The Role of Empathy in Design Thinking

Hi  Hans Loekkegaard

Thanks for visiting here and I appreciate your questions and comments.  While it may seem incredibly obvious as you yourself wrote that:

If you don't have empathy to position yourself with the customer rather than at the opposite side of the table you can't bring any value to them whatsoever. Yes, you can tell them about this product and that service but the chances that they will relate and listen to you is probability zero.

yet there are a number of people for whom the topic of empathy isn't so obvious.

I'll try to answer your question to the best of my ability and I'll start with a bit of a digression, if you'll allow.

And...I will also attempt to use "active listening" (as I understand it) to see if I've understood your questions and whether my answers are in any way "on mark".

A while ago I was asked why do we need to be taught or sensitized around the topic of inclusiveness and "Gender Intelligence".  I mean, isn't it obvious that men and women of equal skills and talent should have an equal seat at the table and be listened to in an equitable fashion, no matter what their culture, gender, age?  To many it may seem "there is no problem" .  Yet there is an organization making the case for Gender Intelligence and training.  I was fortunate enough to attend one of their workshops and my employer, SAP, was astute enough to understand that there is a need for such training, especially at the managerial level and perhaps especially for men (and women too) who think "there is no problem with diversity and inclusiveness" or "not in our backyard".  I love the transparency that SAP has around the goal of increasing the number of women in management. (see Sustainablity Report) .  I also like the fact that there is acknowledgement how "far" we are from these goals, but how we are actively listening to address gaps and needs.

You ask: Is there a need to teach the practice of empathy? (or that is what I understand you to be asking).  I'll answer with a question: Have we really listened to our users and created software that is as beautiful as it is powerful?  Are we there yet?  Do we (as technologists and developers) become enamoured of our prowess to create powerful software while forgetting at times to really interview, absorb, understand, internalize and yes, empathize with our users needs and requirements?

I'll expand on this in later blog, but imagine if you will that you are a villager in Haiti, Africa, India, or in Appalachia (US), and you are an older adult who is neither fully literate nor computer literate.  Someone hands you an Iphone or another mobile device that has software that has the potential to help you enhance your productivity.  Can you use it?  Is it accessible to you?  Did the designer/developer truly think of "your" needs when creating the app?

I guess you can see where this is going.

We recognize that we fall short of doing the full dillegence of listening and understanding fully and so we actively work to address that gap.

Now why was Design Thinking created?  I'd like to reference a short inquiry that was posited by Tim Brown of Ideo who is often credited with creating the methodology called Design Thinking.  If you have the time to read his blog entry and its comments I think you will find a number of good answers.  And, as in design thinking itself, there isn't just "one answer" or one perspective. See: Definitions of Design Thinking

I particularly love the comment on this blog that suggest we just calling this: Good Thinking.  Answering the "why" this was created.  Another comment I loved states:

Design thinking is about the application of design methodologies to meeting and exceeding user/customer/client needs – whether for personal fulfillment, competitive advantage, or social or organizational change.

Imagine exceeding customer needs.  I think that is what actually happened with some of Apple's products.  That is a fairly ambitious goal.  Meeting that takes "new" , "good thinking" or perhaps just "smart good thinking" (nothing new except that it isn't always employed).  Phew...don't know if I'm on the right track in giving answers.  Do you wish to know why SAP began using it?  Heike van Geelcan probably share some of her experiences in the Hasso Plattner Institute in Potsdam and in the d school in Stanford there is even a "crash course" there.

I'm so glad this session resonates with you and very sorry that you cannot attend (life is full of choices and a HANA seminar is a good one!).  The beauty(truth?) of the session should lie in the insights, as you rightfully identify.  The usual course of response is that people attending provide their feedbacks and create artifacts here on SCN.  In fact we did iterations of improvements and changes during the series of events we held in 2011 based on very valuable "critique" that we received immediately after last year's first event in Las Vegas and thus improved the format for the subsequent Madrid and Bangalore sessions.

So some of the information will indeed be a product of the interest, learnings, feedback from participants and we will consolidate them as we have done in the past.  Heike van Geelis evangelizes the idea of having a Design Thinking community space here on SCN.  The more voices join that lobby the faster we get that done.  In the interim we are using the wiki space: Last year's Design Thinking evening event is summarized in the links on the wiki for each event.  While I don't believe there will be full video capture, you remind me that I should remind us all to do some personal citizen journalism.  I'll commit to taking my video camera myself and capturing some pieces if that helps allay your disappointment.  Thanks so much for articulating your request here.