name: design-thinking
description: "Apply design thinking methodology to product problems using IDEO 5-stage model, Stanford d.school methodology, British Design Council Double Diamond, Google Design Sprint (4-day and 5-day variants), Lightning Decision Jam (AJ&Smart), and advanced ideation and facilitation techniques. Covers How Might We (HMW) reframing, 8 ideation techniques (Crazy 8s, SCAMPER, Brainwriting 6-3-5, Worst Possible Idea, Round-Robin, Bodystorming, Analogous Inspiration, Constraint Ideation), prototyping spectrum (paper to high-fidelity), 6 facilitation techniques (Dot Voting, Rose/Thorn/Bud, Affinity Clustering, Silent Critique, Gallery Walk, Decider Vote), prototype-test-learn loop, design thinking anti-patterns, and PM interview application. Use when running a design sprint, applying the double diamond process, reframing problems with HMW, facilitating ideation workshops, or answering PM interview questions about design approaches."
argument-hint: "[describe the product problem or design challenge, the target user, what you know so far, and whether this is for a workshop, sprint, or ongoing design process]"

Design Thinking for Product Managers

Design thinking is a human-centered, iterative approach to innovation. It is not just for designers -- it is a PM's sharpest tool for attacking ambiguous problems. The key insight: most teams rush to solutions before understanding the problem. Design thinking forces you to earn the right to solve.

Apply this skill to: $ARGUMENTS

The Three Core Frameworks

Framework 1: IDEO 5-Stage Model

Critical principle: These stages are non-linear. Teams should loop back from Test to Empathize, from Prototype to Define. Design thinking is iterative, not sequential.

Framework 2: Double Diamond (British Design Council)

Diamond 1: Problem Space (Discover + Define)
- Diverge (Discover): Explore the full problem space through research, observation, immersion
- Converge (Define): Synthesize into the right problem to solve

Diamond 2: Solution Space (Develop + Deliver)
- Diverge (Develop): Generate as many solution ideas as possible
- Converge (Deliver): Select, prototype, and test the best solutions

The key insight: Most teams skip Diamond 1 entirely. They jump straight to solutions, solving the wrong problem well.

Framework 3: Google Design Sprint

5-Day Format (Jake Knapp, Original)

4-Day Format (Design Sprint 2.0)

Lightning Decision Jam (AJ&Smart, 30-60 minutes)

For when you need sprint-like outcomes without 4-5 days:
1. Problems: Each participant writes problems silently (3 min)
2. Prioritize: Dot vote on most important problems (3 min)
3. Reframe: Convert top problem into a HMW question (2 min)
4. Solutions: Silent ideation on the HMW (5 min)
5. Prioritize: Dot vote on solutions (3 min)
6. Effort/Impact: Plot top solutions on effort/impact matrix (5 min)
7. Action: Convert winners into next steps with owners and deadlines (5 min)

How Might We (HMW) Statements

HMW statements reframe a problem into an opportunity for ideation. The three words do specific work: "How" implies there is a way, "Might" opens possibility without commitment, "We" makes it collaborative.

Formula

"How might we [verb] [outcome] for [user] so that [higher-level goal]?"

Calibration

HMW Process

1. Start with user pain points from research
2. Write 5-10 HMW statements individually (silent, 5 minutes)
3. Share and cluster on a wall or board
4. Dot vote to select top 1-3 for ideation
5. Verify: does each selected HMW pass the "multiple solutions" test?

Ideation Techniques

Technique 1: Crazy 8s

Each participant sketches 8 ideas in 8 minutes. Forces quantity over quality. One idea per panel on a folded sheet of paper.

Technique 2: SCAMPER

Systematic prompt for modifying existing concepts:
- Substitute: What component can we replace?
- Combine: What can we merge with another concept?
- Adapt: What can we borrow from another domain?
- Modify: What can we enlarge, minimize, or change?
- Put to other uses: Can this serve a different purpose?
- Eliminate: What can we remove entirely?
- Reverse: What if we did the opposite?

Technique 3: Brainwriting / 6-3-5 Method

6 participants, 3 ideas each, 5 minutes per round. Each person writes 3 ideas, passes their sheet to the next person, who builds on those ideas. Generates up to 108 ideas in 30 minutes. Key benefit: prevents domination by the loudest voice.

Technique 4: Worst Possible Idea

Deliberately generate absurdly terrible solutions. Then extract useful attributes from the bad ideas. Reduces fear of judgment and unlocks creativity. Works well as a warm-up before other techniques.

Technique 5: Round-Robin Ideation

Circular contribution pattern where each participant adds incrementally to previous contributions. Ensures equal voice and encourages building on others' thoughts.

Technique 6: Bodystorming / Role-Playing

Immersive ideation through physical enactment. Teams role-play customer journeys using props and prototypes. Uncovers relationships between people, space, and products that abstract thinking misses.

Technique 7: Analogous Inspiration

How does a completely different industry solve a similar problem? If you are designing an onboarding flow, study how hotels check in guests, how airports guide passengers, or how games tutorial new players.

