Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T15:06:33.649Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR INTEGRATING DESIGN THINKING AND LEAN STARTUP METHODS INTO THE INNOVATION PROCESS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Tucker Marion ,
David Cannon ,
Tahira Reid  and
Anna-Maria McGowan
Tucker Marion*
Affiliation:
NASA
David Cannon
Affiliation:
NASA
Tahira Reid
Affiliation:
NASA
Anna-Maria McGowan
Affiliation:
NASA
*
Marion, Tucker, Northeastern University, Entrepreneurship and Innovation, United States of America, t.marion@neu.edu

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Design thinking is a methodology that comes from the industrial design realm and is centred on culling better needs insight from users. Another popular methodology is based gaining insight on the potential of an opportunity through experimentation, testing, and iterating with users. This is commonly referred to as lean startup methods. However, from a research perspective, we still do not know the most effective way to implement these user focused design methods within the innovation process within organizations, and which aspects of the design process are the most impactful in developing new opportunities. In this research, we propose a high-level conceptual process model on how user focused design methods such as design thinking and lean startup methods can be integrated into the up-front innovation process within organizations. We review the conceptual model, associated activities, and process considerations. The article concludes with thoughts on future research.

Keywords

User centred designDesign processNew product development
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 31 - 40
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Atance, C. M., & O'Neill, D. K. (2001). Episodic future thinking. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(12), 533–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barczak, G., Hultink, E. J., & Sultan, F. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of information technology usage in NPD: A comparison of Dutch and US companies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(6), 620–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blank, S. (2013). Why the lean startup changes everything. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 63–72.Google Scholar
Blank, S., & Dorf, B. (2020). The startup owner's manual: The step-by-step guide for building a great company. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84.Google ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, R. (2019). Systems thinking and design thinking: The search for principles in the world we are making. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 5(2), 85–104.Google Scholar
Bunduchi, R. (2017). Legitimacy-seeking mechanisms in product innovation: A qualitative study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34(3), 315–342.10.1111/jpim.12354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlgren, L., Rauth, I., & Elmquist, M. (2016). Framing design thinking: The concept in idea and enactment. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(1), 38–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, D., & Elman, C. (2008). Qualitative and multi-method research: Organizations, publication, and reflections on integration. Part IX, Organizations, Institutions, and Movements in the Field of Methodology, Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, 780–795.Google Scholar
Continuum (accessed 2020). https://www.continuuminnovation.com/en/what-we-do/case-studies/swiffer/Google Scholar
Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. J. (2005). Lean, rapid, and profitable new product development. Product Development Institute.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. G. (2006). Winning at new products: pathways to profitable innovation. In Proceedings Project Management Research Conference, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. G. (2008). Perspective: The stage-gate® idea-to-launch process—update, what's new, and nexgen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(3), 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. G., & Sommer, A. F. (2016). Agile-Stage-Gate: New idea-to-launch method for manufactured new products is faster, more responsive. Industrial Marketing Management, 59, 167–180.10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. G. (2017). Idea-to-Launch Gating Systems: Better, Faster, and More Agile: Leading firms are rethinking and reinventing their idea-to-launch gating systems, adding elements of Agile to traditional Stage-Gate structures to add flexibility and speed while retaining structure. Research-Technology Management, 60(1), 48–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. G. (2019). The drivers of success in new-product development. Industrial Marketing Management, 76, 36–47.10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.07.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). New products: what separates winners from losers?. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4(3), 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative. Quantitative, and mixed methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2008). Engineering Design Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Daly, S. R., Seifert, C. M., Yilmaz, S., & Gonzalez, R. (2016). Comparing ideation techniques for beginning designers. Journal of Mechanical Design, 138(10).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devaraj, S., & Kohli, R. (2003). Performance impacts of information technology: Is actual usage the missing link?. Management Science, 49(3), 273–289.10.1287/mnsc.49.3.273.12736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design studies, 32(6), 521–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerson, R. M., & Fretz, R. I. (2001). Participant Observation. Handbook of Ethnography, 352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EPAM Continuum Insulet Omnipod. (2021). https://www.continuuminnovation.com/en/what-we-do/case-studies/insulet-omnipod-insulin-management-system.Google Scholar
