I was thinking about this today. We have a new project for the team and there are two individuals leading it: a strategist-thinker and a designer-thinker. Not to say they are very different, because the truth is that at my place of work, a strategist-thinker and a designer-thinker has many overlapping skill sets and are very similar people. In fact they can do the exact same work, but I think their approach may be a
little different.
Let's say the project is an open ended blue sky project with a corporate strategy component to it.
This is how I imagine each of these individuals to tackle the project:
The strategist-thinker would approach the project solution as a series of frameworks pulled together from a human-centered design approach: understanding needs and values. This means the final result is made up from co-creating, empathy building, prototyping etc. and all this creates a few example communication pieces and one big communication piece in powerpoint for the executive level.
The designer-thinker would approach this project using the same human-centered design methods, but create artifacts (communication/education) along the way as needed and would also create communications for the executive level, but may not settle on what that modality will be until closer to the end.
At firsthand, it seems like the strategist-thinker and designer-thinker are exactly the same except the designer-thinker is a little less planful in his/her approach and makes more work for themselves, and does not give in to powerpoint.
However, I think the difference is significant. It means that a designer-thinker doesn't really have a solution approach to begin with, but rather uses a as-they-see-fit approach to a solution. They leave it open for experimentation and constant inspiration which makes it a potentially scary non-linear path but the approach is applied to the entire project. As a result the solution is designed just as much as the process is a human-centered one. Whereas a strategist-thinker begins with an understanding that the human-centered design approach is a means to an end which is a powerpoint presentation and a framework for understanding a future strategy.
I am not saying that a designer-thinker works without a plan. A strategist-thinker uses all the same methods as the designer-thinker; they just work differently. So the strategist-thinker is not incapable of creating design or using it and the designer-thinker is not incapable of creating a robust strategic framework. Not only that, but it isn't unlikely that if we were to give a designer-thinker and a strategist-thinker the exact same project they would come up with the same solution, just not the same
delivery.
And does delivery matter?
Yup. I think it does.
OK so at the very end, what am I saying? Is the designer-thinker better than the strategist-thinker? No, they are both excellent. I think the better answer is found when you ask what your clients want and are open/comfortable with, and go from there. If they are asking for what's familiar, and most commonly used (a.k.a. the powerpoint deck) then walking through a strategist-thinker approach makes the most sense because you'll already be pushing their boundaries with the applied human-centered approach, and they will still feel comfortable with what's familiar. If they are really open and say "surprise me" and are your friends, maybe take a risk and try the designer-thinker approach (Even better if the client is a designer, they'll get it/expect it)
