Natasha Jen: Design Thinking is Bullsh*t.

Summary

The speaker, a graphic designer and educator, critically examines design thinking, a popular approach to problem-solving. They express concerns about its oversimplification, lack of depth, and the potential for ignoring the broader consequences of design. The speaker challenges the design thinking community to consider the importance of language, aesthetics, and the true impact of design on society. They conclude with a creative project that humorously applies design thinking to itself, aiming to provoke thought and add a touch of delight to the often dry discourse around this methodology.

Takeaways

• 🎨 The speaker identifies as a graphic designer, emphasizing the role of playing with words, symbols, and images to make information tangible and delightful.
• 🏫 As a design educator, the speaker is intrigued by different design approaches and learns from other disciplines like architecture, but questions the oversimplification of design thinking.
• 🤔 The speaker expresses difficulty in understanding design thinking and its methodologies, leading to a self-reflective exploration and reframing of their perspective.
• 📈 The popularity of design thinking, as shown by internet search trends, spiked around 2015 with the launch of an online course by IDEO, suggesting a correlation between marketing and trend.
• 🔍 The speaker criticizes the uniformity of design thinking results, noting that searches for design thinking yield similar diagrams and methodologies rather than diverse outcomes.
• 🏗 The speaker argues that design thinking's focus on a single medium (posters) is limiting and that design should involve a broader range of research and resources.
• 🌐 The speaker is concerned about design thinking's ignorance of the potential negative consequences of design, such as waste or climate change.
• 💬 The language of design thinking is criticized for being filled with jargon and promoting an instant satisfaction mindset, rather than a deep, developmental approach.
• 📚 The speaker is troubled by design thinking's infiltration into education, particularly with the rise of quick boot camps and courses that undermine the value of thorough education.
• 🎨 The speaker, as a graphic designer, finds the visual representation of design thinking to be lacking in aesthetic quality and clarity, advocating for a more thoughtful approach to visual communication.
• 😄 In conclusion, the speaker suggests that design thinking could benefit from a more nuanced, less dry, and more visually appealing approach, and presents a project that humorously critiques and analyzes design thinking through a designer's lens.

Q & A

What is the speaker's profession and how do they describe their work?

The speaker is a graphic designer who explains their work as playing with words, symbols, and images to make information tangible and understandable, with an aim to also make things delightful.

Why does the speaker find it hard to explain what a graphic designer does?

The speaker finds it hard to explain because people often assume graphic designers are only involved in branding, UX/UI, or advertising, whereas the speaker believes they deal with these areas in a much broader way.

What is the speaker's view on design thinking?

The speaker expresses skepticism towards design thinking, finding it too simplistic and formulaic, and criticizes its approach as being too focused on process rather than the broader implications of design.

How does the speaker feel about the use of posters as the primary medium in design thinking?

The speaker is critical of the reliance on posters as the main medium for design thinking, arguing that design should involve a variety of research materials and not be confined to a single method of expression.

What does the speaker think about the language used in design thinking?

The speaker finds the language of design thinking to be problematic, filled with jargon and buzzwords that lack depth and can be misleading, suggesting a need for a more nuanced vocabulary.

What is the speaker's opinion on the impact of design thinking on the world?

The speaker questions the impact of design thinking, noting that it often settles for superficial solutions and fails to address deeper issues like waste or climate change.

How does the speaker view the role of beauty in design thinking?

The speaker believes that beauty is integral to design and is critical of the design thinking approach that separates form from function, arguing that beauty is not just decoration but a reflection of intelligence and quality.

What is the speaker's concern about design thinking's influence on education?

The speaker is worried that design thinking promotes a fast-food approach to education, suggesting quick fixes and instant results rather than deep, thoughtful learning.

What did the speaker and their team create to critique design thinking?

The speaker and their team created a poster that applies design thinking's own methodology to analyze and critique itself, aiming to provide a different perspective on design thinking in a visually engaging way.

What is the speaker's final message regarding design thinking?

The speaker's final message is a call for design thinking to be more nuanced, considerate of broader implications, and to value the importance of beauty, artistry, and culture in design.

