© 2020 ASTD DBA the Association for Talent Development (ATD)

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

23 22 21 20 1 2 3 4 5

No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
including photocopying, recording, information storage and retrieval systems, or other electronic or
mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief
quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright
law. For permission requests, please go to www.copyright.com, or contact Copyright Clearance Center
(CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 (telephone: 978.750.8400; fax: 978.646.8600).

ATD Press is an internationally renowned source of insightful and practical information on talent de-
velopment, training, and professional development.

The content in chapter 13 is published with permission of the California Independent System Operator
Corp. All rights reserved.
Chapter 14 was written by Sharon Boller, Beth Boller, and Kristen Hewett. Images within chapter 14 are
used with permission from NxStage Medical, Inc.
Appendix 11 content developed by Will Thalheimer with help from others. Version 12. © Copyright
2018. Info: worklearning.com/ltem/

ATD Press
1640 King Street
Alexandria, VA 22314 USA

Ordering information: Books published by ATD Press can be purchased by visiting ATD’s website at
td.org/books or by calling 800.628.2783 or 703.683.8100.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2020934144

ISBN-10: 1-95049-618-X
ISBN-13: 978-1-950496-18-1
e-ISBN: 978-1-950496-19-8

ATD Press Editorial Staff

Director: Sarah Halgas
Manager: Melissa Jones
Community of Practice Manager, Learning Design: Eliza Blanchard
Developmental Editor: Jack Harlow
Production Editor: Hannah Sternberg
Text Design: Michelle Jose
Cover Design: Faceout Studio, Amanda Hudson
Printed by P.A. Hutchison Company, Mayfield, PA
Contents
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Section 1: Get Acquainted With the Concepts

Chapter 1: A Primer on Design Thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Chapter 2: Linking Design Thinking to Learning Experiences. . . . . 15
Chapter 3: A Design Thinking Framework for Training and
Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Section 2: Get Perspective and Refine the Problem

Chapter 4: Start With the Business Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Chapter 5: Pull in the Learner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Chapter 6: Verify Constraints As You Go. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Section 3: Ideate, Prototype, and Iterate

Chapter 7: Ideate and Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Chapter 8: Refine and Develop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Section 4: Implement and Evaluate

Chapter 9: Implement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Chapter 10: Evaluate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Section 5: Sell Your Use Case

Chapter 11: Get Buy-in From Stakeholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Chapter 12: Using Design Thinking When a Project Is Underway. 177
Chapter 13: CAISO Scheduling Coordinator Curriculum. . . . . . . . . 189
Chapter 14: NxStage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
References and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Appendixes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
About the Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Introduction
The stories captivated us. The first one was the story of Doug Dietz, an indus-
trial designer for GE Health. He shared it in a TED Talk as he described his
pride in his design of an MRI machine. His pride turned to distress as he stood
in a hospital hallway and watched a young child crying as she approached the
MRI scanning room with her parents (TEDx San Jose 2012).
As they neared the entrance to the MRI room, the dad bent down to his
daughter and said, “Remember, we talked about how you need to be brave.”
The machine Doug so proudly designed terrified young patients (and even
adult ones) when they needed a scan. Eighty percent of kids required seda-
tion to successfully get a scan. Doug was mortified and vowed to redesign
the experience of getting a scan by involving those who feared it the most:
preschoolers. The result of this design-thinking approach to redesigning the
experience of a scan meant that one hospital reduced its sedation rate from
80 percent to 1 percent.
The second story happened at Stanford University, where a class was
challenged with designing a cheaper incubator. One team went to Nepal, where
they visited the rural communities where babies were most at risk of dying
from premature birth or low birth weight. In observing the communities and
talking with these families, they realized the task wasn’t just to build a cheaper
incubator, it was to design one that was accessible to families who would
never make it to a hospital. The biggest constraint was environment, not cost
(ABC News 2011). Their human-centered, design-thinking approach gave
them completely different insight into how to solve the problem. Instead of a
high-tech, sleek incubator made with low-cost parts, they created a low-tech
incubator that looked like a small sleeping bag and maintained an infant’s
body temperature for four hours. It could be recharged for another four hours
by putting it into boiling water for a few minutes. The Embrace Nest infant
warmer has helped more than 200,000 babies (Extreme Design for Extreme
Affordability; Standford University).

v
vi Introduction

In training and development, our stories may be less dramatic, but there
is a desperate need for a human-centered approach to designing learning. Our
industry tends to think first about creating courses and workshops instead of
recognizing learning as a journey that involves many steps and stages. The
experiences we have at each stage of the journey either propel us forward or
cause us to exit. We spend billions of dollars each year on training solutions
without significant success stories to share in terms of results or rave reviews
from learners. That’s a problem if people opt out of the journey or the journey
leads to nowhere. When that happens, we have failed our learners and our
organizational needs.
This book offers a primer on how to apply design thinking techniques
to training and performance development. Design thinking is a problem-
solving methodology that focuses heavily on involving users of a solution in
its design. We start with a brief primer on design thinking and then introduce
you to our LXD Framework, a way of integrating design thinking techniques
with instructional design. We show and tell how to use a variety of tools that
can help you create an optimal learning experience. For us, optimal learning
experience means three things:
• It delivers value to learners.
• It solves a problem for the organization.
• It produces a measurable outcome.
And note how we frame it as a learning experience. We don’t create learn-
ing. Instead, people have an experience as they learn. The learning typically
comes from a variety of means, including formal training programs, resources,
and experiences. At times you will see learning experience design referenced.
Other times we may reference training. When we reference training, we are
talking about a formal event. When we reference a learning experience, we
are talking about a collection of activities that a learner participates in or has
access to that support learning something.
Design thinking can be for anyone in training and performance devel-
opment, which itself encompasses a lot of roles and titles. Are you a learning
designer, learning architect, instructional designer, L&D professional, HR pro-
fessional, chief learning officer, training professional, or talent development
 Introduction vii

