Abstract
This visual submission presents a provocative visual argument (Blair 2012) that aims to interrogate the mainstream “Design Thinking” approach adopted in a variety of contexts including in an increasing number of design schools. By reducing complex high-order practices and mapping them onto the five-step DT sequence, the paper invites readers to interrogate the value, validity and usefulness of portraying design activity in such terms. What is gained and lost by reducing rich and complex activities as well-defined processes? What may these mappings suggest about how we teach and learn to navigate the rich territories of design? What is occluded in these satirical over-simplifications? This exploratory visual paper explores these and more questions in a pre-linguistic visual dialogue. In response to reviewers’ suggestions, the paper closes with a written section that brings quotations from the cited literature to energise dialogical discussion on this topic.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drslxd.2025.012
Citation
Sosa, R.(2025) Design Thinking (A Visual Critique), in Clemente, V., Gomes, G., Reis, M., Félix, S., Ala, S., Jones, D. (eds.), Learn X Design 2025, 22-24 September 2025, Aveiro, Portugal. https://doi.org/10.21606/drslxd.2025.012
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Conference Track
Visual Submission
Design Thinking (A Visual Critique)
This visual submission presents a provocative visual argument (Blair 2012) that aims to interrogate the mainstream “Design Thinking” approach adopted in a variety of contexts including in an increasing number of design schools. By reducing complex high-order practices and mapping them onto the five-step DT sequence, the paper invites readers to interrogate the value, validity and usefulness of portraying design activity in such terms. What is gained and lost by reducing rich and complex activities as well-defined processes? What may these mappings suggest about how we teach and learn to navigate the rich territories of design? What is occluded in these satirical over-simplifications? This exploratory visual paper explores these and more questions in a pre-linguistic visual dialogue. In response to reviewers’ suggestions, the paper closes with a written section that brings quotations from the cited literature to energise dialogical discussion on this topic.