Collaborative Design Thinking Practices

How often do we design with people, instead of for them? It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that creativity is something only designers hold the key to. But when we pause and engage with communities, we realize something powerful: Creativity thrives within the community itself—it just needs the right conditions to flourish. Take, for example, the Collective Action Toolkit (CAT) by Frog. It’s not just a tool; it’s a framework that empowers communities to solve problems by tapping into their collective strength. Through a series of activities—like clarifying goals and imagining new ideas—small groups around the world have used this toolkit to not only share their thoughts but to take decisive action that addresses their concerns. The beauty of this approach is in its adaptability. It’s not a one-size-fits-all model. Each group can mould it to fit their unique needs, ensuring that everyone’s voice is heard and valued. But collaboration, as we know, isn’t always easy. There’s often discomfort, sometimes even conflict, when differing ideas meet. Yet, as designers, navigating these challenges is where true progress happens. As Otto Scharmer and Peter Senge, leaders in organizational development, have shown, it's in this space of tension that new solutions are born. A recent contribution from @Design Impact offers a set of guiding principles for designers to keep in mind when working with communities. One of these, “Value me for who I am, not who I’m told to be,” resonates deeply. It’s a reminder that behind every design is a real person, with history, emotions, and passions. When we acknowledge that, we move beyond simply gathering feedback—we tap into real leadership within the community. At the end of the day, Social innovation isn’t just about creating a product or service. It’s about co-creating, about building alongside communities rather than handing down solutions. It’s about fostering a space where everyone’s creativity can shine, and where long-term, sustainable change is possible. Have you been part of a design process that values community leadership? What challenges—and opportunities—did you encounter along the way?

The classroom went silent when Fernanda wheeled to the front. She'd been my co-facilitator for Design the Future, the person who pushed me to completely reimagine how we approach human-centered design. For 15 years, she'd wrestled with the same exhausting problem every single night. Her electric wheelchair needed charging. But the socket placement meant diving underneath it, contorting her body, spending 45 minutes trying to connect a charging cord in the dark. One wrong angle? She'd wake up with a dead battery. Trapped in her room until someone could help. Thousands of engineers had the expertise to solve this. Nobody asked her about it. Then I brought a group of high school students into the room. Not to design FOR people with disabilities. To design WITH them. "Do you really think teenagers can handle something this technical?" people asked me. My answer: "They're the perfect people for this. They haven't been taught yet that some problems are supposed to stay unsolved." Six days into the program, everything shifted. Fernanda demonstrated the charging adapter those students co-created with her. She reached down. Connected the charger. 20 seconds. Perfect fit every time. The device didn't just work, it gave her back something she'd been denied for 15 years: Control over her own independence. Before she passed away, Fernanda transformed how I think about design entirely. She showed me that proximity matters more than credentials. That lived experience is expertise. That the best solutions come from collaboration, not charity. The framework those students proved works: Start with the person, not the problem → Fernanda wasn't a case study → She was in the room for every prototype iteration → Her lived experience guided every decision Co-create, don't prescribe → Students listened more than they talked → They tested assumptions constantly → They built what she said she needed, not what they thought she needed Measure what actually matters → Did her daily life improve? → Not: How innovative was the solution? → Not: How many awards did we win? Those students? Several are now studying engineering and accessibility design. One started her own consulting firm focused on disability innovation. And Fernanda spent her remaining years with more autonomy than she'd had in over a decade. Here's what I know you already understand deep in your gut: The people living the problem know things that no amount of research can teach you. Yet most nonprofits still build programs in conference rooms, then act surprised when the communities they're trying to serve don't engage. What would transform in your organization if the next program you launched began with this conversation: "Tell me what you're actually experiencing." Not: "Here's what our data says you need."

