The design thinking process takes a human-centered approach towards training and consists of five stages:

• Empathize
• Define
• Ideate
• Prototype
• Test

In the Empathize stage, designers should connect with users or learners and gain insights into what drives and motivates them. Designers want to consider interviews and observations, as well as empathy mapping and the use of learner personas. Once designers know who their audience is and what really drives them, they can move on to the second stage in the design thinking process, the Define stage.

Define

In this stage, designers leverage all the information they have gathered in the first stage and organizes, interprets and makes sense of it. This allows to define the problem that is at the core of the design challenge. Meaning, designers have to define an actionable and meaningful problem statement that needs to be solved.. This design challenge will guide the designer and kick-start the ideation process rather than just defining learning objectives.This stage is about clarity and focus. Without it, it’s like stumbling in the dark. So let’s bring some light into the design thinking process.

A Good Problem Statement

The first step to shed light onto a design challenge is a good problem statement. It will guide a designer and add focus to their work, and it is the starting point to spark off new ideas in the Ideation stage. A good problem statement is:

• Human-centered
• Broad enough for creative freedom
• Narrow enough to make it manageable
• Actionable

There are multiple ways to define a problem statement that designers can follow with their teams.

Define a Problem Statement – Space Saturation and Group & Affinity Diagrams

This process might sound daunting, but is quite simple. Designers collect their observations and findings in one space using, for example post-it notes. This creates a collage of experiences, thoughts, insights and stories. Once all thoughts and insights are up on the wall, it is easy to draw connections between individual stories and insights and develop even deeper insights which help define the problem.

Define a Problem Statement – Point of View

In order to develop a problem statement in a goal-oriented manner, a point of view (POV) is a meaningful and actionable way to do exactly that. A POV allows designers to reframe a design challenge by combining three elements: user, need and insight. The following sentence can be helpful when developing a POV:

[User] _______ needs a way to [verb] ________ because [surprising insight] ________.

The measure of a successful POV is the number of different questions it will lead to as these questions are the base for the Ideation stage. Keep in mind that a POV should never contain a specific solution or how to fulfill a user’s need, but provide a wide enough scope to get the design team thinking.

Define a Problem Statement – How Might We Questions

Start using the POV by asking specific “How Might We” questions (HMV). These questions need to be built on the observations a designer collected in the Empathize stage. HMV questions should be broad enough for a wide range of solutions, but narrow enough that specific solutions can be created for them. Just like with POVs, the more questions a design team can come up with, the better. It opens up the design challenge to more solutions. HMW questions are really the launchpad for brainstorming sessions in the Ideation stage. To take it even further, ask “what is holding us back” for each HMV question to develop additional insights for the Ideation stage.

The Define stage is the crucial link between the Empathize and Ideation stage. It is however important to note that these stages don’t necessary happen in a linear way, and a design team might realize they have to go back and forth in order to find the best solution for their design challenge. The Define stage will help a design team gather great ideas to establish what possible elements would be part of the training solution.

Design thinking is a methodology putting human needs at the centre of design decisions. The design challenge at hand is reframed in human-centric ways, designers try to find multiple solutions in brainstorming sessions, and use prototyping and testing to ensure the best solution for learners. The design thinking process consists of five stages:

• Emphathize
• Define
• Ideate
• Prototype
• Test

Empathize

In this stage of the design thinking process, designers should put aside their own assumptions about the learner and the design challenge at hand and gain insights into their users instead. Consulting experts as well as engaging and empathizing with learners to understand where they are coming from and what drives and motivates them is as important as getting immersed in the physical environment. There are a couple of ways to achieve a better understanding of your learners.

Interview and Observe

In order to learn more about your users, you first have to meet them where they are at. Put yourself in their shoes and understand what their day to day looks like. Book meetings and interviews to ask pointed questions, and use observations to get a realistic picture of the learner. Talk to supervisors and managers to learn more about high performers and strugglers on a team and focus on how the learning experience design can help develop their skills.