professional? Our industry uses lots of different acronyms and role titles. For
clarity’s sake, we reference training and performance development professionals
to encompass all these possible roles. This book is for you.
Here’s what you’ll find within this book:
• Section 1: Get Acquainted With the Concepts summarizes what
design thinking is and how to connect its steps to training and per-
formance development. This section also introduces our learning
experience design (LXD) framework as a means of incorporating
design thinking techniques within the process of training program
and learning experience design.
• Section 2: Get Perspective and Refine the Problem focuses on the
early steps in the framework. It includes tools that help you gather
perspective from all the stakeholders associated with a request for
training and helps you refine the problem for which training was
predefined as a solution.
• Section 3: Ideate, Prototype, and Iterate contains tools that help
you involve your learner and business stakeholders in designing,
developing, and testing your solution.
• Section 4: Implement and Evaluate walks you through what’s
needed to ensure people benefit from what you developed. With-
in it, we provide tools and techniques for activating what you’ve
designed and measuring your impact.
• Section 5: Sell Your Use Case offers insights on how to sell the
use of design thinking techniques to develop training solutions
within your organization. It includes two case studies you can
use to help showcase the power of design thinking in training and
development.
Armed with the concepts and techniques in this book, you can move beyond
creating events to creating experiences that produce measurable results.
SECTION 1
GET
ACQUAINTED
WITH THE
CONCEPTS
 1 A Primer on Design
Thinking
In This Chapter:
• How and why learning solutions fail
• An antidote to failure: design thinking and its “sweet spot”
• The five keys to design thinking

Imagine that you and your friend Suzy agree to go on a vacation together. Suzy
is all-in on the idea of a friend vacation, but she’s not much into planning. “No
worries,” you tell Suzy. “I love planning trips. I’ll take care of everything. All
you have to do is show up.” Because you want to ensure you both have a great
vacation, you agree on the timing, climate, and budget, but you tell Suzy to trust
you for the rest.
You dive into planning. You find a perfect hiking trip for the two of you.
Suzy and you have gone on a couple hikes before and seemed to have fun, so
you are confident she’ll love it. Your week-long trip features daily long hikes,
tent camping, and backpacking your supplies between camping destinations.
Your trip will be a fantastic respite from the frenzy of daily life. The camp-
sites you’ll stay at are primitive and have no electricity. There is no cell phone
reception either, ensuring you get fully off the grid.
The designated day of departure arrives. You reached out to Suzy a few
days prior and told her to meet you at the airport at 8 a.m. with shorts, t-shirts,
and hiking shoes. There’s no mention of any other type of clothing, which is
when Suzy starts to get a bit nervous. However, she arrives at the appointed
time and you excitedly share your destination and itinerary. Suzy’s face says
it all: She’s horrified. She lets you know she H-A-T-E-S camping. Her idea of
“active” differs dramatically from yours. To her, a couple of three-mile hikes
in a week is active, particularly if coupled with a leisurely day of pedaling a
bike around a cute little seaside resort town. She wants a hot shower and a
3
4 Chapter 1

clean, cozy bed every night. Finally, she has no desire to carry her food—she
wants it served in a restaurant.
What the heck happened? You thought you had good info on Suzy, but
you made several assumptions fueled by limited facts. With those assumptions,
you proceeded to plan a vacation that did not match her wants or needs. The
result was an unsatisfactory vacation for both of you, as neither of you got
what you wanted or needed from it.
Right now, you are probably thinking, “I would never do this. Obviously,
someone who is going on a vacation needs to give input into the destination
and the activities. Otherwise, it will be a horrible experience for that person.
This is a crazy, unrealistic example.”
You’re right. It is crazy.
But guess what? People inside companies do different versions of this
kind of crazy all the time.

How and Why Learning Fails to Be a Solution

If you’re reading this book, you are likely looking for a way to make a training
or performance development solution produce bonafide performance and op-
erational results for your company. If you are like us, there are three possible
ways to sabotage your efforts:
• You fail to clarify exactly what results the company wants to
attain. You lack knowledge of the needs of the business: the “why”
of the solution from the business’s perspective and what opera-
tional result the business hopes to achieve. If no one can specify the
destination, it’s difficult to design a journey to get there.
• You make assumptions about learners instead of gathering
perspective from them. You gather demographic data (experi-
ence, education, tenure) and you even craft learning objectives.
What you miss doing is diving deep into empathy-building. You
don’t take time (or don’t feel you have the time) to get perspective
from learners on their daily realities: what they think, feel, see,
hear, and do related to whatever you’re focusing on helping them
learn. You don’t fully understand the context in which they will be
 A Primer on Design Thinking 5

