm] [sikmleaders] Article: Design Thinking as the backbone for the Knowledge Management Industry

Thanks for the hat tip, Matt :-)

I would also recommend Roger L. Martin and his book, The Design of Business.

There are many possible touch points between knowledge management and design thinking worth exploring but I would say it all depends on if you think or want to use design thinking as either a method, an intervention, an organisational capability or a personal mindset.

And yes, there is as much ambiguity in design thinking as there is in KM.

Personally I’ve become familiar with design thinking because of the way I approach mediating the relationship between technology and people.

James


# James Dellow
Chief Technology Solutions
https://digitalworkplace.co/
+61 414 233711