Was Design Thinking Designed Not to Work?

I like how the article brings up another view of design thinking. I agree it is somehow limited, especially when dealing with a problem that needs more statistical analysis or time. Still, there is definitely something worth taking away, such as the mindset of ideation. It is helpful for early-stage brainstorming. If the article could mentioned more about how and when IDEO/design thinking help, the analysis would be more comprehensive. One of the pros of design thinking is to help people think in a different and more systematic way, helping people keep iterating and improving their products. As mentioned in the article, Design Thinking is designed as a 5-easy-steps-anybody-can-do thing. However, I think this doesn’t mean people should follow the five steps or finish something in a short time; instead, they should internalize and improve it with their professional experience so that their own “design thinking” process could be useful as they need. Also, while performing ideation, which is one of the processes of design thinking, the process emphasizes that people should be brave at ideating and should not judge others’ ideas at first. This is beneficial for future communication/ideation with other colleagues and peers, no matter if it is in a Design Thinking context. Some perils of design thinking are indeed as the author mentioned, that some org/people overthink Design Thinking and want to implement it everywhere, but not considering whether it is suitable or useful in the case. Thus, it sometimes wastes resources and time spent on those for which Design Thinking is not suitable. Design Thinking also ignores business/market/case analysis, and this could cause big problems and lead the final solution in a totally wrong direction, as in the Gainesville case. If IDEO had done a better market and case analysis, they could focus on fixing the problem that really matters.