Flock: Harnessing the Sharing Economy for Leisure

23 min readJan 3, 2020

Back in Fall 2017, I wrote a series of blog posts on Wordpress documenting my reflections on working with an undergraduate team to design an app called Flock, which seeks to harness the power of the sharing economy and apply it to all things leisure, recreation, and entertainment. This was a part of a course titled Customer Insights for Innovation, which was one of my favorite courses from my time as an undergraduate. I wanted to share those reflections here, in hopes that they will serve as a source of inspiration for budding researchers in the realms of design, leisure, and the sharing economy, as well as serve as a personal reminder for how far I have come as a researcher in design since. The reflections are broken down as such:

Project Scope: Revolutionizing Recreation Through the Sharing Economy
Putting Theory Into Practice: Design-Thinking Bootcamp Experience
Shared Spaces and Leisurely Activities Observation Guide
Observation Experience
Draft Interview Questions
First Practice Interview Experience
Interview Experience
Data Synthesis: Persona and Empathy-Map Creation
Brainstorming & Ideation Experience
Prototyping and Group Feedback Experience
Final Course Reflection

Project Scope: Revolutionizing Recreation Through the Sharing Economy

Originally posted September 17, 2017

According to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “everyone has the right to rest and leisure.” Many people enjoy utilizing their rest and leisure time on individualized and sedentary activities such as napping, engaging with electronic devices such as a televisions or computers, and reading print materials. On the other hand, many others enjoy social and interactive experiences that require more energy expenditure than do some of the sedentary activities stated above. These activities include, but are certainly not limited to, playing physical sports and exercising. Research has shown that leading a more active lifestyle rather than a sedentary lifestyle can have numerous benefits on one’s health, fitness, and, ultimately, wellbeing. Of course, one should maintain an equitable balance of sedentary and active activities when rest and leisure time is available. However, in this digital and technological age, many people have an imbalance in favor of sedentary activities for a variety of reasons — perhaps they prefer more inactive activities, do not know about the process of getting involved with active activities, lack motivation, feel like they do not have enough time to dedicate to those activities, or simply cannot find anyone to partake in those active activities with.

I will be using the ‘sharing economy’ system as a premise for aspirational participants and amateurs who seek to engage in social and interactive leisurely activities with others, but have historically been detracted from participating due to constraints in time, resources, experience, personal networks, etc. The purpose of this project is to transform the way rest and leisure are approached by people who may prefer to participate in more sedentary activities, in hopes of improving their physical, emotional, psychological, and social health. In addition, shared social and interactive activities can create a stronger sense of community and belonging, detract from participation in unproductive activities, and provide a platform for informal learning. The context of my research rests primarily on trends in the recreation industry such as the gravitation towards “small-scale sports,” “gender-specific leagues,” and the development of fitness and health technologies. Preexisting wearable devices and smartphone applications have successfully met the needs of athletes and trainers but are not necessarily beneficial to aspirational participants and amateurs hoping to get more involved with active leisurely experiences. Through secondary research and qualitative data collection and analysis, this project aims to proffer new ideas and solutions that revolutionize the way aspirational participants and amateurs allocate their leisure time towards more fruitful and productive activities. Its purpose is to encourage more active and group leisurely experiences that will increase the wellbeing of individuals, thereby increasing the wellbeing of entire communities and societies. By using the ‘sharing economy’ as the primary vehicle of change, the proposed product/service will enable peer to peer (P2P) interactions and transactions, promote the idea of trust, and tap into underutilized resources and potential. Also, research will enable me to answer these questions related to rest and leisure and recreation:

How do people typically allocate their rest and leisure time? Do they spend more time participating in sedentary activities or active activities? How often are they alone or together with a group?
How can we create maximum value, which is oftentimes confirmed by feelings of pleasure and satisfaction, using the time allocated for rest and leisure? Maximum value, as well as wellbeing, are subjective and relative terms and will be explored more.
What are the most common deterrents to participating in active activities? Time, resources, experience, personal networks, etc… What else?

