Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

The Intrapreneur's Playground - Agile Australia 2013

The Intrapreneur's Playground - Agile Australia 2013

Is it possible for internal web teams to deliver customer-focused innovation within the rigidly siloed and constrained environments of large, traditional organisations? How do product teams attempt to deliver truly differentiated and valuable new offerings to known and mature markets?

Using recent case studies, this session walks through some techniques for nurturing innovation within such environments, exploring design practices borrowed from lean principles that can achieve the right outcomes in tight timeframes. As customer's expectations and behaviours change at a rate that defies prediction, an Agile response to digital product innovation will be key to staying relevant and progressive. Learn how to deliver new digital products and services using techniques like gamestorming, collaborative design, and guerilla customer testing.

Jonny Schneider

June 19, 2013
Tweet

More Decks by Jonny Schneider

Other Decks in Design

Transcript

  1. None
  2. (Go and see) "Genchi  gembutsu" GO  AND  SEE

  3. It's  easy  to  never  leave  your  comfy  desk   if

     you're  serious  about  being  an  intrapreneur,  then  your  desk  is  probably  the  worst  place  to  be. If  you're  looking  for  ideas,    just  step  outside  your  office  and  be  with  your  customers,   witness  their  necessity  -­‐  it's  the  best  inspira?on  you  can  find. -­‐  crea?ve  genius  to  come  up  with  ideas -­‐  a  skills  that  can  be  learnt -­‐  There’s  really  no  secret  sauce  to  innova?on. Let’s  first  look  at  some  of  the  skills  that  you’ll  need  ...
  4. At  ThoughtWorks,  we  use  these  spider  diagrams  as  a  neat

     way  of  showing  some  of  the  skills  and  disciplines  we  think  are   important  for  product  innova?on. Having  a  ra?ng  of  5  on  any  of  these  skills,  doesn’t  mean  mastery...  it  just  means  you’ve  got  enough  experience  to  share  your   knowledge/experiences  with  others. Not  many  people  have  all  of  these  skills  –  start  ups  rarely  do. Established  organisa?ons    are  usually  experts  in  execu?on  &  distribu?on,  but  discovery  and  idea?on  skills  are  oNen  harder   to  find.   I  regard  Kate  (in  red)  as  being  quite  brilliant  with  ideas,  storytelling  and  experience  design. In  contrast  I’m  more  of  an  analy1cal  observer  (in  blue).  I  strive  to  understand,  then  explore  through  prototyping  and   valida?on.   This  complementarity  of  skills  is  really  useful  -­‐  innova?on  is  best  when  it  involves  as  many  different  perspec?ves  as  possible. But  so  what?  Why  should  you  care  about  innova?on  in  big  enterprise? Business  are  measured  on  the  share-­‐market  in  terms  of  current  profitability  +  future  poten?al.  If  you  remain  sta?c,  the  risk   of  becoming  irrelevant  is  high  (the  Kodak  Effect) So  big  companies  who  might  be  great  at  distribu?on  and  execu?on  need  to  work  out  beXer  ways  to  innovate.   People  oNen  look  to  startups.  Lean  Startup  in  the  Enterprise.  And  that’s  valid,  there’re  lots  of  success  stories  from  startups   disrup?ng  the  market.  Instagram  vs.  Flickr  is  one  example. But,  the  threat  isn’t  just  from  startups.  It’s  from  any  organisa?on  that’s  beXer  at  innova?ng  that  you  are.  And  there’s  lots  of   big  organisa?ons  who  are  good  at  it  -­‐  what  can  be  learn  from  them?
  5. INCREMENTAL INNOVATION First,  let’s  describe  what  we  actually  mean  by

