The example Maggie Gram brings up in Of Design Thinking of Gainsville, Florida is a stark example of how modern design thinking isn’t a perfect solution. Rebranding, having a catchy tagline, and a pretty logo only offers a surface level bandage to a much larger issue, one fundamentally unsolvable through simple design. This brings up one of the largest perils of design thinking. While it can be effective in some respects, it’s unable to fix the larger systematic issues plaguing a company or a city. A department of design could offer more abstract takes on policy, but it’s not increasing education rates nor is it lifting others out of poverty.
Debbie Levitt characterizes the surge in modern design thinking as a “fantasy,” reliant on the smoke and mirrors of fancy templates and sticky notes. This is core to the appeal of design thinking, which creates the illusion of work being done. As Gram states, design thinking isn’t necessarily malicious, instead being a “colossal and seductive promise.”
Another example of the failure of design thinking is the relaying of information in front of patients at Kaiser Permanente, ostensibly to fight patient information loss. It fails to consider the feelings of the patient, who aren’t your average person, and might not want to hear about their lack of prognosis. It fails to create a sense of empathy for our patient, and also puts each nurse in a vulnerable position, sharing sensitive information and potentially hurting someone right in front of them.
Design is design. Marginalized communities suffer the most when design thinking is implemented, simply because it fails to solve the core issues at hand. They aren’t suffering because they lack the motivation to pursue innovative thinking or product ideation, they’re suffering because they don’t have the resources to sustain themselves in the first place. Design isn’t providing them food on the table, nor is it pushing them into higher paying jobs. Building around what product managers and creators consider an “average user” tends to cast these groups to the side, as with the example of Gainsville.
Within marginalized groups, design is often not the only solution necessary, instead forming a component of something much larger. It’s important to take into account design, just as it’s important to consider the real-world ramifications of our actions, and to see what effect our work would logically have on others. Design by itself is an abstract, elegant tool, but not one we can use in every situation.
