 Felly, gydag. Fy enwedig. Felly, rydyn ni'n meddwl â'r felig o'i mwylo. Felly, rydyn ni'n meddwl â'r felig? Felly, yma'r angen gwybod yma, dw i'r newydd digital yma, mae'n gwybod yw'r newydd. Mae'n gwybod i'ch cymhredu, mae'n gwybod i'r cwpohiwyr.org ac mae'n rhaid i fod yn y bwysig, felly rydw i'n gweithio. Rydw i'n rhaid i'n gweithio ar gyfer Facebook ac Twitter. Rydw i'n meddwl â'r ddaf yn ogylcheddol yn y cyfnod. Rydw i'n meddwl am y YouTube, ac ymlaen i gweithio arall. A ddaf'r mynd i'r gweithio, mae'n bwysig ar y cwm drwsydd. Mae'n cwm arno gyd, mae'n gweithio ar y cwm. Ac Ymwyllfa Oebbelman, Mae drwsfyn am 17, a ddechrau'n mynd i'n meddwl i'r Pentegram. A'i adaeli bod gwlad danes o mynd i'r ddechrau yn rhan a yn meddwl. Mae'r oedd yn forphio gweithio. Aparul 12, mae anabell Ceildorf, erbyn arfautodd yn ysgrifgen. Mae'r ddechrau'n cyveloedog yn yr ysgrif yn Brooklyn. Felly rydw i ddim inni gwaith gydig. 00 may 24, Scott Wilson. It an Industrial Designer, but also an amazing entrepreneur. He came up with the idea of having an iPod nano and making it into a watch and then making a strap for it. And then he got Kickstarter funding for that and it's so successful, it's available in all the Apple stores. So, interesting example of a mixture of the new kind of entrepreneurial funding plus the interesting design. ..a'r archedeg yw Walter Hood, yng Nghymru yn ymweld yng ngyfnod... ..y hynny'n gwybod yw Ogl yn Calefyniau... ..y'n gweithio cymryd yng Nghymru yn llunio cyfraff. I'm eisiau'n gweithio'n gweithio'n gweithio... ..naeth yng nghymru Helin Walters... ..ynd yn ymddir arall Ffioenor Moryson a Beth Ffina. Yn amser, yna'n gweithio'n gweithio a'r gweithio'n gweithio... gyda gweithio gyda'r gweithio a'r gweithio arwad ar gweithio'r 10 mewn gwirionedd ymlaen. Mae'n gweithio'r mynd i'w ffobi yn gwneud o'r myneddau ar y dyfodol yng Nghymru, i'n gwneud i'r gwneud. Felly, dwi fyddwch i'n fathio'r first slide'? Mae'n gweithio'r illustriadau ymlaen, yng Nghymru, i'w maeseddu, sy'n gweithio'r shalm o'r... Felly, mae'n gweithio'r hyn. Mae'n cyhoedd ymlaen. a'r ysgol yng Nghymru i Israel. A dyma'r idea yng Nghymru yng Nghymru yng Nghymru, y dweud y berthynas yng Nghymru, y ddechrau a'r ddechrau, y ddechrau ddechrau a'r ddechrau Lodg. Y ddechrau, mae'r ddinud ym ddweud yng nghymru, yn dda wedi cael unig unig ymddangos, a'r ddweud yng nghymru yn gweld ymddangos. Maen nhw'n ddweud yng Nghymru, rwy'n ddweud amdano gyda rhaid o'r ddweud, If you think of logical things like science, they tend to be thought of as left brain. I think of design thinking perhaps as a combination of those two. If you think about any designer who is trying to solve a problem, they will really use a mixture of that logic and that intuitive thinking. The left brain being the design thinking, and then the right brain being more of the design process, the learning by doing, the tacit knowledge, the making, the sort of intuitive way of behaving. So you could say that every designer of any kind is a design thinker, except perhaps if it's really purely for just the craft. And if you think about those traditional crafts like designing glass or pottery, things that are really evolved through the making, through the intuitive process, then they probably don't really need that left brain. They just need to get very good. And a great example, if we could look at these series of slides, Eva Zeisel, who's 105 year long life, we celebrated the beginning of this series, describes herself as not interested in innovation at all. She's only interested in getting perfection of her craft. So she really does or did operate purely on the right brain. You can see here the beautiful salt sellers and vessels that she designed in 1946. And another 1946 example. Look at the next one, though, and you see this is designed in 2003. And it looks remarkably similar. So she's been evolving and perfecting that way of doing some making craft intuitively. So perhaps she's a kind of designer who didn't need design thinking, just needed the process of getting better and better at craft. Now back to this double thing. You know, I think if you're a talented designer, the chances are you're schizophrenic and that you really don't know which of those two you are in. Are you a right brain person? Well, some of the time. Are you left brain person? Yes. I mean, I think about things really carefully. Well, I do have to go into this right brain thing where I do lots of sort of drawings and sketches and try to get myself interested. So, yeah, I'm schizophrenic. I'm afraid. OK. So the other way I think people are describing design thinking rather than being applicable to everybody is a relatively recent idea, which was kind in the 90s for it being to do with interdisciplinary teams who imply design methods and processes, but they do it in teams of people collaborating together. And so I think there's a little hierarchy of design awareness and design practice and design thinking might be a way of trying to see how that fits with the rest of design. So I'll just take you through some examples of that. So if we think about design awareness, which is really about how to choose, you know, people do that in their everyday lives, don't they? I mean, everybody makes design decisions about what they wear and what they have in their gardens and how they decorate their apartment or house. And so they're making design choices day by day. And here, Don Norman describes that as a form of design in that that he's saying that those choices are actually a form of design, but they're choosing from a set of things that you can choose from, as opposed to creating the new ones. If we think more about design practice, which is the doing of the design, in all the different disciplines, then I think you can see this mix of the schizophrenic behavior that I described earlier being applied in all the design disciplines that we recognize. And the design awards that we have at Cuba Hewyd are a very good way of seeing a snapshot of that. So let's just go through last year's winners. This is Rick Valesenti for Communications. So this is sort of graphic design, very full of ideas, definitely schizophrenic. If you think of interaction design, very high tech, you'd say that that was even more likely to be thoughtful in terms of the left brain component, but certainly intuitive as well. Then you think of product design. Well, yes, lots of problem solving there. So another schizophrenic person, hello, John Franco. Architecture, I think similar story, really. Perhaps a little more division sometimes that the engineering component of architecture tends to be different people sometimes, but definitely architects would think of themselves as both left and right. And interior design in the same sort of way. Then landscape architecture, yes, I mean same story. Fashion, perhaps you could exist in a more intuitive world. I mean, you could be a fashion designer as a career without relying too much on logical thinking, mostly on intuitive. It's closer perhaps to craft, but still a bit of both, I would say. And when it comes to design mind, somebody like Steve Heller, you know, is definitely on the left-ish side of design. He's he's not got much operational right brain stuff, although he obviously enjoys it. And if you think about Matthew Carter, the design of typefaces, all those ones you have on your screens, he probably designed. Yes, I mean that really is close to craft, I think the perfection of the serif on a type font is something that you do learn by trying it over and over again in an intuitive way. So so it isn't so much of the left brain there. I do think that most of the public, though, tend to fall into this category where they they think of designers in rather an archetypal kind of way. And perhaps the the lamp or or the chair are very good examples of that. And these are a couple of lights that were designed by guys from Switzerland. So the one on the right is by Eve Behar from Fuse Project. That was designed quite recently for Herman Miller, but it's a classic light design. The one on the left by Richard Sapper was designed in the 60s in Italy. But both these guys are from Switzerland. I don't know whether Switzerland has anything to do with it really, probably not. And then to my final level on that hierarchy, getting into this design thinking with interdisciplinary teams. This was really largely developed with Tim Brown's leadership at IDO in my experience at any rate as an IDO person. And Tim draws this diagram where he says that design thinking is different from other kinds of thinking in terms of the starting point. So if you think about the all innovation really coming from the mixture, the middle point, the overlap of that Venn diagram where you have business and technology and people coming together and you think of scientific innovation starts really with technology and then they start looking for the money and they look for the customer. Whereas the money people, they tend to start with the idea of the financial aspect of it. I can make a buck and then they look for the customer and they look for the technology. Whereas designers, we tend to start with the people. We still have to look for the money and for the technology, but the starting point is a little different. Let me move on to the next slide and show you a little video. The reason for riding a bike as a kid is going down the hill with my hands up in the air and just going, whee! My first major bike that I got that I really love was a five speed twin. The bicycle really was my passport to seeing new places. I gotta say, it felt great to ride that bike. It felt really freeing and it did give me that, whee! kind of feeling again. Very easy, very easy to ride. First of all, the coasting brake, sweet. I love the coasting brakes. The positioning just