asked to apply what they learn or what constraints their real world
may pose in doing that application. When you don’t gather input
into their attitudes and daily worldview, you must instead rely on
assumptions: either yours or those of a business stakeholder. You
(and they) may be right, but statistically the odds are high that you
are wrong. Relying on assumptions is dangerous territory to be in.
Assumptions made with limited data tend to be wrong. The Ama-
zon Fire phone is a great example of this and is referenced in two
different business articles on the danger of assumptions (Forbes
2016; Fortune 2016 ).
• You—and your stakeholders—focus on training as an event
rather than a set of experiences. This focus tempts you into
designing stuff that people in your organization cannot easily
implement or maintain. Learning is not an event that happens
once and is done. It is a journey—a learner travels with a defined
starting point and ending point and requires multiple opportuni-
ties to retrieve and practice use of learning along the way (Karpick
and Roedinger 2008; UCLA’s Bjork Learning Laboratory Research
2012). Training is commonly viewed as a business-centered process
(BCP). It is designed as such, which means it usually is event-
focused: a workshop, a conference, an e-learning course, or even a
series of e-learning courses. It focuses exclusively on the business’s
needs or wants and doesn’t typically consider the people who are
the target of the event or solution.
The antidote to learning efforts that fail over and over? Design thinking
and its “sweet spot.”

How Do You Stop the Crazy?

Design thinking, in contrast to business-centered processes, is a human-
centered process (HCP). It starts with a focus on people rather than the business
desire for profit. It originated in the late 1950s as a problem-solving technique
that quickly morphed into a product development technique. Companies real-
ized that to create products that people would buy, they needed to start with
6 Chapter 1

the target user rather than the company’s goal of making money. Profit would
come from a solid understanding of what people wanted and needed and what
their pain points were. Product developers needed to find a “sweet spot” be-
tween what target buyers would find useful, what a company could profitably
make, and how that product could be made within the constraints that both
buyers and the business had. Its successful adoption in technology-based prod-
uct development has pushed it to wider and wider usage across lots of sectors,
including training and development. It’s a natural fit because training and
development already has processes that are similar. Design thinking provides
a terrific overlay to existing training design processes and gives practitioners
great tools and techniques to add to their toolbox.
The design thinking process provides a means for defining problems from
multiple perspectives, brainstorming possible solutions, prototyping those solu-
tions, and then testing and iterating to optimize the best approach. When you
are creating training or job support tools, you can use tools and techniques
from design thinking to design solutions that hit the “sweet spot” between
three forces (Figure 1-1):
1. what the business wants or needs to achieve operationally (such as
some sort of measurable goal)
2. what learners perceive as useful, relevant, engaging, and a valuable
use of their time and effort
3. what can be realistically implemented and sustained given technol-
ogy or environmental constraints that exist for the business and the
targeted users.
For you to be effective at using design thinking steps and techniques, you
need to understand each component of the Venn diagram, so let’s dive a bit
deeper.
 A Primer on Design Thinking 7

Figure 1-1. Design Thinking Is About “Finding the Sweet Spot”

The Top Circle: Learner Wants and Needs

The simple definition of a great learning experience is one that:
• Delivers value to the learner (solves a problem they have). The
learner may be an employee, a customer, a patient, or anyone who
the business is trying to train to do something or help understand
something.
• Is easy to use (avoids creating “miserable” moments due to clumsy
or unclear directions).
• Is enjoyable to use (creates “magical moments” that delight the
learner or make them want to continue their experience).
Think about Uber or Lyft and the app you use to request a ride from
either company. First, that service—as represented by the app—solves a huge
problem for many travelers: finding safe, reliable transportation when taxis
aren’t easily located. Second, the app is extremely easy to use; it is “intuitive,”
which means it doesn’t require instructions. You learn how to use it by using
it. Third, it’s “enjoyable.” You have the cool little map with the image of the car
as it works its way toward you. You can see who your driver is, how others
have rated that driver, and exactly what your trip will cost you. You don’t have
to tip or fumble with money. Those are all plusses that equate to “enjoyable.”
Now think about a typical learning solution you might devise under the
auspices of training and development. This solution might be an e-learning
course or even an entire curriculum within your organization.
8 Chapter 1

• What problem is the course or experience solving for the learner

(not your organization)?
• What value is it providing to the learner?
• How enjoyable is it for the learner to complete?
Those are intriguing questions, because you likely don’t consistently think
of things from the learner’s point of view when you design training. Instead,
you are probably very focused on the constraints or the person making the
request. Requests are typically accompanied by constraints. Therefore, you
often think about what’s possible within the timeline or budget you have. You
think about what the business says the solution needs to include. You think
about content that needs to go into it and how you’ll get that content. You
likely don’t start with, “How would the learner describe this experience? Will
they enjoy it? Find it valuable?”
Bottom-Line Performance (now merged with TiER1 Performance) does
an annual learning trends survey. In 2018, it added a question specifically
focused on the frequency with which learners were involved in a solution’s
design. The survey results suggest room for growth (Boller and Boller 2019).
In many situations, subject matter experts (SMEs) and stakeholders claim the
role of learner in the design meeting and assume they know what the learner
wants, needs, and feels. No one verifies these assumptions with the learners
themselves. Typically, this approach is well-intentioned: People want to save
the learner’s time. Unfortunately, making decisions based on assumptions about
the learner’s work context, constraints, wants, or needs leads to solutions that
don’t produce business results (and therefore don’t meet the business needs).
They also seldom meet learner needs and wants.
Take a look at the survey responses (Table 1-1). You’ll see some positive
trends here—and lots of room for growth. Given our own experience in the
industry and the hundreds of projects we’ve been involved with, we know
that it can be extremely challenging to get “voice of the learner” insights and
perspectives. As we evaluated these results, we felt the always percentage was
inflated.
 A Primer on Design Thinking 9

Table 1-1. Bottom-Line Performance Annual Learning Trends Survey:

Learning Involvement Question
2019: How often do you include target learners in your training design process?
Answer Choices Percent of Responses Number of Responses
Always; target learner 26.17% 67
involvement is mandatory
part of our process
Usually; we try to do so 32.81% 84
every time, but sometimes
it doesn’t happen
Sometimes; it depends on 28.52% 73
the initiative
Occasionally; we only do so 8.59% 22
for very important initiatives
Never 3.91% 10
Total respondents 256
2018: How often do you include target learners in your training design process?
Answer Choices Percent of Responses Number of Responses
Very often 15.97% 19
Often 42.86% 51
Sometimes 20.17% 24
Rarely 18.49% 22
Never 2.52% 3
Total respondents 119

The Left Circle: Business Needs

Healthy businesses define financial targets they want to hit each year. They
also usually have longer-term financial targets that are three to five years out.
The top-line financial target that businesses typically focus on is revenue
and ways to increase it. The bottom-line financial target is profit and ways
to increase profit margins and overall profits. A focus on these two metrics
helps ensure a company has enough cash and a good cash flow. Cash and cash
flow (having enough cash to pay bills when bills are due) are the life blood of a
business. Consequently, a lot of what a business does in terms of strategies and
initiatives is with an eye toward growing revenue as well as increasing profits
10 Chapter 1

so that the business has enough cash to continue to operate and grow. Initia-
tives targeted toward improving employee engagement link back to revenue
and profitability. Happy employees tend to be loyal, productive employees.
Productive employees generate revenue and profit for the business.
Businesses typically have annual financial goals (cash, profit margin) they
want to achieve. They then define business initiatives that support these finan-
cial—or operational—goals. Here are a couple of examples:
• A company’s one-year financial goal might be to increase revenue
by 20 percent (or perhaps to increase revenue related to a specific
product by 20 percent). In support of that goal, the company might
identify an initiative designed to help it either attract new custom-
ers or sell more goods or services to existing customers, such as
launching a new product or service.
• A company’s goal might be to increase its profit margin by 5 per-
cent. While this can be attained by growing revenue, it might also
be achieved by reducing the cost of delivering goods or services.
One mechanism for reducing cost of goods or services is to adjust
processes so those goods can be delivered more efficiently. Another
mechanism for decreasing costs might be reducing ramp-up time
for new hires so they reach maximum productivity more quickly.
A third initiative might be to reduce quality problems, which also
enables improved efficiency.
In short, business needs are typically driven by a need to increase revenue,
improve cash flow, or improve profitability. Any training or learning solution
you design should drive some sort of operational result, such as:
• increasing sales (which improves revenue, and, eventually, cash
available to the business)
• speeding up the time it takes to close a sale or deliver a product
(which improves cash flow)
• making someone or something (such as a process) more efficient
(which lowers costs and improves profitability)
• increasing employee engagement, which can have a positive impact
on employee retention as well as productivity.
 A Primer on Design Thinking 11

C-suite leaders and upper-level managers must focus on business needs

and results. This is not because they are solely focused on money. It’s because
they know jobs depend on this focus. If a company lacks enough cash or prof-
itability, jobs are lost.

The Right Circle: Business and Learner

Constraints
Decisions about how you will design, build, and deploy a solution must factor
in constraints: learner, technical, environmental, and business.
These are common categories where constraints exist:
• Time. This includes time to create something, time required to
implement something, time required to sustain something, time
available to undergo a learning journey, and time available to sup-
port someone who is on a learning journey. It may also be a date by
which something has to be done.
• Budget. What dollars are available to pay for development and
implementation of a solution as well as ongoing maintenance of a
solution? What return on investment does the company expect and
how soon does it need to be achieved?
• Skills. What skills does the company have—or can gain access to—
to design and build the solution?
• Technology. What software, hardware, and device limitations
exist?
• Access to needed people or other resources. People you need
access to include stakeholders who pave the way for a project to get
done, subject matter experts who contribute insights, and target
learners who provide perspective. Other resources you may need
access to include space and testing tools.
There’s a cautionary tale in discussing constraints. Often people assume
there are constraints that may not really exist. Constraints should always be
verified by those who are assumed to be creating them. Go ahead and brainstorm
all the constraints you can think of; just check them all out before assuming
they are all correct.
12 Chapter 1

The Five Steps to Design Thinking

We’ve outlined the problem we hope to solve with this book: shifting from a
sole focus on the business or content when designing learning experiences to a
learner-focused approach that gets to a win-win for learners and the business.
We’ve also explained the three factors practitioners need to balance to remedy
this problem.
The question remains: How exactly does one go about “finding the sweet
spot?”
The rest of the book provides answers as well as examples. Before we
move on, though, we want to give you a quick primer on the traditional design
thinking model that served as our starter for modifying how we design a better
learner experience. The model features five steps: empathize, define, ideate,
prototype, and test (Figure 1-2).