Putting Theory Into Practice: Design Thinking Bootcamp Experience

Originally posted September 26, 2017

Throughout the past two class periods and the design thinking bootcamp, I realized that design thinking is akin to putting theory into practice, which my team and I did in multiple respects. First and foremost, we took what we had been learning about design thinking from assigned readings and gleaning websites (like thisisdesignthinking.net) and implemented that in an interactive and thought-provoking workshop. Second, upon identifying and defining the opportunity at hand through discovery of our partner’s wants and needs, we then brainstormed solutions and created prototypes that addressed the opportunity. In short, we derived insights from the customer and then innovated based on those insights. Third, evaluation of the proposed idea and prototype provided the foundation for further exploration and iteration in order to make the solution the best it can be for the user.

After interviewing my partner in two rounds, I developed the following problem-statement: “A busy W&M student and iPhone user needs a way to easily manage their time using a comprehensive time-management planner application because otherwise they may be overbooked or forget about a planned activity or responsibility.” I began generating ideas for iPhone applications that could potentially solve my partner’s problem without even realizing that my ideas should not be solely constricted to an iPhone or software. It was only after I saw and listened to my fellow classmates’ innovative ideas (the comprehensive watch with hologram-mapping capabilities really sparked my interest!) did I realize how much I was limiting myself and the boundless opportunities and routes available for innovation. I also realized the importance of selling the prototype rather than simply telling it. I learned that regardless of how earth-shattering or revolutionary an idea or prototype may be, what matters is the way that it is presented to the user. In design thinking, it should be presented to the user as an incomplete draft so that constructive feedback can be provided. Simultaneously, however, the prototype should spark the interest and curiosity of the user and enable them to experience something new. This further reasserts the fundamental and primary need to understand the individual user in order to create a product or service that can improve their wellbeing in one way or another.

One specific challenge both my partner and I faced while formulating and putting the problem into words was distinguishing between a cellphone-specific problem versus a problem related to an external factor (such as a network carrier or geographic location). We decided not to read too much into it and work our preliminary ideas around this caveat. Another challenge specific to me was that I struggled to strike a balance between presenting a complete prototype and ensuring that the quality of said prototype was up to my (unfortunately) very high artistic and perfectionist standards. In future instances where I will prototype under a time crunch (such as in rapid prototyping), I will try my best to put aside this expectation of perfection in order to create a palpable prototype in time that can be evaluated and critiqued by the user. On a final note, I want to say how much I enjoyed the process of the design thinking workshop and how much I appreciated the expansive ideas presented by my partner and classmates. It really got me thinking of the limitless boundaries of our imagination and how theory can be put into practice in practically an infinite number of ways ∞

Design thinking framework consists of the four iterative steps of discovery, definition, creation, and evaluation — *The Design Thinking Framework we used as a basis for the workshop, adapted from* ***Design Thinking: New Product Development Essentials from the PDMA*** by Michael G. Luchs, Scott Swan, and Abbie Griffin

Shared Spaces and Leisurely Activities Observation Guide

Originally posted October 1, 2017

I helped create a draft of critical questions that members of my team and I should qualitatively take note of during our observations. This list is in no way exhaustive, but should capture details that are relevant to our research questions.

Observer:
Location:
Leisurely Activity:
Day of the Week and Date:
Start Time:
End Time:

Who do you want to observe? We are seeking a diverse array of participants.
Who was participating in the leisurely activity? What are their demographic backgrounds?
How many participants were engaged in the leisurely activity?
Was it an individually-oriented or group-oriented activity?
Did participants know other participants prior to the activity began?
Did participants engage with one another, and if so, how? Was the leisurely activity intended for individuals or groups?
Where do you want to observe? As of now, we intend to explore locations such as the local bookstore, the Student Recreation Center, the Sadler Center game room, local restaurants, small businesses, and student group meeting (e.g. acapella group rehearsal).
Where is the shared space located?
What utilities, amenities, and physical attributes are either present or absent in the space (ie. Physical makeup and contextual variables of the shared space)?
Where is the leisurely activity taking place in relation to the shared space?
Who is the owner/provider of this shared space?
How does the shared space look like sans the leisurely activity taking place?
What do you want to observe?
What is the frequency of this leisurely activity in the shared space?
Is the shared space conducive to the leisurely activity?
Do participants bring anything with them to the shared space besides themselves?
What were some of the behaviors exhibited by the participants? Did their behavior change at different moments of the leisurely activity?
How do you want to conduct the observation sessions?
Did you participate in the leisurely activity, and if so, how was it?
Did you interact with any of the participants?
What challenges did you encounter while observing the leisurely activity?
How did you document the observation session? Field notes, sketches of the general layout of the people and the place, and photographs of the shared space when possible.