felt really easy. Like I could have any clothing on that I want to put on. I could ride to the store or ride to work and feel like it's ready to go. So this was an example of Shimano, who were very strong component manufacturers for bicycles, coming to IDO and asking for help in deciding what to do next, because they were worried that they would lose their dominant market share just because it was already full. I mean, they'd got every bicycle that was to do with high performance, pretty much in America. And they saw Armstrong coming to the end of his career and wondered what to do next. And the research with this interdisciplinary team revealed that there were a whole lot of people who used to ride bikes when they were kids. Loved it. But they were put off by going into the bike stores nowadays because all these young people were so athletic and they had lycra on and, you know, they kind of felt embarrassed about it. So they went choosing to go and think of a bicycle as a way of getting around. So the idea of this was a set of components that would allow you to get on a bike without ever having to do anything that looked and felt at all athletic. So you have the computer that's generated by the electricity in one hub that changes gears automatically. So you don't have to put on any special shoes. You don't have to change any levers. You just get on the bike, ride, and you're away. So this idea seemed very successful as a form of design thinking emerging from this interdisciplinary team in that it told Shimano as a design company what they could be doing in the future. However, four people who are interested in design craft, it's not a very nice story because Shimano actually makes those components and then Trek or Rally or somebody makes the bicycles. And they're the things that are bought by the user. So when you go down the high street, you used to be able to say to your mum, hey mum, I designed that bicycle. But now you have to say, hey mum, I designed the strategy that convinced Shimano to build the components that allowed them to sell them to the companies that designed that bicycle. That's not such an easy story. So the design thinking tends not to be quite so satisfying if you're thinking about design practice and design craft. Okay, thank you. Let's have the next one. So just flicking through the components there, those are the components they made, yes. And this is the website to support this easy form of riding. And that's the bikes themselves. Okay. So we think of this sort of innovation as being based on, if you want to go from the left bottom quadrant there to the right bottom quadrant, you just want to get something a bit cheaper, you're a bit better, more beautiful or something, you can just move straight across in an evolutionary sense. But if you want to do something that's really different, innovative, new, then to go in this abstract zone up in the top area is part of that process. So I think the design thinkers in these interdisciplinary teams tend to have to go into this abstract world where they do research first, they generate alternatives, and then they create new ideas. Okay, now is the time for me to introduce the real star of the evening. So Helen, can you join us? Hello. So you just want me to start? Yeah, go on. Okay, so first of all please take that awful picture off. Thank you. It's just such a big face. So thank you, Bill. I thought it was a nice picture. I know my hair looks really dirty. Authentic hair, true, you know? I mean, I like the pink. I just needed to wash my hair that day, I hadn't realised. So I wanted to thank Bill for so much for having me here. It's such a pleasure to be here and I'm just completely blown away and honoured to be here and for you guys all to turn out to hear me bloviate. And I'm really excited to hear Fiona and Beth to talk about this topic, which is one that I've been thinking about for a long time and I'm really happy that Bruce Nussbaum is in the audience because he was the person who really first introduced me to the concept of design thinking when I worked for him at Business Week. He's right back in the middle so we can shoot straight at him. I know, he's right here to heckle, which is actually really unfortunate and unkind. So I'll try not to let you down, Bruce. But what has been really interesting to me recently is that I've been working for a company called Dublin and one of the things that I've been doing while I've been there is going through the archives and Dublin was founded in 1981 by Jay Doblin, who is this legendary, renowned industrial designer who had worked with all of the major industrial design firms in the 50s and 60s and then he founded his own design firm or he founded Dublin in 1981 and I came across this piece that he'd written actually in 1978 to talk about design-led innovation and I was reading it and it's kind of amazing and I unearthed this diagram that he'd drawn about the redesign or how to redesign the gasoline pump, petrol pump, gas pump, petrol pump. You know what I mean? And so I wanted to share that with you first. It takes you through the seven levels of the designer and the seven levels of the design process. So if we can go to the next one. OK, I'm going to read these out. So the designer accepts the pump's performance but shortens and cleans up its form so this is kind of the traditional industrial design challenge. So, you know, the designer is looking at the form of a product and then performance improvements are made, either Money, Gallonage or Philip. I had to look that up. I didn't know what that meant. It can be punched directly. Inserted credit card automatically builds the customer. So remember this was 78. So this is a pretty radical idea, the credit card. You know, pumping, putting that into the machine was not a very common idea but so this is elevating design somewhat and then the third kind of moving up this chain changes the basic mechanism. The station is like a parking lot where hoses are pulled from trap doors below ground. All the controls are on the nozzle. So again, it's becoming more complex, more sophisticated as you move up. So number four involves products which are outside the company's control. So extending the business model away from the actual product and the form factor to be more of a service design. Excuse me. No liquid fuel is pumped. Pressurised cartridges are inserted into the car. One cartridge fits all car like sealed beam headlamps at one price sale. So really kind of thinking about the whole of the design, thinking about the car as well as the petrol pump. The next one is the service performed is changed. There are no more gas stations. Fuel cartridges are bought anywhere like beer which I have to say is a really unnerving thing to think about beer and cars in the same thing but it was the 70s so we'll let it slide. And then it's getting kind of out of control, right? The next two are just bonkers. This one, the service is eliminated. Cars never need refuelling. They run indefinitely on atomic power and the last one, my favourite of all, transportation is eliminated. All human contact is by telecommunications. And so Jay was no fool. I sadly never got to meet him. He died in the 80s but he understood that this was ludicrous and that these kind of ideas were really kind of pushing at the boundaries of what is accepted. But what I think is amazing is that back in 1978 we were kind of thinking about how to define design and kind of where design fitted in and how what the designer's role was. And I can't tell if it's great or depressing that we're still having some of these same conversations now and we still don't have many of the answers. So if you can move to the next slide. So the theme of what I wanted to say, and I'm sorry, I promise I won't go on too long but really what I want to talk about is language. If I can speak, I'm so sorry. There's water if you want. I think I'm all right. I think I'm fine. Thank you. And so I think one of the design thinking one, it's one, it's a topic that really gets people head up. It really gets people motivated either with kind of fury and anger or excitement and passion. And it's kind of unleashed a whole new level of discussion I think which is really important. But what I think it has exemplified to a certain extent is the confusion around design that persists. So if you think about the medical profession I think about all of the different specialisations that you have within medicine. And so we know about physicians, we know about surgeons, we know about neurologists, we know about gynaecology, we know about all of these specialisations and we probably don't understand the complexity of what these people are actually doing. But we do have a sense that we know what they do to an extent as a lay person, as a patient, as a regular human being. And in the design community, even though Bill just showed us the National Design Awards which I think are a good kind of cross-section of what design can offer, I think there's much less understanding about what design can do and about what designers do. And I think it's really problematic when we're thinking about design thinking. If you say to somebody, you know, I'm a designer, then the person you're talking to has a very clear idea of what that is, but it might not actually be accurate at all to actually what you do. And I think that's really problematic and has real implications for how design can kind of persist in business and how design can actually make a difference in the world. So it was really interesting as I was preparing for this talk for this evening, for this lovely gathering. I got some pushback from people who were not really happy about the idea of design practice versus design thinking and kind of these dichotomies that we have and people were just