Cultivating Design Thinking for Sustainable Business Transformation in a VUCA World: Insights from a German Case Study

By inergency On Mar 15, 2024

[ad_1]

1. Introduction

With the 2030 Agenda, the United Nations has made a promise to work closely together to “secure the rights and well-being of everyone on a healthy, thriving planet” [1]. To facilitate fulfillment of this collective commitment, the UN member states defined and jointly adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals in 2015 [2]. In 2023, the UN declared that the achievement of these goals is at risk [1], and so the Secretary General Mr. Guterres proclaimed at the 2023 SDG Summit that “the SDG Summit in September must be a moment of unity to provide a renewed impetus and accelerated actions for reaching the Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs” [3]. In its report, the UN states that the world has entered an “age of polycrisis” [1], where conflict, climate change, and COVID-19 are identified as the causes of several interrelated crises that threaten progress toward achieving the SDGs [1]. These global turbulences result in VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous) environments [4]. The term VUCA was transferred, by Johansen, from the military to the social sciences in 2013 [4]. It can be understood as an acronym that “captures essential elements of external environment of contemporary organizations” [5].

Describing business environments as volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, Johansen stated that the world was changing more rapidly and with greater threats than ever before [4], which causes “quick and chaotic changes, lack of standards, or the constant outdating of plans and projects” [6]. As causes of the accelerated development of VUCA environments, one could consider factors related to health, such as the COVID-19 pandemic that affected humans, societies, and economies within a short period, political (re-)actions to shifting business environments, and technological disruptions such as the breakthrough of artificial intelligence; these have opened up opportunities for some and risks for others. In this context, scholars discovered that, in contrast to previous thinking where strategies were developed for the long term and rigidly implemented, “the most successful business strategies in today’s world are those that are flexible and adaptive” [7], and so adaptability to rapid changing environments is being demanded from companies and their managers [6] more than ever. Hence, companies are searching for approaches that help to address complex and wicked problems [8,9]. As precisely this potential has been recognized in the science and practice of the Design Thinking method, it is not surprising that the idea of Design Thinking is experiencing a renaissance, not only for the innovation of new products but also for the transformation of companies [10].

The idea of Design Thinking originates from the research into using organized creativity to solve problems [9]. It was developed into a process-based method by which problems are first analyzed, then solutions are identified, evaluated, and finally implemented as answers to human needs [9]. With a process understanding that is creative rather than purely analytical in nature, Design Thinking is nowadays understood as “an iterative innovation and problem-solving process, which is based on specific principles (such as a focus on user needs, multidiscipliniariy, etc.) and uses specific methods (such as creative thinking, visualization, experimentation, etc.)” [11]. The concept of Design Thinking is currently being applied to both product and business innovation [10]. However, there are still gaps in research with regard to the organizational factors required to utilize Design Thinking in companies, not just for product and service innovation but also for the adaptation of companies to rapidly changing market environments [11]. So, Rösch for example calls for further research around cultures and the composition of teams that enable utilizing the potential of Design Thinking [11].

We are interested in studying the capabilities of company organizations with which adaptability can be generated. Our paper is based on the following two hypotheses:

H1.

To survive in today’s world of VUCA and turbulence, companies must be able to adapt sustainably to rapidly changing environments.

H2.

Design Thinking is a method that enables companies to adapt to rapidly changing market environments and to transform sustainably at both product and company level.

The research question of this paper:

Which organizational factors need to be cultivated in companies to utilize Design Thinking for sustainable innovation at both product and company levels?

Structure of this work:

The following Section 2 highlights essential conditions that need to be created at international political level in order to enable sustainable transformations of companies;
Section 3 presents how Design Thinking cannot only be used for product development but also for sustainable transformations of companies. It further demonstrates how the principles of Industry 5.0 and the idea of ecodesign can transform Design Thinking into a sustainable method;
Section 4 and Section 5 present a field study at E-Ventures, a company that operates as an operator for electric charging stations in various European countries. This field study identified a specific company DNA (consisting of a purposefully orchestrated staff diversity and a company mantra that affects all levels of the company);
Section 6 illustrates that this specific company DNA provides organizational key factors to utilize the full potential of Design Thinking for sustainable company transformations and thus answers the research question of this paper;
Section 7 summarizes the results and discusses the limitations of this study.

