3 Design Thinking exercises to make problem-solving more exciting

An illustration of three individuals looking at a giant phone on the floor. — Design Thinking workshops provide a hands-on approach to problem-solving.

Giving designers hands-on experience with Design Thinking is essential. We’ll learn to walk in the shoes of the end-user and also make decisions focusing on their needs. In some cases, Design Thinking exercises are added to a meeting to help solve a problem that seems challenging — but how do we make sure we keep those problem-solving sessions exciting?

Here are 3 techniques and exercises from Design Thinking that you can leverage.

An illustration of two men sitting behind a desk and talking to each other. — The best way to give designers hands-on experience with Design Thinking is through exercises.

#1 — “Yes, but” vs. “Yes, and” exercise

That exercise takes more than 15 minutes and is done in pairs. The purpose of that exercise is to improve teamwork and learn to accept others’ ideas and also build on them. It shows the difference between an open and closed mindset.

The exercise starts with choosing a task that will be discussed. Both designers must know the task. One person will start the conversation by sharing an idea. Now, let’s decide that both designers have to design a search page together.

Designer 1: “The search page should show current trends.”

Another person has to answer with the words “Yes, but”, and explain why that idea doesn’t work. Now, the same person shares another idea and the first one answers the same way. Designers will block each other’s ideas for 3 to 4 times.

Designer 2: “Yes, but it doesn’t bring any value to the user. Let’s display recent searches on the search page.”

Designer 1: “Yes, but it doesn’t fill the space purposefully. We should show the latest news on the search page.”

The second part does work the same way, but instead of starting their answer with “Yes, but”, they have to start the answer with “Yes, and”. Now, both start building on other’s ideas. Later on, compare the conversations to each other.

Designer 1: “Let’s show current trends on the search page.”

Designer 2: “Yes, and let’s add images about these trends.”

This exercise proves that the framing of our language matters. One will add a negative flow to the conversation, while the other makes people feel included like their thoughts are worth something. It’s also releasing creativity inside us.

An illustration of two person drawing circles with a giant divider. — “Yes, and” makes other people feel included like their thoughts are worth something.

#2 — “Five whys” or “Nine Whys” exercise

That exercise focuses on asking questions that start with why. These questions will eventually lead to a better understanding of a certain thing. Designers use that exercise to clearly understand the root cause of the user’s problem.

Like the previous exercise, this one is also conducted in pairs and takes almost 15 minutes. One designer is interviewing another designer for 5 minutes, and then switching roles. Start with “What do you do when working on __?”.

Designer 1: “What do you do when working on that search page design? Please make a short list of activities.”

Designer 2: *makes the list of activities before designing*

Designer 1: “Why is that task important to you?”

Continue asking these questions five times, nine times or until another person can’t go any deeper because they have reached the underlying purpose. When that person gets stuck, ask “Does a story come to mind?”. Later, share insights.

Because of the simplicity, the exercise is also helping designers to reveal when a strong purpose is missing in a meeting. Once the meeting identifies the main purpose that is unambiguous, everyone has more freedom and opportunities.

An illustration of a woman holding a giant question mark on her hand. — Asking “why” questions will eventually lead to a better understanding of a certain thing.

#3 — The “Six Thinking Hats” exercise

The “Six Thinking Hats” exercise is a popular exercise because it’s allowing us to look at problems from six different perspectives. This technique can prevent conflicts when designers with different thinking styles will discuss a problem.

For that exercise, we need at least 6 designers. A designer wearing a white hat ensures that everyone can clearly understand the problem. The red hat shares feelings and emotions about that problem to understand different opinions.

The designer wearing a black hat focuses on potential negative outcomes, but also difficulties that might come in the way with the idea. The yellow hat will focus on possible solutions that help designers to beat these difficulties.

Green hat creates solutions to the problem. Blue hat focuses on controlling the process, and the next steps that should be taken within the project. Numerous perspectives give everyone a detailed picture of the outcomes from that idea.

Numerous perspectives can give everyone a detailed picture of the outcomes from that idea.

Through these exercises, we can explore the possibilities of using imagination, logic, comprehensive reasoning and instinct to create an outcome. Here, we’re talking about the outcome that serves our users and business in the best way.

Design Thinking exercises are helping designers to understand users, and also identify their challenges and needs. Besides that, they are designed to reframe the way we approach innovation of a product while focusing on the end-user.

We also ensure that everyone’s voice is heard, and has an equal opportunity to participate and contribute to the project. The exercises help with developing a culture of innovation in a team that embraces empathy, and good teamwork.

Additional links

3 Design Thinking exercises to make problem-solving more exciting was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

from UX Collective – Medium https://uxdesign.cc/3-design-thinking-exercises-to-make-problem-solving-more-exciting-98bc3bb67350?source=rss—-138adf9c44c—4