Figure 1-2. Traditional Illustration of Design Thinking Approach to Product

Development

Design thinking does not have its origins in design; it’s a problem-solving
approach that’s been around for decades and has uses across lots of industries.
It’s most useful when problems or optimal solutions are fuzzy. It’s human-
centered, which means it starts by focusing on people rather than business goals.
Product developers often use a design thinking approach to design products
because the products ideally solve some sort of problem or need that buyers
or users have.
 A Primer on Design Thinking 13

Product developers take an iterative journey through these steps:

• In the empathize step, designers spend time gaining perspective
from target users of a potential need that a product might solve.
This perspective-gathering process, done via observations or inter-
views, enables them to build empathy for the users and their wants
and needs. During this step, designers spend time observing users
in their environment so they can see potential needs or problems
in the context of the user’s daily experience. They interview them,
asking questions about their likes and dislikes, their thoughts and
feelings, their pain points, and their motivators. They build a clear
picture of how people might use a potential product and what value
the product can provide—from the user’s perspective.
• The second step is to define a problem that exists from both the
business’s perspective and the user’s perspective. Here’s where
business goals enter the picture. A user may have a need, but the
business must be able to solve that need while also making a profit.
Once this problem (or opportunity) is defined and constraints begin
to emerge (for example, the product must be portable; it cannot cost
more than $X to produce, and so on), designers can begin to . . .
• Ideate and brainstorm possible solutions to the problem, seeking
solutions and ideas that fit within that sweet spot of user needs,
business needs, and technology or environmental constraints.
• The next step is to prototype—quickly and cheaply—the most
promising and intriguing solutions.
• Target users then test these solutions. Designers seek user feedback
and observe users interacting with the prototypes, weighing user
feedback against technical constraints and business needs.
• Observation and user feedback help designers iterate on their orig-
inal ideas and prototypes, making improvements that align with the
sweet spot they are trying to stay within. Implementation is implied
but not really stated. That’s because some products continuously
iterate (think software-as-a-service products that push out new
releases every few weeks to months).
14 Chapter 1

Work on Your Own

Think about a product or service that you love, whether it’s Uber, the Star-
bucks app, an online grocery ordering service, a life-changing childcare prod-
uct, or even a great restaurant that you frequent.
Consider why you love it. What need or want is it satisfying for you?
What need does the service satisfy for the business? And what constraints are
factored into that product or service’s design?
Your needs drive your use of the product or service—not the needs of the
business. In the same way, the learners’ needs will drive the value they receive
from whatever solutions you create, not the needs of the business.

Summary
In this chapter we introduced you to the fallacy of trying to design solutions
without considering the needs of the end user. Just like you shouldn’t plan a
vacation without consulting the other vacationers, organizations need to
avoid designing training programs and learning solutions without input from
learners.
We then walked you through a problem-solving approach that brings users
of a solution into the process of designing that solution: design thinking. Its
starting point of “empathize” helps designers create a balance between users,
the business, and environmental constraints. In chapter 2, we’ll talk about how
to take this basic design thinking model and use it to develop more learner-
centered solutions, shifting away from a primarily business-focused model to
one that equally balances the needs of learners with the needs of the business.
About the Authors
Sharon Boller
Sharon Boller is a managing director at
TiER1 Performance, where she focuses on
helping clients figure out how to activate
their business strategies through their people.
She partners with her colleagues at TiER1
to bring together the disciplines of learning,
change, communication, technology, and
creativity to create blended solutions that en-
able people to do their best work.
Prior to joining TiER1 Performance, Sharon was the CEO and president of
Bottom-Line Performance (BLP), a learning solutions firm she founded in 1995.
She and her partner/co-owner Kirk Boller grew BLP from a single-woman
sole proprietorship to a $4 million-plus company with a highly skilled team
of diverse capabilities. Under the direction of Sharon and Kirk, BLP produced
communication, education, and training solutions for life science companies,
manufacturing, energy companies, and more.
Sharon is a frequent speaker at industry conferences on topics such as
performance-focused learning design, UX, technology and trends, learning
game design, and design thinking. She is the author of two other books pub-
lished by ATD Press: Teamwork Training was published in 1995, and Play to
Learn: Everything You Need to Know About Designing Effective Learning Games was
published in 2017 with co-author Karl Kapp. Her company is the recipient
of more than 30 awards from organizations such as Brandon Hall, Horizon
Interactive Awards, and Life Science Trainers and Educators Network.
Her industry interests are wide-ranging and include storytelling, emerging
technologies, business strategy, leadership, learning, and experience design.

257
258 About the Authors

Laura Fletcher
Laura Fletcher is a seasoned learning consultant
with 15 years’ experience in learning and devel-
opment. She served the clients of Bottom-Line
Performance for over seven years, where she de-
signed and developed award-winning solutions
ranging from instructor-led workshops to mo-
bile apps. It was during her tenure as manager
of Instructional Design at Bottom-Line Perfor-
mance that her ID team became something of a
design-thinking “incubation lab,” experimenting
with design thinking techniques and integrating them into the design process.
After leaving Bottom-Line Performance, she joined Salesforce, where she
consults with leaders and teams to cultivate advancement- and leadership-read-
iness. She continues to rely on design thinking to ensure programming meets
the needs of thousands of diverse, global employees while also delivering value
to the business.
She has a master’s degree in Human Resource Development from the Uni-
versity of Illinois and lives in Indianapolis with her husband and two children.
Index
Page numbers followed by f or t refer to figures or tables, respectively.

