Archive — Double diamond
It’s 15 years since the Design Council came up with the double diamond, a model of the design process.
I find it useful as a general guide, although it does seem to confuse many people who assume it to be a strictly linear process. Recent conversations I’ve had at both the Service Design Academy and work have shown me that it remains a challenge to truly convey the complexity of a design process, and that the double diamond may in fact hinder this.
As always, it’s about having the right approach and mindset, rather than expecting an off-the-shelf tool or model to fix all your problems. Cat Drew’s article points this out:
But following a toolkit does not equal designing a good solution to the right problem. It is as much about the mindsets as the tools (e.g. being humble and open to ideas coming from everywhere and changing as a result of feedback, curious about what’s really going on and how things are working or not and working as teams rather than as a lone genius).
Is convergence in design thinking problematic?
The problem I have with it is it models a form of Normality. You can diverge but, in the end, you must converge.
An interesting idea from Alastair Somerville. He explains his alternative design process:
Yes, there is a convergence to design a product that meets identified user needs. Yes, there are constraints around what can be made.
However, divergence is recognised through the process.