Observation Experience

Originally posted October 8, 2017

My team’s broad topic deals with the optimization of idle, shared spaces and the use of those spaces for leisurely activities that will increase their participant’s wellbeing. As detailed in our observation guide, we hoped to explore elements related to the shared space, leisurely activity, and people’s behavior. The leisurely activity I chose to observe was a Cardio Hip-Hop Group Fitness Class in the Multi-Purpose Studio (MPS) at the Student Recreation Center (“The Rec”). My observation took the form of unstructured participant ethnography, whereby I participated in the class while simultaneously observing my surroundings. There were both upsides and challenges that came with conducting this particular type of observatory method in the given time and place.

As a simultaneous observer and participant in the class, I gained a newfound sense of appreciation for the leisurely activity at hand, the participants who sought out this group and shared space in order to increase their wellbeing in one way or another, and the determination of all participants to keep up with the exercises despite how intense they may have been (they definitely were for me). Had I not actively engaged in the activity, I may not have known the reasons behind the behaviors displayed by the participants. From this experience, I learned that being an “insider” who is able to empathize with participants realistically captures the context at hand. Also, drafting an observation guide with my team prior to conducting observation sessions enabled me to know exactly what I should look out for while observing instead of scrambling to remember and record every minute detail that may not have been relevant to the project.

Perhaps the most challenging aspect of the observation session was surveying participant’s behavioral patterns (besides myself and the instructor) while the songs were playing simply because of the intensiveness of the workout. Had I not paid attention to the instructor’s every move, I would have gotten lost in the movements and bumped into other participants in the front and on both sides (though that still happened due to the crowded nature of the room and quite possibly my ineptness and clumsiness). I responded to this challenge by surveying participants’ behaviors before the class, during the short break times, and after the class. Due to the involved nature of the leisurely activity (which certainly overwhelmed me as a one-time drop-in and newcomer), perhaps trying (un)structured observational ethnography where the observer sits in the back of the MPS would have elicited more detailed information about participant behavior. Another challenge I faced was recording field notes. I went in with the intention of being able to write down notes during the break times but came out with no notes besides those made at the beginning of the class. However, within the hour after the class I wrote down all my observations in the journal, transferred them over electronically, and organized them according to which part of the observation guide they satisfied.

Overall, I enjoyed the experience and will consider doing it again in order to capture new insights. There are both upsides and downsides to using a participant observatory method, but I feel like my observations of this particular leisurely activity, shared space, and people were improved because of it.

Diagram of the layout of the room that was observed based on observer’s memory. — *This diagram depicts the number, gender, and physical orientation of participants within the shared space*

Draft Interview Questions

Originally posted October 11, 2017

Based on the synthesis of my team’s observations and fieldwork notes, I have drafted a set of interview questions that can be asked to leisurely activity participants in order to extract new insights on space optimization and participant behavior:

What is your purpose for coming here? What factors brought you to this specific space? What drew you to this particular activity and space?
Did your behavior change throughout the activity? Can you walk me through how you felt at the beginning, during, and after the activity?
What impact do you think this activity has on your wellbeing? Your behavior? Your emotions and feelings?
What are your thoughts on the physical space and its contextual variables? Amenities? Unique characteristics?
Why did you decide to come here instead of staying at home?
Would you encourage others to come to a similar shared space to participate in a similar leisurely activity?

First Practice Interview Experience

Originally posted October 16, 2017

Conducting the informal practice interview session was a valuable experience that allowed me to discover how I am as an interviewer and what parts of my team’s interview guide were ineffective or needed rephrasing. I conducted the interview with a medical student who described himself as “having very little free time.” Although challenging at times, I tried to distance myself away from the information I already knew about the close relative I was interviewing, as the goal of interviewing is to extract newfound insights, or non-obvious findings. Therefore, it is critical to do the in-depth interview with people that I do not know so that I do not anticipate their answers or have biases. I wanted the interview to be a rewarding experience both for me as an interviewer and the interviewee; it was my goal to create an environment where the interviewee felt comfortable to freely speak their mind while I gathered information that would be constructive to the interview guide and future interview sessions.

