It is nice to have a systematic way to think about design. However, in Gainesville, Florida example by Maggie Gram we can see how modern design thinking isn’t a perfect solution. The town wanted to become “a more competitive place for new businesses and talent” but IDEO missed the realities for most residents. The idealistic thinking overlooked the demographics of the residents of Gainesville. Having a great tagline, and having a nice logo just serve as a placebo for a much bigger problem of poverty and systemic that is inherently unsolvable by simplistic design. This is inheritably the biggest peril of design thinking. While it can be effective in solving some problems it is unable to fix the larger systematic issues plaguing a company or a city.
Design is often one part of the answer/solution, especially in marginalized and underrepresented communities; it is frequently a part of something much greater and not a solution on its own. It’s vital to examine the design, just as it’s important to think about the consequences of our actions in the real world and to consider how our work might reasonably affect other people. It certainly can grab people’s attention but other factors come in play for bigger societal issues.
The first real-world example of a badly failed design thinking project that popped into my head is the Google Glasses. The cutting-edge gadget was launched 10 years ago and made the AR technology that was only seen in movies a reality. However, just two years after they were launched, Google announced they would no longer be producing a consumer version of the glasses. This failure can be attributed largely to the creators’ failure to identify and validate the consumers and the issues the device was intended to address. Instead, they believed that the product’s buzz would be sufficient to appeal to everyone, even in the absence of actual solutions or value.
