Design thinking
Comments made by the facilitators and monitors suggested that the design thinking process was useful, but each Living Lab chartered its own course after the empathising stage.
Collectively, key insights into the design thinking process included:
All groups were aware of the need for iteration. |
It was not necessary to start with the empathy phase, but you can start with an existing product or prototype. This can help provide ‘concrete’ focus and energy and the other phases can be brought into play in due course. |
Not all Living Lab stakeholders wanted to be engaged in the ideate phase. Reasons for this included lack of time, cultural preferences, unfamiliarity with process, lack of trust, uncertainty of the outcome, or reluctance to voice their opinions or concerns in open fora. |
The prototype stage was particularly challenging, but rapid prototyping can also help provide energy to the Living Lab in helping to define the problem and determine stakeholder needs and interests. Prototyping enables learning by doing (and potentially failing). |
The early steps are easier, even if the define phase often did not get enough attention. More time spent during the first stages can reduce later problems during, for example, the prototype phase. |
Iteration is not a failure. Changes in context, legislation or technology or understanding of stakeholder preferences could result in need for a change in problem definition and/or prototype. |
The monitoring and evaluation process