A failure to clarify, 4
problem reframing for,
access to learners, 158
59–60, 60t
and hard “no” to, 165–166,
responding to initial requests,
167t
46–47
internal learners, 159–164,
stakeholder mapping, 48–49,
159f
48f
learners outside the organi-
strategy blueprints, 49–54,
zation, 164–165, 165f
50f (See also Appendix 2)
acquire knowledge or skill stage,
business problem
19f, 22
creating evaluation metrics
ADDIE model, 31, 202
for, 147
Amazon Fire phone, 5
learner perspective in refin-
ing, 84, 85t–86t, 86–87
B reframing, 59–60, 60t
BCPs (business-centered process- buy-in. See stakeholder buy-in
es), 5
beta versions, 127–128, 182–183
Bjork, Robert, 18
C
California Independent System Op-
Bjork Learning and Forgetting Lab,
erator (CAISO) project, 187–195
UCLA, 18
design workshop for, 187–190,
Bottom-Line Performance, 8, 20,
190f
139–140, 198. See also Get Real
learner persona in, 190–193,
brainstorming, 110–112, 111f, 112t–113t
191f, 192f
Brinkerhoff, Robert, 152
results of, 193–195
budget constraints, 11, 90–92
changes, workplace, 147
build memory and try using on the
commitment to learning, 21, 27t
job stage, 19f, 23–25
conscious competence, 24
business-centered processes
constraints, 7f, 11, 89–99. See also
(BCPs), 5
Appendix 8
business perspective, 7f, 9–11, 45–61,
budget, 90–92
46f
categories of, 90
agreement on success mea-
environment, 90, 97–98
sures for, 57–59, 59t
in ideate stage, 105
defining, 48
in NxStage project, 209–211,
examples of, 54–57, 55t–57t
211t
people, 96–97

259
260 Index

technology, 94–96 roles and titles in, vi–vii

time, 92–94 sharing benefits of, to drive
verifying, 11, 98 buy-in, 167–172
content collection documents, per- “sweet spot” in, 6–7, 7f
sona in, 82, 191–193, 192f traditional model of, 12–13,
cost analysis, 160. See also Appen- 12f, 29
dix 13 design workshop
cross-functional design teams, 106 for CAISO project, 187–190,
190f
for NxStage project, 205–211,
D 206f, 207f, 208t, 211t
define step, traditional, 12, 12f, 13, 31
development. See also refine and
design meetings, 38
develop (in iterate stage)
alternatives for learners’
design thinking approach to, 15–16,
involvement in, 162
16f
one- vs. multi-day, 41
using design thinking during,
role of learner in, 8
179–182
sample agenda for, 38t–40t
Dietz, Doug, v
design proofs, 118–119, 120f–121f
Difficulty, Importance, Frequency
design thinking, 3–14, 173–186. See
(DIF) analyses, 77. See also
also Learning Experience De-
Appendix 7
sign (LXD) framework
digital prototyping, 115, 115f
action plan for (See Appen-
drawing, in ideation, 113, 114f
dix 14)
at Bottom-Line Performance,
139–140 E
business needs in, 7f, 9–11 efficacy, confirming, 146
in CAISO project, 187–195 elaboration, in learning, 23–24, 27t
clients’ fears of, 171–172 Embrace Nest infant warmer, v
constraints in, 7f, 11 empathize step, traditional, 12, 12f,
defined, vi 13, 30, 31
during development, 179–182 empathy maps, 71–75, 71f. See also
and failures of learning as Appendix 5
solution, 4–5 in CAISO project, 189, 190f
learner wants and needs in, deciding whether to use, 83,
7–9, 7f, 9t 84f
linked to learning experienc- in getting stakeholder buy-in,
es, 15–28 161–162
mindset for, 173 in ideate stage, 107, 108f, 109t
in NxStage project, 197–218 in NxStage project, 206–207
at pilot, 182–183 engagement in learning, 22
post-design meeting, 175–179 environment constraints, 90, 97–98,
to revise existing projects, 209–211, 211t
184–186 Evaluating Learning (ATD), 145
 Index 261

evaluation, 145–153. See also Ap- constraints, 89–99

pendices 9 through 12 learner wants and needs,
criticality of, 57–58 63–87
Kirkpatrick Four Levels of Get Real
Evaluation model for, Cross-Functional Design
149–150 Teams Have Superpowers,
Learning-Transfer Evaluation 106
Model for, 150–151, 150t Discovering Buried Content,
Phillips ROI Methodology for, 170–171
151–152 Forgetting Curve, Retriev-
reasons for, 145–146 al Practice, and Spacing
Success Case Method for, 152 Effect, 17–18
timing for, 147–149, 148t Lack of Learner Access
evaluation metrics, 147–149, 148t Blows Things Up, 163–164
existing projects, revising, 184–186 LTEM at Work, 151
experience maps, 75–77, 76t. See Mapping the Journey
also Appendix 6 Post-Design, 181–182
created during development, Personal Proliferation, 81–82
180 Power of UX Testing, 124
deciding whether to use, 83, Rolling Out Design Thinking
84f at Bottom-Line Perfor-
in ideate stage, 105 mance, 139–140
in NxStage project, 208–209 Things Change, 147
exploration, in learning, 23, 24, 27t Verifying Constraints, 98
Virtual Observations, 67–68
When There Is No Journey,
F Just an Event, 20
failure, handling, 178
goals
feedback, 174–175
financial, 9–10
in iterate stage, 13, 163
mastery vs. compliance or
from learners on design, 162
performance, 21
from managers, 24, 56, 56t–57t, 57
in NxStage project, 208, 208t
from pilot sessions or beta versions,
127–128
on prototypes, 31, 33 H
financial targets/goals, 9–10 Honest Conversations, 20
focus groups, 68–71, 83, 84f
forgetting curve, 17–18
I
ideate (in LXD Framework), 30f, 31,
G 103–116, 103f
get perspective (in LXD Frame- inputs for, 104–105, 104t–105t
work), 30f, 31, 33, 174 participants in, 105–106
business perspective, 45–61
262 Index