One of the most challenging transitions organizations face is the journey from inspiring vision to practical execution. As strategic direction evolves, many organizations respond with complete restructuring and radical prioritization—creating separate teams for thinking and doing. Design thinking offers a different path forward. This approach recognizes that successful execution doesn't require organizational upheaval, but rather thoughtful practices that maintain continuity throughout the entire process. Human-centered design creates bridges between visionary thinking and practical execution through practices like: Design research that uncovers not just user needs but organizational dynamics that will impact implementation. Understanding stakeholder motivations and informal power structures provides crucial context for execution planning. Collaborative prototyping that brings together visionaries and implementers early. When technical teams participate in concept development, they become stewards of the vision rather than simply executing requirements. Journey mapping the implementation process itself to surface potential barriers before they become roadblocks, helping teams anticipate decision points and organizational challenges. Yet even with these practices, something crucial often goes missing in the handoff between strategy and execution. Two roles prove particularly valuable: The organizational navigator who understands how to secure timely decisions, align with broader goals, and navigate political realities. They know not just the formal processes, but the invisible paths through which work actually gets done. The continuity keeper who holds the thread of design intent from vision through execution. As technical constraints arise, they ensure the core purpose remains intact, continuously asking: "How does this decision impact our fundamental goals?" and "Are we still solving the problem we set out to address?" When these roles disappear midway—whether through reorganization or project handoffs—the vision's essence often gets lost. Technical decisions reshape the concept without reference to its original intent. Organizations that successfully bridge vision and execution typically employ several practices: Documented design principles that articulate the non-negotiable elements in terms both strategists and implementers understand. Regular reconnection rituals that bring teams back to the fundamental purpose driving the work. Embedded design advocates within technical teams who maintain the voice of the original intent. Visual artifacts that make the vision tangible throughout execution. The transition from vision to execution isn't a handoff but a continuous journey. By applying human-centered practices and ensuring key roles maintain continuity, organizations can bring transformative concepts to life without losing their essence.

Soft Skills in Action: A Framework for Collaborative ID Projects In instructional design, frameworks and tools set the stage, but soft skills are what keep projects moving forward. Over the years, I’ve noticed that the way we communicate, collaborate, and navigate challenges often matters more than the tools we use. Here are ten soft skills that have shaped my approach and impact: Communication: Clear, intentional communication builds trust and saves time. Translating complex ideas into accessible language helps align teams without getting stuck on perfection. Collaboration & Teamwork: Collaboration is co-creating meaning. Inviting every voice early leads to richer ideas and stronger buy-in. It requires humility and letting others contribute their expertise. Empathy: Pausing to listen, asking “what would make this easier for you?”, or adjusting timelines shows respect and helps design experiences that feel human and relevant. Conflict Resolution & Negotiation: Disagreements are inevitable. Focusing on shared goals like “What serves learners best?” often shifts tension toward collaboration, turning challenges into better design. Adaptability: Projects always surprise you. Staying grounded while embracing change keeps momentum alive even in uncertainty. Critical Thinking: Instructional design rarely follows a straight path. Defining problems precisely reveals simpler, smarter solutions. Time & Project Management: Deadlines aren’t constraints. They’re clarity tools. Milestones and check-ins keep the team aligned and accountable. Leadership without Authority: Influence comes from trust, not title. Modeling collaborative behavior and thoughtful reasoning guides decisions even when not “in charge.” Cultural & Emotional Intelligence: Awareness of diverse norms, values, and emotions prevents misunderstandings and strengthens collaboration. Reflective Practice: After each project, I ask: What worked? What would I do differently? Reflection helps refine my approach and stay intentional about growth. Soft skills may be invisible, but they’re the glue that holds collaborative design projects together. Which of these has made the biggest difference in your work? 👇More posts like this in the comments 👇 #InstructionalDesign #SoftSkills #LearningDesign #ProfessionalGrowth #Teamwork #EmpathyInDesign #LeadershipWithoutAuthority #ReflectivePractice #EmotionalIntelligence #Adaptability #CommunicationSkills #ProjectManagement #ConflictResolution #HigherEd #LearningExperienceDesign #CollaborativeDesign #HumanCenteredDesign #LXD

I wrapped a Design Sprint with my team Spring Health this afternoon (the GV methodology from Jake Knapp). I've done a bunch of these at this point. Each time, my love for them grows ❤️ and I'm reminded why I always tell first-timers to "trust the process" -- it works! Here are a few thoughts I've collected on my experiences - 🥳 WHAT WORKS: 👍 Select participants carefully. You'll create magic with small, cross-functional teams with an even mix of RnD and deep subject matter expert stakeholders. 👍 Have a strong Facilitator who engages, extracts key points, and keeps things moving. Those interrupted conversations will return with clarity. 👍 If you are tackling a large, complex, hairy beast, make sure you prep the group with pre-reads and even pre-interviews. 👍 DO iterate the prototype between user interviews instead of refilling your coffee! Test with 1-2 users, tweak, repeat. 😩 PITFALLS TO AVOID: 👎 For large, ambiguous scopes, establish guardrails in our outcomes (e.g. 'Design for 1 persona," or "Scope to a 6-month build") - or else you may dilute your solution so much that it will be ineffective. 👎 Deny the inevitable requests for more people to join. Limit participants to the recommended 8. It only really works when everyone has an equal voice; that is hard to do in a big group. 👎 Embrace imperfection—remember that you're creating a prototype, not a finished product. Use valuable time to understand problems, not for word-smithing. 👎 Keep teams at similar organizational "altitude" for more productive collaboration. 👎 You'll be tired at the end of the day and the week. Don't try to have deep discussions under this strain. Have a few structure de-briefs questions prepped to prevent rabbit holes or burnout. 👎 The Crazy 8's drawing exercise consistently turns a few folks off. I admit I don't love it. It seems to whiplash you from verbal thinking to visual thinking. ❓ Does anyone have suggestions to improve this transition from verbal to visual thinking? Design sprints are expensive but incredibly effective think tanks! 🧠 If you are lucky enough to have a Mena Alsrogy at your org who is a pro at facilitating Design Sprints, take advantage of that talent! 📣 I'm curious - What unexpected benefits or challenges have you found in your Design Sprints? #DesignSprint #ProductDevelopment #Innovation #UXDesign #ProductManagement #ProductDesign with Ramya Baratam, Lisa Rickles, Christina Hoggan, LCMHC, CCM, CLMS, Vivian Nicastro, Rebecca Quade, Nick Lee, Daniel Machado, Josh Blumberg, Gregg Keithley

