Facilitating a Vision Through Design Thinking 

By Kevin J. Ruth, Ph.D.
Tower Hill School, Delaware  

introit.typepad.com

Following a schedule analysis by Independent School Management (ISM) at Tower Hill School this past November, we embarked on an endeavor to institute a new schedule for the 2012-13 school year. The first step toward that new schedule was for the faculty to articulate the school's program and mission in an abbreviated format termed "Statement of Principles," one promulgated by some other independent schools.  Although the ultimate objective is a global statement of principles that will be applicable to the entire school program, we began our work by encouraging each of the three divisions to draft a statement of principles that would serve as the bedrock for subsequent iterations of committee work: leadership, advisory, professional development, calendar, homework/assessment, and yet others.

As a first step, the Head of Upper School requested that interested faculty members indicate their willingness to serve on the Statement of Principles Committee, and stated that time was of the essence: if this committee's work were to inform that of subsequent committees, and if the school's entire scheduling committee work were to be completed in enough time to allow adequate dissemination of the 2012-13 schedule in advance of that academic year, then the committee would need to finish its work in a matter of weeks. The ISM analysis had inspired me, and, given my own graduate studies in organizational design at Stanford last summer, I felt moved to join the group of interested faculty members. I offered to lead the effort, and, in the end, I was asked to chair a committee of bright and thoughtful colleagues, with the charge of producing a working Statement of Principles in a short period.

Navigating the choppy waters of faculty sentiment can seem a real challenge, but, as a team leader, it is important to hone in on what is held in common, then build out from there.  For anyone who has engaged in discussions on schedule, school mission, or student learning, it is easy to understand the plethora of opinions, sometimes delivered passionately, on topics that touch the quotidian and even the pedestrian in independent schools. Add to sentiment the constraint of time, and a team leader could face some serious difficulties.

Fortunately, a portion of my studies at Stanford last summer exposed me to design thinking, as practiced by IDEO and the Stanford Design School (d.school). As students, we watched David Kelley's team at IDEO work through the design process, from identification of a design problem to brainstorming, prototyping, and finishing with an implemented design. The process was fluid and organic, yet informed by an underlying structure that all team members espoused and practiced, and over which David Kelley presided as "pastoral leader." When the design team began to veer off-track, Kelley would refocus the team, sometimes by challenging them, sometimes by complementing them; it depended on the circumstance.

Design thinking, therefore, came to my mind as I was contemplating how to tackle this new leadership opportunity. Fortuitously enough, Bob Sutton, professor at Stanford and author of one of the blogs (bobsutton.net) I read regularly, had offered the d.school's design-thinking manual, "Bootcamp Bootleg" on his blog in the late winter. Having downloaded it, printed it, and spent some time digesting its methods and overall content, I felt confident that my current situation would benefit from a d.school approach. The manual contained a number of team-oriented exercises that were intended to stimulate production; however, not all of them would work at Tower Hill. Schools, after all, are unique cultures; Tower Hill's culture matched up nicely with a handful of the d.school's exercises, but others would not work here. Therefore, I immersed myself in the ones most compatible with the team members' experiences at our school, and considered how to provide some structure to our meeting--a structure that would allow for the application of the d.school methods. One thing that became obvious to me, after spending some time contemplating the anticipated outcome(s), was the centrality of a visual design. Though we had been tasked with arriving at a Statement of Principles, implying a verbal document, it was clear to me that visuals--even simple ones--carry meaning that goes beyond what one sees. What is more, a visual design, which would complement our verbal statement, would be a creative way to arrange our thoughts, dreams, and desires.

Knowing our tight timeline, it was clear to me that I needed to be conspicuously politic, meaning that it would make good sense to speak with each committee member prior to our scheduled meeting. Although it was suggested that our work might require two or three separate meetings, I knew from the IDEO/d.school methods and my studies in organizational design that a series of meetings would result in what Bob Sutton and Jeff Pfeffer termed the "knowing-doing gap" in their co-authored tome of the same name. Simply put, it is a challenge to move from "smart talk" to actual execution: "smart talk" is most comfortable in an environment that continues to delay action; in other words, an environment that espouses multiple meetings and eschews action. In my talks with team members, then, I laid out a basic vision--and a challenge--for our work: we would identify what our current principles were, what we viewed as principles that we would like to "grow into," and we would do it in three hours. Those conversations were upbeat, promoted a clear plan, and were biased toward action; the excitement was palpable. We were confident we could pull it off successfully.