like, especially people who haven't been immersed in this discussion a bit like, well, what are you talking about? You know, are you implying that design practitioners don't think that's weird because obviously they do? And then, and so I was kind of interested in that. And I think what I'm thinking is kind of akin to what Bill was saying is that this isn't about either or this is about and this is about both. But I did also want to pull up to talk about the ads that you showed, those Mercedes ads, which caused a bit of a stir when they came out and they are so beautiful. The illustrations are so beautiful, but they're such nonsense. I can't stand them because what they do is they say that the right-hand side of the brain is all technicolour and gorgeous and flowing and amazing and creative and exploratory and all the rest of it. And then the left brain, people are really gray and drab and dull and boring. And I just think that's nonsense, you know? I mean, I've worked with, you know, at Dublin as part of a much bigger strategy consultancy and so I've had the opportunity to work with people who are super left brain and holy shit, these guys are so creative and I know that financial innovation is not something that we're particularly excited about these days, but it is amazing to see the creativity that goes into this work and the way that analysts can look at data and they can grock this stuff into just kind of meaningful insights that can really help. And I think that's amazing and I think that to kind of set up the right hand, the right side of the brain is this kind of, that the only creative powerhouse is really unfortunate. And similarly, I've worked with designers who just blow my mind, you know? They're just so creative and they're so incredible and they come up with solutions for things that you just, you have no idea how they got there but you're so excited to see that they did that. And I think we have to celebrate rather than trying to get everybody to be everything, we should be celebrating what people are good at. You know, be good at what you're good at and be happy about that and be as good as you possibly can and then you also have to, I guess we have to develop empathy and that's something that designers always talk about but develop empathy for those other people. So it's not a question of setting up an opposition but it is a question of learning how to understand other people and that gets back to my idea about language. What I'm really passionate about is figuring out a way that we can all talk the same language and we can all be understood and we can make ourselves understood within any context. So I did want to dive in too, thank you very much. Just being a little bit more specific about design thinking and obviously I bring a huge baggage to this topic having covered it at Business Week but so in my experience, and I'm sure lots of people have other experiences, but in my experience design thinking has become or is used as a process often within really big companies, the big companies that have the biggest difficulties in innovating because they are the least nimble, the least flexible, the least able to change. They're super tankers so changing is really super hard and design thinking has been introduced as this incredibly useful process by which you can bring people together and you can put people in the room and again to echo something that Bill had said is that we talk about interdisciplinary teams, it's like a cliché to talk about this now, but it's so important. The problems that we face as a society are so complex that no one person can solve them and what we need is for people to be able to come together and be able to sit around a table wherever it is and be able to share insights. And again this comes back to my language issue, of if you're not speaking at the same level, then how can you be understood and how can you actually make the change that you're all purporting to be there for? I was just at the TED conference and David Kelly, who is obviously the founder of IDO with Bill, gave a talk in the design session and his new mission is to kind of stop the world from dividing people into creative and non-creative people. He's just really, when the talk goes live, you should all hunt it down because it's just a really beautiful and lyrical and poetic introduction to these ideas for people not within that community. And he described a workshop that they'd done at IDO, I guess, at some point. And so all of these people are there, the big wigs, the hotshots, the CEOs are there, the C-suite and everyone's getting going at this kind of workshop thinking and everything is fine until it gets difficult. And so everybody, anyone who's ever worked in this field, knows that shit's going to get difficult at some point. And he said it was remarkable because as soon as it got difficult, the blackberries would come out and people were like, I've got a very important email, I have to answer this now, I have to take this call. And so they all left the room just at the moment when they really needed to be doubling down and really getting on with it. And so he said that he asked something, he was like, what's going on, what are you doing? And the answer invariably was, I'm just not that creative, this bit's not for me, you guys sort this bit out and I'll be back when that's done. And this is such a shame, this is such a shame, it's a shame and it's honestly a tragedy that this is kind of the way that we've set ourselves up. And I see the same thing honestly happening in the design community too. I think it's honestly criminal how badly equipped we're sending out our graduates often. They don't know what a P&L she is, they don't know the very simplest business information on how to run a business, and I think not everyone has to run a business, but I think that we have to be moving towards speaking the same language, I'm just going to repeat myself a lot, but at least have the same kind of basic foundational knowledge so that we can all start to move and start to apply these things in a way that will actually make the difference that we want. I don't really know what happened, I feel like when you're a kid, there's always a willingness to learn, there's always what you have to learn, you have to go to school and you have to do something. But somehow when you enter real life, when you become a grown up and you enter the office, you're not allowed to not know anymore, you're not allowed to not know an answer, you have to know everything, and that's just nonsense again, we don't know everything, and we need to kind of change the culture so that we can be more comfortable with not knowing, I suppose. And I think one other thing, and then I promise I'll stop talking, is that it's great to feel like you're part of a tribe, it's great to feel like you're part of something and you're part of a gang and you've got your special kind of sign language and your coded language and everybody, you understand it and no one else does and that's really cool. And it is really cool, but we have to also realise that this patois, this jargon has just infiltrated society to such an extent that we're not really making sense anymore half the time, and if we're not making sense, then how can we really expect to change anything? And I just, and I don't mean to get political, but I just noticed that, okay, that's just really annoyed me, so I'm going to share it, but the Bill in Pennsylvania about mandatory ultrasounds is called the Women's Right to Know Act, and this double-speak is not helpful, this double-speak is going to kill our society and I think that we have to do something about this and my humble suggestion is that we all just reign it in and then we just start to speak in English again and then we just, English in this culture will work, but just speak common language and try to make ourselves understood and be open to other people and then that's how we will be able to make the difference that we want to see. Thank you. So one of the barriers, of course, for people who are in a big organisation, like the one you talked about, is that they've been in these narrow silos for so long, I mean, they decided they wanted to become some form of specialist scientist or business career, or legal career, whatever it might be, before they actually went to university and then as they went through university, they get to be more and more specialist than they move into an organisation like a large company and they're increasing the nature of that specialty and then suddenly somebody comes along and says, try this design thinking thing, just get in the room and collaborate with all these people completely different backgrounds, that's a hard thing to do. Yeah, absolutely. And I think that people, we just all have to be a little bit more sensitive to each other, we have to understand that this is difficult and we have to take away this kind of culture of judgement where this is going to be weird and this is going to be uncomfortable, but I have to say, when I first joined Dublin, I kind of went on, they do these workshops to kind of help people think about this kind of thing and I went and it was so interesting to see these executives and they were so grumpy, they were so cross to be there, they didn't want to be there at all, they wanted to be on their blackberry, they were really busy, for heaven's sake, what am I doing here? And it was like a three day event and you saw this shift kind of halfway through when suddenly it was just like, wait a minute, this isn't abstract, this isn't totally abstract, this is actually really useful, I can actually apply this in my own work, holy shit, okay, count me in, I'm back. And the end of the workshop was just this kind of astonishing come to Jesus moment of light, suddenly we had