Design Thinking: A Considerate Approach of Problem Solving, A Literature Review

International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 348 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Design Thinking: A Considerate Approach of Problem Solving, A Literature Review Dr. Harshada Raut Assistant Professor, Maharashtra Education Society Institute of Management and Career Courses. Dr. Girish Ashok Bodhankar Associate Professor, Maharashtra Education Society Institute of Management and Career Courses. Dr. Manasi Bhate Professor, Maharashtra Education Society Institute of Management and Career Courses. AbstracT: Designers not only create creative solutions by collaborating with colleagues (other designers, engineers, marketing specialists, etc.), researchers, and stakeholders, but they also frequently collaborate with the end consumers of their products. In the participatory approach, the product user is viewed as a 'partner' throughout the creative process, from data analysis to developing new ideas and design solutions. The overall advantage of collaborative design thinking is evident. Co-creation not only improves a product's image, the well-being of future customers, and their devotion to the brand, but it also raises the effectiveness of creative and innovative processes. Users are regarded as experts during the design process, particularly in their interactions with and experiences with specific goods and services. The study reveals Introduction: The design thinking technique is widely used in business and is becoming increasingly popular in public services. Nonetheless, there are market niches in which participants prefer not to use the tools and procedures provided by this new approach. After describing the characteristics of the design thinking approach, the paper seeks to present potential solutions for its widespread adoption in all industries by providing real possibilities for expressing the advantages numerically. Following a brief conceptual clarification, the paper discusses two major difficulties. The first major topic is whether numerical effectiveness influences decision-makers in encouraging the spread of the design thinking approach. Second, three appropriate measurement methods for evaluating efficacy are introduced, with a comparison of their key aspects. Finally, the writers draw findings and assess the research question. Concept of Design Thinking: International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 349 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Even though researchers have explored the concept of design thinking since the 1960s, the w ord is imprecise and unclear when used to design (Simon 1996).According to Goldschmidt (2017), different communities interpret the phrase design thinking differently. The author separates two facets. (1) Descriptive models of the design process based on observational studies of real-world or laboratory design activities by individuals or teams; (2) an approach for use in enterprises seeking to introduce innovative goods or services. Definitions refer to how designers think as part of the creative process (Brown 2009, 2008; Lawson 2006; Cross 2006; Rowe 1987); and a design mindset (the majority of current scholars work in this area). In contrast to previous design thinking research, which found that design thinking was analytical or inductive thinking (Rowe, 1987), recent research contends that design thinking is synthetic and abductive thinking, which aligns with approaches to wicked problems such as applying design thinking to entire organizations (Martin 2009, Brown 2009). Brown's (2009, 2008) claim that the notion of design thinking, which is defined as thinking like a designer, is now widely acknowledged and utilized in different fields. Early research into design identified specific design processes and designer practices such as visualization, sketching, drawing, and so on as characteristics of design thinking (Rowe 1987; Cross 2006). On the other side, current research attempts to define design thinking as a design attitude (Berger, 2010; Brown 2009, 2008; Martin 2009; Owen 2007; Lawson 2006; Dsunne and Martin 2006). These mindsets can be understood as characteristics of design thinking. Research identifies how design thinking is used, so embedding it beyond typical design contexts and establishing a ubiquitous design thinking culture, which can be incorporated into business strategy (Porcini 2009) or non-profit organization goals. Research has focused on various design thinking characteristics and approaches. For example, Brown (2008, 2009) emphasizes prototyping and a user-centered approach in industrial design. According to Renard (2014), the phrase design thinking has roots in a variety of disciplines and is frequently, but not solely, connected with engineering, architecture, and related design disciplines in early writing on the subject. The emergence and evolution of the notion Two decades before it became a popular notion for innovation, an international research group identified and examined design thinking (at the time written in lower case) as the cognitive process of designers (Cross, Dorst, & Roozenburg, 1992; Eastman, McCracken, & Newstetter, 2001). The goal of these studies was to get deeper insight into the key characteristics of Design Creativity. Instead of aiming for universal design approaches (as the 1970s movement did), design thinking research focuses on uncovering the basic mental processes that designers use when working on a project. Today, Design Thinking (now spelled in upper case) is considered as a complicated