Empathy Map

A great way to summarize a person’s experience and what designers learned during interviews and observations is the use of an empathy map. It’s commonly divided into four quadrants and refers to what the learner said, did, thought and felt. It’s rather easy to determine what a learner said or did, but it gets a bit more complicated when filling in what they thought and felt. Draw the four quadrants on a whiteboard or large piece of paper and start writing down findings from interviews and observations. Ideally, work with your team and write ideas on post-its so they can be moved around as needed. Next, synthesize the learner’s needs based on the empathy map to define the design challenge. Keep in mind that needs are verbs, meaning they describe activities and desires. As a last step, synthesize insights. Look at the empathy map and ask why something is the way it is and use that knowledge to solve the design challenge. Use the empathy map to role-play the persona and ask questions such as “What would this person do when they see this?” or “Why would this person not move on to the next step?”

Learner Personas

An empathy map is the first step in creating learner personas. Think of personas as fictional, generalized characters, each with their individual goals and needs. Information that can help create a persona on top of the empathy map include, but are not limited to, job role, biggest challenge, demographic information, personal background, tech savviness and years with the organization. Once learner personas are in place, it becomes more intuitive to create content that resonates with these personas allowing designers to keep the learning experience solution human-centred.

Traditionally, designers complete a target audience analysis, however, design thinking is taking this analysis to the next level. It allows designers to create a more human-centered learning experience that makes learning stick. By emphasizing with learners, learning experiences are more meaningful which increase motivation and engagement. Instead of creating content that no ones wants to take part in, create unforgettable experiences that make an actual difference.

You probably heard the news that IKEA opened its first Indian store in Hyderabad. In case you haven’t, you can view a video of the first day and see how 40,000 people lined up and rushed to get inside the new store; pictures that remind me more of a rock concert than the opening of a DIY furniture store. I also read a newspaper article about the store opening and was simply in awe.

The article states that India’s retail landscape is complex. The middle class spends about US$30 billion of furniture a year, but 95% of those goods are mainly purchased through smaller shops that offer custom-built products. IKEA’s brand stands for mass-produced, affordable and functional products with lean and lightweight design in contrast to bulkier furniture usually found in Indian households. However, IKEA is also known for a good bargain, which appeals to the Indian shopper. But still, how does IKEA think it can actually succeed? The answer is simple and inspiring at the same time:

• IKEA is selling certain products for less than it charges in other countries to adapt to India’s lower income level
• It tailors offerings for local tastes. For example, most Indians don’t use knives so IKEA removed its children cutlery packs and sells four spoons instead
• IKEA employees visited about 1,000 (yes, 1,000) households to understand how people live. They learned that relatives frequently stop by so they added more folding chairs and stools that serve as flexible seating
• Indian women are shorter than European women so some of the cabinet displays are lower
• The IKEA restaurant caters towards the Indian population with more than 1,000 available seats (more than any other IKEA in the world) and vegetarian Swedish meatballs
• Furniture is mainly made out of metal and lifted off the floor because people often clean their floors with water

So why am I talking about India’s retail landscape and how IKEA caters to it? For me, this is a perfect example of adapting a given strategy to a new audience. It’s about creating the perfect experience for a geographic region unknown to IKEA. Instead of sitting at the drawing board and thinking about what might work well and what wouldn’t, IKEA sent employees to Indian households to speak and interact with their end users.

My question to you is, if IKEA can do it, why can’t we in L&D? Why do we, more often than not, still not leverage usability testing, talk and interact with our learners when creating learning for them? IKEA’s example shows how crucial user testing is in order to create an experience that truly makes a difference. A learning experience that is catered towards the real needs of the learners will be more successful. Yes, it might take us a bit longer upfront to build the training, but isn’t it worth it in the end, if our learners will not only use the content we offer them, but change their behaviours because of it?