May 20, 2016
The relationship between business and design has gone through deep changes in the past years. We are assisting at a convergence between business and design lead by the formalisation and adoption of design thinking and the revelation that good design is good business: many approaches from design have migrated into business and management enhancing the potential of business focused companies.
But there is a very special case of a method that was developed as an answer to a business need that has successfully migrated to design practices.
This is the case of Lego Serious Play: developed from the ’90s to improve the quality of strategic development meetings it has now been adopted by design companies to enhance creative processes, collaboration among different department, promote co-creation and participative design that includes customers, users, designers, and stakeholders.
Presented at #CassCreativity Seminar series on May 4th 2916, you can watch the whole Storyfy from this Link.
March 30, 2016
Why Digital Transformation has nothing to do with Digital
IDC predicts that 2016 will be shaped by digital transformation, with availability, capabilities and business needs being the biggest related issues IT leadership will face.
With this announcement comes a flurry of buzz: from the media, articles about the latest platforms, apps, software and other tools that will lead digital transformation; from companies, vague references to ‘digital’ in press releases; and from marketing departments, campaigns touting CTO and CMO initiatives investing in the latest technologies, branded as the ultimate solution to deploy ‘digital transformation.’
Let’s take a step back for a second.
read more »
March 7, 2016
Markets are conversations (C) P. Bertini
One of the biggest challenges today, is to deliver meaningful experiences that create value to brands and are valuable for the users. As UX and CX professionals we are today responsible for the value generation processes, because an experience is created by the understanding of what does value mean for all those involved in the experience: the brand and the users.
I recently gave a speech at UX Denmark 2016, the theme was trust & emotion. If trust is the willingness to take risks, where does trust come from and how can it be useful in the UX field? Trust is generated by interaction, there is no trust unless the parts have had – or are in the conditions of having – an interaction that can build and support a relationship that generates positive emotions.
Interaction generates trust and relationships, and relationships generate experiences, and experiences are the real value in the experience economy.
Therefore, if relationships are the (metaphorical) places where value is generated between the interacting parts, then the only way to be in a relationship is through an EXPERIENCE.
Experience is generated by experiences, and the design of future experiences requires imagination and the understanding of the perception of the present experiences through narratives and storytelling of the past.
read more »
November 15, 2014
Facilitation’s thorny issues
Facilitating is an art. it requires a mix of personality traits, like the ability to guide and lead a group, a set of knowledge about group dynamics, psychology, and techniques.
A facilitator is usually an external member, someone who enters into a group and guides them through a journey to get to a goal. The design part is the key: a facilitator always needs to know exactly where the group is, the next steps, the timing of every activity and include any eventual recovery plan in case something does not goes according to the plans.
Facilitator’s personality is another essential factor: the facilitator needs to be able to engage and lead the group, mitigate power games and dominant personalities and to involve shy and silent people without putting pressure.
All is clear, until the facilitator faces a challenge: facilitate within a group they know well.
read more »
August 9, 2014
cocreation & UX
In the past few years, we have assisted to a sort of divorce between users and organisations: technology has bought in a wide range of new behaviours and opportunities that companies are not always able to follow or predict. Most innovative projects fail because it’s difficult to fully understand what’s in the users’ heads (Leadbeater 2008) and the big changes society is facing, with a shift from products to experiences makes traditional UX approaches difficult, time-consuming and less effective.
To reduce complexity and make the overall internal and external process simpler and leaner, UX today can take advantage of collaborative approaches that involve and engages stakeholders, users, and designers in a creative and participative activity, namely co-creation.
read more »
June 20, 2014
© Patrizia Bertini
In the past few years, the number of articles published around Lego Serious Play is hugely increased.
The initial theories developed in the mid ’90s, 20 years ago, by Johan Ross and Bart Viktor and put into its current shape by Robert Rasmussen, are today converging and mingling with new trends and emerging needs.
What was supposed to simply be a language, communication tool, problem solving methodology, based on the belief that everyone can contribute to the discussion, the decisions, and the outcome, it has become a tool for exploring, both a crinkly and torn treasure map to be completed with the imagination of the facilitator and the participants, and a hammer to deconstruct and construct new opportunities.
read more »
May 30, 2014
Co-creation: A Lego Serious Play Workshop
User centred design (UCD) is an approach that considers the user as the central point of any design process. UCD projects traditionally implied a preliminary study of users to collect their needs and requirements: a lot of efforts were made to understand users’ expectations, behaviours, frustrations, problems and generally the research approaches involved interviews, ethnographic studies, questionnaires, surveys, or focus groups.
Collected data would then be analysed by experts who would eventually come up with user requirements: a list of issues that designers should take into consideration during their design and implementation phase.
read more »
April 26, 2013
Organisations as organisms
A large extend of organisational theory considered organisations from a mechanistic and traditional view. However, organisations can be seen much more like living biological organism. The etymology of the two words, organisations and organisms suggests that the two terms share something much more significant that needs to be considered and looked at: they both share their greek origin, ὄργανον – organon, “instrument, implement, tool, organ of sense or apprehension” but the word has been traced to descend by the Proto-Indo-European *werǵ- (“work, to make”).
The history of the term well reflects the shift from the original biological meaning to the much more social nature of contemporary meaning: organisation, according to the English Oxford Dictionary, appeared in 14th century in French from Latin and originally it referred to anything related to a living being. Organisation referred to the development or coordination of parts in order to carry out vital functions. From its first appearance in 1425 when the Grand Chirurgie was published and recorded the term until late 18th century, the term organisation had a specific biologic connotation. But at the end of the 18th century a new meaning come to use, and organisation started referring to “the condition of being organised; systematic ordering or arrangement; specifically the way in which particular activities or institutions are organised.” In 1790 E. Burke wrote the Reflections on the Revolution in France where he explicitly stated that society was supposed to be managed as a living organism. This passage is considered as the first evidence of the shift from the biological into the sociological realm of the term organisation.
read more »
April 6, 2013
DIKW Pyramid (Ackoff)
The importance of organisations’ relationship capital lies in the quality of the relations established by the members of an organisation, and in organisations’ capacity to turn a group of individuals into a functional team.
Such a social and relational capital
can be the driver for the creation of organisational wisdom
. Organisations have long focused on the skill base and on the accumulation of internal know-hows
, improving and encouraging people to increase their knowledge
base, as if by increasing the individuals knowledge could spontaneously have a massive impact on the whole organisation. An increase in the know-how is essential for an organisation, however, for such a know-how to become an organisational asset, rather than to remain an individual (human resource
related) skill, more efforts are needed.
If the relational capital is not adequate and constructive, knowledge of an individual remains an individual personal asset rather than becoming part of a collective and organisational environment.
To capitalise on the learning practices that have pervaded organisations in the past decade, knowledge needs to be put into action. Know-hows
need to turn into know-whys
read more »
March 27, 2013
For those who were not there and for those who want to keep reflecting on the contents presented on Saturday 23rd March in Ferrara [Italy], here are the Keynote speakers’ presentation. A big thank you to all the speakers who agreed to share their precious and inspiring material!
Robert Rasmussen, Rasmussen Consulting (Denmark) | The LEGO SERIOUS PLAY method: a thinking, communication and problem solving techniques for groups insights to its the origin, purpose, functionality and theoretical underpinnings.
read more »