thinking process for creating new realities, indicating the incorporation of design culture and methodology into domains such as corporate innovation. Two authors and their books have primarily contributed to the reconfiguration of design thinking: Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation by Tim Brown (2009), CEO of IDEO, one of the world's most influential design consultancies, and The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 350 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Competitive Advantage (2009) by Roger Martin, Dean of the Rotman School of Management in Toronto and a management consulting veteran. Although the writers' definitions and descriptions of Design Thinking differ, they both investigate its role and potential inside businesses. Traditionally, design thinking relies on the designer‟s capacity to consider at the same time 1. human needs and new visions of living well, 2. available material and technical resources, and 3. the constrains and opportunities of a project or business. The designer must be analytical and emphatic, rational and emotional, methodical and intuitive, oriented by plans and limitations while being spontaneous (Pombo & Tschimmel, 2005, 2011). Because visual perception is the most dominating of the senses, perception in and via images is very important in Design Thinking. This is emphasized by various design scholars, including Goldschmidt, Lawson, and Cross. According to Lawson (1986, 2004) and Cross (2011), designers typically use sketches, drawings, and material models to collaboratively explore project problems and solutions. The act of visualizing their thoughts appears to clarify designers' ideas, as Goldschmidt verifies (1991, 1994, 2003). Goldschmidt argues in her several works on the key significance of visual representation in the genesis and evolution of ideas in the design process that sketching is an extension of'mental imagery'. By visualizing his views regarding project aspects, the designer broadens the task's problem space, incorporating and even uncovering new aspects. According to Cross, thinking in different viewpoints on future possibilities is difficult to accomplish using only internal mental processes; the designer must interact with an outward representation. Thus, Cross concludes that visualizing ideas through sketching "provides a temporary, external store for tentative ideas, and supports the 'dialogue' that the designer has between problem and solution" (Cross, 2011:12). Sketching is a type of mental modulation of the problem-solution space of the design thinker's current assignment. Aside from the mental support that visualisation provides, the designer enjoys the playful aspect of drawing and model making, which improves his focus and perceptive sensitivity. In the same way that sketching helps designers consider and elaborate on ideas, early prototyping is another technique of visualizing and testing novel solutions, and hence a principle and instrument of Design Thinking. It is a visual representation of concepts, the transition of an idea into a testable model, and hence, according to Liedtka and Ogilvie (2011), essential to the creative design process. And, because the designer never has enough information about a project, much alone the most important information, rapid prototyping enables for the testing of early product or company specifics, forms, and nuances. Models of the Design Thinking Process Several process models for applying Design Thinking to business and innovation have been published and defended as the most appropriate. Some of the most well-known models are : International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 351 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 1. 3 I model (Brown & Wyatt, 2010) and Figure 1: 3 I Model Source: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/websites-apps/what-is-the-3imodel-in-design/ In 2001, IDEO developed the DT model for social innovation, which consists of three I's: inspiration, ideation, and implementation. As the design agency was increasingly asked to work on problems unrelated to traditional design (health care, learning environments, etc.), they wanted to distinguish this new type of experience-oriented design work from industrial design. (Brown & Wyatt, 2010). Inspiration, the model's first Design Thinking space, includes the following design activities: identifying the design problem or opportunity, developing the design brief to provide a framework for the design team, and observing the target group's behaviour in their daily living environment. After identifying the context through observation and design research, the Design Thinking process begins in the Ideation space: an interdisciplinary team goes through a synthesis process in which they distil what they have observed and learned into insights that lead to either opportunity for change or new solutions. Visual representations of ideas are encouraged during brainstorming sessions to help others understand challenging concepts. The third sector of the IDEO DT paradigm is Implementation, which transforms the best ideas into action plans. According to Brown and Wyatt (ibid.), prototyping serves as the foundation for the implementation phase. Prototyping enables the testing, iteration, and improvement of new concepts and material solutions. After determining the final product or service, the implementation space's final step is to create a communication plan to help explain the solution both within and outside the organization. 