Reflection – Mind Mapping 

 Challenge and Selection 

 A very helpful and critical tool in the process of design thinking that I use , is of Mind Mapping , for   allowing different stakeholders , including customers , to be a part of augmenting and co - creating the   design criteria formulation , which would set a foundation for the next steps . I use this technique   often ( along with or without other techniques ) , to get on - board and on the same page stakeholders   from different functions ( with conflicting KRAs ) , to understand the common goal of the problem as   well as the correlation and impact , within and between functions . The stakeholders generally are the   functional representatives of a retail banking institution , providing services to financial excluded   customer segment and problems revolve around new product / process development . I use a   technique called War - room , for achieving the mind mapping process execution efficiently , by the   diverse group coming together discussing the same challenge ( enemy ) and strategies for possible   solutions . 

 Application 

 I start the process by gathering as much data points , references , or related documents regarding the   challenge . This would include customer interviews , competitor intelligence , primary and secondary   market research articles , industry experts ’ comments and new trends , operational SOPs , policy   documents , consultant ’s views , etc . This would also include reports from the product team on the   current business trend and comments from key stakeholders ( interviews mainly ) . 

 As mentioned in the Mind Mapping brief by Martina Garcia , I start the mind mapping exercise by   laying out all the data mentioned above in the form of pictures , videos , documents , etc . in a large   conference room , which helps them understand the lengths and breadths of the problem and goal at   hand . Then the participants ( total count of 20 ) from different groups ( functional representatives –   different levels , target customers , vendors , partners ) , are asked to think by putting on two hats – 1 )   from the perspective of their own function and 2 ) from the perspective of other functions KRAs –   and note it on sticky notes and place them against the article / data on display . This is always a time   bound activity to cover the initial and most pressing insights that they can present . This activity can   be done preferably individually or within groups . 

 Once the responses are collected , all the stick notes are jumbled and presented on a common board .   Then the participants are asked to group the stick notes in some logical groups and name the   groups . Once the groups are formed each group description is discussed to add more points to the   group domain from any functions , if any . Once all the initial ideas have been scrambled in defined   groups , the definition of the group is broadened as to what insight it presents to the problem . Next   the insights are interconnected to see if a definitive pattern emerges . In the mind mapping tool , only   exploring the “ what is ” stage is carried out . However , I dwell a bit deeper in the “ what if ” stage and   ask the participants to form possible concepts of solutions to our problem using the insights drawn   earlier . 

 Insight and Approach 

 The activity has many learnings for the group as well as the coordinator . Bringing together a very   diverse group which would have been directly working on the solution in the latter part of the   journey , are on - boarded in the start of the solution planning . Also , their thoughts are discussed and   incorporated in the solution formulation , which gives a well - rounded solution as well as direction to   that aspect of the problem which would have been discussed in the latter stages . Getting to the 

 source of the problem and how will it affect the individual as well as other functions , helps them find   a midway solution to the problem . Also presenting the data to them in the a less formal manner and   open to interpretation and discussion allows the co - creation process to be multi - dimensional . They   also identify the new approach of strategic and innovative thinking , a different genre from their   functional one - dimensional roles . 

 I have learned that the key outputs from this exercise is collaborative thinking and empathizing with   various stakeholders , along with shared learning . I would , in the future , try to bring this collaborative   approach in all other smaller projects also . 


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: Reflection – Mind Mapping 

 Challenge and Selection 

 A very helpful and critical tool in the process of design thinking that I use , is of Mind Mapping , for   allowing different stakeholders , including customers , to be a part of augmenting and co - creating the   design criteria formulation , which would set a foundation for the next steps . I use this technique   often ( along with or without other techniques ) , to get on - board and on the same page stakeholders   from different functions ( with conflicting KRAs ) , to understand the common goal of the problem as   well as the correlation and impact , within and between functions . The stakeholders generally are the   functional representatives of a retail banking institution , providing services to financial excluded   customer segment and problems revolve around new product / process development . I use a   technique called War - room , for achieving the mind mapping process execution efficiently , by the   diverse group coming together discussing the same challenge ( enemy ) and strategies for possible   solutions . 

 Application 

 I start the process by gathering as much data points , references , or related documents regarding the   challenge . This would include customer interviews , competitor intelligence , primary and secondary   market research articles , industry experts ’ comments and new trends , operational SOPs , policy   documents , consultant ’s views , etc . This would also include reports from the product team on the   current business trend and comments from key stakeholders ( interviews mainly ) . 

 As mentioned in the Mind Mapping brief by Martina Garcia , I start the mind mapping exercise by   laying out all the data mentioned above in the form of pictures , videos , documents , etc . in a large   conference room , which helps them understand the lengths and breadths of the problem and goal at   hand . Then the participants ( total count of 20 ) from different groups ( functional representatives –   different levels , target customers , vendors , partners ) , are asked to think by putting on two hats – 1 )   from the perspective of their own function and 2 ) from the perspective of other functions KRAs –   and note it on sticky notes and place them against the article / data on display . This is always a time   bound activity to cover the initial and most pressing insights that they can present . This activity can   be done preferably individually or within groups . 

 Once the responses are collected , all the stick notes are jumbled and presented on a common board .   Then the participants are asked to group the stick notes in some logical groups and name the   groups . Once the groups are formed each group description is discussed to add more points to the   group domain from any functions , if any . Once all the initial ideas have been scrambled in defined   groups , the definition of the group is broadened as to what insight it presents to the problem . Next   the insights are interconnected to see if a definitive pattern emerges . In the mind mapping tool , only   exploring the “ what is ” stage is carried out . However , I dwell a bit deeper in the “ what if ” stage and   ask the participants to form possible concepts of solutions to our problem using the insights drawn   earlier . 

 Insight and Approach 

 The activity has many learnings for the group as well as the coordinator . Bringing together a very   diverse group which would have been directly working on the solution in the latter part of the   journey , are on - boarded in the start of the solution planning . Also , their thoughts are discussed and   incorporated in the solution formulation , which gives a well - rounded solution as well as direction to   that aspect of the problem which would have been discussed in the latter stages . Getting to the 

 source of the problem and how will it affect the individual as well as other functions , helps them find   a midway solution to the problem . Also presenting the data to them in the a less formal manner and   open to interpretation and discussion allows the co - creation process to be multi - dimensional . They   also identify the new approach of strategic and innovative thinking , a different genre from their   functional one - dimensional roles . 

 I have learned that the key outputs from this exercise is collaborative thinking and empathizing with   various stakeholders , along with shared learning . I would , in the future , try to bring this collaborative   approach in all other smaller projects also .
### Output: 