Lots of blog buzz around "design thinking" re: the New York Times article Designing is More than Packaging - see comments by Steve Portigal and Christoper Fahey to name a few.
I agree with Fahey's observation that the NYTimes article "included by far the clearest summary of what design thinking is that I’ve ever read, including from all the design thinking leaders". Then again, it sounds a hell of a lot like just plain old user-centered design to me:
"While definitions vary, design thinking usually involves a period of field research — usually close observation of people — to generate inspiration and a better understanding of what is needed, followed by open, nonjudgmental generation of ideas. After a brief analysis, a number of the more promising ideas are combined and expanded to go into “rapid prototyping,” which can vary from a simple drawing or text description to a three-dimensional mock-up. Feedback on the prototypes helps hone the ideas so that a select few can be used."
What I did find more interesting, was the sentence in the Times article that immediately followed that description:
"It’s the designers’ version of the scientific method,” explains Greg Galle, co-founder and managing partner of the C2 Group, a consulting firm based in Half Moon Bay, Calif. “It’s sloppy and messy and not nearly as disciplined as the scientist, but we do trial and error and we hypothesize and test and we see what we learn and then we go back and try again.”
For those interested in understanding more about true scientific methods, read here.
