Design Thinking vs. Traditional Problem Solving: What’s the Difference

When it comes to analysing the challenges in the business and design sector, design thinking and traditional problem solving are the key approaches. Whether it’s designing a new product or solving an internal process issue, these approaches help solve a problem and create a substantial difference. While both aim at providing solutions to individuals and larger organisations, they are vastly different in terms of approach, outcomes, and focus. 

In this article, we will be touching upon everything related to design thinking and traditional problem-solving.

What is traditional problem solving?

Traditional problem-solving methods have been around for centuries. These methods are typically linear, logical, and analytical, and often follow a straightforward process, which can be broken down into a series of sequential steps. The steps usually involve:

1. Identifying the problem
2. Gathering information
3. Analysing the information
4. Developing solutions
5. Implementing the solution
6. Evaluating the outcome

Relying on existing knowledge, data, and past experiences, this method is quite structured and works best in stable environments where problems are well-defined, and solutions are straightforward. Traditional problem-solving thrives in industries where technical or operational challenges need to be addressed, as it focuses heavily on logic, efficiency, and predictability.

However, while effective in some scenarios, traditional problem-solving often lacks flexibility and innovation. It is typically geared toward short-term fixes rather than long-term, creative solutions. For businesses facing rapidly changing environments, such as technology, healthcare, or retail, this rigid approach may not provide the adaptability and innovation needed to keep up.

What is design thinking?

On the other hand, design thinking is a relatively modern, human-centred approach to problem-solving that has gained immense popularity, especially in creative industries. Unlike traditional methods, design thinking is non-linear, iterative, and emphasises empathy for the end-user or customer. The typical steps in a design thinking process are:

1. Understanding the needs, behaviours, and experiences of the people affected by the problem.
2. Clarifying the problem based on the insights gathered during the empathy phase. 
3. Brainstorming as many creative solutions as possible, without judgement. 
4. Creating quick, low-fidelity versions of solutions. 
5. Testing the prototypes with real users to gather feedback.

This iterative, user-focused approach allows teams to remain flexible, learn from failures, and continuously improve their solutions based on real-world feedback. Design thinking thrives in environments where innovation and adaptability are critical, such as product design, software development, or marketing.
Key differences between traditional problem solving & design thinking.

Key difference 

When to use the approach

Traditional problem solving is best suited for situations where problems are well-defined, and the path to a solution is clear. Industries like manufacturing, logistics, and finance often benefit from this method due to their emphasis on efficiency, precision, and minimising risks.
Design thinking is ideal for ambiguous, complex problems that require creativity and innovation. It’s particularly valuable in industries that deal with rapidly changing markets or require a deep understanding of human needs, such as technology, healthcare, and customer service.

Real life examples

1) Traditional Problem Solving Example: Assembly Line Optimization in Manufacturing

Scenario:
A car manufacturing company faces delays in production due to inefficiencies in its assembly line. The goal is to minimise downtime, reduce costs, and increase production speed.

Traditional Problem-Solving Approach:
The company uses a traditional problem-solving method such as Six Sigma, which focuses on reducing defects and waste through data-driven analysis. The team:

> Identifies the problem: Assembly line inefficiencies causing delays.
> Collects data: They gather information on how long each step in the assembly process takes, identify bottlenecks, and analyse performance metrics.
> Analyses the data: Root cause analysis is performed to pinpoint the specific stations where inefficiencies occur.
> Develops a solution: The team adjusts workflows, adds automation, and modifies certain tasks to improve efficiency.
> Implements the solution: Changes are made to the assembly line.
> Monitors and evaluates: The new process is tracked for improvements in production speed and reduced downtime.
> Outcome: This structured approach helps the company solve a specific, well-defined problem with a clear, logical solution. The focus is on technical efficiency and achieving predictable outcomes.

2) Design Thinking Example: Airbnb’s User Experience Overhaul

Scenario:
In 2009, Airbnb was struggling to gain traction, with very few bookings happening on the platform. The problem wasn’t well-defined, but the company needed to understand why users were not engaging with the service.

Design Thinking Approach:
Airbnb’s founders applied Design Thinking to revamp the user experience. The steps involved:

> Empathise: The founders personally visited users who were listing properties on the platform and interviewed guests and hosts. They discovered that poor-quality, unappealing photos were a significant reason why people weren’t booking.
> Define: They reframed the problem as an issue of trust and perception—people weren’t booking rooms because the listings didn’t look appealing or trustworthy.
> Ideate: The team brainstormed creative ways to enhance the visual appeal of listings, including sending professional photographers to host homes to take high-quality photos.
> Prototype: They quickly implemented a prototype by hiring professional photographers to take pictures of the properties listed on Airbnb.
> Test: The new photos were uploaded, and soon, listings with professional-quality images started receiving more bookings. Airbnb continued testing and refining the platform’s overall design based on user feedback.
> Outcome: This human-centred, iterative approach helped Airbnb solve the issue by improving the user experience. Today, the company is a global leader in the travel and accommodation industry.

Conclusion

Choosing the right approach depends on the nature of the problem. If the problem is clear and technical, traditional methods may be more suitable. However, if innovation and user experience are central to the solution, Design Thinking offers a more flexible and empathetic path to success.