Eppinger, S., & Ulrich, K. (2015). Product design and development. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.Google Scholar
Felin, T., Gambardella, A., Stern, S., & Zenger, T. (2019). Lean startup and the business model: Experimentation revisited. Forthcoming in Long Range Planning (Open Access).Google Scholar
Fixson, S. K., & Rao, J. (2014). Learning emergent strategies through design thinking. Design Management Review, 25(1), 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, M. (2012). Engineering systems thinking: Cognitive competencies of successful systems engineers. Procedia Computer Science, 8, 273–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures (Vol. 5019). Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gans, J. S., Stern, S., & Wu, J. (2019). Foundations of entrepreneurial strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 40(5), 736–756.10.1002/smj.3010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Given, L. M. (Ed.). (2008). The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967) (2009).“. Jargoning: The use of the grounded theory vocabulary.” The Grounded Theory Review, 8(1).Google Scholar
Greene, M. T., & Papalambros, P. Y. (2016, March). A cognitive framework for engineering systems thinking. In 2016 Conference on Systems Engineering Research (pp. 1-7).Google Scholar
Greene, M.T., Gonzalez, R., Papalambros, P.Y., and McGowan, A.-M. (2017). Design Thinking vs. Systems Thinking for Engineering Design: What's the Difference?, International Conference on Engineering Design, Vancouver, Canada, August 21–25, 2017Google Scholar
IBM, 2018. The Total Economic Impact of IBM's Design Thinking Practice. https://www.ibm.com/design/thinking/static/media/Enterprise-Design-Thinking-Report.8ab1e9e1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Iskander, N. (2018). Design thinking is fundamentally conservative and preserves the Status Quo. Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. L., Drummond, D. K., & Camara, S. (2007). What is qualitative research?. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 8(1), 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, M. P. (2007). The relative importance of interfirm relationships and knowledge transfer for new product development success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(2), 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewrick, M., Link, P., & Leifer, L. (2018). The Design Thinking Playbook. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Liedtka, J. (2015). Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liedtka, J. (2018). Why design thinking works. Harvard Business Review, 96(5), 72–79.Google Scholar
Lockwood, T. (2009). Transition: How to become a more design-minded organization. Design Management Review, 20(3), 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luchs, M. G. (2015). A Brief Introduction to Design Thinking. Design Thinking: New Product Development Essentials from the PDMA, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marion, T. J., & Fixson, S. (2018). The Innovation Navigator: Transforming Your Organization in the Era of Digital Design and Collaborative Culture. University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781487512514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marion, T. J., Reid, M., Hultink, E. J., & Barczak, G. (2016). The Influence of Collaborative IT Tools on NPD: High-performing NPD teams tend to use collaborative tools such as wikis and microblogs throughout the NPD process. Research-Technology Management, 59(2), 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markham, S. K., & Lee, H. (2013). Product Development and Management Association's 2012 Comparative Performance Assessment Study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(3), 408–429.10.1111/jpim.12025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, M. H., & Marion, T. J. (2010). Innovating for effectiveness: Lessons from design firms. Research-Technology Management, 53(5), 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Micheli, P., Wilner, S. J., Bhatti, S. H., Mura, M., & Beverland, M. B. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Müller, R. M., & Thoring, K. (2012). Design thinking vs. lean startup: A comparison of two user-driven innovation strategies. Leading Through Design, 151, 91–106.Google Scholar
Philips Cocreation. https://www.philips.com/a-w/cocreatorlab/homepage.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Crown Books.Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. & Shankar, R. (2019). Strategic Management of Technological Innovation. McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
Seidel, V. P., & Fixson, S. K. (2013). Adopting design thinking in novice multidisciplinary teams: The application and limits of design methods and reflexive practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripsas, M. (2009). Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of “The Digital Photography Company”. Organization Science, 20(2), 441–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wacquant, L. (2003). Ethnografeast: A progress report on the practice and promise of ethnography. Ethnography, 4(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, Y. K. (1994) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar