An Overview of Design Thinking By Louis Morin

Dr. Hugh MunroMBA Director, Professor (Marketing)

Lazaridis School of Business and Economics

INTRODUCTION 1

WHAT IS DESIGN THINKING? 1

Roots of Design Thinking 1

Modes of Thinking 2

WHY DESIGN THINKING 3

DESIGN THINKING PROCESS 6

What is? – Develop a Deep Understanding of the Situation and the Customer 6

What if? – Development of Possibilities 7

What wows? Pursue Quality and Aesthetics 8

What works? – The Build – Measure – Learn Feedback Loop 8

SKILLS OF A DESIGN THINKER 10

Imagination 10

Story 11

Empathy 11

Build Shared Understanding 12

Design is Action Oriented 12

SENSIBILITIES OF A DESIGN THINKER 12

Description of Design Sensibility 13

Zen – An example of an integrated design sensibility 14

IMPLEMENTING DESIGN THINKING IN AN ORGANIZATION 16

Agency 16

Address Longer Term Problems 17

Flow of Work 17

Encourage Experimentation and Respect Failure 17

EXHIBITS 19

REFERENCES 20

Introduction

What is Design Thinking?

Design thinking is an approach to creating the future of a business where the focus

is on imagining future possibilities for the business or its products. “Designers

invent a different future.”1 “

Design thinking deals with

primarily what does not yet

exist.”2

Roots of Design Thinking

Design thinking developed

from architecture and product

design. Where architects and

industrial designers develop an

idea for a building or

production. For example, in the

drawing to the right, one can see an image for Michelangelo’s drawing 3 of St. Peter’s

Cathedral in Rome.

From architectural design, design thinking extended into product design. The

following image shows a drawing4 and photos for a gripper toothbrush by Oral-B.

While the process of Design Thinking evolved from architectural principle, it is

being extended beyond into

1 Liedtka, J. Strategy as Design. P. 22.2 Liedtka, J. Strategy as Design. P. 23.3 Backtoclassics.com. Project for St Peter's in Rome by Michelangelo Buonarroti.4 Caula, R. Designboom. (2014, February 28)

Figure 1 - Michelangelo's Drawing for St. Peter's in Rome.

1

domains like organizational design, business design, social innovation, education,

and digital experiences5.

Modes of Thinking

Design Thinking contrasts with the dominant mode of thinking in organizations

today where the focus on analysis. In analytical thinking, the purpose is to

understand and to make decisions around increased levels of understanding. For

example, “Inventories are too high, sales are too low, or the customer is dissatisfied.”

The answers could be, And the focus of work would be on resolving the gap between

this less than ideal state and a specific goal. An analytical search would proceed to

identify the root causes of the problem and work towards achieving better state.

In The Second Road of Thought, by T. Golsby-Smith provides a perspective one

different types of thinking as outlined by Aristotle, he states that, “Rhetoric was the

road by which humans designed alternative futures; analytics was the road by

which we diagnosed what already exists.”6 Design thinking is an approach that uses

a rhetorical approach to design alternative futures. We cannot analyze our way into

the future. Argumentation lies at the heart of the second road. Design thinking uses

a variety of tools to encourage argumentation, like design charettes and prototyping.

These tools give people something concrete to give feedback to. According to Golby-

Smit, “Arguments are the engines by which humans create alternative futures.

Cicero claimed that all human civilization was built on the pathway of rhetoric and

memorably imagined uncivilized tribes arguing their way out of caves and into

villages.”7 The table below describes the two different types of thinking described by

Aristole.

Logic Road8 Rhetoric and Topica

5 Ideo Selected Work. (n.d.). Retrieved October 13, 20156 Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. P. 41.7 Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. P. 41.8 Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. P. 41.

2

“If I can pull apart any system into its working parts and explain it in cause and

effect relations, surely I will be able to fully know the truth about the system.”

“Rhetoric was the domain where things can be other than they are.”

Table 1 – Aristotle’s Types of Thinking.

Roger Martin in his paper Embedding Design into Business elaborates further on the types of thinking and breaks it down into three different modes9: inductive, deductive and adductive. The different modes are described in the table below. Design Thinking would follow under the abductive mode.

Definition Example

InductiveProving through observation that something actually works

A manufacturer analyzes it’s products to determine the most profitable

DeductiveProving through reasoning and principles that something must be

Keep customers satisfied and you’ll get repeat sales

AbductiveThe logic of what might be – reason that it may be

Imagine what a building would look like

Table 2 - Modes of Thinking.

Why Design Thinking

The imperative behind Design Thinking can be captured by the following statement

made during a conversation with leaders of a major food company, a senior

executive said to the group, “In the early 2000s we became the most efficient food

company in the world; but so have our main competitors. What now?”10 The

statement is saying that companies in all industries have been pursuing process

based improvement in their organizations. However, when all competitors are

pursue the same goals using the same methods, none of the companies will develop

a differentiable competitive advantage.

Furthermore, the speed of change is increasing very rapidly. For example,

Buckminster Fuller invented something called the, “Knowledge Doubling Curve,” in

which he stated that until 1900 human knowledge doubled every century, and then

9 Martin, R. Embedding Design into Business. P. 77-78.10 Vossoughi, S. “A Survival Guide for: The Age of Meaning. P. 59

3

by the end of World War II knowledge was doubling every 25 years. Today, on

average human knowledge is doubling every 13 months. According to IBM, the

build out of the “internet of things” will lead to the doubling of knowledge every

twelve hours11. While different domains of knowledge may develop at different

rates, or the rates of knowledge development may differ across industries. The

implications of the rapid rate of knowledge development for an individual business

is staggering. Knowledge could develop very rapidly that would make a business

irrelevant.

Knowledge development can be viewed as a metric for the pace of change, and along

with the globalization of markets and competition, the expansion of the service-

based economy, the impact of deregulation and privatization, and the explosion of

the knowledge revolution. All these forces are driving firms to fundamentally

rethink their business models and radically transform their capabilities.12 But the

question is, “How does a business radically transform?” Design Thinking offers an

approach for business to radically transform by developing new offerings

In the paper Building a Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems13, by Karen

Christen the author argues that we are now in the Age of Design and we have left the

Age of Science. In the Age of Science, the focus of human activity was on

understanding the natural world, and with this basic understanding humans could

develop technology. Technology provided humans the ability to, “harness, control,

and transform our world.” The goal was to find the right answer to a problem. In the

Age of Science, the problem, “was well understood, the stakeholders few, the

constraints stable, and in the end there was a concrete result that solved the

problem.”

Types of Problems Where Design Thinking is Useful

11 Schilling, D.R. Knowledge Doubling Every 12 Months, Soon to be Every 12 Hours.12 Martin, Roger. The Design of Business. P. 16.13 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 51

4

Analysis or inductive and deductive thinking is still useful. Those tools can be

applied successful to many problems, but increasingly the problems that

organizations face can be defined as wicked. Wicked problems have no definitive

formulation14. Problems that occur under high levels of uncertainty require a

different approach. According to, Karen Christensen, “Wicked problems demand an

opportunity-driven approach: they require making decisions, doing experiments,

launching pilot programs, testing prototypes,”15 which is a design thinking approach.

Design Thinking Process

Jeanne Liedtka in her book, Design for Growth, proposes a design thinking process

composes of the following four phases:

What is?16 – Develop a Deep Understanding of the Situation and the Customer

14 Camillus, John C., “Strategy as a Wicked Problem”, Harvard Business Review, May, 2008, 86(5), pp. 101.15 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 5316 Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth. P. 22.

5

In this phase of the

process, the purpose is

to make an

assessment of the

current reality and

identify the problem

or opportunity that we

want to tackle. In this

phase of the process,

the focus is one the

customers that are to

be served. Once the

target customer has been chosen the next step is to develop an understanding of the

customer and their problems. Design offers a number of tools like journey mapping

to develop a deeper understanding of the customer. In this phase, a lot of Design

Thinking practitioners focus on developing a deep understanding of what the

customer is with the purpose of understanding their experience.

What if? – Development of PossibilitiesWith a situation analysis and an understanding of the customer, a design thinking

practitioner will develop ideas or intuitive insights as to possibilities for the current

situation. In this stage, we begin to explore possibilities for what a desirable future

might look like. In this stage, it is important not limit oneself to what one believes is

possible. To achieve breakthroughs, it is important to remain divergent as opposed

to start trimming or converging on specific solutions.

In this phase, design thinking practitioners will use a variety of tools like

brainstorming, concept development, visualization. One of the purposes of this

phase to develop as many concepts as possible, keeping the process divergent, and

not narrowing the solution down to quickly.

Figure 3 - Design Thinking Process.6

This is a hypothesis generating mode to identify concepts for further exploration. In

this phase, there is a risk that stakeholders in the design thinking process will want

to converge on a solution. Not coming to a solution, keeping the solution uncertain,

can make stakeholders anxious and uncomfortable. However, resolving this

uncertainty too quickly can limit possibilities. In the article, Time for Design, by

Jeanne Liedtka and Henry Mintzberg, they state that “Business leaders seeking

better design thinking should pay careful attention to the challenges of preventing

premature consensus emerging in the face of chaos, and of maintaining the fluidity

that is emerging in the face of chaos.”17

What wows? Pursue Quality and AestheticsThe purpose of this phase to take the ideas and concepts of the previous phase and

to converge on concepts that that deliver customer value and have strong profit

potential. The first part of this process it perform assumption testing on this process

to understand the risks and opportunities associated with each concept. In this

phase, it is important to remain hypothesis driven by having a clear idea of what you

feel the customer wants and by soliciting feedback against what you are offering.

Solutions are generated through an iterative process. According to Jeanne Liedkta,

“Think of an architect’s progress through a series of representations of their work –

sketches to cardboard models, to wooden models, to 3D renderings – all before a

single shovelful of dirt has been lifted on the construction site.”18 Following the

assumption-testing phase, the next step is rapid prototyping where something

concrete enough is built to place in front of stakeholders to receive feedback.

In developing a new product or service offering, one of the goals is to produce

something of a higher standard than existing offerings in the market. According to

Jeanne Liedtka, “If you want great designs, seek simplicity, emotional engagement,

and that sweet spot between the familiar and the new. And, of course, do the job

well. And yet, if it’s all that obvious, why are we are we surrounded by so many

17 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 37.18 Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth.

7

mediocre designs.”19 Or for example Steve Jobs, one of the great champions of design

in the computer industry, spoke to people about, ‘being insanely great,’ telling them:

‘What you create has got to be so good that you are shocked that you could actually

create something that good.”20

What works? – The Build – Measure – Learn Feedback Loop

In this phase, a company must begin to converge on the possibilities to pursue, it

may select several of the project developed in the previous phase and begin to

develop prototypes or use design charettes and demonstrate them to customers to

solicit their feedback.

In the book, The Lean Startup, the author Eric Ries describes the Minimum Viable

Product.21 It can be described as a, “Rough,” product that lacks many features that

may prove essential later on. The purpose is to get the product in front of people

and get their feedback. Eric Ries describes a, “Build – Measure – Learn,” feedback

loop. As you move through this phase, you want to work in fast feedback cycles

trying to learn as much as possible about what the customer wants.

The iterative nature of the Build – Measure – Learn feedback loop is inherent to the

design thinking process. “After studying architects in action, philosopher and

academic David Schon described design as “a shaping process,” in which the

situation ‘talks back’ continually and ‘each move is a local experiment which

contributes to the global experiment of reframing the problem.”22

The Build – Measure – Learn approach is similar to the hypothesis-driven approach

of the traditional scientific method. According to Jeanne Leidtka the purpose of this

approach is so that, “The designer substitutes mental experiments for physical

19 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 3420 Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. P. 71.21 Reis, Eric. The Lean Startup. P. 76-77.22 Liedtka, J. Strategy as Design. P. 21.

8

ones.23 What makes the hypothesis driven approach necessary to design thinking is

the uncertainty associated with the proposed solution. However, we should not

view the uncertainty as a barrier, to a certain extent we must, “Accept that we

cannot know all the answers before we do things.”24 According to Jeanne Liedtka,

you don’t really understand the problem until after the first prototype, and you

cannot become too attached to your initial solution and you have to prepared to

start over at least once.”25

Skills of a Design Thinker

The author C. Owen26 makes a distinction between two types of creative people. The

first group is called, “Finders”. They exercise their creativity through discovery to

find explanations for phenomena that are not well understood. In professional life,

they are scientists or scholars and are responsible for much of our progress in

understanding ourselves, and our environment. The second group is called,

“Makers,” They demonstrate their creativity through invention. Makers are driven

to synthesize what they know in new constructions, arrangements, patterns,

compositions, and concepts that bring tangible fresh expression of what can be.