     ‘innova?on’,  with  some  examples. This  is  by  no  means  the  only  way  to  categorise  innova?on,  but  you’ve  got  to  start  somewhere! ‘Incremental’  is  characterised  by  small  ongoing  changes  oNen  at  the  micro-­‐level  to  collec1vely  improve  an  exis1ng   product.  Perhaps  you  could  think  of  it  in  terms  of  op1misa1on  of  core  products. Large  enterprises  are  preXy  good  at  this,  aNer  all,  100%  of  their  revenue  typically  comes  from  these  core  products,  so   there’s  strong  mo?va?on  to  invest  here.  Typically,  70%  of  innova?on  investment  is  a  good  benchmark. <iOS>  Ongoing  changes,  all  the  ?me.  iO7  has  just  been  announced.   ‘Lateral’  I  like  to  think  of  lateral  innova?on  as  the  modifica1on  of  an  exis1ng  product  or  capability  in  order  to  create   new  revenue  streams  or  reach  new  markets.   Riskier,  higher  chance  of  failure,  but  it  usually  occurs  on  top  of  exis?ng  assets  and  business  models  -­‐  so  addi?onal   investment  there  is  somewhat  limited,  and  it’s  usually  possible  to  use  research  to  minimise  risk.  20%  of  investment  is  a   good  target  here. <low  cost  iPod  touch>  Dropped  a  few  features  (rear  facing  camera)  and  some  different  materials  to  make  it  cheaper.  Now   affordable  for  a  previously  unreached  market. ‘Disrup1ve’  This  kind  of  innova?on  is  typically  driven  by  big  breakthroughs  in  technology  and/or  a  significant  change  in   meaning  to  acquire  or  interact  with  a  given  object  or  product.   If  you  want  to  dig  a  liXle  deeper  about  what  I  mean  here,  I  recommend  checking  out  Don  Norman  and  Robert  Vergan?’s   excellent  white  paper  “Incremental  and  Radical  Innova?on:  Design  Research  versus  Technology  and  Meaning  Change”   hXp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/incremental_and_radi.html iMac  G3  in  the  1990’s  is  great  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on  -­‐  it  changed  what  it  meant  to  own  a  computer. Then  they  did  it  again  in  2008  with  iPhone.  I  was  working  on  mobile  soNware  products  at  the  ?me,  and  remember  it  clearly.   A  lot  of  people  though  “telephony  is  really  hard,  there’s  no  way  Apple  will  get  this  right”,  but  they  were  wrong,  and  what  it   means  to  have  a  truly  ‘smart’  phone  changed  drama?cally. lately,  it’s  Apple  Wrist  Watch  that  we’re  hearing  about.
  6. LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION First,  let’s  describe  what  we  actually

     mean  by  ‘innova?on’,  with  some  examples. This  is  by  no  means  the  only  way  to  categorise  innova?on,  but  you’ve  got  to  start  somewhere! ‘Incremental’  is  characterised  by  small  ongoing  changes  oNen  at  the  micro-­‐level  to  collec1vely  improve  an  exis1ng   product.  Perhaps  you  could  think  of  it  in  terms  of  op1misa1on  of  core  products. Large  enterprises  are  preXy  good  at  this,  aNer  all,  100%  of  their  revenue  typically  comes  from  these  core  products,  so   there’s  strong  mo?va?on  to  invest  here.  Typically,  70%  of  innova?on  investment  is  a  good  benchmark. <iOS>  Ongoing  changes,  all  the  ?me.  iO7  has  just  been  announced.   ‘Lateral’  I  like  to  think  of  lateral  innova?on  as  the  modifica1on  of  an  exis1ng  product  or  capability  in  order  to  create   new  revenue  streams  or  reach  new  markets.   Riskier,  higher  chance  of  failure,  but  it  usually  occurs  on  top  of  exis?ng  assets  and  business  models  -­‐  so  addi?onal   investment  there  is  somewhat  limited,  and  it’s  usually  possible  to  use  research  to  minimise  risk.  20%  of  investment  is  a   good  target  here. <low  cost  iPod  touch>  Dropped  a  few  features  (rear  facing  camera)  and  some  different  materials  to  make  it  cheaper.  Now   affordable  for  a  previously  unreached  market. ‘Disrup1ve’  This  kind  of  innova?on  is  typically  driven  by  big  breakthroughs  in  technology  and/or  a  significant  change  in   meaning  to  acquire  or  interact  with  a  given  object  or  product.   If  you  want  to  dig  a  liXle  deeper  about  what  I  mean  here,  I  recommend  checking  out  Don  Norman  and  Robert  Vergan?’s   excellent  white  paper  “Incremental  and  Radical  Innova?on:  Design  Research  versus  Technology  and  Meaning  Change”   hXp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/incremental_and_radi.html iMac  G3  in  the  1990’s  is  great  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on  -­‐  it  changed  what  it  meant  to  own  a  computer. Then  they  did  it  again  in  2008  with  iPhone.  I  was  working  on  mobile  soNware  products  at  the  ?me,  and  remember  it  clearly.   A  lot  of  people  though  “telephony  is  really  hard,  there’s  no  way  Apple  will  get  this  right”,  but  they  were  wrong,  and  what  it   means  to  have  a  truly  ‘smart’  phone  changed  drama?cally. lately,  it’s  Apple  Wrist  Watch  that  we’re  hearing  about.
  7. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION 1995 First,  let’s  describe

