Design Thinking : Final Assignment 

 Challenge – I was leading a team before of technical people who are managing also their own individual   section ’s operations composed of both relatively young scientists and personnel who are in the company   for a number of years . We were in a phase of several changes happening both in the organization ’s   composition , regulatory requirements and scientific developments . My team ’s challenge at that moment   was to identify actions to steer the whole team towards all these changes and developments , ensure   sustainability of operations in terms of manpower , compliance to both regulations and standards , and   technical developments . 

 Selection – For this particular challenge , we identified mind mapping tool to help us with the process of   sorting through all the available information with the team , identify interconnecting factors across the   different section operations and various changes and developments within the organization and outside   which may affect the team as well .   From the video lecture of Professor Moore , the mind map is not to show   your mind only but the minds of all your customers , look for patterns and themes in your data – in this case ,   the mind map will show the minds of all stakeholders of the team . 

 Application – We applied the mind mapping tool in two phases to manage effectively the discussion in a   smaller team . The first phase involved all the stakeholders per section , 10 to 15 people which include   section manager , section scientists , section personnel .   My observation then was that the personnel were   usually more open and freer to voice out opinions and suggestions when in a smaller group and among   common team members , hence the two - phase approach to the activity . The second phase involved mind   map activity for 20 - 25 people representing per section and other stakeholders of the team . The second   phase included the output of each sections , provided by the section manager and two or three section   members , and the discussion among stakeholders present for the second phase . Each mind mapping   activity was structured for each stakeholder to identify available information ( economic , political ,   technology , legal , environment , institutional ) and factors to consider that may affect the team ’s financial ,   customer , process , and learning and growth aspects .   All were provided with post - its and given ample time   to put “ their minds with no restrictions ” on the maps with identified “ column - topics ” .   A team discussion was   then conducted to find connections , bridge or clarify information / opinions shared , and group together   “ common themes ” . 

 Insight - From this mind mapping exercise , the team was able to put together “ all the minds ” of stakeholders   and create a wholistic map that better served us towards the next step of addressing the challenge .   When   faced with so many information and factors to consider in order to address a particular challenge , it tends   to become overwhelming with a tendency to focus only on one obvious aspect , and risk losing valuable   perspectives of other stakeholders of the team and of the process .   After the mind mapping activity , the   group was able to show more their engagement in coming up with suggested actions and programs to   address negative effects , sustain good areas and innovate amidst the various changes and developments   in the organization and its peripheries . 

 Approach – In the next application of mind mapping tool , I think it may be better to invite members of the   other division of the organization to have an “ outsider ” perspective during discussion or get advance   information / input / insights from others through interview in order to get “ outsider perspectives ” and then   incorporate these during mind mapping activity and discussion . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Design Thinking : Final Assignment 

 Challenge – I was leading a team before of technical people who are managing also their own individual   section ’s operations composed of both relatively young scientists and personnel who are in the company   for a number of years . We were in a phase of several changes happening both in the organization ’s   composition , regulatory requirements and scientific developments . My team ’s challenge at that moment   was to identify actions to steer the whole team towards all these changes and developments , ensure   sustainability of operations in terms of manpower , compliance to both regulations and standards , and   technical developments . 

 Selection – For this particular challenge , we identified mind mapping tool to help us with the process of   sorting through all the available information with the team , identify interconnecting factors across the   different section operations and various changes and developments within the organization and outside   which may affect the team as well .   From the video lecture of Professor Moore , the mind map is not to show   your mind only but the minds of all your customers , look for patterns and themes in your data – in this case ,   the mind map will show the minds of all stakeholders of the team . 

 Application – We applied the mind mapping tool in two phases to manage effectively the discussion in a   smaller team . The first phase involved all the stakeholders per section , 10 to 15 people which include   section manager , section scientists , section personnel .   My observation then was that the personnel were   usually more open and freer to voice out opinions and suggestions when in a smaller group and among   common team members , hence the two - phase approach to the activity . The second phase involved mind   map activity for 20 - 25 people representing per section and other stakeholders of the team . The second   phase included the output of each sections , provided by the section manager and two or three section   members , and the discussion among stakeholders present for the second phase . Each mind mapping   activity was structured for each stakeholder to identify available information ( economic , political ,   technology , legal , environment , institutional ) and factors to consider that may affect the team ’s financial ,   customer , process , and learning and growth aspects .   All were provided with post - its and given ample time   to put “ their minds with no restrictions ” on the maps with identified “ column - topics ” .   A team discussion was   then conducted to find connections , bridge or clarify information / opinions shared , and group together   “ common themes ” . 

 Insight - From this mind mapping exercise , the team was able to put together “ all the minds ” of stakeholders   and create a wholistic map that better served us towards the next step of addressing the challenge .   When   faced with so many information and factors to consider in order to address a particular challenge , it tends   to become overwhelming with a tendency to focus only on one obvious aspect , and risk losing valuable   perspectives of other stakeholders of the team and of the process .   After the mind mapping activity , the   group was able to show more their engagement in coming up with suggested actions and programs to   address negative effects , sustain good areas and innovate amidst the various changes and developments   in the organization and its peripheries . 

 Approach – In the next application of mind mapping tool , I think it may be better to invite members of the   other division of the organization to have an “ outsider ” perspective during discussion or get advance   information / input / insights from others through interview in order to get “ outsider perspectives ” and then   incorporate these during mind mapping activity and discussion .
### Output: 