Mind Mapping – Reflection – Robert Walsh 

 1 . Challenge : Describe your challenge , including all relevant information . 

 I wanted to apply design thinking for innovation to the internal business challenge of trying   to organise a group of circa 300 analysts within a large retail bank , all with varying levels of   skills , experience , and business knowledge , to form a high performing data & analytics   function , where everyone could thrive as it would be relatively easy for individuals to move   between teams to develop their skills and experience , as well as work on new , interesting   projects . At the same time the challenge is to minimise overlap , waste and inefficiency . 

 2 . Selection : In your own words , briefly describe the tool you selected ( e.g. , what it is and why 

 you selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references ) .     I chose to try and apply the Mind Mapping tool to this exercise . I chose this because I   thought it could be a good way of capturing all the different dimensions , and elements that   impact such a wide and diverse group of individuals . I also wanted to try this tool as it is not   one I have used extensively and was therefore one I wanted to practice . It was definitely a   good tool for this particular problem , as it allowed me to brainstorm and get down on paper   all the various different facets of the challenge ( be they big or small ) and then start to cluster   and organise these thematically ( e.g. training , location , business grade , promotion   prospects , etc . ) My initial version was very messy , but with some polish , I think this could   also be turned into a good communication tool to help illustrate my thought process and   business recommendations in a more interactive and compelling way than a more traditional   PowerPoint slide deck . 

 3 . Application : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , what 

 you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 I began with a very large piece of A4 paper and lots of sketching of boxes of ideas , issues ,   and data points in pencil ( as I knew I would be doing a lot of rubbing out and re - writing as   the thought process developed ) . After this initial brainstorming process , key themes started   to emerge ( e.g. technical skills – i.e. SQL database coding , Tableau data visualisation ,   PowerPoint report writing skills , etc . ) ; and took these macro themes and placed them on   post it notes , then I was able to interconnect these themes with lines , as well as group   individual sub - themes and data points beneath each of them . It was definitely a messy and   iterative process to begin with , but I was comfortable with this having seen the example in   the online video , and the freedom to sketch and make mistakes in this way helped capture a   more expansive set of thinking and hopefully reach a more complete final map . Towards the   latter stages , I spent time trimming down and refining the map a little . I did n’t draw it all out   neatly again , but someone could potentially do this , instead I just highlighted the key points   that I felt were most important to focus on in the short , medium and long term , as a form of   prioritisation ( to help avoid a long laundry list of to dos that might never be achieved ) . I was   happy with the outcome and would definitely consider using this tool again in future . 

 4 . Insight : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your 

 challenge ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design   thinking more broadly ) . 

 The key insight that I think the Mind Mapping tool helped bring to the foreground was   around the need for colleague empathy during any restructure process . Initially I had been   very concerned with the functional success of the restructure – i.e. did it achieve an optimal   technical design , could it be implemented quickly and efficiently , did it remove inefficiency   and duplication ? Etc . However , through a more expansive brainstorming approach using the 

 mind map I found myself giving more consideration to how colleagues would feel and be   impacted by the process ( many have been with the company a long time ; may have been   stuck doing just one thing during that time ; some may be eager for change ; others   apprehensive of it ) . This opened up a whole new line of thinking around colleague   engagement both as inputs into the organisational design process as well as in how to   communicate the outcomes effectively and secure the maximum buy - in to the new   approach . 

 5 . Approach : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you 

 selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why . 

 I think the Mind Map was the right tool to chose given the breadth of elements that could   impact a reorganisation of this magnitude . The only small thing I would do differently to   make the process more efficient next time would be to write all the sub - points on post - it   notes initially and then start to group them on the map ( rather than writing things directly   onto the map , which then needed to be rubbed out and changed , etc . ) Also , I think it would   definitely be good to seek a broader range of views and opinions ( i.e. getting a small group   of colleagues to co - create a mind - map together ) , as this would be a good way to validate   thinking in real - time and minimise the chance of any blind - spots being missed . The caveat   to this is that this would need to be kept to a manageable number of colleagues ( i.e. 6 to 8   key people like a focus group ) in order to be able to manage the process effectively and still   be able to input fully yourself . Otherwise , if there are too many inputs there will simply be too   much ‘ noise ’ and my role would shift from thinking creatively about the problem to simply   managing the process of data capture and collation . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: Robert Walsh
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: Mind Mapping – Reflection – Robert Walsh 

 1 . Challenge : Describe your challenge , including all relevant information . 