     what  we  actually  mean  by  ‘innova?on’,  with  some  examples. This  is  by  no  means  the  only  way  to  categorise  innova?on,  but  you’ve  got  to  start  somewhere! ‘Incremental’  is  characterised  by  small  ongoing  changes  oNen  at  the  micro-­‐level  to  collec1vely  improve  an  exis1ng   product.  Perhaps  you  could  think  of  it  in  terms  of  op1misa1on  of  core  products. Large  enterprises  are  preXy  good  at  this,  aNer  all,  100%  of  their  revenue  typically  comes  from  these  core  products,  so   there’s  strong  mo?va?on  to  invest  here.  Typically,  70%  of  innova?on  investment  is  a  good  benchmark. <iOS>  Ongoing  changes,  all  the  ?me.  iO7  has  just  been  announced.   ‘Lateral’  I  like  to  think  of  lateral  innova?on  as  the  modifica1on  of  an  exis1ng  product  or  capability  in  order  to  create   new  revenue  streams  or  reach  new  markets.   Riskier,  higher  chance  of  failure,  but  it  usually  occurs  on  top  of  exis?ng  assets  and  business  models  -­‐  so  addi?onal   investment  there  is  somewhat  limited,  and  it’s  usually  possible  to  use  research  to  minimise  risk.  20%  of  investment  is  a   good  target  here. <low  cost  iPod  touch>  Dropped  a  few  features  (rear  facing  camera)  and  some  different  materials  to  make  it  cheaper.  Now   affordable  for  a  previously  unreached  market. ‘Disrup1ve’  This  kind  of  innova?on  is  typically  driven  by  big  breakthroughs  in  technology  and/or  a  significant  change  in   meaning  to  acquire  or  interact  with  a  given  object  or  product.   If  you  want  to  dig  a  liXle  deeper  about  what  I  mean  here,  I  recommend  checking  out  Don  Norman  and  Robert  Vergan?’s   excellent  white  paper  “Incremental  and  Radical  Innova?on:  Design  Research  versus  Technology  and  Meaning  Change”   hXp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/incremental_and_radi.html iMac  G3  in  the  1990’s  is  great  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on  -­‐  it  changed  what  it  meant  to  own  a  computer. Then  they  did  it  again  in  2008  with  iPhone.  I  was  working  on  mobile  soNware  products  at  the  ?me,  and  remember  it  clearly.   A  lot  of  people  though  “telephony  is  really  hard,  there’s  no  way  Apple  will  get  this  right”,  but  they  were  wrong,  and  what  it   means  to  have  a  truly  ‘smart’  phone  changed  drama?cally. lately,  it’s  Apple  Wrist  Watch  that  we’re  hearing  about.
  8. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION 2008 First,  let’s  describe

     what  we  actually  mean  by  ‘innova?on’,  with  some  examples. This  is  by  no  means  the  only  way  to  categorise  innova?on,  but  you’ve  got  to  start  somewhere! ‘Incremental’  is  characterised  by  small  ongoing  changes  oNen  at  the  micro-­‐level  to  collec1vely  improve  an  exis1ng   product.  Perhaps  you  could  think  of  it  in  terms  of  op1misa1on  of  core  products. Large  enterprises  are  preXy  good  at  this,  aNer  all,  100%  of  their  revenue  typically  comes  from  these  core  products,  so   there’s  strong  mo?va?on  to  invest  here.  Typically,  70%  of  innova?on  investment  is  a  good  benchmark. <iOS>  Ongoing  changes,  all  the  ?me.  iO7  has  just  been  announced.   ‘Lateral’  I  like  to  think  of  lateral  innova?on  as  the  modifica1on  of  an  exis1ng  product  or  capability  in  order  to  create   new  revenue  streams  or  reach  new  markets.   Riskier,  higher  chance  of  failure,  but  it  usually  occurs  on  top  of  exis?ng  assets  and  business  models  -­‐  so  addi?onal   investment  there  is  somewhat  limited,  and  it’s  usually  possible  to  use  research  to  minimise  risk.  20%  of  investment  is  a   good  target  here. <low  cost  iPod  touch>  Dropped  a  few  features  (rear  facing  camera)  and  some  different  materials  to  make  it  cheaper.  Now   affordable  for  a  previously  unreached  market. ‘Disrup1ve’  This  kind  of  innova?on  is  typically  driven  by  big  breakthroughs  in  technology  and/or  a  significant  change  in   meaning  to  acquire  or  interact  with  a  given  object  or  product.   If  you  want  to  dig  a  liXle  deeper  about  what  I  mean  here,  I  recommend  checking  out  Don  Norman  and  Robert  Vergan?’s   excellent  white  paper  “Incremental  and  Radical  Innova?on:  Design  Research  versus  Technology  and  Meaning  Change”   hXp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/incremental_and_radi.html iMac  G3  in  the  1990’s  is  great  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on  -­‐  it  changed  what  it  meant  to  own  a  computer. Then  they  did  it  again  in  2008  with  iPhone.  I  was  working  on  mobile  soNware  products  at  the  ?me,  and  remember  it  clearly.   A  lot  of  people  though  “telephony  is  really  hard,  there’s  no  way  Apple  will  get  this  right”,  but  they  were  wrong,  and  what  it   means  to  have  a  truly  ‘smart’  phone  changed  drama?cally. lately,  it’s  Apple  Wrist  Watch  that  we’re  hearing  about.
  9. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION First,  let’s  describe  what

     we  actually  mean  by  ‘innova?on’,  with  some  examples. This  is  by  no  means  the  only  way  to  categorise  innova?on,  but  you’ve  got  to  start  somewhere! ‘Incremental’  is  characterised  by  small  ongoing  changes  oNen  at  the  micro-­‐level  to  collec1vely  improve  an  exis1ng   product.  Perhaps  you  could  think  of  it  in  terms  of  op1misa1on  of  core  products. Large  enterprises  are  preXy  good  at  this,  aNer  all,  100%  of  their  revenue  typically  comes  from  these  core  products,  so   there’s  strong  mo?va?on  to  invest  here.  Typically,  70%  of  innova?on  investment  is  a  good  benchmark. <iOS>  Ongoing  changes,  all  the  ?me.  iO7  has  just  been  announced.   ‘Lateral’  I  like  to  think  of  lateral  innova?on  as  the  modifica1on  of  an  exis1ng  product  or  capability  in  order  to  create   new  revenue  streams  or  reach  new  markets.   Riskier,  higher  chance  of  failure,  but  it  usually  occurs  on  top  of  exis?ng  assets  and  business  models  -­‐  so  addi?onal   investment  there  is  somewhat  limited,  and  it’s  usually  possible  to  use  research  to  minimise  risk.  20%  of  investment  is  a   good  target  here. <low  cost  iPod  touch>  Dropped  a  few  features  (rear  facing  camera)  and  some  different  materials  to  make  it  cheaper.  Now   affordable  for  a  previously  unreached  market. ‘Disrup1ve’  This  kind  of  innova?on  is  typically  driven  by  big  breakthroughs  in  technology  and/or  a  significant  change  in   meaning  to  acquire  or  interact  with  a  given  object  or  product.   If  you  want  to  dig  a  liXle  deeper  about  what  I  mean  here,  I  recommend  checking  out  Don  Norman  and  Robert  Vergan?’s   excellent  white  paper  “Incremental  and  Radical  Innova?on:  Design  Research  versus  Technology  and  Meaning  Change”   hXp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/incremental_and_radi.html iMac  G3  in  the  1990’s  is  great  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on  -­‐  it  changed  what  it  meant  to  own  a  computer. Then  they  did  it  again  in  2008  with  iPhone.  I  was  working  on  mobile  soNware  products  at  the  ?me,  and  remember  it  clearly.   A  lot  of  people  though  “telephony  is  really  hard,  there’s  no  way  Apple  will  get  this  right”,  but  they  were  wrong,  and  what  it   means  to  have  a  truly  ‘smart’  phone  changed  drama?cally. lately,  it’s  Apple  Wrist  Watch  that  we’re  hearing  about.
  10. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION 2008 Let’s  look  at