all these evangelists and it was kind of alarming, but I think you just have to give people a break, you have to treat people the way that you would like to be treated if you were trying to learn something new, I mean these people, if you're a scientist and you're deeply embedded in your science work, you're going to be really smart and there's no reason that you shouldn't be able to grog this stuff. I think there is a tendency to get a backlash though if you try these methods and they don't succeed quickly and then people say, oh it doesn't work, so that tends to, once something gets popularized and accepted as a rational thing to try and then unless it's quickly successful it often suffers a backlash and I think we've seen that happening in the last few years with the idea of design thinking. Yeah, definitely, definitely and I think it's really important that it isn't set up and I think I meant to say this and forgot, but it's not a panacea. This isn't the quick fix that everyone is looking for. Innovation is really, really hard work. If it were easy then our world would be a better place, then everyone would be at it, but the failure rate of innovation is just enormously high. But yeah, so I think it's just a framing issue of design thinking is an incredibly useful and powerful process that can help but in order to innovate successfully you have to think about a whole lot more than just processes. You have to, for instance, just one example that springs to mind is thinking about internal culture and thinking about the bed that you have, the bedding that you have in which you're trying to plant these seedlings. Are you planting on rocks or are you planting on delicious, fertilised soil? I must say I take comfort from the fact that young people are so readily adaptable. I was lucky enough to teach a class in the Stanford D School for a few years before coming to New York. And it was just amazing. The idea of the D School is that you have students from these different MA programmes. So you put together teams from people from completely different backgrounds. They're not trying to get a design degree. They're in the D School in order to collaborate with other people from different backgrounds. So you get a business student with an ethnography student, with a design student, with a technology student. And you put teams of four or five together like that. And amazingly, they seem to be able to collaborate successfully after a dramatically short time. I mean, just the opposite to the story of the siloed individuals in big companies. They seem to be able to collaborate after half a quarter and really be able to do it successfully and find great results from that, which is wonderful to see. So if we can see the kind of concept of D School-like education spreading, which it does seem to be doing, then perhaps our young people will rescue us. Oh, I'm really excited about the young people. I think we're going to be fine. They're totally amazing. And they totally understand the stuff at a level that none of us old people get. And that's great, but you know, it happened. We were like that. The old and old, you know. We were like that once, and we all have our moments. But I do think what's interesting about the education piece, and again, it's something that we did at business, where we really tried to track this stuff and see who was doing it and really saw the explosion of classes that are purporting to kind of cover the design and business spectrum. And I just want to raise one word of caution, I suppose, in that what's important here is not that you're not trying to create the ultimate all-rounder. You're still, you know, the education classes are still about having your deep specialty, but it's just expanding your kind of understanding, the scope of understanding. I think there's been some confusion in the marketplace about what these graduates might do. It's just like, are you a designer? Are you, what are you, an analyst? And I think, you know, companies will figure this out. And I think what's important is that the scope of the education is just kind of allowing that language, that language matter that I'm banging on about to kind of spread. When Davie Kelly was starting the D-School, he started working on the idea back in around 2001, I think. And as I was teaching a little part-time in classes in the design programme at Stanford over the years, he said, asked me to do a little research and see if there were other places in the world that had used similar ideas in the past. And I looked around, looked at all the courses that might have been collaborative across disciplines. There was only one that I found that was remarkably similar. And that was at Helsinki University, where they had a University of Technology, another University of Design, another one of business. And they had classes that were coming together in exactly the same similar way and producing designs. And that's now turned into the Alta University. And in fact, Yr O Sotomo, who founded that, has now gone off to Shanghai to do the same thing there. So it is kind of the methodology, I think, it does need to have this idea that people come in with their specialty and their expertise and they keep it. What they're doing is adding some design thinking to help them collaborate with others and come up with solutions which they might not have been able to achieve without those collaborations. Yeah, I think it's super exciting. I think we just have to be aware, though, that you can't, you know, I don't know, there's lots of MBA programmes that are, you know, MBA in design and all of that. And I think that it's totally admirable that people are trying these things. I just think that we have to be aware of, you know, two years in graduate school is not that long. And two years in graduate school, you're already learning quite a lot. So it's a question of how much you can kind of shoehorn into that very short period of time. And I think it just is behoove into all of the people designing these courses just to be as smart as possible about what's really necessary and thinking about the design of the curriculum smartly. Well, let's ask Fiona and Beth to join us and they're going to help us understand this in a much richer way, I think. So Fiona Morrison is shimmying into her spot there. All right, elegant, thank you. And she's been, until recently, working at JetBlue and she's been responsible for all those incredible achievements that JetBlue has in terms of the great terminal at JFK, but also the overall design approach and the branding. So I think it's great to have you bring us the sort of more the other side of the picture, not consulting, had to do it, make it really happen. So please tell us a bit about yourself. I think there's a slide to... Sure, with the old headshot. Okay, yes, it's old. It's a few years ago, yeah, it was slightly different. Just the hair. Well, thank you for having me. I'm really excited to be here. I have notes that I'm going to look at sort of out of the corner of my eye. I think the big thing for me to say here is when you get invited to one of these things is I'm not a designer. I never said I was, I've never done a design course. I don't think of myself as a designer. I think of myself, I'm a brand strategist. That was my job at JetBlue until a few weeks ago. But I'm a designer naibla and profound sort of cheerleader of good designer and sometimes a groupie of design. But I think that's part of the role of being a strategist or a brand strategist or working for a brand like JetBlue and being part of building it is actually sort of seeing that whole and understanding how you need to collaborate to come up with good decisions. You know, at JetBlue we didn't really sort of said let's do some design thinking. It never actually happened like that. My first exposure to design thinking was actually just last year at an executive session at the D-School for design thinking for executives and sort of a four-day immersion where they didn't let you have your blackberry and people were twitching the first two days. And then generally by the end of it sort of raising their hands in praise and having evangelical moments, sort of going that was the most amazing thing I've ever experienced and then wondering how the heck they're going to take it back and get everybody else at their business to understand what they were really talking about that they hadn't just joined a cult for four days and come back. But with JetBlue the role whilst we didn't think of it as design thinking we had I think the foundation in our brand that allowed us to think, that allows the company to think in a different way than a lot of other companies which is it has a mission of to bring humanity back to air travel. It's pretty hard to avoid the basis of design thinking which is sort of empathy and humanity when you've got a very short succinct and quite prescriptive mission statement that nobody can say I never heard that before or I can't remember it. So it constantly sort of was the thing that drove us back to saying well does this service product idea communication help us bring humanity back to air travel? So my role there was to lead a team that was focused on always thinking about what's the customer impact and also what's the crew member impact because if you're going to have a service brand you have to be able to deliver a great service. There's a lot of JetBlue is not the first there's a lot of airlines out there that have done some great stuff. Southwest is an incredibly customer centric and obviously Air New Zealand has done work with IDO on some amazing pieces of product. Their cuddle couch where they turn three economy seats into a couch for long haul flights is amazing not just because it's a great piece of design and simplicity but because