Outlines

00:00

🎨 Introduction to Design Thinking and Personal Background

The speaker begins by expressing gratitude and honor for being present, hinting at a discussion on design thinking. They provide a brief overview of their work as a graphic designer, emphasizing the broad nature of the field which includes branding, UX/UI, and advertising. The speaker clarifies their role as playing with words, symbols, and images to make information tangible and delightful. They also mention their teaching role at the School of Visual Arts in New York City, reflecting on the diversity of their students and addressing a question about the ethnic composition of their class. The speaker expresses curiosity and a struggle with understanding design thinking, leading to a self-reflective journey and a desire to reframe their perspective on the topic.

05:01

🔍 Critique of Design Thinking's Universality and Methodology

The speaker poses a critical question about the nuances of design thinking, challenging its universal application. They present data on the rise in popularity of design thinking since 2011, particularly after IDEO's online course launch. The speaker expresses skepticism about the simplistic, step-by-step approach often associated with design thinking, suggesting it's not a universal solution for design problems. They also critique the repetitive nature of design thinking projects and case studies, which often result in similar diagrams, and question the reliance on a single medium, such as posters, for design expression. The speaker argues for a more holistic and research-driven approach to design, beyond the confines of a single methodology.

10:03

📚 The Evolution and Misinterpretation of Design Thinking

The speaker delves into the origins of design thinking, tracing its evolution from academic roots to business applications, particularly with the influence of IDEO and Stanford. They express concern over the reduction of design thinking to a simplistic equation with creativity and innovation, arguing that innovation is an attribute, not a thing. The speaker also points out the historical irony that innovation has occurred for centuries without design thinking. They critique the positive spin on design thinking, suggesting it忽视s the potential negative consequences of design, such as waste or climate change, and call for more responsible design thinking practices.

15:05

🗣️ The Problematic Language of Design Thinking

The speaker addresses the jargon and vocabulary associated with design thinking, suggesting it is filled with buzzwords and lacks the depth and specificity found in other design disciplines. They critique terms like 'body storming' and 'extreme user' as unnecessary neologisms and argue that design thinking's language promotes an attitude of instant gratification rather than deep, thoughtful development. The speaker contrasts this with the more grounded and practical language used by designers when discussing budget, audience, context, and other critical aspects of design.

20:06

🏫 Design Thinking in Education: A Critical Perspective

The speaker discusses design thinking's impact on education, noting its push into various levels of schooling with the promise of equipping students to solve complex problems. However, they express concern over the fast-paced, boot-camp style courses that suggest design thinking can be quickly learned, likening it to fast-food thinking. They argue this approach is dangerous and undermines the value of deep, rigorous education and training in design. The speaker also critiques the visual representation of design thinking, calling it 'horribly ugly' and suggests that a focus on basic design principles, such as typography, could greatly improve its presentation.

25:08

🎭 A Graphic Designer's Creative Critique of Design Thinking

The speaker, identifying as a graphic designer, argues against the notion that design thinking is only about function and not form, quoting Steve Jobs to emphasize the importance of beauty and artistry in design. They critique the dry and unengaging nature of design thinking literature and propose a more delightful approach. As a project, they created a poster that both critiques and applies design thinking to itself, using dense content and a playful visual language to offer a different perspective on the subject. The speaker concludes by distributing this poster, hoping to provoke thought and smiles among the audience.

Keywords

💡Design Thinking

Design Thinking is a problem-solving approach that encourages empathy for the user, experimentation, and iteration. It is often associated with a five-step process: empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test. In the video, the speaker expresses skepticism about the method's effectiveness and oversimplification, suggesting it lacks nuance and doesn't always lead to meaningful innovation.

💡Graphic Design

Graphic Design refers to the art and profession of arranging visual elements to communicate messages. The speaker identifies as a graphic designer and discusses the broader role of designers in manipulating words, symbols, and images to make information tangible and understandable, which contrasts with the perceived limitations of Design Thinking.

💡Innovation

Innovation is the process of translating an idea or invention into a good or service that creates value or for which customers will pay. The speaker criticizes the simplistic association of Design Thinking with guaranteed innovation, arguing that innovation is not a product but a quality that can be strived for in any creative endeavor.

💡Visual Thinking

Visual Thinking is the use of visual representation to solve problems and communicate ideas. The speaker references Robert McKee's work on visual thinking, suggesting that the ability to visualize is crucial to design, but this aspect seems to be undervalued in the Design Thinking methodology.