I have compiled some takeaways from this practice interview that I hope to change and improve upon come the real interview rounds. First, I should only ask open questions to elicit a more detailed and insightful response. Second, I should try my best to focus on the skills of rapport-building and listening by always shifting the focus of attention to the interviewee instead of back to me. I have a tendency to interject in conversations and make tangential comments, which is something that I need to work on while interviewing people. Third, I tried to write down what my interviewee was saying while they were simultaneously speaking. In retrospect, this was not a very good idea and I will ask my interviewee if I can record the session next time, to be transcribed afterwards.

With regards to what needs to be changed in the interview guide, there are many suggestions that both my interviewee and I made. They suggested that I “take out redundancies in the questions.” This is because they would sometimes unintentionally answer the follow-up questions in the interview guide without me having even asked them yet. This put pressure on me to think of new follow-up questions on the spot, which were not always the most useful things to ask. My practice interviewee also suggested that I “ask about other activities.” So instead of asking my interviewee what their favorite activity is, I should instead be asking them what their most common leisurely activity is. Because the interview ran for around twenty minutes, either I need to work with my team to develop more in-depth questions that will elicit longer responses and/or I need to ask my future interviewees to elaborate more on their answers. I look forward to taking my interviewee’s constructive criticism and suggestions into consideration as my team and I begin to move forward with more formal interview sessions.

Interview Experience

Originally posted October 31, 2017

I initially went into the interview process hesitantly, as it would have been the first time I would interview a stranger. However, prior preparations and practice transformed my hesitation into anticipation and excitement of discovering something new. As detailed below, there are various aspects of the experience that worked well and others that were more challenging but ultimately constructive.

First, I appreciated the iterative nature of the process. For example, we individually created drafts of our interview guides and code sheets and then conducted preliminary rounds of practice interviews and coding with the intention of improving upon the interview guide and code sheet. After reconvening and taking each others’ suggestions into account, we created one finalized version of the interview guide and code sheet to be utilized by all members of the team throughout the two real in-depth interviews and re-coding of the transcripts. What I can extract from this experience is that first drafts can almost always be refined and that practice makes *almost* perfect.

One challenge I encountered while interviewing was that I would oftentimes ask follow-up questions to statements made by the interviewees that may not necessarily have directly related to the interview questions at hand. My reasons for this were manifold: first, I wanted the interview to flow smoothly like a natural discussion, and, second, I wanted to elongate the interview as much as possible in order to reach the 45 minute minimum threshold. Interestingly enough, my first interview lasted 57 minutes while my second lasted 37 minutes, mainly due to the fact that I kept prompting the first interviewee to elaborate as much as possible through examples and anecdotes. Also, I realized that the first interviewee was more outgoing and willing to open up while I had to pry information from the second interviewee. This is why it is of utmost importance to conduct multiple interviews, regardless of whether they are intercept or in-depth.

However, perhaps the most challenging part of the process was coordinating the eight in-depth interviews (each individual completed two) within a short period of time. Because of the length of the interviews and the possible inconvenience they may have been to some of the interviewees, I offered incentives to two of my peers to encourage them to be interviewed by my team members. Afterwards, I coordinated with two other people that my team members recruited and decided on a time that worked for both of us. Because of the amount of information being exchanged regarding the coordination of the interview sessions, my team and I set up a Google Sheet for the sake of organization and streamlining communication:

Name of Team Member | Interviewees | Time Availability | Contact (#/email) | Interviewer

Overall, the insights synthesized from the interviews made the rigorous and repetitive process worth it. Without trial and error, my team would not have been able to improve upon the different components that constituted key parts of the interview process such as the interview guide, code sheet, and data analysis.

Data Synthesis: Persona and Empathy-Map Creation

Originally posted November 7, 2017

The data synthesis experience, which was comprised of creating personas and an empathy map, was one of the parts of the design-thinking process that I enjoyed most. Perhaps this was because it allowed my teammates and me to be creative (of course, within the confines of the project scope) and to humanize and put a face to all the insights we had been gathering over the last few weeks in the discovery phase. Also, I appreciated the opportunity to visualize my team’s findings using websites such as Xtensio (for the personas) and RealtimeBoard (for the empathy map). These editing tools really helped us streamline the process and present our insights in a more engaging and digestible format.

In the former half of the data synthesis process, my team and I decided to create two personas: Sharon Spacey and Lee Schure (puns intended!). Initially, we wanted to have two personas that represented different people in society that could function as our prototypical users — hence why we created a college-aged female persona and a working male persona. It was only after we fully crafted each persona and began the empathy mapping stage did I realize that Lee Schure functioned as our main persona (he is, ironically, someone who is rarely able to fit leisure time into his busy working-life schedule) while Sharon Spacey represented the anti-persona (a U of M social butterfly).