Design Thinkers fall into the category of makers.

While a Finder’s purpose is to describe, a maker’s purpose is to create new objects,

products, experiences that stakeholder’s value. And to invent, Makers require a

specific set of skills including: imagination, story, empathy, building a shared

understanding, and an action-approach (practical).

Imagination

23 Liedtka, J. Strategy as Design. P. 22.24 Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. P 69.25 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 37.26 Owen, C. Design Thinking: On its Nature and Use. P. 45.

9

One of the skills that Design Thinkers require is imagination. Imagination is a

capacity to use the mind to visualize. In the Design Thinking context, it is the

capacity to visualize, “What could be,” and then to create documents, prototypes,

and drawings that describe it. For example when Bill Stumpf, and Don Chadwick,

designed the award winning Aeron chair for Herman Miller, they had lots of detailed

consumer research from which to apply inductive reasoning and robust sets of

design principles to consider deductively. However, they used the consumer

research and design principles as a starting point: “they imagined what a chair of the

future could look like, and how that chair could forever change the way users think

about office chairs.”27

Story

In order to engage a wide variety of stakeholders, Design thinkers need to be able to

communicate effectively and to communicate effectively one needs to understand

how the human brain works. In the book, A Whole New Mind, Daniel Pink, gives two

examples. One example is written in technical jargon, and the other is written in the

form of a story. Daniel Pink then asks the user to pick which one they remember

better from the two examples. It is much easier for the reader to remember the

prose written in the story form. “Narrative imagining – story – is the fundamental

instrument of thought,” writes cognitive scientist, Mark Turner. “Rational capacities

depend on it. It is our chief means of looking into the future, of predicting, of

planning, and of explaining… Most of our experience, our knowledge and out

thinking is organized around stories.”28 In order to facilitate the development of a

shared understanding among stakeholders, stories are a key tool.

Empathy

Empathy is the capacity to understand the mental and emotional experience of

another. A Design thinker creates, “Something,” for a stakeholder, a user, or a

customer, or other interested party. Whether it is a product, experience, or service

27 Christensen, Karen. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems.28 Pink, D. A Whole New Mind. P. 99.

10

the purpose of Design Thinking is to create of value for the stakeholders, and in

order to create value a designer must come to understand the minds of the

stakeholders to the project. To empathize with the stakeholder, design thinkers use

observational research methodologies to reveal latent needs.29 However, developing

a cursory or superficial understanding of those needs is not enough. The Design

Thinker needs to attempt to achieve a deep understanding of the user.30 To develop

that deep understanding, anthropologists have developed a tool called, “Thick

Descriptions.” For human behaviour to make sense to an outside observer, a thick

description is necessary to explain not just how people act, but the context for their

behaviour.31

Build Shared Understanding

The Design Thinker needs to build a shared understanding of the problem among

the stakeholder group. “A shared understanding of a given problem cannot be taken

for granted, and that the absence of buy-in about a problem’s definition, scope and

goals can kill a project just as sure as faulty implementation.”32 If stakeholders do

not agree on the problem, then a proposed solution may not meet on stakeholder’s

understanding of the problem. To effectively collaborate, a shared understanding of

the problem is required.

Design is Action Oriented

The purpose of the Design Thinking is not to engage in the process by to actually

implement something concrete. The Design Thinker needs to interact with

stakeholders, understand their needs, create concepts, drawings, and solicit their

feedback. “Better designing – of products, organizations, strategies – holds the key

to unlocking the real potential of design for business. The basic of attributes of

successful designing are well recognized: the process is synthetic, future focused,

29 Coughlan, P. and Prokopoff, I. Managing Change By Design. p. 100.30 Martin, R. Designing in Hostile Territory. P.8931 Canada, A. Mapping the Future in Uncertain Times. p. 95.32 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 52

11

hypothesis-driven, and opportunistic. It involves observation, the use of

frameworks and prototyping.”33

Sensibilities of a Design Thinker

Description of Design Sensibility

Design sensibility could be described as a philosophy or an aesthetic approach.

From a musical perspective, examples of different design sensibilities could be

classical as compared to rock and roll as compared to jazz or hip-hop. Each of these

musical genres represents a different set of design principles.