2. VUCA Dynamics and Their Development

Ultimately, Design Thinking is merely an instrument that can generate sustainable innovations only if the underlying intentions are also sustainable. This section examines important prerequisites for companies to generate sustainable innovations.

Naturally, there have been VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous) times before, but not at this “scale, the intensity and the speed” [4]. In the search for an effective way to deal with VUCA environments, it is worthwhile to research their causes. Johansen cites climate change, global warming, and other challenges as examples of factors that contribute to a VUCA world. The SDG Report 2023 makes a similar observation and describes an age of polycrisis, which has arisen as a result of a convergence of climate change, conflicts, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other global challenges [1]. According to Johansen, the volatility and uncertainty resulting from this environment can best be addressed with a clear vision (“Volatility can yield to vision; in a VUCA world, vision gets rewarded disproportionately” [4]) and a comprehensive understanding (“Uncertainty yields to understanding, whether it’s marketplace understanding, scientific understanding, or understanding of competition or consumers” [4]). This finding is supported by Nowacka, who also proclaims that the answer to volatility is vision [6]. She further states that “consequently, one of the main effects is the problem of defining and understanding the surrounding world by managers” [6]. So, a clear vision and a comprehensive understanding can be seen as fundamentally necessary for transforming companies sustainably.

At first glance, it can be noted that the UN has developed and initiated such a vision through the development of the 2030 Agenda, which can serve as a compass for sustainable economic activity and development. This trend toward greater sustainability can also be found in the mindsets of the global industry, where the idea of Industry 4.0 is evolving into a concept of Industry 5.0, described as “an open and evolving concept … moving towards a collaborative and co-creative vision of the World Industrial System of the future” [12] that inherits three characteristics, “human-centricity, sustainability, resiliency” [12].

However, if we look at the current reality, a different picture emerges. While there are “151 national governments having pledged to achieve net-zero emissions” [13], the reality is that “governments, in aggregate, still plan to produce more than double the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than what would be consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5 °C” [13]. These countries are “literally doubling down on fossil fuel production” [13]. The same picture emerges at the level of global corporations. In a global study on the economics of the global oil industry (study sample: Shell, TotalEnergies, BP, Equinor, Eni, Repsol, OMV, PKN Orlen, MOL, Wintershall Dea, Petrol Group, Ina Croatia [14]), Greenpeace found that the global oil majors reported the “highest profits in history” in 2022, with 99.7% of their energy volume coming from oil and gas production and only 0.3% from renewable energies [14]. Now, one might think that this is just the status quo, and that this ratio will change with investments in renewable energies. Unfortunately, however, the situation in the oil and gas industry also looks similar, with an investment share of around 93% in the continued exploitation of oil and gas reserves and only around 7% in sustainable energy production [14]. This dissent in the assessment of the climate crisis and its causes could also recently be observed at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 28). While Guterres emphasized the decisive influence of fossil fuels, “we cannot save a burning planet with a fire hose of fossil fuels. The 1.5-degree limit is only possible if we ultimately stop burning all fossil fuels. Not reduce. Not abate” [15], the President of the World Climate Conference in Dubai, Sultan Al-Jaber, doubted whether phasing out fossil fuels is even necessary to achieve the 1.5 degree target [16]. A look at the preservation of biodiversity (SDG 15 [17]) provides another example that raises questions about the sincere conviction of the stakeholders for the Sustainable Development Goals. While the declared SDG is to “halt biodiversity loss” [17] and studies by official institutions such as the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation have stated, already as far back as 2018, that “the use of pesticides containing glyphosate has a significant impact on biodiversity” [18], the EU Commission in November 2023 extended the approval of glyphosate for a further 10 years. These are just two examples that may raise the question of how far the SDGs actually represent a shared vision of the involved actors. The SDG Report 2023 is explicit in its assessment that 85% of progress toward achieving the SDGs is either “moderately or severely off track” or in “stagnation or regression” (“48% moderately or severely off track”, “37% stagnation or regression”, which means a “regression below the 2015 baseline” [1]). So, the UN report comes to a rather disillusioning conclusion: “At the midpoint of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, a sobering reality emerges: The world is falling short of meeting most of the Goals by 2030” [1].