💡IDEO

IDEO is a global design company known for its human-centered design approach. The speaker mentions IDEO's role in popularizing Design Thinking through an online course, indicating a correlation between IDEO's marketing efforts and the rise in Design Thinking's popularity.

💡Jargon

Jargon refers to the specialized language or terminology used by a particular profession or group. The speaker critiques Design Thinking for its use of jargon, such as 'body storming' and 'extreme user,' which can obfuscate rather than clarify the design process, making it less accessible and more alienating to non-experts.

💡Beauty

Beauty, in the context of the video, is discussed as an essential aspect of design that goes beyond functionality. The speaker argues against the notion that design thinking should disregard aesthetics, citing Steve Jobs' view that beauty is integral to a product's quality and cultural impact.

💡Methodology

A methodology is a system of methods used in a particular field of study. The speaker questions the one-size-fits-all approach of Design Thinking as a methodology, suggesting it might be too simplistic and not account for the complexities and nuances of different design challenges.

💡Simplicity

Simplicity in design refers to the principle of minimizing complexity without sacrificing functionality. The speaker expresses concern that Design Thinking's step-by-step approach oversimplifies the design process, potentially leading to solutions that lack depth and consideration of broader implications.

💡Consequences

Consequences in design pertain to the impact or outcome of a design solution. The speaker criticizes Design Thinking for ignoring the potential negative consequences of designs, such as contributing to waste or climate change, advocating for a more responsible and holistic approach to design.

💡Education

Education, as discussed in the video, involves the teaching and learning processes. The speaker is critical of Design Thinking's influence on education, particularly the push for fast-track boot camps that promise quick mastery, which the speaker sees as undermining the value of deep, thoughtful learning.

Highlights

Introduction to the speaker's background as a graphic designer and educator.

The speaker's role in playing with words, symbols, and images to make information tangible and delightful.

The diversity of students in the speaker's design class, challenging stereotypes.

The speaker's curiosity and self-reflection on design thinking, despite initial resistance.

Critique of design thinking's simplicity and its promise to solve complex problems.

Analysis of the rise in popularity of design thinking and its correlation with IDEO's online course.

The speaker's concern over the homogeneity of design thinking visual outputs.

The limitations of using a single medium (posters) as the primary tool in design thinking.

The speaker's argument against design thinking's ignorance of consequences like waste and climate change.

The evolution of design thinking from academia to business and its impact on the field.

The problematic equation of design thinking with creativity and innovation.

Critique of design thinking's vocabulary and its impact on the perception of design.

The speaker's concern over the fast-food approach to design education promoted by design thinking.

The importance of beauty in design and its role in elevating the quality of life and culture.

Steve Jobs' perspective on beauty and its influence on product design.

The speaker's project applying design thinking to itself, aiming to make it more nuanced and delightful.

Conclusion and call to action for a more thoughtful and beautiful approach to design thinking.

Transcripts

I'm so humbled and honored to be here

I'm going to talk a little bit about

design thinking the topic that we all

really love but before I do that I want

to just kind of show you a little bit

about about what I do because I'm not

going to talk about my work but it's -

this is to give you a sense about the

work that we do

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

okay that was a very quick overview so I

you know I'm a graphic designer and it's

very hard to explain to people what a

graphic designer

does because people now assume that we

are you know either branding people or

we do UX UI or we we deal with

advertising and I would say that you

know we deal with all of these in a kind

of really really broad way but I always

try to think about you know my role as a

graphic designer

through the lens of playing with words

symbols and images and it's really about

making information on tangible and

understandable and if we can make things

delightful that's really the goal so um

I I teach as well I teach at school of

visual arts in New York City I've been

teaching there for four years now so

this is my senior class I took this

Instagram story last week when I got

back to my class from a trip and people

asked me immediately on Instagram do

people have to be Asian in order to be

in your class you know No okay is this

this year we have a lot of Asian

students in Korea and you might notice

that there's only one guy in my class

which was really weird but anyhow as a

designer myself and also as a design

educator I'm always very interested

about different ways to to do design

different ways to think about design so

I get really excited when I'm working

with people from other disciplines for

example we learn tremendously from

architects and I think a lot of the ways

that architects used to think through

their projects are really really useful

in graphic design as well but there's

one one thing that I just can't really

write my head around

and that is design thinking and I asked

myself why you know why can't I really

understand this I'm not stupid

I'm very curious I'm I'm a hard learner

so I started to UM dig into it and the

more I got into it that the more

outrageous is it appears to me so

earlier last year I gave a talk titled

design thinking's [ __ ] so this this

talk got a lot of [ __ ] attention you

know on the internet and also got a lot

of feedback from people both good and

those who really questioned my you know

my intent behind this and whether I

really understood design thinking and

some of those critics call me that you

know I'm a graphic designer I only do

logos I don't know how to solve more

complex and bigger problems so you know

in the last couple of months we did I

did a little soul-searching and right I

kind of today I want to reframe you know

my my point of view on design thinking

and I try to kind of use the mythology

that design thinking tends who uses to

ask the right questions right so design

thinking always starts out with how my

sweet as the kind of starting point for

design so so I kind of refrained my my

talk um around the around these six

questions so question number one and

this is a question not only to design

thinkers were you know design thinking

of enthusiasts is for everybody and for

myself for designers as well so that is

how my we make design thinking a little

bit more nuanced so this is a chart that

shows the internet search trend you know

on Google as you can see that design

thinking like the search on design

thinking started to rise around 2011 and

around the Year 2015

it really started to um spike up and

that was a time when the renowned design

firm IDEO pull out this online

course that's called I do you I think

there's a correlation between that and

that is sort of the time when you think

that the marketing around Design

Thinking really started to you know to

to to bubble up and then but as you um

you know search just just type in a term

design thinking this is the kind of

image that you will get so it's

basically just a series of same diagrams

following these five steps and they're

there I agree with some of the UM steps

here I'm not sure about the simplicity

of this and I'm not sure about that such

a simple step-by-step solution can be a

kind of universalized methodology to

solve all the design problems I think

that is a very very simplistic view and

then I try to you know understand that

okay are there any projects out there

that that you know we can look at and we

can try to you know analyze and

understand you know what design thinking

really has produced in the world so you

know when you type in design thinking

projects where we're even design

thinking case studies what you will see

again is the series of the same diagrams

then that is very very strange to me

because we are typing things like

architecture you actually see buildings

and when you do the same search over a

different time you get very different

image results and for me as a graphic

designer

an image is worth a lot more than words

you know so images actually show

evidence and what's really weird about

design thinking is that it isn't matter

how you I mean what search words are you

you type it you always get more or less

the same result and then of course we're

all very familiar with this image of

people standing around a board using

posters as the medium you know as the

the only medium for design and again

more of this kind of form view and there

is even more so why did you kind of see

a lot of these you're kind of I get very

worried about about this particular

methodology not that I not I hate post

as well

use it quite a lot but when you only use

one single medium and it's at this

little little square paper based square

it's the only kind of outlet for your

research for your thinking for how you

actually deal with design I think that's

a really big problem because design

needs to actually really go out of these

little squares design needs to actually

use a lot of research looking at photos

images precedents looking at histories

other case studies in order to kind of

build a more holistic understanding

about any problem so I have a big

problem with with with this methodology

and then more so when you actually look

into where it's actually written on the

posters you realized that these are just

these like people's thoughts they're

just thoughts in their head so in a way

this is a kind of self-fulfilling loop

right that is not open up to any other

kind of thinking other than your own I