Not only does design sensibility include different principles or ideas come together

in a designer’s mind to produce a work, but it also includes notions of quality. For

example, look at the images of the two offices in the exhibit below. If one were to

propose a test for someone, and ask them which office design they prefer, the

majority of people would choose the office design on the right. Both of these office

spaces were created by a design thinking process. The individuals that created both

design may or may not have been trained as designers.

The office space on the left is dark, grey, and practically colorless environment. The

principle concern of the designer would be strict functionality and cost. The office

environment practically demands of its workers to, “Get the job done,” without

concern for the health and emotional spiritual state of the workers. In contrast the

office on the right is much brighter. Aside from the blue seats, it is likewise colorless,

however the high ceilings and the white give it a much more optimistic feel and

seems to express more concern for the individuals that work there.

33 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 34

12

Figure 4 - Contrasting Different Office Design Aesthetics

Applying the methods of Design Thinking alone is not sufficient, the Design Thinker

must have an organized sense of a sensibility of design philosophy. This doesn’t

have to be an identity, but more of choosing a philosophy that is appropriate

environment or problem space.34 According to the authors Suri and Henrix,35 Design

sensibilities consist of the intuitive qualities such as delight, beauty, personal

meaning and cultural resonance. These subtle qualities are subjective and difficult

to articulate. In the pictures of the office space above, two different people may have

two different descriptions of the design. These intuitive qualities are generally

discounted in the workplace because of their subjectivity, and because most

management training focuses on analytical methods managers are undeveloped in

this area and do not have the capacity to discuss those intuitive qualities. In the

words of Abraham Maslow, “He who is good with a hammer, tends to think

everything is a nail.” Consequently, managers may be blind to situations that call for

intuitive thinking, and approach those problems with their analytic minds

eliminating a range of possibilities. Design methods and design sensibilities together

can, “create the experiences and outcomes upon which successful businesses

capitalize: clear distinction from competitors, lasting market impact, and customer

loyalty.”36

Zen – An example of an integrated design sensibility

34 Suri, F. J., and Hendrix, M. Developing Design Sensibilities. P. 167.35 Suri, F. J., and Hendrix, M. Developing Design Sensibilities. P. 167.36 Suri, F. J., and Hendrix, M. Developing Design Sensibilities. P. 167.

13

Zen, a Japanese school of Buddhism, has an aesthetic ideal called, “ Shibumi.”

Shibumi is reserved for, “objects and experiences that exhibit all at once the very

best of everything and nothing: elegant simplicity; effortless effectiveness; beautiful

imperfection.37 In reading the previous sentence, it is difficult to come to a direct

sense of the meaning. For example, how could one identify an object that exhibits,

“The very best of everything and nothing.” In an attempt to create an object that

strives to achieve Shibumi, Zen emphasizes a series of principles listed in the table

below.

Principle Description

Koko (austerity)Restraint, exclusion, omission, embracing the idea of ‘not adding’ is a valid subtractive approach.

Kanso (simplicity)Beauty and utility need not be overstated, overly decorative or fanciful and imparts a sense of being fresh, clean, and neat.

Shizen (naturalness)Strike a balance between being at once ‘of nature’ without pretense, without, articifice, not forced, yet to be revealed as intentional rather than accidental or haphazard.

YugenThe power of suggestion is often stronger than that of full disclosure: leaving something to the imagination creates an irresistible aura of mystery that compels us to find answers.

Fukinsei (imperfection,

asymmetry)

The goal of fukinsei is to invoke the natural human inclination to seek symmetry. To employ fukinsei is to convey the symmetrical harmony of nature by providing something that appears to be asymmetrical.

Datsuzoku (break from routine)

These strange timings and random locations are not merely coincidence: neuroscientists now believe that the ability to engineer creative breakthroughs hinges on the capacity to synthesize and make connections between seemingly-disparate things, and a key ingredient is time away from the problem.

Seijaku (stillness, tranquility)

It is in states of active calm, tranquility, and solitude that we find the essence of creative energy.

Figure 4 shows a landscape design, which can be used to illustrate the Zen

sensibility. A more detailed

analysis can be found in the

37 May, M. Zen and the Art of Simplicity. P. 180.

14

exhibit at the end of the document. It is a very simple garden that balances

symmetry with some asymmetrical elements. The overall sense of the garden is one

of stillness and tranquility. There is a sense of restraint give by the garden in the

front, but the lush green of the shrubs in the foreground balances that restraint.