Technique 8: Constraint Ideation

Apply artificial constraints to force creative solutions:
- What if you had zero budget?
- What if you had to solve this in one day?
- What if you could not add any new features?
- What if the user was completely non-technical?

Selecting the Right Technique

Prototyping Spectrum

Choose the minimum fidelity needed to test your key assumption:

Prototype-Test-Learn Loop

1. Prototype: Build the minimum artifact needed to test your key assumption
2. Test: Put it in front of 5 real users (5 users reveals ~85% of usability issues per Nielsen Norman Group)
3. Learn: What did users do vs. what you expected? What surprised you?
4. Iterate: Update the prototype based on what you learned
5. Repeat until confident in the solution

Rule: Never skip from prototype directly to production. At least one cycle of user testing should occur.

Facilitation Techniques for Workshops

Dot Voting

• Each participant gets dots equal to ~25% of total options
• Can place all dots on one option or spread across multiple
• Creates a heat map of group preferences
• Prevents lengthy debates; empowers quiet participants

Rose / Thorn / Bud

• Rose: What is working well (strengths, successes)
• Thorn: What is challenging (pain points, blockers)
• Bud: What has potential (emerging ideas, opportunities)
• Timebox: 10 minutes equally per category
• Use for retrospectives, project debriefs, design reviews

Affinity Clustering

• Generate ideas or observations on individual sticky notes
• Silently group related items into clusters
• Label each cluster with a theme
• Aim for 3-8 clusters (avoid forcing items into groups)
• Reveals non-obvious connections between ideas

Silent Critique / Gallery Walk

• Display all work (sketches, prototypes, concepts) on walls
• Participants walk through silently, leaving feedback on sticky notes
• Alternative: use dot stickers to mark ideas they find compelling
• Prevents dominant voices from overshadowing feedback
• Provide specific feedback criteria for higher-quality input

Decider Vote

• Used when consensus is impractical or time-constrained
• One designated decider (usually the PM or sponsor) makes the final call
• The decider listens to team input, then decides
• Decision is final and respected by the group
• Use when: time is limited, stakes are high, team cannot converge

Fist to Five

• Participants hold up 1-5 fingers indicating support level
• 5 = fully support, 3 = can live with it, 1 = strong objection
• If anyone holds up 1-2, they explain their concern before proceeding
• Quick consensus check that surfaces hidden objections

Design Thinking Anti-Patterns

PM Interview Application

When asked "How would you approach this design challenge?" in a PM interview:

Structure your answer using the Double Diamond:

1. Clarify (30 seconds): What is the goal? Who is the user? What constraints exist?
2. Discover (1 minute): What research would you do? What do you need to learn about users?
3. Define (1 minute): Frame the problem as a HMW statement. Explain why this framing.
4. Develop (2 minutes): Generate 3-5 solution ideas across different approaches (quick fix, medium investment, big bet)
5. Deliver (1 minute): Which solution would you prioritize and why? How would you test it? What would success look like?

Interviewer signals you are doing well: They ask follow-up questions about your solutions, not your framework.

Output Template

DESIGN THINKING SESSION
Date: [Today]
Facilitator: [Name]
Participants: [Names and roles]
Duration: [Time allocated]

CHALLENGE STATEMENT
[The problem being addressed, from the user's perspective]

RESEARCH INSIGHTS (Diamond 1 -- Discover)
1. [Key insight with evidence source]
2. [Key insight with evidence source]
3. [Key insight with evidence source]

PROBLEM FRAMING (Diamond 1 -- Define)
Chosen HMW: [The most promising How Might We statement]
Why this framing: [Why this will unlock the best solutions]
Discarded framings:
- [HMW 1]: [Why not chosen]
- [HMW 2]: [Why not chosen]

IDEATION (Diamond 2 -- Develop)
Technique used: [Crazy 8s / Brainwriting / etc.]
Total ideas generated: [N]
Top 5 ideas:
1. [Idea + one-line description]
2. [Idea + one-line description]
3. [Idea + one-line description]
4. [Idea + one-line description]
5. [Idea + one-line description]

SELECTION
Selected direction: [Which idea]
Selection method: [Dot vote / Decider / Effort-Impact matrix]
Why: [Evidence or logic supporting this choice]
What we are NOT doing: [Explicitly state rejected alternatives and why]

PROTOTYPE PLAN
Fidelity level: [Paper / Wireframe / Clickable / Wizard of Oz]
What we will build: [Minimum artifact to test the key assumption]
Key assumption being tested: [The one thing we most need to learn]
Timeline: [How long to build the prototype]

TEST PLAN
Who we will test with: [User segment, N=5 minimum]
Recruitment method: [How we find participants]
Test format: [Moderated / Unmoderated / In-person / Remote]
Key questions: [What we need to learn from the test]

SUCCESS CRITERIA
Proceed signal: [What outcome gives confidence to move forward]
Pivot signal: [What outcome means we need to revisit]
Kill signal: [What outcome means we abandon this direction]

NEXT STEPS
| Action | Owner | Deadline |
|--------|-------|----------|
| [Step] | [Name] | [Date]  |