they actually did it for economy class travellers. Innovations never really happened in the back of the plane. It's usually in the pointy bits where they get all that fun exciting stuff. So when an airline thinking about consumers thinking about the future of travellers really kind of taken quite a big step in that. And a funny little airline in a funny little country that really, you know, honestly, as an Australian we have a thing with New Zealand. But you know, there's not stopping airlines here from taking that and being forced to take that step. I mean, I think technology is forcing them. It's very hard to miss the voice of the consumer these days if you're an airline. They're tweeting their Facebook and they're doing everything and it's very hard for an airline to say I didn't hear that or people aren't telling me that. So airlines and service industries in general are having to really pick up their game. So just to wrap myself up, I, you know, I, 10 years at JetBlue, I just left two weeks ago, I'm still twitching. I'm saying that I'm not sure what to do with myself during the days, but I'm definitely sort of someone who, you know, wants to continue in this world of, you know, thinking about consumer-led or a human-centric design and working in a brand strategic or a strategic brand manner. Not sure where that'll be. So any ideas, welcome. Thank you. Thank you. So Beth Fynor is actually has a background from Stanford in the business school. So she joined IDO to help all those design folks from different disciplines, understand a bit more about business issues and she's been doing a wonderful job of that. So tell us more about yourself, Beth. Sure. So I often think that I actually lucked into IDO. It was kind of a fluke that I ended up there. I, someone had emailed me and said, what are you doing after school? And I said, I don't know what should I do? And they wrote back, you should work at IDO. And my response was, they don't hire people like me. And this was a number of years ago, about seven years ago. And so lucky for me, they did hire me and they still do. And I think when I started at IDO, I was on the business side. So I think a lot about our client relationships and the businesses that IDO is in and how we're growing those. But I always saw my main job as actually that of a translator, right? Because there's this chasm between IDO and this design world and the businesses. And over the past seven years, you actually see that that role becomes less and less necessary. Because luckily, we keep hiring people like me, right? So there's lots of business people running around IDO now doing business design and actually helping to make ideas even more tangible and have even more impact in the world. But also our clients are becoming much more skilled in talking about design thinking. And so I find myself in kind of a new place over the past few years, which is really thinking about emerging areas of IDO's business. And so working with talented designers and areas of content to help bring those businesses to bear for IDO, whether that's thinking more about service. So I've done a lot of work in retail and hospitality, banking. I know it's like the big evil. And then also thinking about education, right? So what does that mean, both the private and public sector? And then doing actually work over the past couple of years thinking about IDO's business in South America. So it's been an interesting transition for me to actually watch kind of that translation role become less and less necessary, but also one that's really filled with hope as well. So that's me. Thank you. So what are we going to talk about? You've got us here. Well, I have a question, if that's... Can I ask a question? And it's for you Fiona. I just wondered if you could be more specific about actually how you work within JetBlue. What response you met having been at your D-School experience. So when you went back, what happened? How did you make that work? Gosh, I wish I could say I went back and they all stopped and listened and said, oh my goodness, aren't you brilliant? Let's do it. Let's throw out everything in the meeting room and turn it into a collaboration centre. They didn't. But I think what did happen and what JetBlue has been doing over the course of the last couple of years is sending people from across different disciplines within the company. So the head of airport operations went and did the D-School and came back waving his hands in the air and sort of doing the dance. And I think one of the things... Design thinking dance. Design thinking, we can do that later. Design thinking dance, but I think, and I went across a whole lot of different disciplines within the company. And what that's done, whilst any change is never as quick as you'd like it to be, it started to build this sort of idea that it's okay to stop and think, it's okay to go into abstract. So these people are now in meetings going, hang on, could we... We're not going to be about to follow the steps of the process necessarily. It'd be nice if you had the time, but the elements of the process are coming in. And I would say that it might not always win, but at least it's discussed. And I think historically, JetBlue as a result of sort of that DNA of the humanity of back-to-air travel has a good foundation for going, hang on, do we have to do it like everybody else? Just because other airlines do it doesn't mean it's good. Is that what people really want? So that combined with sort of this interdisciplinary team is definitely helping. So what's it like doing it with a bank? It can be hard, actually. I think, well, I think there are a lot of industries that are ripe for change and they're very excited about it, but they don't necessarily know how to change. And so I think we see, right? There are so many industries that haven't changed, right? So you look at stores like borders that are out of business, right? And they didn't change and they actually had all of the assets right in front of them years ago, but they didn't see how things were moving. And so I think we're lucky that banks come to us and ask the questions, but I think it goes back to how deep that understanding is within their organisations in terms of their willingness to move or to change. So there are definitely organisations that are willing to do that. I think oftentimes they're so focused on what's new, what's the new product or service that we can deliver from this. And so we've had instances in banks where they create and they have this wonderful innovation team that we work with. And then that innovation team is very successful in rolling out a new product or a new service. And then what happens is six months later, that whole team is promoted. And so that team doesn't exist anymore. And so I think there are successes that you can see there, but generally those successes are not part of the fabric of the culture of an organisation. And so it's very difficult for them to be maintained over time. I think that a lot of the problems that one sees with any form of consulting and design is whether it actually gets implemented. I mean, there's often a chasm between the people who come to the project and enjoy it like you'll visit to the D-School, but the people who are on our project in a design consulting team from the client side who really sort of get value out of it because they participate, but then they take it back to the rest of the organisation and try and implement something. And it's just a different world. There's so many stories where things don't really happen. I wonder if you have any comments about how one could break those barriers. I mean, you started me thinking about a project that we actually did with IDO, which was for the development or the sort of evolution of the JetBlue product, which was even more legroom, just to make it the sort of even more product. And we did a lot of work with IDO and it's a phenomenal project for me to work on, but it's got this sort of lofty notion oh, they're off doing design thinking stuff. They're going to come back with something that's operationally very challenging or difficult. And I think what we found was that I'm sure the IDO team sort of handed their baby across to us and then we kind of just chopped off its legs, basically. But I think you have to, for a business, there's always other parameters. There's always other parameters that aren't, whilst you might have discussed them in the design thinking process or in the sort of the collaboration process, there's always other parameters that get in the way, damn them, and sort of ruin that moment. And I think it's just a matter of being aware of the parameters, taking, having a lofty goal and hopefully thinking that you're taking one step at a time as opposed to reaching the immediate goal. I'm just thinking of JetBlue in that regard. You can bite off certain elements and maybe get that greater good. Yeah, I mean, it's funny, because hearing that, right, you're like you hand over the baby and I guess I think my hope is always that, or I think we used to do that a lot. And we used to, it actually takes a lot more care to make sure that the people are involved in birthing that baby and creating that baby and all those other parts of that experience. And so there's lots of theories around lean startup and agile design versus a waterfall approach, which is that, just toss it over the fence and hope it lands safely. And I think we spend a lot more of our time now actually starting to create buy-in really early and making sure that the right stakeholders are there. And there are sacrifices that happen on both sides, but I think at the end of the day that makes for a more seamless experience. And hopefully that because the right people are in the room, there is more buy-in. But you do at