The (Actual) Design Process

While there are a host of books, opinions and in most major companies, official documents, on the "design process" I am not sure I have ever witnessed a team actually following the sanctioned process as written. When a design project fails, or falls short of its goals, it is common to blame the team for not following the proscribed process. Yet a successful team is often one that has learned to "tailor" the process when they stumble across a conflict between the proscribed process and the desired result. The winning view of the sanctioned design process is usually like Captain Jack Sparrow's view of the Pirate Code in the movie Pirates of the Caribbean, "It's more of a guideline, really."

It must be recognized that there is no process which, by itself, guarantees a successful design. The design of perpetual motion machines still fail regardless of what process you follow.

Maybe it is appropriate to begin by asking... what process do we actually follow when we design something?

Below is a process map of the design process as it is almost always carried out.

Actual Design Process Define Problem: The first stage represents the impetus for an effort, This is often a perceived need (food or shelter) or desire (good tasting food or swimming pool), or opportunity (100,000,000 tax rebate checks), or edict (corporate plan) or scheme (your plan) or the catchall term, problem, which is to say any of the preceding. We will therefore use the term "problem" but notice that most businesses exclude those problems for which there is no money generating solution (thus global warming is not a problem in this context) and include as problems anything for which the solution is a money maker (thus video games are the solution to the "problem" of children having way to much money and free time).

Assess Situation: Even before one starts to consider possible solutions it is necessary to assess whether the stated problem is actually the one which needs solving or whether there might be a better way to define the problem which perhaps lends itself to easier solution or a broader solution. This step is often revisited if the initial problem seems to have no workable solution; the problem may be redefined, or limited so that at least a portion may be solved.

Search the Toy Store: This step is almost always missed in the text book descriptions of problem solving but it is never missed by the engineer who actually solves problems. What it means is that problem solvers are constantly examining and reconsidering the myriad techniques, devices, information, and past experiences of which they are aware in the hopes of applying them in new ways to solve existing problems or some times in old ways to solve new problems. Picture a child experimenting with tinker toys in which each new item is pressed against every existing piece to see what new and useful things might be formed. Most innovation comes about while searching the toy store.

Formulate a Plan: After searching the toy store the designer formulates an overall plan by assembling new and old concepts to create a plausible solution to the problem. The designer's experience is a large factor in the likelihood that the plan can really be implemented.

Workable?: The designer and perhaps others (peers) try to decide if the plan is workable. The judgment to proceed will be affirmative if it is felt that the details, which are not yet worked out, are simply a matter of execution. A plan is considered conservative if those who must execute it have had a great deal of experience and success in performing very similar tasks in the expected time frame. A plan is aggressive if the plan requires activity outside the direct experience of the responsible members or if the time is especially limited. It is almost always the case that designers will overestimate their experience and simultaneously underestimate the experience required to execute a plan. Likewise with the speed of execution and the number of hours the plan actually requires. If even the designer doubts the plan at this stage there is really no hope of success. A trip back to the assessment of the problem is in order to see if the scope of the problem can be redefined or limited in such a way that a solution presents itself. Subsequently the toy store is revisited to consider different methods. The loop is executed until the designer gives up on the problem or until a workable plan is developed.

Work Out the Details: Books on project management will begin with this step. If the designer has actually been correct about which activities should have been complete in the "Formulate a Plan" section and which are just "Details" then the project will proceed just like building a bridge. In general there will be no surprises as long as the resources needed are available. The fact is, however, that the probability of simple execution of details is related to how conservative or aggressive the plan is.

All Worked Out?: Each major detail is attacked in exactly the same manner as the main problem; that is, the procedure just described is recursively applied until even the most minute detail has been handled. During this process it is possible that one of the details will seem intractable. A decision must be made for these as whether to proceed, reassess the original problem (so that the detail becomes moot) or to simply give up on the whole thing.

Things to note: The most critical part of the design process occurs at the "Workable?" decision diamond. The innovation within the process occurs prior to this decision diamond and the assertion that a task is possible places it below. Of course, since each detail is itself a small design process, there is room for innovation in handling every detail. But when a designer pushes too much of the plan formulation to the "detail" side of the process then the design project becomes more risky. It will not be obvious how, or if, the minimally defined details, relegated to a later time or delegated to others will resolve themselves. Conversely, when the designer performs too much of the design process in the "plan formulation" stage, the design is slowed and mired in consideration of low level details. In addition the project execution is slowed because much that could have been delegated was not.