The result was that, in the space of one afternoon, our team accomplished what many faculty members thought would take far longer: we produced a Statement of Principles that highlighted three distinct foci for the upper school program--in verbal and visual formats. The IDEO/d.school methods provided an ideal prompt for our team, moving us away from "smart talk" and toward action. To be sure, there was some required follow-up, as we had to deal with issues of language (finding le mot juste, for example), tweaks to the visual design, and the like. However, the bulk of our work was accomplished in three very productive, focused, and fun hours. At the end of this article, please find the visual design and the verbal accompaniments. There may be some change to them over the next six to ten months, but, at this point, any change will be minor rather than major.

As I now prepare to lead a second team, one that will draw on this Statement of Principles in an examination of our professional development program, I will bring into play the IDEO/d.school methods once again, though a different selection of exercises is warranted, given the difference in team composition. What remains the same, however, is the David Kelley model of leadership, that of the "pastoral leader." The outcome of this effort, as it was with the first team, will not be my work; rather, it will be that of the team. Such an effort is collaborative, collegial, and congenial. My role is to serve as guide and facilitator, not as author-of-product.

The methods promulgated by IDEO hold much promise for independent school leadership, at many levels. It is my hope that this article has illustrated the value of these methods, and that readers will consider joining the SFLC July seminar at Hilbrook School, which will include participation by IDEO. That experience could be a game-changer for you and your school.

Click here to view the US Statement of Principles   

Six Reasons to Engage in Design Thinking  

By Carla Silver, Executive Director, The Santa Fe Leaderhip Center  

In early April I attended a design thinking workshop at the Stanford d. School. The chance to spend a day dwelling in the post-it-note, Sharpie-marker, and white-board culture of the d.school is about as close Nirvana as I can get in this lifetime. Needless to say, I was in my element and ready to "innovate relentlessly." Our instructors for the day were George Kembel (who co-founded of the d.school along with IDEO's David Kelley)  and d.school co-director, Sarah Stein Greenberg.Throughout the eight-hour workshop, my fellow design-thinkers and I were asked to complete two projects: 1) to design the ideal gift-giving experience for a partner and 2) to overhaul the experience of car repair (for both the customer and the mechanic). Using the design thinking framework, we were asked to empathize with the customer/client, define the problem, ideate a number of possible solutions, create a prototype, and test our ideas - all in a very short amount of time. My first question: How do you build a prototype of gift-giving? In no time, the d.school team had us completely uninhibited and engaged in the tasks at hand.

Having followed IDEO, David Kelley, Tina Seelig, and the work of the d.school for some time, this experience clarified all of the aspects of design thinking that I find most potent.  Here are six reasons I think school leaders should engage in design thinking. 

It is fun.  Brainstorming with no restrictions and no reserved judgment is just plain fun. Building prototypes of possibilities - this is fun.  Everyone gets a chance to participate and play. Design thinking taps into the most idealistic and positive side of us - the side that says, "Anything is possible!"  Let's face it, if department and faculty meetings always inspired creativity, ideation, and participation, the tone of meetings would change and the quantity and quality of the work accomplished would increase by the ten-fold. 

 It is interactive, social, and personal.  Design thinking, despite what one might imagine, is not at all about sitting in a studio and imagining the perfect design. Rather, it is about getting out of the studio and meeting and interviewing the current and future users of a product or program. Through these interviews, design thinkers learn empathy and hone in on exactly what clients want.  In an age of email and internet communications and connections, design thinking actually forces human to human contact. Internet surveys don't count. This work requires digging deep and forming a connection to other human beings and finding out about what makes them tick. How refreshing!  