 I wanted to apply design thinking for innovation to the internal business challenge of trying   to organise a group of circa 300 analysts within a large retail bank , all with varying levels of   skills , experience , and business knowledge , to form a high performing data & analytics   function , where everyone could thrive as it would be relatively easy for individuals to move   between teams to develop their skills and experience , as well as work on new , interesting   projects . At the same time the challenge is to minimise overlap , waste and inefficiency . 

 2 . Selection : In your own words , briefly describe the tool you selected ( e.g. , what it is and why 

 you selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references ) .     I chose to try and apply the Mind Mapping tool to this exercise . I chose this because I   thought it could be a good way of capturing all the different dimensions , and elements that   impact such a wide and diverse group of individuals . I also wanted to try this tool as it is not   one I have used extensively and was therefore one I wanted to practice . It was definitely a   good tool for this particular problem , as it allowed me to brainstorm and get down on paper   all the various different facets of the challenge ( be they big or small ) and then start to cluster   and organise these thematically ( e.g. training , location , business grade , promotion   prospects , etc . ) My initial version was very messy , but with some polish , I think this could   also be turned into a good communication tool to help illustrate my thought process and   business recommendations in a more interactive and compelling way than a more traditional   PowerPoint slide deck . 

 3 . Application : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , what 

 you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 I began with a very large piece of A4 paper and lots of sketching of boxes of ideas , issues ,   and data points in pencil ( as I knew I would be doing a lot of rubbing out and re - writing as   the thought process developed ) . After this initial brainstorming process , key themes started   to emerge ( e.g. technical skills – i.e. SQL database coding , Tableau data visualisation ,   PowerPoint report writing skills , etc . ) ; and took these macro themes and placed them on   post it notes , then I was able to interconnect these themes with lines , as well as group   individual sub - themes and data points beneath each of them . It was definitely a messy and   iterative process to begin with , but I was comfortable with this having seen the example in   the online video , and the freedom to sketch and make mistakes in this way helped capture a   more expansive set of thinking and hopefully reach a more complete final map . Towards the   latter stages , I spent time trimming down and refining the map a little . I did n’t draw it all out   neatly again , but someone could potentially do this , instead I just highlighted the key points   that I felt were most important to focus on in the short , medium and long term , as a form of   prioritisation ( to help avoid a long laundry list of to dos that might never be achieved ) . I was   happy with the outcome and would definitely consider using this tool again in future . 

 4 . Insight : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your 

 challenge ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design   thinking more broadly ) . 

 The key insight that I think the Mind Mapping tool helped bring to the foreground was   around the need for colleague empathy during any restructure process . Initially I had been   very concerned with the functional success of the restructure – i.e. did it achieve an optimal   technical design , could it be implemented quickly and efficiently , did it remove inefficiency   and duplication ? Etc . However , through a more expansive brainstorming approach using the 

 mind map I found myself giving more consideration to how colleagues would feel and be   impacted by the process ( many have been with the company a long time ; may have been   stuck doing just one thing during that time ; some may be eager for change ; others   apprehensive of it ) . This opened up a whole new line of thinking around colleague   engagement both as inputs into the organisational design process as well as in how to   communicate the outcomes effectively and secure the maximum buy - in to the new   approach . 

 5 . Approach : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you 

 selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why . 

 I think the Mind Map was the right tool to chose given the breadth of elements that could   impact a reorganisation of this magnitude . The only small thing I would do differently to   make the process more efficient next time would be to write all the sub - points on post - it   notes initially and then start to group them on the map ( rather than writing things directly   onto the map , which then needed to be rubbed out and changed , etc . ) Also , I think it would   definitely be good to seek a broader range of views and opinions ( i.e. getting a small group   of colleagues to co - create a mind - map together ) , as this would be a good way to validate   thinking in real - time and minimise the chance of any blind - spots being missed . The caveat   to this is that this would need to be kept to a manageable number of colleagues ( i.e. 6 to 8   key people like a focus group ) in order to be able to manage the process effectively and still   be able to input fully yourself . Otherwise , if there are too many inputs there will simply be too   much ‘ noise ’ and my role would shift from thinking creatively about the problem to simply   managing the process of data capture and collation .
### Output: 