     a  similar  example  from  Google. search  algorithms,  for  over  a  decade  now. GSA  Enterprise  Search.  They’ve  taken  all  of  this  indexing  and  search  know-­‐how  and  paired  it  with  some  dedicated  hardware   to  make  it  possible  for  large  business  to  have  a  Google-­‐like  experience  with  their  own  data.   Android  OS  is  a  good  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on,  having  a  significant  impact  on  the  mobile  compu?ng.   More  recently,  we’re  hearing  things  about  a  driverless  car,  which  might  represent  their  next  disrup?ve  innova?on. Anyway,  these  big  companies  that  are  famous  for  innova?ng  probably  aren’t  much  like  the  organisa?ons  we  all  work  with   day-­‐to-­‐day So  the  ques?on  remains,  how  can  we  encourage  innova?on  and  entrepreneurial  behaviours  from  within  ‘everyday’   companies
  11. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION LATERAL INNOVATION INCREMENTAL INNOVATION Let’s  look  at  a

     similar  example  from  Google. search  algorithms,  for  over  a  decade  now. GSA  Enterprise  Search.  They’ve  taken  all  of  this  indexing  and  search  know-­‐how  and  paired  it  with  some  dedicated  hardware   to  make  it  possible  for  large  business  to  have  a  Google-­‐like  experience  with  their  own  data.   Android  OS  is  a  good  example  of  disrup?ve  innova?on,  having  a  significant  impact  on  the  mobile  compu?ng.   More  recently,  we’re  hearing  things  about  a  driverless  car,  which  might  represent  their  next  disrup?ve  innova?on. Anyway,  these  big  companies  that  are  famous  for  innova?ng  probably  aren’t  much  like  the  organisa?ons  we  all  work  with   day-­‐to-­‐day So  the  ques?on  remains,  how  can  we  encourage  innova?on  and  entrepreneurial  behaviours  from  within  ‘everyday’   companies
  12. So  how  do  these  big  companies  encourage  innova?on? Most  people

     are  more  concerned  with  just  doing  their  job. They  get  mixed  messages  from  management  –  they  have  to  maintain  produc?vity  and  yet  at  the  same  ?me  they  have  to  demonstrate  crea?ve   new  ways  of  doing  things. You  actually  can’t  do  both  at  the  same  ?me. KPIs  and  rigid  planning  of  deliverables  are  counter  produc?ve  -­‐  the  idea?on  process  has  more  in  common  with  play  than  structured  work create  an  environment  that  is  forgiving,  relaxed  and  conducive  to  crea?ve  thinking within  teams  encourage  people  to  exercise  both  their  crea?ve  skills  and  analy?c  judgement. -­‐  3M  and  google   tackle  this  challenge  by  giving  their  people  a  percentage  of  paid  work  hours  to  hatch  new  ideas. It’s  how  the  post-­‐it  note  was  invented  and  has  helped  fuel  3M’s  22,800  patents.   3M’s  15%  programs  was  launched  in  1948  –  in  post  war  America,  3M  understood  the  impera?ve  to  innovate  or  die. Other  companies  have  embraced  the  FedEx  day,  Ship  it  days  or  hack  days   If  companies  are  serious  about  fostering  a  culture  of  entrapreneurship  –  then  a  percentage  of  working  hours  must  be  devoted  to  discovery  and   experimenta?on. -­‐  In  addi1on  to  giving  employees  1me -­‐  You  need  to  encourage  certain  behaviours
  13. core  elements  of  crea?ve  thinking   Regardless  of  what  logis?cs

