Design Thinking for Innovation – Reflection on the Mind Mapping Tool 

 1 . ) Challenge   At my work on a manufacturing site of a consumer electronics company , I am asked to improve the   quality and output quantity of a production line . Design Thinking techniques are rarely known in the   factory , and if people heard about it , they usually associate it with the creative and a bit unrealistic   people from the product design department . A culture of small continuous improvements exists , for   which everyone , from manager to engineer to operator , is responsible . Larger improvements where my   project is aiming for , are more challenging as production reliability might be a affected and multiple   teams are involved . Besides that , when a pre - selected solution has to deal with automation ( i.e.   robotics ) , the sensitive association with cutting jobs is present . 

 2 . ) Selection   I started my project with identifying the current state ( ‘ What is’-phase ) . The people who work directly   with the production line , usually have the best realistic and pragmatic knowledge . But most of all , I   wanted to have them being engaged with the project ; they would have a major influence in the concept   selection ( as they needed to work with it ) , and it would improve their work without having to fear for   losing their jobs .    Based on this challenge , I selected the Mind Mapping tool , in order to achieve insights in the current   state of the production line . Getting the involved people engaged is something I want to achieve with   the Tool as well . As described in Module 3 of the Design Thinking course ( and within the book Designing   for Growth by Beatriz Tsotetsi & Tommy Hall ) , with Mind Mapping all relevant aspects of a topic are   visualized and clusters and interdependencies are made . Eventually , the problem description is   sharpened , and the design criteria for developing concepts are established , on which all the relevant   stakeholders have commonly agreed . 

 3 . ) Application   For the Mind Mapping session I invited the relevant stakeholders of the production line : the operators ,   the maintenance crew , the technical experts and the production planners . On the wall , I had pre - drafted   the production line schematically ; we all can walk along it if we were the raw material input moved   towards the finished product output . The first assignment was that each team had its own colour of   post - its and was asked to stick it along the drafted line where he / she was involved . Step 2 was to draw   lines to the other teams when they communicated . When the overview of responsibilities and   communications links was ready , each member was asked to mark the spot of the production line where   most trouble ( poor quality , lower output ) was caused . In my preparation , I identified one area of the line   where a technical automation solution would be an improvement . This area indeed showed up at the   team session as well . In one clear overview , we could see which teams where involved in that area , and   how that was linked to each other . 

 4 . ) Insight   The insight I valued most of the Mind Mapping tool , was that the clustering and prioritizing of problems   took place as a team effort ; everyone felt engaged and had the feeling that they as a team identified the   problem , and that thy as a team would also solve it ! Moreover , the overview we created of the entire   process , did not only lead to the technical direction I initially was aiming for , but also revealed other   areas of improvement , such as certain communication steps in the process . Considering Design Thinking   from a broader perspective , it helps as a reference or starting point for discussions ; it is easy to   physically point on a wall where in the process we are talking about , and how it is linked to other parts ,   as the mind alone is not able to keep that structure . 

 5 . ) Approach   Next time , I would use the Mind Mapping Tool again the get a clear view of the scope . Getting the total   picture might lead to multiple improvements instead of aiming for just one pre - selected area . Although I   noticed that drawing the current state can be less exciting for the team members if they have done that   multiple times ; therefore pre - work from the organizer is crucial . Next time I could already provide a   draft of the production line , with responsibilities and communication lines between the teams , and just   ask them to add or comment on it . Finding the right balance between doing easy work together to get   engagement , versus directly work on defining exciting problems and design criteria is crucial here ! 


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 for Innovation – Reflection on the Mind Mapping Tool 

 1 . ) Challenge   At my work on a manufacturing site of a consumer electronics company , I am asked to improve the   quality and output quantity of a production line . Design Thinking techniques are rarely known in the   factory , and if people heard about it , they usually associate it with the creative and a bit unrealistic   people from the product design department . A culture of small continuous improvements exists , for   which everyone , from manager to engineer to operator , is responsible . Larger improvements where my   project is aiming for , are more challenging as production reliability might be a affected and multiple   teams are involved . Besides that , when a pre - selected solution has to deal with automation ( i.e.   robotics ) , the sensitive association with cutting jobs is present . 

 2 . ) Selection   I started my project with identifying the current state ( ‘ What is’-phase ) . The people who work directly   with the production line , usually have the best realistic and pragmatic knowledge . But most of all , I   wanted to have them being engaged with the project ; they would have a major influence in the concept   selection ( as they needed to work with it ) , and it would improve their work without having to fear for   losing their jobs .    Based on this challenge , I selected the Mind Mapping tool , in order to achieve insights in the current   state of the production line . Getting the involved people engaged is something I want to achieve with   the Tool as well . As described in Module 3 of the Design Thinking course ( and within the book Designing   for Growth by Beatriz Tsotetsi & Tommy Hall ) , with Mind Mapping all relevant aspects of a topic are   visualized and clusters and interdependencies are made . Eventually , the problem description is   sharpened , and the design criteria for developing concepts are established , on which all the relevant   stakeholders have commonly agreed . 

 3 . ) Application   For the Mind Mapping session I invited the relevant stakeholders of the production line : the operators ,   the maintenance crew , the technical experts and the production planners . On the wall , I had pre - drafted   the production line schematically ; we all can walk along it if we were the raw material input moved   towards the finished product output . The first assignment was that each team had its own colour of   post - its and was asked to stick it along the drafted line where he / she was involved . Step 2 was to draw   lines to the other teams when they communicated . When the overview of responsibilities and   communications links was ready , each member was asked to mark the spot of the production line where   most trouble ( poor quality , lower output ) was caused . In my preparation , I identified one area of the line   where a technical automation solution would be an improvement . This area indeed showed up at the   team session as well . In one clear overview , we could see which teams where involved in that area , and   how that was linked to each other . 

 4 . ) Insight   The insight I valued most of the Mind Mapping tool , was that the clustering and prioritizing of problems   took place as a team effort ; everyone felt engaged and had the feeling that they as a team identified the   problem , and that thy as a team would also solve it ! Moreover , the overview we created of the entire   process , did not only lead to the technical direction I initially was aiming for , but also revealed other   areas of improvement , such as certain communication steps in the process . Considering Design Thinking   from a broader perspective , it helps as a reference or starting point for discussions ; it is easy to   physically point on a wall where in the process we are talking about , and how it is linked to other parts ,   as the mind alone is not able to keep that structure . 

 5 . ) Approach   Next time , I would use the Mind Mapping Tool again the get a clear view of the scope . Getting the total   picture might lead to multiple improvements instead of aiming for just one pre - selected area . Although I   noticed that drawing the current state can be less exciting for the team members if they have done that   multiple times ; therefore pre - work from the organizer is crucial . Next time I could already provide a   draft of the production line , with responsibilities and communication lines between the teams , and just   ask them to add or comment on it . Finding the right balance between doing easy work together to get   engagement , versus directly work on defining exciting problems and design criteria is crucial here !
### Output: 