2.IDEO‟s HCD Model In response to a request from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, IDEO created another DT model as a toolbox for NGOs and social entrepreneurs working with underprivileged people in developing countries (Brown & Wyatt, 2010). The kit is also built on three areas International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 352 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 that IDEO's designers believe are necessary for a human-centered design process and create the acronym HCD: Hearing, Creating, and Delivering. Figure 2: HCD Model (Sourcehttps://www.ideo.com/journal/design-kit-the-human-centereddesign-toolkit) The user is guided through a participatory design process in this approach, which is supplemented by activities such as developing listening skills, running workshops, and implementing ideas "Human-Centered Design (HCD) will help you hear the needs of constituents in new ways, create innovative solutions to meet these needs, and deliver solutions with financial sustainability in mind." In comparison to the 3 I model, the HCD model is far more complicated and thorough. The acronym HCD has a twofold meaning that Figure 1: 3.The Model of the Hasso-Plattner Institute International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 353 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Figure 2: Hasso-Plattner Institute (Source https://hpi.de/d-school/themen/design-thinking/) Another DT model, similar to IDEOs‟ 3 I, developed in an educational context, is the Design Thinking model of the d-school of the Hasso-Plattner-Institute at University of Potsdam in Germany, an institution directly connected with Stanford University and IDEO. The design thinking process is visualized in six steps in their model, which is also based on IDEO process experience. Each step is connected by curved lines to suggest that it is executed in iterative loops. According to Thoring and Müller (2011), the first phase of the paradigm, Understand, involves gathering existing information about the issue through secondary research. The second stage, Observe, employs a qualitative research strategy that incorporates interviewing and observing procedures to gather information about the consumers' demands (id., ibid.: 38). Through storytelling, insights are shared with the group and then synthesised into a visual framework known as Point of View, which reflects the user's perspective. The Ideation stage is exactly like the 3 I model's Ideation phase. The next two levels, Prototype and Tests, include the same activities and considerations as the Implementation space of the 3 I model. We could see that the three models provided here have extremely similar space phase sequences. This Hasso-Plattner Institute model, which outperforms the other two IDEO models, demonstrates that the stages of a design process are not necessarily completed sequentially, and that projects may loop back to prior phases. This paradigm is less wellknown than the first two since the stages do not have an easily memorable name. Thus, it is difficult to promote. 4.The 4 D or Double Diamond Model of the British Council International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 354 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Figure 3: Double Diamond Model (Source https://mgearon.com/ux/double-diamond-model/) The Double Diamond design process model, created by the Design Council in 2005, is graphically based on a simple diagram describing the divergent and convergent stages of the design process, giving the model the shape of a double diamond. The concept is also known as the 4 D model because the names of each step begin with a 'D': Discover, Define, Develop, and Deliver. What distinguishes this model from the one of three I's or the HCD is the visual mapping of the divergent and convergent stages of the design process, which is distinctive of design thinking. The first quarter of the Double Diamond depicts the project's initial divergence phase, the Discovery phase, during which the designer seeks out new prospects, markets, information, trends, and ideas. The second quarter, which concludes the first Diamond, represents the Definition stage, a type of filter in which the initial ideas are scrutinized, selected, and dismissed. The Define stage also includes the first creation of project ideas, in which the designer must consider the broader context of the discovered opportunity. The primary tasks during the definition phase are project development, project management, and corporate sign-off, which are all detailed on the Design Council website. The third quarter of the Double Diamond signifies the period of development. We are once again in a divergence time, as the project underwent corporate and financial sign-off during the Develop stage. Design-led solutions are generated, iterated, and tested within the organization by multidisciplinary teams using DT tools such as brainstorming, sketching, scenarios, renderings, and prototypes. The final step of the 4 D model, the Convergence Deliver stage, involves final testing, sign-off, production, and launch. Every aspect of the Double Diamond design process is far more intricate and complex than we can demonstrate in this work, and the same can be said for the other models. International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 355 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 The Double Diamond is the most complete of the models described here, most likely because it was developed for designers to utilize, whereas the other three models were created with business and management in mind. The visual moniker, the diamond, and the option of adopting the 4 D's acronym are all favorable arguments for this approach. 