After reading about experience mapping as the springboard for innovative solutions, I came into class ready to document my team’s persona and their journey throughout a specific experience. It was only after the introductory presentation did I realize that empathy maps are different from journey/experience maps. With that in mind, we decided to create an empathy map rather than a journey/experience map for Lee Schure in order to better document his general feelings and actions related to our project scope (leisure activities and shared spaces). However, the experience mapping processes that I read about were certainly still applicable to the empathy mapping process (e.g. using the user experience (UX) as inputs to the map, including “do/say/feel” elements, considering the pains and gains). My team and I emerged from this experience with a deeper understanding of Lee Schure and his needs. Hopefully, the “How Might We?” (HMW) step of the creation process will further deepen our knowledge of prototypical users like Lee Schure, so that we can create a product that best suits their needs.

User Persona of Lee Schure, a Prototypical User

Empathy Map for Lee Schure, a Prototypical User

Brainstorming & Ideation Experience

Originally posted November 15, 2017

After devising ten How Might We (HMW) statements that corresponded to our persona (Lee Schure) and his pains and gains, my team and I employed a multi-vote method to choose one HMW statement to focus on for the ideation process. It was critical to take a step back and reevaluate whether the HMW statement addressed the insights for Lee Schure, our initial project scope, and the sharing economy prompt. Consequently, we converged on “HMW connect people who have the same ideas about leisure and comfort” because we felt that it was the highest potential HMW statement that we could create a viable solution from. Surprisingly, it only took my team and I approximately five minutes to converge on this one HMW statement.

Then, we brainstormed a large quantity of ideas on the yellow sticky notes, things that went against our HMW statement on pink sticky notes, and new idea inspirations on the yellow sticky notes based on the pink sticky notes. It was interesting to see the wide range of ideas posited and the creativity of my team members come to light. For example, one team member wrote “making people live with their enemies/arch nemesis” as one of the ideas that would go against the selected HMW statement . However, out of this emerged the idea of having shared living-spaces based on people’s favorite hobbies and leisure activities. Another rather absurd idea that elicited a viable solution was to “kidnap people,” which inspired the idea of having a transportation or shuttle service for specific leisure activities. It was really cool seeing what things can emerge from crazy ideas! However, now we had twenty eight different ideas on the whiteboard and no clue as to how we would narrow all of these ideas down to just one.

To solve this problem, we categorized all twenty eight sticky notes, multi-voted (with five votes each) for the top ideas, eliminated categories that got no votes, and then multi-voted until we got down to three categories. At this point, class has ended and my team and I decided to meet later that evening to converge on one category and idea. We used deductive reasoning and weighed all the categories (space-sharing app, camps, TV shows and network) against one another to decide on the category “camps.” However, we then decided to tweak the idea and create an app that would function as a platform for organizers and participants to attend camps tailored to their specific leisure interests and preferences. Anyone can become an organizer and/or participant and attend one of these “CampShare” camps, with the majority of proceeds going back to the organizer of the camp and a small cut going back to the app in order to keep it running. There will be a ratings system put in place (similar to Uber and AirBnb) for both organizers and participants. There will also be a rewards system as a part of the promotion of this platform, where people can use referral codes and accumulate points through their organization and/or participation in any “CampShare” camp. I am very excited to see where my team and I will take “CampShare” in the future, and to begin solidifying the details of the new and exciting platform!

Prototyping and Group Feedback Experience

Originally posted November 23, 2017

Along with ideation, prototyping is one of my favorite steps in the design-thinking framework, perhaps because this is what I like doing as a hobby (casually sketching new ideas and solving problems) and it allows me to put my creative cap on.

After coming up with a rough idea of what we wanted our final product/service to be, my team and I decided to create two low-fidelity prototypes: the first was a storyboard that would show the process our persona (Lee Schure) would go through in obtaining and using our product, and the second as a representation of the application interface for our three intended user types — participants, organizers, and space-sharers. These two prototypes would be created in paper-based 2-D form because we felt like this was most appropriate at this stage. I worked with one of my team members on the rough draft of the storyboard that had eight illustrations depicting Lee Schure discovering the app, signing up as a participant of a camp, attending the camp, and then gaining enough confidence to organize his own camp. I then went home and created a more refined version of the rough draft to be presented to another group for feedback during the following class session. Because of my affinity for storytelling and drawing, I naturally jumped on the opportunity to work on this prototype for my team and loved every part of creating it.