think that is a highly highly

problematic way to think about design

it's just way too simplistic and then

let's look at that the origin of Design

Thinking I'm not going to go through all

the details of each but Design Thinking

really started out with a kind of

academic you know environment Robert

McKee who is the second one in a diagram

he did this book that's called

experience in visual thinking that is a

really really fantastic book and I

recommend you to get it he talked about

how visual were the ability to visualize

things were having the skill in visual

thinking is really important to all

design but then you know over the years

the conscious evolved into very

different things and in 90s

David Kelly who's also a co-founder of I

ideal he kind of really brought it into

the business that setting as well as

into Stanford so that's when things

begin to actually I think go wrong so if

you get a research design thinking and

this is the kind of you know lying

which that you will get a lot you know

you see that there's this kind of very

simplistic equation between design

thinking and creativity and innovation

as if design thinking is this thing that

can promise innovation and I find that a

very problematic point of view because

first of all innovation is not a thing

it's an attribute it's a quality that

you can hope that whatever you do can

actually achieve the quality of

innovation innovation but that's not a

thing in itself and there's this whole

history on innovation as well as the

talk of innovation that's a very

interesting topic but that's a totally

different talk and there better you know

scholars on that topic so um let's

continuing with this so you know

innovation one question that I would

like to ask is that people have been

innovating for centuries so what do

people actually do before Design

Thinking came about right think about

that right so okay anyhow so you know if

you if you look at you know what design

thinking advocates is that you know it's

a kind of is this a solution based

design methodology that helps people to

think like designers to create better

things to work better to to help you

with an organizational problem to make

more profit so on and so forth it's all

kind of very you know positive attitude

on design thinking itself and I think

what it fails to do is to actually look

at the opposite side of things which is

what a designer does on a day-to-day

basis is that whatever we do it doesn't

matter today it's the product that we

design where it's a packaging where it's

something that we put out into the world

there's always some consequence to it I

find Design Thinking is kind of very

ignorant to the consequences that it may

produce into the world such as waste or

climate change so on and so forth and I

would love to see more design thinkers

produce work in that area okay question

number two how am i we give you a more

meaning

for vocabulary so this is about the

language around design-thinking so as

you know each discipline has his own

very particular set of vocabulary and

you really need to have a very deep set

of vocabulary in order to actually have

a deep dialogue about things for example

in graphic design there's a whole set of

vocabulary about abstraction about

meaning about typography so on so forth

but then if you um get into design

thinking you will get this kind of thing

unleash unlock you know it's it's kind

of terrifying to actually see that

design is being presented as this kind

of beast that you can just let go and

attack the world and then win everything

I think there's the kind of attitudinal

problem here it's it doesn't kind of

think about design as a thing that you

develop right development takes time or

you build building building things also

takes time but rather is this instant

satisfaction that you can unleash or

unlock something instantaneously and

then once you dive deeper into it my god

is packed with jargons which again I

think illustrates a problem you know

about the the Design Thinking discipline

itself these are some of the words that

I was very intrigued by you know for

example body storming I literally had to

google it it's basically brain storming

through role-playing right so why can't

we just call it like that why do we have

to call it body storming extreme user my

god that really sounds like a drug

addict to me ideation is basically

concepting and think probably right

radical innovation the feedback loops so

on and so forth it's really crazy but

then if you talk to a designer you know

doesn't matter which discipline the

designer is from the architects fashion

designers we actually use very boring

words and we we are concerned about very

very boring things such as budget

audience the context the site if you're

an architect the semantics of things if

you're a graphic designer

so you know so now it kind of begins to

get get a sense why design thinking's

language is really problematic next

question how might we elevate is

standard well honestly I haven't found

too many case studies on design thinking

to actually convince me that you know it

has really made a great impact on the

world itself but rather I find the case

studies out there tend to just settle

for the bottom line so for example this

is a MRI machine I don't know how many

of you have gone through this but this

is a very terrifying environment for

children I think for adults too you know

you have to go through this scanner so

GE allegedly you know try to solve this

problem through Design Thinking so when

it came up with was to put you know

cartoons and Tony the Tiger on the wall

and then they made a very big case study

out of it

I'm okay with the idea of you know

making the environments more childlike

with the visual language that they're

familiar with but I think that the bar

here is just basically too low if you

look at the environment it is terrible

if you look at the ceiling is too low

the lighting is terrible we need an

architect here right but I think that

design thinking were designed thinking

case studies tend to just settle for the

bottom line next question how my way

changes at attitude on education alright

so I think you know for for those of you

who are familiar with design thinking or

who follow Design Thinking you know that

it has been trying to

get into education system different

levels of the education systems in

different way you know from high school

down to on now kindergarten with the

with a notion that kids really needs to

learn the method of design thinking in

