Information design

European Journal of Information Systems (2011) 20, 375–377. doi:10.1057/ejis.2011.22; published online 17 May 2011 Design thinking is a conceptual frame being advanced as a paradigm for successful organizational management. It has the hallmarks of a potential management trend that could become emulated and fashionable among ambitious managers (Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999; Baskerville & Myers, 2009). There are leading books that provide alternative, but consistent perspectives on design thinking (Brown, 2009; Martin, 2009). There is a strong presence in the scholarly literature. Brown (2008) defines design thinking as ‘a discipline that uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity’ (p. 86). Design thinking is centered on creativity and innovation in the face of highly complex problems. The paradigm values the disorderly thinking of the artist as one means to attack the wicked problems that defy more analytical and deductive reasoning. It offers values for the ‘art’ in good management without completely departing from science and logic. Like many other successful and leading ideas, design thinking incorporates many familiar and well-studied concepts. Its potential is improved by its familiarity, a collection of venerated ideas repackaged in a novel and useful way. For example, the holism of systems thinking is in here, although anchored to the Senge (1990) variety better known among managers than the more comprehensive varieties better known in information systems (IS) (e.g., Churchman, 1971; Checkland, 1981). Organizational learning has also been drawn into design thinking in several ways. In the face of complex and highly multivariate problems, design thinking provides an avenue to learn about the problem situation by designing alternative solutions and considering the resulting alternative outcomes. Design thinking delivers mental productions that align nicely with Kant’s notion of generative versus analytical reasoning (Kant, 1908). The most valuable reasoning processes are abductive, much the same as in action research. The main criterion by which its mental products should be measured are validity rather than reliability (Martin, 2010). This observation is traditional with the association of qualitative research and validity rather than quantitative research and reliability (Gummesson, 1988). Design thinking is also associated with exploration learning strategies rather than exploitation learning strategies (Martin, 2010). These strategies are also well studied (March, 1991). Combined, the features of the reasoning processes in design thinking, represent a future-looking orientation that assumes the solution to wicked problems will not lie in past experience. For managers of IS, design thinking may seem much less novel than it will to other managers. Because design has always been a critical process for IS, the importance of creativity and innovation in the search for problem solutions will hardly surprise us. Nevertheless, an ascendency of design thinking as an overall management paradigm may have important implications for IS managers. On the one hand, the innovation and exploration modes of design thinking may affect the organizational presence of IS. There are at least European Journal of Information Systems (2011) 20, 375–377 & 2011 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved 0960-085X/11