The feedback session was useful for evaluating our two prototypes and generating ideas to improve our product idea. Although we only had one person from another team present to give us feedback, their feedback was still very valuable. For example, they recommended that we consider a name other than “CampShare” for our app (we decided to change it to Flock) because of its connotations and somewhat irrelevant and misleading image. Other useful points they brought up included ones related to security of user information on the app, the possibility of focusing on two user groups (participants and organizers) instead of three, and idle spaces that may not necessarily be in line with our project (i.e. private spaces like homes). Although my team and I decided that there is no need to pivot our idea, we plan to enhance our product prototypes, digitize both of them, and document the changes we made from our initial product prototypes.

Lastly, and slightly off topic, but the prototyping and feedback process inspired me to do more research into UX/UI design and research, a career path that I am now seriously considering! It’s really cool seeing how practical and applicable the design thinking methodology is to solving real-world problems and improving user experience for a variety of products and services.

Final Course Reflection

Originally posted December 7, 2017

Well before I decided on my Business Analytics Data Science major, I knew I wanted to pursue a concentration in Innovation & Design because it sounded so intriguing. As the feeder course, I registered for Customer Insights for Innovation to get a feel for what the concentration would entail and because it was so relevant to my experiences this past summer conducting secondary research related to the effectiveness of teaching intercultural communication to Bosnian children. I wanted to see how my experiences conducting secondary research could relate to my passion for design, and this course allowed me to do just that and much more. I emerged with a better understanding of wellbeing, the sharing economy, design-thinking, innovation, the leisure/play/recreation industry, and teamwork. Although this list is not anywhere near exhaustive, there are many additional lessons I was able to takeaway from the course:

Developing an effective team takes effort by all members: Honestly, I did have some qualms about going into the class where the group project made up the bulk of the semester and weighed so heavily in our final grade calculation. However, these worries disappeared once I got to know my three team members and we built the necessary foundation of trust with another. Before this course, I had usually preferred working individually on assignments because I had full trust in myself that I would get them done. However, this course enabled me to see the true value of teamwork and collaboration, and my team was a large part of the reason why I looked forward to coming to every class and love working with teams now as opposed to individually. We all exhibited great team dynamics and group cohesion, were diligent about our work and contributed our fair share, and were open to each other’s ideas. I also believe my team was a testament to the beauty of diversity, both in background and thought #teamFlock
Innovation is both an iterative and collaborative process: My team’s unique project was created based on the insights we gathered through observing, interviewing, and defining our target user and their needs. In real world applications of innovation, it is crucial for designers to work hand-in-hand with users and not rush the process. Quality really does matter over quantity in this particular case, and it is important to iterate to improve. I emerged with a newfound sense of appreciation for all the intensive work and dedication that goes into the products and services that I consume daily. Given that it took my teammates and I almost a semester to develop our idea of Flock, I respect companies, labs, and product development teams that can generate user-friendly and polished products within a small timeframe. This is a testament to the amount of time, people, and knowledge through insights that go into developing products and services.
Applying the design-thinking framework allows designers to create what is right for the user: Ever since I was young, I have kept journals of unique ideas that would pop into my head (like a diamond-shaped glass wall, revolutionary door hangers, and a dystopian blockbuster as some of the ideas). I would create sketches and prototypes of these ideas, without even knowing who I was making it for or having background knowledge of the subject. The design-thinking process changed my mindset towards innovation and has enabled me to see the value in focusing more on the people and the process rather than strictly the end product. It is crucial to understand and empathize with people, and that can be best achieved by listening and empathizing. As someone who will ramble about anything and everything if given the chance, this course really taught me to make a concerted effort to lend an ear and practice the art of listening. The discovery phase and working with my team really helped me put this into practice. Therefore, one of the foundations of design-thinking and problem-solving in general would be to listen and really understand what is going on.

“The design-thinking process changed my mindset towards innovation and has enabled me to see the value in focusing more on the people and the process rather than strictly the end product.”

Finally, it was a bittersweet moment leaving class on Monday after the presentations, especially because my team and I had pretty much spent a semester working on our project. However, I am confident that the lessons I learned in this course will carry through my life and work in the future.