     you  employ  to  provide  ?me  for  your  people  to  ?nker  with  ideas,  you   also  need  to  develop  and  internal  culture  that  encourages  these  behaviours.   For  Toyota  it  was  walking  the  shop  floor  and  asking  ques?ons. -­‐  experience  the  customer  facing  roles,  through  sisng  in  the  call  centre  or  working  for  a  week  in   the  shop  front   But  you  also  need  to  follow  through  with  an  innova?on  framework  that  supports  this  culture  of   observa?on,  ques?oning  and  experimenta?on.
  14. 9 And  that  frame  work  includes  the  following  concepts: Divergent

     thinking  -­‐  to  support  discovery  and  ques?oning  and  idea  genera?on Emergent  thinking  -­‐  facilita?ng  the  analysis  and  organisa?on  of  ideas  into  new  themes,   concepts  and  hypothesese Convergent  thinking    -­‐  to  encourage  the  elimina?on  of  bad  ideas  and  the  valida?on  and   evolu?on  of  good  ideas
  15. ★Accelerated feedback and validation ★Replace customer proxy... with customer insight

    + validation customer focussed ★A new way of discovering fresh ideas Lastminute.com case study from Jonny Schneider. Mobile web-app product improvement with Lean UX
  16. What did we do, then? Well...  we  changed  a  few

     things  about  how  product  development  and  design  was  happening. Lastminute.com  weren’t  doing  anything  wrong.  In  fact  they  were  doing  a  whole  lot  of  right.   They  were  commiXed  to  user  tes1ng,  they  had  sound  engineering  prac?ces,  and  really  smart  people  steering  the  ship,  all   based  on  customer  insights  and  data.   But  we  really  wanted  to  get  further  inside  customer’s  heads,  and  explore  ideas  from  the  inside  out. Most  of  all,  we  wanted  to  see  where  this  would  take  us.  
  17. 12 go and ask / go and see First  step

     -­‐  Go  and  see.  Or  in  this  case  -­‐  “go  and  ask” So,  700  high-­‐value  customers  were  told  that  we’d  like  to  design  the  mobile  product  just  for  them,  and  asked  would  they   mind  helping  do  that.  About  100  said  yes. Over  a  week,  those  customers  were  invited  to  breakfast  interviews,  in  groups  of  around  10-­‐15.   These  were  NOT  focus  groups! We  just  asked  them  what  they  wanted  -­‐  what  ideas  did  they  have,  for  the  kind  of  product  they’d  like  to  use,  and  facilitated   simple  games  to  help  s?mulate  crea1ve  thinking.
  18. What did we do, then? [1 minute video clip] Full

    case study http://www.thoughtworks.com/clients/lastminute
  19. 14 The  result  was  about  80  unique  ideas,  related  to

     all  parts  of  the  lastminute.com  experience All  the  way  from  inspira?on  to  travel,  right  through  to  sharing  via  social  media  aNer  the  trip  is  complete. Now  What?   What  do  we  do  with  these  ideas,  and  how  do  we  make  sense  of  which  ones  are  good,  bad  or  ugly?
  20. 15 You will never find anything, unless you’re looking for