The Zen design sensibility is one approach. The purpose of a sensibility in design

thinking is to give the design thinker a set of principles to integrate into their design,

but also a critical framework to feed back into the design that they are working on.

Implementing Design Thinking in an Organization

Design Thinking offers a different approach to addressing organizational

imperatives than the traditional analytic approach. Implementing Design Thinking

will require that members of the organization adopt a different mindset that

includes:

Willingness to acknowledge the unknown

Willingness to incorporate the views of others

Willingness to distribute power

Willingness to experiment

Aside from this mindset, implementing Design Thinking will require that the

organization encourage the agency of its members, it will require a shift in from the

immediate to longer term problems, and adopt an experimental mindset.

Agency

In the paper, “The Second Road of Thought,” the author states that, “If we want to

get people to design their futures, our first task is to emphasize their agency. They

must feel that the world is not determinate: it is putty in their hands and they are it’s

authors.”38 Managing an organization where agency of individual employees

requires a different approach than what would be required in a hierarchy. It

38 Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. P. 40.

15

distributes status, power, and decision making through the organization as opposed

to pushing it up the organization.

Address Longer Term Problems

“Any time you do that in today’s environment, you’re looking at a wicked problem,

because you’re confronting the fundamental problems of identity: who is our

company? What is our direction? What is our market? Who is our customer? These

fundamental issues are always present, but it’s very easy to avoid them by focusing

on immediate problems that are more tractable.”39

Flow of Work40

“Design organizations vary significantly from traditional firms along five key

dimensions: flow of work life; style of work; mode of thinking; source of status; and

dominant attitude.” The style of work is project based with a beginning and an end.

The mode of thinking is more inductive as opposed to analytical and requires less of

a, “Right or wrong,” mindset and requires people to keep an open mind an explore

possibilities. Finally, the source of status does not come from position on the

hierarchy, it comes from the work itself and project results.

Encourage Experimentation and Respect Failure

While there is a rhetorical approach to Design Thinking, where participants attempt

to determine the correct solution. The key determinant of what is right or wrong is

not a decision made in the mind of a group or individual, it involves testing a design

or prototype in the real world. To arrive at the final solution, there is an iterative

process, and each of these iterations involves failure and learning. Participants have

to view that failure is a key component to learning and ultimate success.

39 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 53.40 Martin, Roger. Embedding Design into Business. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

16

17

Exhibits

18

References

Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Canada, Alonso. Mapping the Future in Uncertain Times. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Caula, R. (2014, February 28). Thomas Overthun interview, IDEO associate partner design director. Retrieved October 13, 2015.

Christensen, Karen. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Coughlan, Peter and Prokopoff, Illya. Managing Change By Design. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Ideo Selected Work. (n.d.). Retrieved October 13, 2015, from https://www.ideo.com/work/

Liedtka, Jeanne. Strategy as Design. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Liedtka, Jeanne. If Managers Thought Like Designers. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth. Columbia University Press. 2011.

Martin, Roger. Embedding Design into Business. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Martin, Roger. Designing in Hostile Territory. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Martin, Roger. The Design of Business. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

19

May, Matthew. Zen and the Art of Simplicity. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Milkowski, B. June 7, 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.slideshare.net/BorisFriedrichMilkowski/the-bulletproof-design-brief-a-template-for-more-successful-innovation-projects.

Owen, Charles. Design Thinking: On its Nature and Use. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013. Project for St Peter's in Rome by Michelangelo Buonarroti (BackToClassics.com Virtual Art Gallery)http://www.backtoclassics.com/gallery/michelangelo/projectforstpetersinrome/

Pink, Daniel. A Whole New Mind. Penguin USA. New York, New York. 2005.

Raney, Colin and Jacoby, Ryan. Decisions by Design: Stop Deciding, Start Designing. . In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Reis, Eric. The Lean Startup. Crown Publishing. 2011.

Schilling, D.R. Knowledge Doubling Every 12 Months, Soon to be Every 12 Hours. www.industrytap.com: Retrieved from: http://www.industrytap.com/knowledge-doubling-every-12-months-soon-to-be-every-12-hours/3950.

Suri, Fulton Jane, and Hendrix, Michael. Developing Design Sensibilities. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

Vossoughi, S. “A Survival Guide for: The Age of Meaning. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.

20