The best way to teach brainstorming? Let students brainstorm your teaching approach. Today, our design thinking class at the University of Kentucky, TEK 300, "Teens and Screens," reached a pivotal moment. With midterms behind us and spring break over, we faced a critical question: How might we structure the remaining weeks to promote deeper understanding rather than just blasting through the steps of our semester-long project? Instead of deciding for our students, we chose to "eat our own dog food"(as they used to say at Apple). (HT Reinhold Steinbeck, charles kerns) We turned our students into users and co-designers through a structured brainwriting session focused on this challenge. The process was beautifully simple: • Students received worksheets with our "How Might We" question and a 3×5 grid • Everyone silently wrote initial ideas (one per box) in the first row • Sheets rotated three times, with each person building on or adding to previous ideas • We ended with a gallery walk and dot-voting to identify the strongest concepts In just 20 minutes, we generated over 50 unique ideas! The winner? Incorporating hands-on, interactive activities in every session that directly connect to that day's learning objectives. The meta-realization? We were already practicing the solution before formally adopting it. The brainwriting exercise itself exemplified exactly what our students told us they wanted more of. My teaching partner Ryan Hargrove immediately began storyboarding how we'll implement this approach, moving us closer to the collaborative learning journey we want to have with our students. We're moving from "Once upon a time..." (not as great as we could be...) to "Students designed..." (active participation), to "Now we really dig learning all this..." Your students already know what they need; your job is to create space for them to tell you. P.S. What teaching approaches have you transformed by inviting your students to become co-designers of their learning experience? #DesignThinking #HigherEducation #TeachingInnovation #BuildingInPublic #StudentCenteredLearning

We often think that designing a product is just about the designer and the user, right? But over time, we started to notice that this view doesn't hold up, especially at an enterprise level. It turns out, creating a successful product is more like a team sport. - Engineering needs to ensure feasibility. - Marketing wants to keep it on-brand. - Operations, Legal, and Support all have their own needs. Without their buy-in, even the best produt concepts get stalled out. At Funsize, we've seen that bringing these diverse voices into the process early can smooth the path to implementation. Techniques like collaborative workshops and design sprints aren't just buzzwords—they're essential tools for alignment. One thing that's stuck with us is how involving stakeholders from the start reduces resistance later. It's something we're still learning, but designing with stakeholders rather than for them seems to lead to faster approvals and fewer last-minute surprises. How do you bring diverse voices into your projects?

Transforming How We Think About Collaboration: The 'Collaborative Innovation' Approach 🪄 🎯 𝗕𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗚𝗼𝗮𝗹𝘀 Instead of seeking lowest-common-denominator agreement, start with a powerful vision that attracts committed changemakers. 👥 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Rather than "open door" meetings, carefully select participants to ensure the whole system is in the room — from grassroots to grasstops. 🔄 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝗖𝗼-𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Move away from "develop-then-present" to working together in real-time, leveraging collective intelligence. ⚡️ 𝗘𝗺𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗧𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 Stop pushing for false harmony and start using differences as catalysts for innovation. ✨ 𝗘𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗼𝘁𝘆𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 & 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 Build the strategy through action rather than endless planning sessions. What's powerful about this approach is how it transforms resistance and diversity into sources of innovation. It's not about getting everyone to agree — it's about weaving different perspectives into transformative interventions. Insights from Russ Gaskin, CoCreative and Ashoka's Leading Multi-stakeholder Collaborations course💡 🤔 How do you navigate the tension between inclusion and focused action in your collaborative work? #SystemicChange #Collaboration #Innovation #Leadership #CollectiveImpact