5.The Service Design Thinking (SDT) Model Figure 4: (SDT) Model source https://www.designorate.com/service-design-thinking/: Stickdorn and Schneider's (2010) Service Design Thinking model describes the Design Thinking approach as iterative. The model consists of the following phases: 1. Exploration (understanding the customer's culture and the real service problem, as well as visualizing the context), 2. Creation (generating, testing, and retesting ideas and concepts), 3. Reflection (building on ideas and concepts, prototyping, and thus closely related to stage 2), and 4. Implementation. The authors point out that, while the service design process can be structured in an outline, it is not linear because it is iterative. Stickdorn and Schneider, in accordance with the emergence paradigm, emphasize that the first stage in any SDT process is to design the process itself, because the process is context-dependent and hence varies from project to project. Research Questions: 1) What is Design Thinking? 2) What are the different facets where design thinking is adopted? 3) How has Design thinking helpful in the adopted facets? International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 356 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 Review of Literature: 1.Marketing and Branding : Literature suggests that design can assist in the development of competitive advantage in an integrated and collaborative way and support effective brand development (Brown, 2009, 2008; Mozota, 2003, 2002; Vazquez & Bruce, 2002 Many academics agree that design predicts future products, services, and systems (Berger, 2010; Martin 2009; Brown, 2009, 2008; Neumeier 2009; Mozota, 2003, 2002). Recently, 'design thinking' has gained popularity, with the premise that design can help firms gain a competitive advantage by producing differentiated products, services, and systems that consumers require and desire. However, research has yet to focus on how design thinking might be integrated and promoted in a variety of business situations. Many researchers (Kimbell, 2009; Fraser 2006) propose that design thinking research in design disciplines should take a more in-depth look at design practice techniques. On the other hand, Neumeier (2009) emphasizes agility, collaboration, and responses to wicked problems, which brings him closer to branding. As a result, stakeholders' perceptions of design thinking methodologies in FMCG brand development may differ. While FMCG brands compete in rapidly changing marketplaces, they also require innovative techniques to communicating with consumers and developing brands effectively. In these circumstances, such issues are difficult to explain and are not explored in a meaningful way. These companies are now dealing with 'wicked situations', meaning that neither the problem nor the solution is understood (Buchanan, 1992). Recent discussions have compared wicked problems to design challenges (Berger, 2010; Martin, 2009; Brown, 2008, 2009; Neumeier, 2009). According to Neumeier (2009), the core difficulty of brand building is convincing a complicated organization to carry out a daring idea, therefore design thinking assists firms in appreciating rapidly changing markets, identifying possibilities, and solving unclear problems. Design and designers are well positioned to address the wicked challenges that businesses confront, and design thinking prepares for what FMCG brand development requires. Martin (2009) demonstrates how P&G might prevent a slump in activity by embracing design as a primary driver for the business. As organizations in the FMCG sector face a competitive and rapidly changing market, it is critical to use design thinking to explore new brand ideas. This study intends to meet the aforementioned needs for novel methods to branding and design thinking research. Customers can get closer to management and execute innovation by using human-centered design thinking to all levels of an organisation. Professionals, researchers, and managers recognized that design thinking might be utilized effectively for design difficulties, although it is more commonly used to investigate and describe business problems, products, and services. 2. Education Sector: Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla, and Çetinkaya (2013) conducted a literature review on "designerly thinking" and "design thinking" to identify trends, authors to follow, and differences in how the concept has been treated in academic and non-academic press. Their research literature base consisted of 168 items, which included academic publications, novels, and blogs/other social media. Their analysis yielded four research themes centered on International Journal of Research (IJR) e-ISSN: 2348-6848 p-ISSN: 2348-795X Vol. 12 Issue 09 September 2025 Received: 20 September 2025 363 Revised: 25 September 2025 Accepted:28 September 2025 Copyright  authors 2025 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5281/ZENODO.17287123 July, Montreal, Canada. https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/drs-conference papers/drs2010/researchpapers/75 24. Agogino, A. M., Beckman, S. L., Castaños, C., Kramer, J., Roschuni, C., and Yang, M. C., “Design Practitioners‟ Perspectives on Methods for Ideation and Prototyping,” Mudd Design Workshop IX, Claremont, CA, 2015 25. Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design thinking for social innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29-43. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1596/ 1020797X_ 12_1_ 29.