some point have to let go, right? I do at the end of the day, we are consulting for them and I think we care so much about those things having impact in the world, but it becomes someone else's responsibility. And so there's always attention there for sure. Yeah, I think there's lots of theories about how to nurture innovation and there's all sorts of discussion about how companies should do it. Should you have like a kind of innovation unit that's totally separate from the main company? Should you have, how then do you put that back into the host without it being kind of either squashed or overwhelmed? And I think people are pretty smart about this, but it's really important that the culture piece doesn't get overlooked at any point because the culture of the company is going to dictate whether something is successful or not. And making consultants can only do so much and they need to make sure that the people who are actually going to do the hard work on board and that they are coming up with the ideas. This isn't about dictating, you know, you should do this, it'll be great, that's not going to help, that's not going to help anybody. Yeah, I think people are pretty confused at the moment by the success of Apple because that's such a powerful thing and the stories about design being so important in terms of contributing to that success are so obviously visible. But it gives the impression that it's very much an individual personality dominating the decisions and choices in order to achieve that success. And then you look at something that's the opposite of that, which is the entire structure of, say, Silicon Valley, which is an engine actually of innovation, has been for a long time, 30, 40 years, 50 years even. And there, really, the sort of interdisciplinary teamwork that we're describing with design thinking was always the structure of the startup company because what they did with any startup company was hire the VP of every different discipline, put them together in a room and tell them to get on with it, you know, and they will not tell them, I mean they would do it together, very much a collaborative process. So the sort of engine of innovation that we see in the valley is very contrasting, at least intellectually, with the idea of Apple's success. Can you comment on that? I can, to a certain extent, in that I think it's the just genius storytellers, right? I mean it's not true that everything was done by Steve Jobs when he was there, and Tim Cook, who's taken over the firm since him, was legendary at figuring out issues of supply chain and applying just the same rigor that Jobs was doing elsewhere, but Jobs was just a master marketer and kind of crafted this narrative about the company that's incredibly compelling and really easy for people to grab hold of. Yeah, that's it. Would you say the startup company has something similar in structure to the design thinking idea? Sorry. Yes, and I think what the start... I think also what they do that is so interesting is that they have this flexibility that we talk about as being so critical to successful businesses where you can try something and if it doesn't work, you can try something else pretty quickly and you can iterate really, really rapidly in order to make success. And I think one of the interesting things I've been seeing out of the valley is this designer's fund, which is where... It's a VC fund which is specifically based on having a designer, an engineer, and a business person in a room together to see what happens. And I think we're going to see some super interesting stuff that's being driven by design. That in itself will kind of elevate design a little bit further up the discussion poll and help design to have a more central place at the table. I think it's also interesting when we think about Silicon Valley or an apple versus I think what happens at most large organisations in terms of how they think about innovation. They go and they hire this person who's going to run innovation. They create this silo for them to sit. And I think the most successful of those individuals actually start to create or find their own networks outside that maybe they're not competitive in other industries but they start to create their own cohort because they actually don't have one. And so I think one of the great things about the Silicon Valley model is like everyone is on board. Everyone is bought in. And I think when you're in a larger organisation and actually trying to fundamentally change the culture you're kind of a lone ranger. You're riding by yourself. And it's a really difficult place to be. And so I think it's a caution that I look at our clients who have put that into place and I worry about them a little bit because it's a huge responsibility and then it's so easy to just say, oh, you're gone. That didn't work out so well. Let's hide that somewhere else. I don't know. It's tough because not everyone can start anew to create the culture that would be necessary to actually breed that type of behaviour across an organisation. What about designing government? Oh, designing government. Oh my gosh. That's a hard one. We've been dabbling in that a little bit. And I think you have to change your expectations about what you can change and what impact looks like. Because the level, the scale, the number of people there who are kind of making decisions and all of a sudden you think you're doing this project and everyone's already over here and it's just a different monster altogether. I think it actually comes back to a piece around language is really important and it might be a different tone on language but it's all about saying, how can we make this simple so that everyone at every level of government, if you think about an agency that you might be working with, can actually understand what their place is within that process, where they fit within that monster at some level, how they can contribute so that they see what you see. Let's get some other people to join us. I think they're going to bring the microphones up to the side here. And if you want to ask a question or make a comment, please come up to the mic and remember to say who you are before you start. In the meantime, Helen is going to say. In the meantime, I have a very important point I'd like to make. It was actually just to talk about government a bit more in that there's a really interesting initiative called Code for America that's happening, which isn't specifically designed but it's about bringing this kind of, it's about bringing design thinking to the problem of government and the problem of citizenship and I was listening to Jennifer Parker, who's the founder of Code for America Talk the other day and she was describing this initiative where it's kind of goofy. They named fire hydrants in Boston and they allowed people to adopt a fire hydrant so when it snowed, you went and dug out Al your fire hydrant and you had ownership and you felt very responsible for Al and you didn't want him to be submerged and they added all the gaming stuff that everybody has to do these days but it's been enormously successful and it was one of the Code for America volunteers who designed this and rolled it out in two and a half months just to see what would happen. Nine cities have adopted this and are kind of using it in appropriate ways for their cities like Hawaii's having flood warnings are being used in Hawaii and Chicago has it for snow so it's being adopted at an exponential rate and people from government had told Jennifer that this would have taken two and a half years and cost millions of dollars if they'd done it the traditional way of going through the layers of bureaucracy needed and I think what's interesting is these are kids, they're just trying it and they're doing it and I think this is the kind of... this is why we're not all lost because the kids can do this kind of thing. Please. Hi, my name is Andrew Robinson I teach at Parsons and I'm an artist and a designer. I have a couple of visual reactions to things that you've been saying. I want to just straight out say it's interesting to hear you talk about ideas about strategy and innovation in business and I was struck by your talking about language I personally feel really uncomfortable with the term design thinking many people do and one of the reasons why I feel uncomfortable is because some things that you've mentioned appear the immediate assumption when you use that language that people who practice design are not thinking that's not true. It's a bit rude too. But I think it brings up a larger issue about for me when I hear about what you guys describe about branding, about strategy about innovation in business that's what it is. It's strategy and business and innovation which is genius, it's really important but it's not design from my point of view. For example when you talked about Eva Zizell being intuitive I actually totally disagree with that when you think about what she did so when she went to the Soviet Union before she got thrown on a gulag she was hired by that government to design and innovate their entire ceramics industry and one of the asks was we need to be really efficient about how we produce wares for the people of the Soviet Union. She also did things with the way that the teacup handle is actually designed that were really specific design problems so to say that because her evolution as a designer didn't change radically because of one T set sold a crate and barrel I think is a little disingenuous. So my question really is how what is design thinking when it comes down to the practical I guess I'm just trying to find a different word for it. The other thing that I struggle with and I'll sit down after this is one of the things that I've seen I co-taught a class with Columbia and Parsons where MBA