process for, 106–114, 107f, K

108f, 109t, 110f, 111f, Kalbach, Jim, 50
112t–113t, 114f Kirkpatrick Four Levels of Evalua-
ideate step, traditional, 12, 12f, 13 tion, 149–150
impact of problem, 47 knowledge
implement (in LXD Framework), acquiring, 19f, 22
30f, 32, 133–144 building, 19f, 23–25
implementation plan, 134–141, 134f, maintained over time, 19f,
136t–138t, 140t–141t (See also 25–26
Appendix 10)
measures to monitor, 142
risks to mitigate, 142–143 L
implementation plan, 134–141, 134f, learn and practice step, 22, 27t
136t–138t, 140t–141t. See also learner personas, 78–82, 80f
Appendix 10 in CAISO project, 190–193,
improvement opportunities, identi- 191f, 192f
fying, 146 created during development,
internal learners, getting buy-in to 180
include, 159–164, 159f deciding whether to use, 83,
interviews, 68–71. See also Appen- 84f
dix 4 empathy maps in construct-
alternatives for learners’ in- ing, 71
volvement in, 162–163 for ideation, 105–107, 107f
deciding whether to use, 83, in NxStage project, 206–207,
84f 206f, 207f, 207t
iterate (in LXD Framework), 30f, 32 learner perspectives, 7–9, 7f, 9t,
pilot sessions, 127–128 63–87, 64f, 174
refine and develop, 117–129 assumptions about, 4–5, 8,
user experience testing, 21–22
122–124, 123t choosing tools for identify-
iteration checkpoints, 116, 128–129 ing, 82–84, 84f
empathy maps for, 71–75, 71f
(See also Appendix 5)
J in finding “sweet spot,” 175
journey maps, 75–77, 76t. See also interviews and focus groups
experience maps for, 68–71 (See also Ap-
created during development, pendix 4)
180 journey maps or experience
and implementation plan, maps for, 75–77, 76t (See
134, 134f also Appendix 6)
post-design, 181–182 learner personas, 78–82, 80f
noticing, 21
observations of, 66–68 (See
also Appendix 3)
 Index 263

in refining business problem, magical vs. miserable, 26–28,

84, 85t–86t, 86–87 27t–28t
tactics and tools for under- maintain over time stage in,
standing, 65–84, 84f 19f, 25–26
learner stories, 108–110, 109t, 110f, in NxStage project, 211–216,
211t 212f–215f
Learning Battle cards, 110, 111f prepare stage in, 19f, 21–22
Learning Experience Design (LXD) stages in, 19f
framework, vi, 29–42, 30f to support learner stories,
business needs in, 46f 108–110, 109t, 110f
costs versus benefits of, 160 Learning-Transfer Evaluation Model
design meetings in, 38, (LTEM), 150–151, 150t
38t–40t, 41 LXD Framework. See Learning
differences between other Experience Design (LXD)
models and, 158 framework
example of, 33–34, 34t–37t Lyft, 7
ideation and prototyping in,
103f
implementation in, 133f
M
magical moments, 7, 26–28, 27t–28t
learner needs and wants in, 64f
maintain over time stage, 19f, 25–26
principles underpinning,
measurement. See also evaluation
32–33, 173–174
in implementation stage, 142
refining and developing in,
reasons for engaging in, 58
117f
success measures, 57–59, 59t
stakeholders’ assumptions
memory, long-term, 19f, 23–25
about, 160–161
metrics
learning experiences, 5. See also
evaluation, 147–149, 148t
training
outcome, 146
defined, vi
sources of, 52–53
failures of, 4–5
minimum viable product (MVP)
linked to design thinking (See
for NxStage project, 216–217,
learning journey[s])
216f, 217t
successful, 7
sprints resulting in, 124–126,
learning journey(s), 15–28, 33, 173.
125t, 126t
See also Appendix 1
miserable moments, 7, 26–28,
acquire knowledge or skill
27t–28t
stage in, 19f, 22
mitigating risks, 142–143
for age project, 211–216,
motivation for learning, 21
212f–215f
MRI machine, v
build memory and try using
MVP. See minimum viable product
on the job stage in, 19f,
23–25
264 Index

N prepare stage, 19f, 21–22

needs analysis, traditional, 65. See problem refining. See refine the
also business perspective; problem (in LXD Framework)
learner perspectives problem reframing, 59–60, 60t
NxStage project, 106, 197–218 profits, 9–10
background of, 197–200, 200f project overview, 176
creating learning journeys project plan, 34t–37t
and initial prototypes, project sponsor, 91
211–216, 212f–215f project team meeting space, post-
design workshop for, 205–211, ing persona in, 82
206f, 207f, 208t, 211t prototype (in LXD Framework), 30f,
initial perspective gathering 31, 33, 103f, 174
and analysis for, 202–205, for age project, 211–216,
202t–205t 212f–215f
problems addressed in, 201 creating functional proto-
strategies used in, 218 types, 114–115
user testing and minimum during development, 180
viable product, 216–217, iteration checkpoint for, 116
216f, 217t in NxStage project, 211–216,
212f–215f
prototype step, traditional, 12, 12f, 13
O
observations, 66–68, 82, 84f. See
also Appendix 3 Q
outcome metrics, 146 quantifying problem, 47
outside learners, getting buy-in to
access, 164–165, 165f R
refine and develop (in iterate
P stage), 32, 117–129
people constraints, 11, 96–97 design proofs in, 118–119,
Performance-Focused Smile Sheets 120f–121f
(Thalheimer), 128 iteration checkpoints in,
“Performance-Focused Survey 128–129
Questions” (Thalheimer), 151 pilot sessions and beta ver-
personas. See learner personas sions in, 127–128
persona wall, 82 sprints in, 124–126, 125t, 126t
perspective (term), 31. See also user experience testing in,
get perspective (in LXD 122–124, 123t
Framework) refine the problem (in LXD Frame-
Phillips ROI Methodology, 151–152 work), 30, 30f, 31
pilot sessions, 32, 127–128, 182–183 business perspective, 45–61
post-design meeting design think- constraints, 89–99
ing, 175–179 learner perspectives, 63–87
 Index 265