Considering that the SDGs were adopted by all UN member states eight years ago, this presents a questionable picture. Whether and to what extent these controversies may be caused by lobbyist activities and conflicts of interest cannot be answered in this article and this is also not its aim. However, to what extent the key players share the vision of the SDGs and the motivation to act can be questioned. With this regard, Bainbridge and Roco note “incentive problems in which decision-makers simply lack the motivation to act or confront severe disincentives when addressing future issues” as another trap that organizations fall into with these issues [19].

Therefore, considering Johansen’s idea that “volatility can yield to vision” [4], in the absence of a shared vision among influential global players, such as politics and institutions, which can create the framework conditions for sustainable business, it can be assumed that volatility will continue to be fueled and intensify. In addition, the current picture of the acting nations poses the question of the extent to which the political actors, institutional players, and companies share the same understanding regarding the need for environmental sustainability. Johansen notes that “uncertainty yields to understanding, whether it’s marketplace understanding, scientific understanding, or understanding of competition or consumers” [4]. At the very least, there seems to be differences in the understanding of the causes that trigger VUCA, such as climate change, as well as in the question of to whom or what to keep an eye on to secure one’s own future viability. Does maximizing profits and growth ensure the continued existence of one’s own company or are sustainable transformations the path to sustainable survival? Thus, as long as the understanding of these issues diverges at these influential levels, uncertainty will remain, and “the complexity and unpredictability of our world… are apparent to most of us” [19]. It can be assumed that political and economic actors continue to head in different directions, which leads to the assumption that the dynamics and turbulence of the VUCA world will continue to accelerate rather than slow down. Additionally, as long as the global markets do not value sustainable business transformations the way they should be valued, these circumstances hinder companies from sustainably innovating and transforming themselves by applying innovative methods such as Design Thinking.

However, practice also shows a silver lining in the fact that innovations based on sustainable visions and an understanding of the intrinsic value of sustainability can be successful in these times of turbulence. The study on the “100 most sustainable companies of 2023 still flourishing in tumultuous times” confirms demand for the products of the Global Top 100 sustainable companies and their success: “They’ve outperformed the market through these last few tumultuous years” [20].

Summarizing, this section highlights three fundamentally important observations:

A common understanding and a shared vision of the value of sustainability are a prerequisite to utilizing Design Thinking for the sustainable transformation of companies in times of turbulence and VUCA.
There are still considerable differences in the understanding of the need and value of sustainability at the international level. It is questionable whether the sustainable vision of the SDGs is supported and consistently pursued by international politics and institutions. It can be assumed that this situation will further increase volatility on the markets and that uncertainty for companies will also increase rather than decrease. So, these differences remain a challenge for companies that want to transform themselves sustainably with the help of Design Thinking.
To enable sustainable transformation, it requires adaptable companies that can implement sustainable visions in these volatile and uncertain environments. Practice shows that adaptable and sustainably operating companies can still thrive in these environments.

3. Design Thinking for Product Development and Business Transformation

This section examines how Design Thinking can drive sustainable innovation not only at the product level but also on the strategic organizational level and what is needed to accomplish such sustainable transformations.

The future, “just as the present, will be full of “matters of concerns”, for which adaptive and reflexive learning on the fly will be critical” [19]. This requires “situating yourself as an observer in the system, dissociating from this system your own interests, and thinking about your position amidst the things being considered” [19]. This applies not only to the convergence of technologies examined in this context but also to the complex interdependencies between humans and nature [9], for example, to the range and complexity of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals. By addressing this complexity and sustainability issues, Design Thinking can be considered as an innovative, effective, and efficient human-centered problem-solving approach [9,21,22,23].