students and design practitioners worked together and what struck me was the teams that worked really well to design luxury products for this class were the ones who actually collaborated in the studio making things because the business people were able to learn about the material and about the production and make decisions about that my concern is that in education through high school and undergrad and even graduate school that were kind of de-skilling generations of people in the United States and the UK and even in Europe and my concern is design thinking feels like it's just trying to frame something that's not really design that's just kind of my comment and question Thanks Thank you very much I'm profound I stand corrected about Ava I'm sure you're absolutely right but I really feel stand corrected by what Helen said about the difference between the two halves of the brain I do believe that it's all mixed that everybody does both that the scientist uses right brain just as much as left but just is a difference in balance and it helps to explain it perhaps that's why we need a word like design thinking to help us explain the different in terms of kind of operation and to me it's fairly simple in that when I graduated from design school in the 60s my assumption was that I would be designing products that were probably made in metals and plastics for the whole of my life but that somebody else would tell me what to do that the boss or the client would say design this cattle bill design this cooker bill design this iron bill and I would then be the designer doing the design but I wouldn't be expecting myself to try and help to decide what to design and that to me is the difference the practice is about doing the designing but the design thinking is the bit where you're trying to help to decide what to design and that's a different question of course one can come together with the other and usually does that you'd find that most designers particularly if they're a bit entrepreneurial like Scott Wilson will be deciding what to do and doing it but there is a difference in the methodology and I do think we need a label to separate them I would add that I agree with you that I think the term is terribly difficult and really causes more problems often than it solves but I think that I agree with Bill that it's important to have some kind of language around this and maybe it's not the right term but the practice is very different and I also agree with you that it's terribly important to keep the craft side of design to keep that up and to make sure that that's still something that people are taught and understand and it's not necessary for all of the business people to immerse themselves in that and learn that as a separate discipline but I think it's incredibly important and valuable for both sides to have experience within the other and I think that's what a lot of these courses are trying to do they're not trying to undercut the power or the importance of one discipline or another but they are just trying to allow a little overlap or some kind of segue between them so that people can understand a little bit more about what the other side or what the other people are doing I would just say I think coming from a business background it's interesting to hear your comments because I think what I love about the work that I think all of us do is that sometimes the problems are so complex it's so difficult to understand what is tangible about it and when you can pair the design piece with the thinking and the methodology you can make those very very complex concepts tangible and so to me it's hard because I think so much of the work that I'm involved in, that IDEO is involved in doesn't have an end product, an end thing that sits on the shelf these are complex systems some of them actually don't ever appear like in air you would never be able to recognize it but to me the thing that's wonderful about it is how expansive we can be when we borrow from design and so I think the distinction is really interesting and I think we hear from our teams all the time how much they miss being able to always make beautiful things because of the constraints that were sometimes handed or given so it's an interesting balance but for me it's all about a place of inspiration to kind of broaden that set I mean I think you've said it all but I think the thing that came to my mind when you were speaking because I'm someone who shares your passion for the importance of language of finding the right way to say something because the foundation of good design for a client to a designer however the sort of relationship is to be able to communicate your need and you'd be able to communicate back to me what you're seeing, hearing, feeling and wanting to create but I think it's not so much business people taking away from you designer it's actually hoping that we can learn a little from you and expand our horizons rather than being sort of locked in to this must do business but actually going well is there another way to look at this, is there a way to learn from the designer to step back and take a broader view I don't, like I said I'm not a designer, I don't think I am one but I kind of like hanging around with them I also think that we can learn a lot from them so I think it's, you know the language isn't perfect but the intent I think is maybe not perfect but it has integrity and it has to work both ways too this isn't just about the gracious designer bestowing their wisdom on the dumb business person this is about the business person informing the designer too and helping the designer to come up with better ideas this has to be an equal partnership and I think that's something that is often missing too and this is that kind of defensive mechanism that people kind of because people don't want to say that they don't know something people get super defensive and that's super unhelpful One of the slogans that I liked that idea about the project room the separate space where all the stuff in your project is on the walls or around the place and you can go into that room and you instantly remember everything about what you thought yesterday about that project but we have a little slogan saying check your disciplines at the door of the project room because if you don't do that then that sense of intense collaboration between people is still siloed so that really if you can achieve that then you're fluent if you're able to leave your discipline behind if you collaboratively come up with ideas and you don't remember who came up with the idea was it the business person who came up with it was it the human factor scientist I don't know, we just came up with it together so if you've got that level of collaboration then you learn how to do it I think I think your illustration earlier on about everybody when it gets to the tough point suddenly this very important email must be thumbed is that very point of you get up against the wall of what's my discipline, what do I know rather than sort of pushing through it and saying well I don't know damn things so let's see what happens there must be somebody else who wants to say something yes please come to our microphone yes my name is Melinda Zofill and I'm an architecture student at Cornell and one of the major shifts obviously recently has been the shift toward computers and technology and collaboration through technology and in our first year we weren't allowed to touch computers we had to draw everything by hand and then later on we moved into that where below us they started out in computers and so I'm wondering how you think computers and technology have changed design education and therefore creativity and design itself totally on new bill I think to computers just tools so I went to school at the time when I learned to draw with airbrush, with gouache with watercolour with ruling pens and then a few years later none of that was in a use I was using magic markers and a few years after that none of that was in a use I was using computers so who cares I mean it's just another tool so if you think of it as a tool then fine I mean it doesn't really matter it doesn't get in the way it in fact is a wonderful set of tools I mean you can do things that we didn't used to be able to you can do them so much quicker you can do them in wonderful new ways but thinking of it as a necessary component that you are allowed to have not allowed to have seems to me the wrong kind of way of thinking about it that's what I was going to say me too I love this talk and you are? I'm Angela Ye of Ye Ideology we're a design and strategy recruitment firm so we work with corporations and consultancies all across the US and internationally I love the term design thinking and from what we see whether you are an industrial designer or service design specialist strategist engineer we see that when people are more multilingual and in our firm we call it multilingual being able to talk if you're an industrial designer and you can talk engineering you can talk product development and marketing you can relate to them better and we find that in any sector we find that most successful people are more multilingual it doesn't detract from what they know and what they do but it just adds to their purview of what they do so I think also for business to understand the value of design it's better for them to understand it to some level for us to appreciate accounting and finance I don't want to be an accountant but I understand and respect exactly what they do more when I know some level of it and actually to that woman's question having seen design different businesses use different skills and we always still see people who are missing that hand skill and it's still really rare but rendering abilities if you get better and if you're really