Comparative case study results

As mentioned earlier, DT has been used in the case companies chosen for this study and this was one of the most important criteria in this study. In order to make a clearer image of what DT can be in organizations and how it is used, a cross-case comparison must be made. This cross-case comparison is made by using four different comparison points: how DT has been used and what it is, how the process of DT works in these companies, how are DT’s dimensions seen and how has DT been implemented in these companies. Table 9 combines the findings that have been presented in the analysis of the literature review on DT. The first column describes how DT has been perceived in these case companies, is it more of a way of thinking and a philosophy or a concrete tool. Second column tells whether or not there is a process of DT used. The third column highlights the most important dimensions of DT seen and used in the company and the last column includes important factors about how the implementation has been done and what actions or changes does the implementation require.

Table 9. Cross case results of design thinking in the organizational level DT’s

perceptions

DT’s process DT’s dimensions

DT’s

implementation

83

84

All companies see DT as a guiding philosophy that supports the innovation, new product development and other development projects. When it comes to defining DT is a philosophy

85 or toolset, these case companies all see DT more is a higher level way of thinking that can be seen more concretely through its dimensions. DT as a term was not familiar in these companies in an organizational level and it was pointed out by all companies that it is not important to implement the term into the company but instead it is important that it be implemented in different processes. This perception of DT was very similar in all of these case companies, which means that DT is seen more as a philosophy and a way of thinking and not as a tool. This still does not mean that the concept cannot include different methods and tools but DT acts more as a higher level philosophy that divides into different actions and dimensions.

Findings regarding DT process

DT’s process was identified in all companies as a necessary and right way to develop new products and services. All the interviewees were familiar with the different processes of DT that have been presented. These processes in use were all adapting the same basic steps of the DT process with some company specific modifications. All companies highlighted the need to start the process by problem identification and definition. There were different kind of ways to identify these problems but a common understanding was that these problems included customer understanding and empathy. In some cases it was seen possible that some problems were identified through something else than customer empathy. Still in general it was the customer empathy that was the center focus in these companies in an organizational level, when it comes to defining the problem. From problem identification and definition the process moved to idea generation, where different solutions and ideas were evaluated and tested through customer insight. The next step of the process in all companies was the actual concept creation and product or service development that was done through an iterative process and then implemented into action. This iterative process includes validation and continuous learning. All of the companies have implemented this kind of a DT process into the organization but it was not clearly stated that this is the actual process and it has to be followed. Instead the processes varied within one company and between companies according to the best fit and need in a specific project.

Findings regarding DT’s dimensions

The dimensions of DT were identified and accepted in all case companies. Especially experimenting, customer centeredness, problem solving and multifunctional collaboration

86 were highlighted as important dimensions of DT. Innovation and strategy were also seen as dimensions but little differently, compared to other dimensions. When problem solving, experimenting, multifunctional collaboration and customer centeredness were seen as the concrete embodiments of DT, innovation and strategy were seen as outcomes or enablers for DT.

Findings regarding DT’s implementation

Regarding the implementation of DT and how it has happened in these companies, higher management involvement was crucial in four out of five companies. Company D has not seen DT as something that has been separately implemented into the company, but instead it has existed there from the very beginning. This also means that the higher management understanding and support has existed in this company from the very beginning. In the other four companies, it has always been crucial that the higher management level understands the importance of becoming more customer centered and implement DT’s philosophy into the organization. DT has become a part of the company culture and it has been implemented into the processes and into the minds of the people. Educating employees and involving them has been crucial in the cultural change towards becoming more DT oriented. All of these companies have also invested into having designers involved in the innovation projects.

On one hand, the main similarities identified within these five case companies were in the perceptions of DT, the process of DT and the dimensions of DT. On the other hand, the main differences came from the implementation of DT but still there were common factors, such as the higher management involvement. Other differences between the case companies came mainly from how DT was actually used in innovation projects. These findings are reported in the following chapter.

4.2 QCA results: project level associations between design thinking and innovation