CHAPTER 5

DEFINING THE PROBLEM AND INTERPRETING THE RESULTS

Introduction
Before you can go into problem-solving mode, however, there is one very crucial
step that you need to complete—one that will shape your entire design project from start
to finish. In the Design Thinking process, this step is what’s known as the “define” phase.

Learning Outcomes/Objectives

After the completion of this chapter, the student must be able to:

1. Analyze problems based on the empathy stage

2. Define an actionable problem statement

Learning Content/Topic

An integral part of the Design Thinking process is the definition of a meaningful

and actionable problem statement, which the design thinker will focus on solving. This is
perhaps the most challenging part of the Design Thinking process, as the definition of a
problem (also called a design challenge) will require you to synthesize your observations
about your users from the first stage in the Design Thinking process, which is called the
Empathize stage.
When you learn how to master the definition of your problem, problem statement,
or design challenge, it will greatly improve your Design Thinking process and result. Why?
A great definition of your problem statement will guide you and your team’s work and kick
start the ideation process in the right direction. It will bring about clarity and focus to the
design space. On the contrary, if you don’t pay enough attention to defining your problem,
you will work like a person stumbling in the dark.
Analysis and Synthesis

Author/Copyright holder: Teo Yu Siang and Interaction Design Foundation. Copyright

terms and licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0
Before we go into what makes a great problem statement, it’s useful to first gain
an understanding of the relationship between analysis and synthesis that many design
thinkers will go through in their projects. Tim Brown, CEO of the international design
consultancy firm IDEO, wrote in his book Change by Design: How Design Thinking
Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, that analysis and synthesis are
“equally important, and each plays an essential role in the process of creating options
and making choices.”
Analysis is about breaking down complex concepts and problems into smaller,
easier-to-understand constituents. We do that, for instance, during the first stage of the
Design Thinking process, the Empathise stage, when we observe and document details
that relate to our users. Synthesis, on the other hand, involves creatively piecing the
puzzle together to form whole ideas. This happens during the Define stage when we
organise, interpret, and make sense of the data we have gathered to create a problem
statement.
Although analysis takes place during the Empathise stage and synthesis takes
place during the Define stage, they do not only happen in the distinct stages of Design
Thinking. In fact, analysis and synthesis often happen consecutively throughout all stages
of the Design Thinking process. Design thinkers often analyse a situation before
synthesising new insights, and then analyse their synthesised findings once more to
create more detailed syntheses.
What Makes a Good Problem Statement?
A problem statement is important to a Design Thinking project, because it will guide
you and your team and provides a focus on the specific needs that you have uncovered.
It also creates a sense of possibility and optimism that allows team members to spark off
ideas in the Ideation stage, which is the third and following stage in the Design Thinking
process. A good problem statement should thus have the following traits. It should be:
Human-centered. This requires you to frame your problem statement according to
specific users, their needs and the insights that your team has gained in the Empathise
phase. The problem statement should be about the people the team is trying to help,
rather than focussing on technology, monetary returns or product specifications.
Broad enough for creative freedom. This means that the problem statement should not
focus too narrowly on a specific method regarding the implementation of the solution. The
problem statement should also not list technical requirements, as this would
unnecessarily restrict the team and prevent them from exploring areas that might bring
unexpected value and insight to the project.
Narrow enough to make it manageable. On the other hand, a problem statement such
as , “Improve the human condition,” is too broad and will likely cause team members to
easily feel daunted. Problem statements should have sufficient constraints to make the
project manageable.
As well as the three traits mentioned above, it also helps to begin the problem statement
with a verb, such as “Create”, “Define”, and “Adapt”, to make the problem become more
action-oriented.
How to Define a Problem Statement
Methods of interpreting results and findings from the observation oriented Empathize
phase include:
Space Saturate and Group and Affinity Diagrams – Clustering and Bundling Ideas
and Facts
Author/Copyright holder: Giorgio Montersino. Copyright terms and licence: CC BY-SA
2.0
In space saturate and group, designers collate their observations and findings into
one place, to create a collage of experiences, thoughts, insights, and stories. The term
'saturate' describes the way in which the entire team covers or saturates the display with
their collective images, notes, observations, data, experiences, interviews, thoughts,
insights, and stories in order to create a wall of information to inform the problem-defining
process. It will then be possible to draw connections between these individual elements,
or nodes, to connect the dots, and to develop new and deeper insights, which help define
the problem(s) and develop potential solutions. In other words: go from analysis to
synthesis.
Point Of View – Problem Statement

A Point Of view (POV) is a meaningful and actionable problem

statement, which will allow you to ideate in a goal-oriented manner. Your POV captures
your design vision by defining the RIGHT challenge to address in the ideation sessions.
A POV involves reframing a design challenge into an actionable problem statement. You
articulate a POV by combining your knowledge about the user you are designing for, his
or her needs and the insights which you’ve come to know in your research or Empathise
mode. Your POV should be an actionable problem statement that will drive the rest of
your design work.

You articula te a POV by combining these three elements – user, need, and
insight. You can articulate your POV by inserting your information about your user, the
needs and your insights in the following sentence:
“How Might We” Questions

Author/Copyright holder: Teo Yu Siang and Interaction Design Foundation. Copyright

terms and licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

When you’ve defined your design challenge in a POV, you can start to generate
ideas to solve your design challenge. You can start using your POV by asking a specific
question starting with: “How Might We” or “in what ways might we”. How Might
We (HMW) questions are questions that have the potential to spark ideation sessions
such as brainstorms. They should be broad enough for a wide range of solutions, but
narrow enough that specific solutions can be created for them. “How Might We” questions
should be based on the observations you’ve gathered in the Empathise stage of the
Design Thinking process.

For example, you have observed that youths tend not to watch TV programs on
the TV at home, some questions which can guide and spark your ideation session could
be:

• How might we make TV more social, so youths feel more engaged?

• How might we enable TV programs to be watched anywhere, at any time?
• How might we make watching TV at home more exciting?
The HMW questions open up to Ideation sessions where you explore ideas, which
can help you solve your design challenge in an innovative way.

Why-How Laddering

"As a general rule, asking 'why’ yields more abstract statements and asking 'how’ yields
specific statements. Often times abstract statements are more meaningful but not as
directly actionable, and the opposite is true of more specific statements."

– d.school, Method Card, Why-How Laddering

 For this reason, during the Define stage designers seek to define the problem, and
will generally ask why. Designers will use why to progress to the top of the so-called Why-
How Ladder where the ultimate aim is to find out how you can solve one or more
problems. Your How Might We questions will help you move from the Define stage and
into the next stage in Design Thinking, the Ideation stage, where you start looking for
specific innovative solutions. In other words, you could say that the Why-How Laddering
starts with asking Why to work out How they can solve the specific problem or design
challenge.

Teaching and Learning Activities

Discussion
Research
Group Activities

Flexible Teaching Learning Modality (FTLM) adapted

Video Conferencing/Google classroom

Assessment Task
Review Question:

1. How does define stage helps in improving the design thinking process and result?
2. Differentiate analysis with synthesis.
3. What are the characteristics of a good problem statement?
4. What is Point of View-Problem Statement?

Group Activity:
a. Point of View Statement
Make your POV Statement by combining your knowledge about the user you are
designing for, his or her needs and the insights which you’ve come to know in your
research or Empathise mode.
 b. “How Might We” Questions
After making your POV statement, create your How Might We (HMW) questions
which have the potential to spark ideation sessions such as brainstorming.

References:
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/problem-statements