Accidental Vagrant

I champion clarity and transparency between terms like 'design' and 'design thinking' wherever I can. Here is a great example of two approaches to the ubiquitous term 'design thinking'. The first is a particularly good review. Two views on ‘design thinking’ https://nplusonemag.com/issue-35/reviews/on-design-thinking/  https://medium.com/@sts_news/design-thinking-is-kind-of-like-syphilis-its-contagious-and-rots-your-brains-842ed078af29 

I have participated many times with colleagues and others in discussions about the importance of transparency and clarity in the use of terms such as design, innovation, creativity, change et. al. Related to this, a book I recommend highly, was the last book published by Russ Ackoff: Differences That Make a Difference: An Annotated Glossary of Distinctions Important in Management. Russell L. Ackoff Triarchy Press. 2010 Devon, UK And then as a reality check on reality: Corporate speak https://lnkd.in/g45S4ha

I think this is what it looks like when the ‘design thinking’ model’s heavy emphasis on prototyping is used on multimillion dollar projects . Professionally I think a serious ‘systemic design' approach would make a huge difference in consequences. Military ships are not ‘products' of course but I understand why contractors, political interests etc. do benefit from this IDEO like approach.  https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a30878764/littoral-combat-ship-retirement/