reflection, in learning, 23, 24, 27t sharing benefits of design thinking

reframing problems, 59–60, 60t to drive, 167–172
reinforcing learning, 17 stakeholder mapping, 48–49, 48f
repetition, in learning, 23–24, 27t Stanford University d.school, 84
resource constraints, 11 strategy blueprints, 49–57, 50f,
retrieval practice, 17–18 60–61. See also Appendix 2
return on investment (ROI), 151–152 activities in, 54
revenue, 9–10 aspirations in, 52
review meetings, 175–178 challenges in, 51–52
revising existing projects, design examples of, 54–57, 55t–57t
thinking in, 184–186 focus areas in, 53
risk mitigation, in implementing guiding principles in, 54
solutions, 142–143 and implementation plan, 135
ROI (return on investment), 151–152 limitations of, 177
outcomes in, 52–53
review meeting for, 177–178
S to roll out design thinking,
SHARE model, 20, 22, 24–26
139f
skills
selecting measures for, 142
acquiring, 19f, 22
Success Case Method, 152
building, 19f, 23–25
The Success Case Method (Brinker-
constraints of, 11
hoff), 152
maintained over time, 19f,
success measures, getting agree-
25–26
ment on, 57–59, 59t
solutions
supporting performance, 25–26, 28t
incorporated in problem
surveys, 70–71
description, 47
“sweet spot,” 6–7, 7f
risk mitigation in implement-
finding and minding, 12, 33,
ing, 142–143
174
spacing effect, 17–18
learner perspective in, 175
specificity of problem, 47
in stakeholder mapping, 48
sponsors, project, 91
sprints, 124–126, 125t, 126t
stakeholder buy-in, 157–172 T
access to internal learners, T&D professionals. See training and
159–164, 159f development professionals
access to learners outside technology constraints, 11, 94–96,
the organization, 164–165, 209–211, 211t
165f test (in iterate stage), 30f, 32. See
and hard “no” to access, also user experience (UX)
165–166, 167t testing
and learners’ perspectives, test step, traditional, 12, 12f, 13
64 Thalheimer, Will, 57
266 Index

Learning-Transfer Evaluation U
Model, 150–151 Uber, 7
Performance-Focused Smile unconscious competence, 24
Sheets, 128 user experience (UX) testing
“Performance-Focused Sur- during development, 180
vey Questions,” 151 at end of sprints, 125
“Why Learning Evaluation in iterate stage, 122–124, 123t
Matters,” 57–58 in NxStage project, 216–217,
TiER1 Performance, 8, 198 216f, 217t
time constraints, 11, 92–94
training. See also learning
experiences V
as business-centered pro- verifying constraints, 11
cess, 5 virtual observations, 67–68
defined, vi
design thinking approach to,
15–16, 16f
W
“Why Learning Evaluation Matters”
triggers of requests for, 45–46
(Thalheimer), 57–58
training and development (T&D)
Wile, David, 14
professionals
Wile Human Performance Model,
design thinking framework
15–16, 16f
for (See Learning Ex-
perience Design [LXD]
framework)
and learning journey, 21–28
roles of, vi–vii
 DESIGN THINKING FOR TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT
B ET TE R LE AR NING SOLUTIONS TH ROUG H
B ET TE R LE AR NING E XPE RIE NCES
CR E ATING
DESIGN
In Design Thinking for Training and Development, Sharon Boller and Laura
Fletcher share how they adapted the traditional design thinking process for
training and development projects, going beyond the user experience (UX) to
the learner experience (LX).
Design thinking is about balancing the three forces acting on training and THINKING LE AR NING

development programs: learner wants and needs, business needs, and con-
straints. Learn how to get buy-in from skeptical stakeholders. Discover why tak-
ing requests for training, gathering the perspective of stakeholders and learners,
and crafting problem statements will uncover the true issue at hand. In-depth
case studies show how the authors made design thinking work.
With its hands-on, use-it-today approach, this primer will get you started on
JOU R N E YS
FOR
your own journey to applying design thinking.

PR AISE FOR THIS BOOK

TRAINING THAT

“Sharon Boller and Laura Fletcher have written a definitive, informative, and lively book
clearly and expertly outlining the integration of instructional design and design thinking.

AND
If you want to know how to combine these two techniques and disciplines for impressive
results, this is the book for you.” G ET
—KARL M. KAPP, Director, Institute for Interactive Technologies

“I hear a common complaint from today’s L&D practitioners: My organization is heavily
BOLLER

resistant to what we tell them is needed. This book helps us understand and work with, and
not against, very real organization and worker constraints and needs. I recommend devouring
this book’s advice ASAP and figuring out how to make it work in your organization.”

—PATTI SHANK, Founder, Learning Peaks

DEVELOPMENT R ESU LTS
F L E TC H E R

S HARO N B O LLE R L AU R A FLETCH E R

td.org/books 112002 $27.99

Design-Thinking-TP-MECH-v3.indd 1 4/15/20 10:18 AM