    something. - Dave Gray This  is  Dave  Gray,  he  wrote  a  book  called  Game  Storming  which  includes  a  stack  of  excellent  exercises  and  methods  for   facilita?ng  crea?ve  thinking  sessions  with  stakeholders  or  customers.   I  use  this  all  the  ?me  -­‐  it’s  a  great  source  of  inspira1on  for  planning  and  facilita?ng  design  workshops. Dave  talks  a  lot  about  Divergence,  Emergence  and  Convergence  that  we  men?oned  earlier. During  a  webcast  I  once  watched,  he  said  this...  which  I  think  is  really  profound. Encouraging  emergence  is  great  because  some?mes,  ideas  and  solu?ons  we  discover  when  exploring  something  else,  turn   out  to  be  the  most  valuable  ones. So  we  wanted  to  encourage  emergence,  and  what  we  came  up  with  is  what  we  called  the  Pop-­‐Up  Design  Lab  -­‐  where  we   setup  shop  inside  a  hotel  and  brought  the  customers  right  into  the  design  process. Let’s  take  a  look  at  what  that  was  like.
  21. 16 Image  hXp://bit.ly/10eqhxV Image  hXp://bit.ly/10epX25 Image  hXp://bit.ly/12HUerx Image  hXp://bit.ly/13ZWo1u As

     you  saw,  there  was  quite  a  bit  going  on  there. Let’s  take  a  closer  look  at  what  was  actually  happening  on  the  ground. Go  and  See  -­‐  ask,  observe.    Collect  data,  collect  ideas Co  Design  -­‐  Lesng  go  of  the  design  is  probably  the  hardest  part...  for  designers One  dis?nc?on  here,  this  doesn’t  at  all  mean  that  “everyone  is  a  designer”,  and  to  just  ‘let  go’  en?rely.  Actually,  facilita?ng   design  with  people  that  aren’t  familiar  with  design  thinking  can  be  extremely  hard.  In  co-­‐design,  the  role  of  designer  is  that   of  facilitator.  It’s  not  about  ‘crowd  sourcing’  or  ‘group  think’,  it’s  about  on-­‐the-­‐spot  synthesis  led  by  a  designer,  and   collabora?on  to  explore  ideas  inside  the  heads  of  other  people. KJ  Analysis  -­‐  This  need  not  be  more  than  arranging  data  into  meaningful  groups.  There’s  no  need  to  solve  anything  yet,  your   just  looking  for  paXerns  and  themes.  In  qualita?ve  research,  some  would  call  this  axial  coding,  or  second  level  coding.  It’s   where  you  move  from  ‘just  data’  to  star?ng  to  make  connec?ons  and  rela?onships  in  order  to  make  meaning  from  the   data. There’s  a  few  different  approaches  to  this  -­‐  I  like  Jared  Spool’s  approach  hXp://www.uie.com/ar?cles/kj_technique/ Prototyping  -­‐  Validate  ideas  the  quickest  and  cheapest  way  you  can.  Change  direc?on  if  you  need  to.
  22. 16 co-design (emergent) ★Let go of the design ★Explore with

    customers ★Sketch collaboratively KJ Analysis (convergent) ★‘Affinity Diagramming’ ★Make connections ★Identify themes Prototyping (convergent) ★ Construct hypotheses based on insights ★Explore in low fidelity ★Test your hypothesis with customers go and see (divergent) Image  hXp://bit.ly/10eqhxV Image  hXp://bit.ly/10epX25 Image  hXp://bit.ly/12HUerx Image  hXp://bit.ly/13ZWo1u As  you  saw,  there  was  quite  a  bit  going  on  there. Let’s  take  a  closer  look  at  what  was  actually  happening  on  the  ground. Go  and  See  -­‐  ask,  observe.    Collect  data,  collect  ideas Co  Design  -­‐  Lesng  go  of  the  design  is  probably  the  hardest  part...  for  designers One  dis?nc?on  here,  this  doesn’t  at  all  mean  that  “everyone  is  a  designer”,  and  to  just  ‘let  go’  en?rely.  Actually,  facilita?ng   design  with  people  that  aren’t  familiar  with  design  thinking  can  be  extremely  hard.  In  co-­‐design,  the  role  of  designer  is  that   of  facilitator.  It’s  not  about  ‘crowd  sourcing’  or  ‘group  think’,  it’s  about  on-­‐the-­‐spot  synthesis  led  by  a  designer,  and   collabora?on  to  explore  ideas  inside  the  heads  of  other  people. KJ  Analysis  -­‐  This  need  not  be  more  than  arranging  data  into  meaningful  groups.  There’s  no  need  to  solve  anything  yet,  your   just  looking  for  paXerns  and  themes.  In  qualita?ve  research,  some  would  call  this  axial  coding,  or  second  level  coding.  It’s   where  you  move  from  ‘just  data’  to  star?ng  to  make  connec?ons  and  rela?onships  in  order  to  make  meaning  from  the   data. There’s  a  few  different  approaches  to  this  -­‐  I  like  Jared  Spool’s  approach  hXp://www.uie.com/ar?cles/kj_technique/ Prototyping  -­‐  Validate  ideas  the  quickest  and  cheapest  way  you  can.  Change  direc?on  if  you  need  to.
  23. 17 And,  was  it  successful?    Sure  it  was. The