mastering it you can be good at it but sometimes rendering if you're not mastering it it hinders your ability to be creative thank you comments hi I am Alice Goddusman and I'm not really anything in particular except interested in the topic but I thought that this gentleman was really excellent in what he said and I sort of wonder why isn't this like creative why isn't the term instead of design thinking which is so elevated which I think is so you talk about language nobody knows what a designer is to begin with so it's like there's no set that language the word design is probably the most difficult word to define almost so why aren't we just talking about creative solving creative solve problem solving I mean why are we elevating it to this kind of design thinking I mean it just seems like we all as we all once had that ability to create and then all of a sudden it's people are frightened of it as you were saying they you know sort of work with their blackberries and things but it's just so simple so just sort of confused and I think that I just really appreciate what you were saying and I couldn't agree more I think that was what I was trying to say in my earlier comments was you know it's really time to to reign it in and to start talking I say talk in English because I'm from England but just talking in plain language again and making sure that we're all speaking at the same level and we'll all understand what we're talking about in the ether people have embraced it, people have adopted it people really like it and so that's fine I don't think it's worth getting embroiled in some semantic discussion frankly if people are into it and they understand it that's great I guess there is a problem if there's this backlash that happens because people haven't understood it or they don't know what it means and they thought that they had employed it and then it all went completely wrong but I don't know that creative problem solving is any more useful I don't want to lose the idea of design I mean designs had a while to figure out what it is in fact I did a short history of design in five minutes recently looking at the architecture which was originated in 46th century BC when the first design of a pyramid was done that's quite a long time back 70th centuries and if you think about industrial design that's only since the industrial revolution but it's still you know since the 1750s that kind of time about as old as this country has been an independent place so is that a dig? so I think it's a good thing to remember the fact that the evolution of the methods that design uses has had a lot of time to get mature and if you lose the word design then you lose that recognition of that ability to leverage all those methods Louis Catoise demanding his architects arrive in time for the next beautiful palace that was the origin of the charrette wasn't it because they were still doing the drawings after the all nighter as they were riding along in the cart to deliver the drawings so there is a lot about design process that has been around for a long time and is worth remembering has value to stick with that and design yes that stick with the word design in this title perhaps thinking is something maybe it's the best word we got so far I think one of the things I think the closer you get to the business world the closer design thinking comes to not having any meaning at all the closer like the words like innovation you know you'll be sitting with someone they'll be like yeah we have this awesome innovation next year we're going to launch a new product and you're like what that's innovation okay great that's a great starting point but I think one of the ways that it's a starting point but one of the ways that I always talk about it is this kind of human centered perspective on design or human centered design and to me that helps at least ground it in a place and maybe it's not the right place to ground it but otherwise I think design thinking it does it becomes so high that people attach other meanings to it whatever they think it is and then you think you're having one conversation and you're actually having quite a different one I guess the only issue with sorry just one other extra point the issue with creative problem solving is that all problem solving should be creative if it's not then it's not really solving the problem if you the people online try to hear you I'm glad you're glad to hear me but the thing is when I understand design in terms of the process of design but it seems like when we're bringing it to the business world we're no longer designing a product we're designing a way of thinking so then it's not so we're talking about creative solutions for how to think about all aspects of life it's not this I agree with Bill in terms of if you're in the design world and you develop a car or whatever there's a certain process you go through everybody in the design field a landscape architect an architect a fashion designer you go through school you get certain training and it's just like you go to business school and you get certain training and you become a professional in your field when you're trying to get people to just think in a certain way but it's not about your training as a designer anymore that goes with that that you're now just talking about a way of thinking and you're trying to blend this left brain and right brain and work it in this it just seems to me it's more about creative problem solving that when we're talking about as a way of thinking not as a discipline which I respect as a design discipline or that's where I'm getting confused so I think what's really important to remember is that not everybody has to do this this isn't something that everyone has to become expert in and some people are going to be really really super good at this particular form of design this form of design which helps business this form of design which can create new businesses create completely new businesses out of nothing come up with new concepts for businesses this is a particular discipline of design and it doesn't in any way denigrate any of the other disciplines of design and if you don't want to have anything to do with the business you'll have more power to you but this is a particular form of design that is incredibly powerful there's room in the world for lots of people who do beautiful lamps let's have one more comment or question thank you hi my name is Anna Mendoza and I'm a graphic designer but I'm very interested in the question of communication and education I'm from Venezuela and we developed a program to teach teachers the integration how art and science were integrated together and we added to the elementary curriculum drawing as a subject matter and the results of the school were amazing and because when you go back to Leonardo da Vinci who was like the master scientist and designer and the designers thinker that ever existed I think we tried to bring that back because now the scientists are on one side and the designers and artists are on the other side and our idea was to educate the science teachers on art and how the science was in art and then to educate the artists or the art teachers on how there was science in art and we brought it up from preschool to high school and I was thinking if you have thought of since you talked about the education and the integration in the universities there must still be some damage there might already be some damage so have you thought of that as something that could be addressed Thank you, let's have a last word from each of us on that topic Yes That was one word I think that would be absolutely amazing I think it's a tragedy that art drawing all of these disciplines are kind of lost really quickly because I was musical and so I went into music and I never did anything to do with art and I think it's tragic so yes, absolutely You mentioned that you went to TED just recently if you go to online you look at TED Talks the most popular of all the TED Talks was the one by Ken Robinson when he talks about the fact that we do drum this sort of creativity out of our kids that they naturally do these things in elementary school and then by the time they get to the high school they've been told not to really continue with that and only a few oddball people like ourselves will persist enough to fight through that but he's very eloquent in that so if you want to hear a lovely way to be persuasive on that topic I recommend you watch that talk I was just going to say I agree it'd be nice if people weren't I've said in so many brainstorms where somebody's asked to sketch something like how I can't draw you can draw a stick person and it's this sort of resistance and fear of being judged on what you're creating and I think if you are actually just forced to draw whether you're good, bad or indifferent at it it is a different process and it allows you to get beyond and when people do draw stick drawings in brainstorms and you're like well I actually know what you're talking about it's better than words and I think that's a great thing that would be to teach business people how to draw there you go I think all of us probably love the idea of it happening at younger ages but I also love this idea that Fiona is talking about how do you actually start to ask people to do it when they think they've unlearned it to relearn it so asking people to draw when they say they can't or what are the small steps you can ask people to do on a daily basis or monthly basis and I think that's how we start to bring it back into our organizations and our cultures is by taking the small steps and showing people that they still have it and what's the smallest barrier what's the lowest risk thing you could ask someone to do and then start with that Thank you so much for coming Love you