The psychology behind Design Thinking and how it will revolutionise your innovation process
Design Thinking is a powerful framework for innovation, but as it gains popularity, much of its depth is getting lost. This guide breaks down why it works and how to use it effectively, so you can unlock its full potential.
The Magic of Divergent and Convergent Thinking
At the heart of Design Thinking is the Double Diamond - a simple yet genius structure. The outward “flaring” triangles represent Divergent Thinking (exploring possibilities), while the inward “focusing” triangles represent Convergent Thinking (narrowing in). Let’s explore each phase.
Phase 1: Empathise (Divergent Thinking / Flaring)
‘Flare’ out: Explore the situation broadly
In this phase, your goal is to deeply understand the people you’re designing for - their context, needs, and emotions.
Common mistake: Jumping to solutions too soon. This hurts innovation potential. Impactful design addresses real unmet needs which are often hard to discover. The market usually only addresses them superficially, so this research stage is critical for competitive advantage.
The challenge: Ambiguity is uncomfortable. Our brains crave clarity and quick wins.
Key psychological principle: Design Thinking intentionally forces us to separate the tasks of flaring (exploring) and focusing (defining). It helps to remember two things during this phase:
Trust the process - know that you’ll get to do your defining soon, but hold off for now.
Embrace ambiguity - instead of focusing on things to avoid, challenge yourself to do the opposite and seek out ambiguity. This psychologically positions you with a tendency and confidence to explore. Define success as “I discovered a new perspective on my users’ situation”.
Image by @trikayastha
Phase 2: Define (Convergent Thinking / Focusing) >
Focus in: Synthesise and define the problem
Now it’s time to analyse your research, look for themes, and narrow in on a meaningful and desirable problem to solve.
Common mistakes:
Solving problems users don’t care about. This decreases innovation adoption.
Inserting the solution into your problem statement. This drastically limits your ability to come up with solutions later.
The challenge: People don’t always say what they really need. Not because they’re hiding it, but because they don’t realise.
Why is behavior so hard to change? Because people rarely pinpoint what truly motivates them. And that motivation is what gets them off the couch or open their wallet.
Here’s an example - in healthcare, patients with asthma on the surface use an inhaler to help them breathe. But what distinguishes one product from the next is the ability to meet deeper needs. On one of my Design Research projects, it became a clear trend that people wanted to know how to predict when an asthma attack was about to happen so they could prevent it, they wanted personalised insights so they could live more freely.
Key psychological principle:
When writing your design challenge, pay attention to unmet needs that could be emotional (like confidence), or practical (like a desire for control or predictability).
Use phrases like:
We met with…. (Who?) This helps us mentally keep the solution phase human-centric.
They need a way to… (What are they trying to achieve?) e.g. Go about their day without worrying if their asthma will suddenly flare up. Notice this is not written as: ‘They need an AI enhanced inhaler’ - it could be a solution, but it might not be the only way to meet their need, so don’t limit options yet.
Because / It would be game changing if they could… (What’s important to them?). What would it mean to them to overcome their biggest painpoint or obstacle? This makes the solution meaningful. e.g. “Because… certainty means freedom”. Or “It would be game changing if they could spontaneously explore new places and not worry about asthma surprises”.
It would be game changing if they could leave the house for the day and not worry if they’re going to have a surprise attack’. You can reveal this by asking users about their ideal day.
Psychology tip: look for key adjectives (from what users tell you), especially if they are repeated. In the example above, they were ‘surprise’, ‘freedom’, ‘spontaneous’, and ‘explore’. These indicate what people value or are afraid of.
Drawings by John Kembel, image by Jun Ng
Phase 3: Ideate (Divergent thinking / Flaring)
Flare out: Generate many bold ideas
This is where creativity takes center stage. The goal? Come up with as many possible ways to meet the need as you can think of.
Common mistake: spending too long refining an idea.
The challenge: embarrassment and perfection.
Key psychological principle: The mind is logical, so the Design Thinking framework artfully establishes an environment to relax and break this.
First, the ground rules:
Refrain from judgment. No idea is too wild. This needs to be adopted by the whole team.
Quantity over quality. The more ideas, the better. Half baked? Totally fine!
Implementation tips:
Set a timer and play fast tempo upbeat music - it supports your psychological and physical state towards working quickly where there’s no time to evaluate the ideas.
Draw instead of use a lot of words - misinterpretation of ideas can lead to interesting new ones!
Remind yourself that it’s ok to go wild, because you will be converging and focusing very soon.
Image by Jun Ng
Phase 4: Prototype and Test (Convergent Thinking / Focusing)
Focus in: Build, Test, Iterate
After generating a bunch of ideas, cluster similar ideas together and narrow them down to a few concepts to test.
Common mistake: Spending too much time perfecting the ideas. The most efficient and effective way to innovate is to get ideas out in-front of users quickly, get feedback and iterate.
The challenge: Fear of being judged. People often wonder '“Will the unformed idea make me look like a bad designer?”
Key psychological principle: The way to combat this fear is to create really scrappy rough prototypes to start with. Why it works? If you present a user with a pretty polished prototype, they’ll have higher expectations. Not only that, but psychologically they will be less inclined to give honest feedback in fear of offending you. This is why starting with a paper prototype, a rough sketch, or something that looks like it can be changed or scribbled over is most effective. But again, don’t worry, as the concept progresses, the prototype will become higher resolution. And you just repeat this process until you get to your Minimal Viable Product.
The aim is to create something that people (the tester) can experience or interact with. Because, people are not good at giving feedback on hypothetical ideas. When they start interacting with an object or can start moving little figurines around a service or experience journey map, they’ll start revealing some interesting user behaviours and thoughts that will allow you to make insightful improvements. Btw, you’ll want to get them to verbally think out loud so you can capture this.
Images by Jun Ng
Final thoughts: Master your mind, improve your design process
By dissecting the Design Thinking framework from a psychological angle, we are more aware of our natural human tendencies, and how we can use design to break through our creative blockers. Even the concepts of task separation, imposing time limits, and defining some ground rules are widely transferable. Mastering the mechanics of your design process will transform how you innovate, leading to greater efficiency and impact.