order to solve the world's you know very

big problems but then if you look at

design thinking's attitude on the design

thinking education itself this is why

you will get nowadays you will get boot

camps you know very fast courses that

you pay $2.99 5 9999 I don't know why

they all end up with 99 that you can

actually learn how to design I find that

an extremely dangerous idea not only to

the the world of design but only to I

mean but to the idea of Education on

itself it really kind of promotes this

fast-food thinking that you can just pay

something and then get it really fast

through pumping into your stomach and

you're gonna get good at it I find it

really really troublesome it's sort of

like wanting to become an Olympic

athlete without wanting to be trained

you know so that's sort of my problem

with it and this is a a course that

Stanford d.school now offers I mean look

at this this is insane

this picture is insane to me right just

the combination of the words and the and

the image you know behind it and what's

actually in the image would you really

trust this course I would not

thank you how might we make it more

beautiful oh so okay so okay I'm a

graphic designer

I'm very critical of anything that has a

look to it right you know specifically

when it comes to information design when

when when you know just a bundle of

things need to have hierarchy clarity

needs to have you know style needs to be

pleasant needs to be legible and all

that when you kind of just survey the

graphic visual world of design thinking

you get this kind of stuff to me this is

really really horribly ugly um and that

is bad and how come nobody's actually

you know doing anything about it I would

love to teach graphic design where basic

typography to anyone who's doing design

thinking right now we're trying to

generate something about design thinking

but then you would get a certain kind of

oppositional view about that well just

don't worry about the look of things

because Design Thinking is really not

about design so this is a statement by

mr. Brett waters I don't know him but he

teaches a Design Thinking class at

Stanford so um um he's our website you

know he made us the statement that goes

Design Thinking is an engineering

methodology for developing successful

products design thinking has nothing to

do with making something pretty and

everything to do with making something

useful for example an engineer would use

it to develop an ugly machine that this

is job beautifully I find this a really

simplistic dichotomy between form and

function and I think frankly it is quite

irresponsible to think that design

thinking or any

thing that you design has nothing to do

with how it may manifest itself in the

real world everything has its form look

at this these are the gadgets that

permeates our lives on a day to day

basis how can one say that these

machines or you know whatever thing that

engineers make don't have real impact in

the world and don't have to actually be

beautiful to me I think beauty is

actually intelligence beauty is

precision beauty is not decoration so I

find the idea like you know I'm beauty

through the lens of design thinking

really really problematic and then

furthermore I think what it profoundly

ignores the importance of artistry of

craftsmanship of beauty of art of

culture and all these things that

actually elevate the quality of our life

and the quality of our culture that kind

of statement completely removed the

importance of these things I actually

really really matter and I'm gonna play

via short video about Steve Jobs that

there was this you know interview

conducted with him in 1995 and I'm I'm

not a Steve Jobs you know fan I'm very

intrigued by by his work I'm very

intrigued by what he has built and you

know the things that we're using right

now but there's this little snippet in

his interview in which he critiqued

Microsoft but he talked about other

things that I think resonated with me

really well specifically on the issue of

beauty the only problem with Microsoft

is they just have no taste they have

absolutely no taste and and and what

that means is I don't mean that in a

small way I mean in a big way in the

sense that

they they don't think of original ideas

and they don't bring much culture into

their product and and you say well why

is that important well you know

proportionally spaced fonts come from

typesetting and beautiful books that's

where one gets the idea if it weren't

for the Mac they would never have that

in their products and so I guess I am

saddened not by Microsoft success I have

no problem with their success they've

earned their success for the most part I

have a problem with the fact that they

just make really third-rate products

their products have no spirit to them

their products have no in this sort of

spirit of enlightenment about them they

are very pedestrian and the sad part is

is that most customers don't don't have

a lot of that spirit either but but the

way that we're gonna ratchet up our

species is to take the best and to

spread it around to everybody so that

everybody grows up with better things

and starts to understand the subtlety of

these better things okay so that

interview pretty much summed up

everything that I was talking about and

you can you feel free to take out

Microsoft and replace it with design

thinking and that kind of summarizes

everything okay last thing it's a very

important question I think how can we

actually make it just a little more

delightful it is terribly dry I have to

say we read a lot of things from design

thinking about design thinking you know

besides all the jargons it's incredibly

boring and dry so we made a project you

know Ravi asked us to do something and I

think this is a great great subject

matter to do something with so what we

did was that we created this piece

through the

lenz of a graph designer you know that

we play with words and images and

symbols and diagrams so the thing is

called can Design Thinking help us

understand Design Thinking so what we do

is that we we basically two things tire

design thinking five-step methodology

and try to analyze it and try to apply

it on to design thinking itself so we

made a poster out of it we generated all

the content is really really dense you

know so you can you can see much of the

writing from here but if this doesn't

kind of give you a different idea about

design thinking it will definitely make

you smile so we're going to distribute

this poster afterwards and this is my

talk thank you

[Applause]

you

[Music]