     headline  result  is  that  conversions  from  mobile  devices  doubled  following  this  release. Let’s  hear  some  more  from  Kate  about  a  project  she’s  been  involved  with  recently.
  24. A  Superannua?on  Story  –  at  Suncorp Case  study  from  Kate

     Linton.
  25. None
  26. 20

  27. 21

  28. One in five feel ‘ashamed’ or ‘dumb’ 58% worry about

    being financially exposed 43% feel ‘powerless’
  29. Around 1 in 2 Australians worry about whether they will

    have enough to retire on Almost 1 in 2 find super complicated More than 1 in 4 have no idea what their super balance is
  30. None
  31. None
  32. None
  33. None
  34. None
  35. Super is complicated Break it down into simple enjoyable steps

    I’ll never have enough to retire Show that small actions will affect their future I get no benefits from my super Provide immediate rewards to positive actions
  36. 30 Learning to do our own user testing

  37. Points contribute to your score

  38. Quest - to build your home

  39. Badges, role-play, unfolding story

  40. Unpredictable reinforcement

  41. Real-world rewards

  42. Behavioural change & financial literacy

  43. Removed some of the game mechanics

  44. House metaphor sneaks back in...

  45. None
  46. What’s with the points?

  47. None
  48. Account  Crea?on Supply  TFN Tell  Employer Ini?ate  Rollover Update  Beneficiaries

    Origina1on                                                                      2  weeks                                                                                      1  year                                                                                            2  years                                                                                  3  years Lifestyle  Planning Download  Annual  Statement Transac?on  History Transac?on  check-­‐in Re?rement  Planning Lifestyle  Plan Re?reme 1  (Logins  –  Not  shown) 3 5 10 20 50  points Points  to  move  your  status A journey unfolds, one step at a time
  49. None
  50. None
  51. None
  52. None
  53. None
  54. 48 DIVERGENCE So,  in  summary,  here  are  some  techniques  that

     will  help  fuel  your  divergent  thinking  and   idea?on  process... At  the  heart  of  the  discovery  process  is  the  principle  of Genchi  gembutsu  -­‐   Go  and  talk  to  your  customers  -­‐  develop  your  empathy  and  find  the  necessity  in  their  lives -­‐  include  some  face  to  face  @me  alongside  your  [email protected]@ve  research
  55. 49 make  space  for  emergence, Remember  what  dave  says  -­‐

     “you’ll  never  find  anything,  unless  you’re  looking  for  something” Be  willing  to  explore  tangents.    Keep  it  loose. Encourage  crea?ve  thinking  and  co-­‐design  with  your  customers  -­‐  don’t  be  afraid  to  involve  them   early  on  -­‐  get  them  to  draw  their  ideas
  56. 50 CONVERGENCE Key  to  successful  idea?on  ac?vi?es  is  the  prac?ce

     of  convergence  -­‐  agreeing  as  a  team  on  the   ideas  you  believe  will  work Every  brainstorming  ac?vity  you  do  as  a  team  needs  to  be  closed  with  an  agreed  approach  and   ideas  to  move  forward  with   and,  here  are  some  techniques  that  will  help  fuel  your  convergent  thinking  process... -­‐  user  [email protected] -­‐  Pivot  when  you  need  to -­‐  [email protected] -­‐  A/B  [email protected]
  57. 51