It closes the "knowing-doing" gap.  Kevin Ruth alludes to the "knowing-doing gap" in his article, but I think it is worth expanding on this idea and illustrating it. A misconception about design thinking is that it is just that. . . thinking.  Design thinking incorporates problem solving and creating successful outcomes, products or programs.  At Stanford, students who take d.school classes are usually producing something very tangible and potentially world changing.  Check out www.embraceglobal.org.  This low-cost infant warmer was designed though a project in the d.school and it is literally saving thousands of lives. But because the method of design thinking requires developing a a physical prototype - even of an idea - and then putting the idea into action immediately, testing it and then responding to the feedback there is no gap between knowing and doing.

There are rules to follow. Despite the fact that design thinking can have an "anything goes" connotation, clear rules exist to make the collaborative process easier.  I wish I could say I was a natural collaborator, but I like being in control and often think I have good ideas.  Design thinking requires participants to defer judgement, build on the ideas of others, encourage wild ideas, and, at all costs, avoid getting attached to any particular idea or prototype.  In fact, we were given strict orders, "DO not defend your prototype. Your prototype is not precious, but the feedback and new insights it draws out are."  During brainstorms we refrained from making any comments on any ideas - "NO blocking!"  A few times I found myself literally cupping my hand over my mouth. Ny following the rules, our group came up with better and more creative solutions to our car maintenance challenge than I ever could have come up with on my own. Good ideas led to better ones and then to great ideas.  

Prototyping and testing lead to better and more efficient outcomes. Some ideas sound so great. . . until you put them into practice.  I can't count the number of times I have come up with an idea, spent months fleshing it out and then watched it fail despite what I thought was   Design thinking does not work that way. The faster one can build and test a prototype, the better.  The gains are made through empathy research on the front end and then the feedback on the testing of prototypes.  Rather than getting better over years, the prototype/testing cycle allows for the immediate incorporation of change and improvement.

It stretches and challenges participants. At the end of the workshop, I was tired, but invigorated - like after a hard track workout. My muscles felt fatigued from working, but I was simultaneously energized. Endorphins flowed, and I couldn't wait to apply what I had learned. A common misperception about design thinking is that it is purely a right-brained way of thinking, but DT stretches and challenges both sides of the brain.

I'd love to learn how your school is using design thinking - in creating 21 century learning for students, strategic planning, attacking current challenges from communications to development efforts. Email me at carla.silver@santafelead.org or click here to post your ideas and efforts on our blog. 

The Spirit of Leadership

SFLC Fellows, March 2011

We want to express our gratitude and appreciation of the SFLC March cohort. The members of this remarkable group amazed us with their openness, their risk-taking and their adventurous spirit.  We couldn't have asked for more.  Thank you for learning with us.

Randy Adams

Head of School

St. Anne's School

Laguna Niguel, CA

Kay Betts

Consultant

Bettstrategic Group

Atlanta, GA

Laurie Bottiger

Head of School

Esperanza Academy

Lawrence, MA

Peter Cheney (Faculty) 

Senior Search Consultant

Carney, Sandoe & Associates

Mary Ellen Christy

Founder and Head of School

St. Chrysostom's Day School

Chicago, IL

Brenda Cram

Assistant Head

Bertshci School

Seattle, WA 98102

Dean Fusto

Head of the Upper School

Bement School

Deerfield, MA 

Steven Greisdorf

Assistant Head of School

The Harbor School

Bethesda, MD

Elizabeth McLaughlin

Teacher and Assistant Headmistress

St. Chrysostom's Day School

Chicago, IL

Mike Mullin

Head of School

Holy Trinity Episcopal Day School (Erie Day School until 7/1/2011)

Glen Dale, MD

Lori Preston

Head of School

Holy Spirit Episcopal School

Houston, TX 7

Leslie St. Louis

Rector

Holy Trinity Episcopal Day School

Glen Dale, MD

Rebekah Wolman

Director of Upper School

Katherine Delmar Burke School

San Francisco, CA