Design for America
The national vision of DFA is "Communities everywhere face daunting, systemic social challenges. Solutions exist - and so do empathetic, creative problem-solvers."
The Johns Hopkins University and MICA studio, which I am leading, is an organization focused on building a community of practice for human-centered design principles. Traditionally, our studio has led transformational change in the Baltimore area, focusing on consulting projects, design sprints, and education initiatives. When I became a part of the leadership team, we were shifting towards a remote environment and defining replicable programming.
At the time of writing this, we have completed a consulting project in the Fall. As co-lead for the project, we were extremely unsure of what the outcome might entail. We tried our best, learned along the way, and made the most of it for the student consultants. We were very intentional about programming for the six-week project. We focused on each design phase... teaching the material to the student consultants, then allowing them to practice and implement the practices taught. The phases were as follows- Identify, Immerse, Reframe, Ideate, Build, and Test. In the end, based on feedback from the team, the consulting project was a success.
We are in the midst of planning and preparing for another consulting project and a design-thinking conference.
I had no specific experience with DFA programming before joining the leadership team. I was excited by the opportunity but also overwhelmed with the lack of direction and involvement. When transitioning teams began, we met with a couple of other interested students. We found four students, including myself, that were willing to lead the upcoming year.
We met to define and plan the upcoming year based on past programming and involvement, team bandwidth, and opportunity areas. The image above shows an illegible outline of where we thought the year could go. By the start of the 2024 school year, we only had two of us willing to lead the organization, which meant for many changes to the roadmap. We have improvised as the year has gone by and expanded programming based on organization and personal interest.
Again, two of us have been leading the organization thus far. I am technically considered the President and Stephanie is considered the Vice President. We share the work based on bandwidth and availability. We meet semi-frequently to discuss and organize future programming and divvy up work via Slack.
Recently, a couple of the student consultants from our first consulting project have expressed interested in joining the leadership team. We are working through what this could look internally.
Fall Consulting Project
The consulting project was approximately six weeks long with one meeting every week. We started recruiting a couple weeks before the project kick-off (not enough time). We then held an info session, which allowed to us to speak more on the project partner. After parsing through applications, we decided on a single consulting team comprised of six student consultants. During the project, we met for an hour each week, where we would go through the intricacies of each design-thinking phase. The last week consisted of a presentation of their findings with the partner.
We did not focus on recruitment for the project as much as we should have. We posted on LinkedIn once a week leading up to the project. We also sent emails on that same schedule to a member base that has been collecting since the start of the year.
We held a thirty minute info session where we spoke with interested applicants. We gave a brief overview of the design-thinking process, an introduction to the project partner (flowgenius), and expectations of the comprised team.
To be completely transparent, we had six applicants in total. Stephanie and I looked over the applications in detail and decided that all applicants would be a good fit for the project.
The team of student consultants were given a role based on their interests. The team consisted of one Project Manager, two Business Analysts, two Designers, and one Subject Matter Expert.
In the Identify phase, we had the team 1) discuss goals, 2) set documentation and organization processes, 3) conduct online research and expert interviews (secondary research), and 4) create a list of questions that they still have after researching. The video above is a recording of our meeting on this phase.
The team also organized a Figma board and information structure.
In the Immerse phase, we had the team 1) conduct in-person or virtual interviews, observations, and surveys (primary research) and 2) answer questions created from the previous week. The video above is a recording of our meeting on this phase.
The team also learned about stakeholder mapping, analogous experiences, five why's, empathy mapping, and extreme mainstream exercise.
In the Reframe phase, we had the team 1) find patterns in their research, 2) define and refine problem statement (HMW), and 3) set success measures. The video above is a recording of our meeting on this phase.
More specifically, the team learned how to utilize the 2x2, reframing statements, and storytelling with personas frameworks. We also had them start thinking about how their final presentation can be organized.
In the Ideate and Build phases, we had the team 1) identify a wide variety of concepts, 2) validate concepts based on problem statement, 3) select top concepts, 4) determine what to test, and 5) build prototypes. The video above is a recording of our meeting on this phase.
In terms of ideation, the team completed multiple ideation exercises, which we did in the meeting, and two voting/decision exercises. We also had them define the measures of success for their product. In terms of building, we discussed the different ways to prototype a product and the tools needed to build the prototype.
In the Test phase, we had the team 1) meet with stakeholders to test and receive feedback on concepts, 2) incorporate feedback and refine concepts and prototypes, 3) finalize presentation and prototypes, and 4) packet project details and collateral. The video above is a recording of our meeting on this phase.
We reminded the student consultants how to best organize feedback and remove bias. We did not focus on testing the product as much as we did prepare for the presentation because of timing and bandwidth.
While we cannot share the intricacies of the final product or presentation, the team gave an in-depth presentation to the project partner. The Project Manager also packaged the project details and collateral for succinct perusal of flowgenius.
The final product that the team created was a high-fidelity prototype of a mobile application for productivity, specifically designed for neurodiverse individuals. While the overall concept is not exactly new, the team was able to pair traditional productivity concepts with customizable techniques for neurodiverse individuals. It was exciting to see the passion and intrigue into the subject matter that the student consultants exhibited.
"Bren and Stephanie, thank you guys so much for these past 6/7 weeks. You guys were so great at guiding us through everything and making it a stress free environment."
> Designer
"The team blew us away. Thank you so much for this amazing opportunity to collaborate with DFA. We are so excited research and the insights found by the team. Their work will be invaluable to flowgenius' development. Their professionalism was unmatched and communication was top-tier. It was truly a pleasure to partner with the DFA team!"
> flowgenius
Spring Consulting Project
In progress...
Design-Thinking Conference
In progress...