Thus, scholars also recognize the value of Design Thinking for management in general “as a problem-solving approach that enables decision-making in the face of wicked problems” [24] and as a trigger for sustainable organizational innovation [25]. Curious minds seek creative solutions and new insights by focusing on the question of “how things might be” [26], also reflecting on the problem itself by applying creativity “not only in developing new solutions, but also in interpreting and defining the problem addressed” [26]. In a small survey, Ardoin identified the five characteristics of Design Thinking to tackle sustainability issues: “Participatory and people-focused”, “Inspires creativity”, “Encourages diversity in thought and action”, “Adopts a holistic, systems thinking mindset”, and “Offers a streamlined, action-oriented process” [9]; see Figure 1.

Scholars acknowledge that Design Thinking not only provides value for product innovation but also for sustainable strategic and organizational business transformation [11,23]. Hence, Design Thinking is further scientifically developed into new concepts such as Hybrid Design Thinking, where Design Thinking is expanded by ideas from systems thinking, organizational learning, and action research [8]. This also helps in considering the interdependencies of ecological and social systems in the process of describing problems and finding solutions, thereby ultimately finding answers to the more comprehensive problems of environmental sustainability [8], which in turn can lead to the transformation of businesses. Design Thinking is thus gaining a new strategic role, “from designing novel products and services to delivering innovative strategies and supporting organizational transformations” [26].

Recognizing these developments, Magistretti compared the purpose of product and service innovation that he calls “innovation of solutions” [10] with the purpose of strategic and organizational transformation or “innovation of direction” [10]. For both use cases relevant for developing sustainable business, he asked what value Design Thinking could contribute to these use cases [10]. Based on data from 146 Design Thinking projects, he found that Design Thinking is especially effective in “capturing current user needs” and for “envisioning future society” in the area of product development (“innovation of solutions”) [10], whereas “challenging existing assumptions” is of special value for “innovation of direction” [10].

At this point, the question can be raised as to which capabilities should be cultivated in companies to leverage the potential of Design Thinking to effectively capture user needs in envisioning the future society and challenging existing assumptions. To answer this question, we refer to the discoveries of the Design Thinking Dynamic Capabilities made in the context of digital transformation of organizations [22]. Even though Magistretti’s study mirrors Design Thinking only in the case of digital transformation, we believe these capabilities are also compatible with the transformation goals of adaptability (to VUCA environments) and sustainability because complexity can be found regarding the challenges, digital transformation, and sustainable transformation in VUCA environments. Moreover, Design Thinking aims at “leading to more effective and sustainable solutions that address complex challenges” [23].

The five capabilities that need to be cultivated (Figure 1) are “Extending the knowledge base by gaining holistic knowledge through collaboration and close observation of different stakeholders”, “Debating the artificial and human perspectives, by challenging the initial technological challenge and adopting a critical approach”, “Cropping the alternative solutions and information, by empathizing with the user, thus transforming needs into relevant requirements”, “Interpreting by framing the problem under the point of view of different stakeholders that can lead to the identification of new opportunities”, and “Recombining artificial with human factors by associating all the clues within a holistic reframing” [22].

However, it can be debated whether Design Thinking, by itself, leads to sustainable solutions. Santa-Maria notes that “design thinking does not necessarily include sustainability considerations” [27]. Also, Habicher et al. state that although “especially for socially responsible firms, Design Thinking resulted to be very useful to encourage further socio-ecological transformation”, Design Thinking does not promote social change per se [28]. This still-glaring dichotomy becomes particularly clear when looking at one of the core characteristics of Design Thinking. While human-centricity is often referred to in Design Thinking today, it should be noted that user-centricity is the original characteristic [9,26]. The idea of humanity, however, is not necessarily included in user-centricity. User-centricity does not always lead to sustainable development but can also simply be aimed toward generating new income streams or cost reductions. Ultimately, Design Thinking is an approach that is used to pursue the goals and visions set by its sponsors. So, here again, as seen in Figure 1, for a shared sustainable vision that, in addition to economic objectives, includes human and environmental objectives [21,23] and is shared by actors, a foundation must be established for the development and implementation of sustainable innovations. In order to “shift away from a user-centric focus to a more systemic/holistic perspective” and thus strengthen a sustainable orientation [27], the inclusion of the three main characteristics of Industry 5.0, “Human-centricity”, “Sustainability” (incorporating the SDGs), and “Resiliency” (“the ability of a system to keep or recover quickly to a steady state”) [12] can foster the creation of sustainable visions, recognizing that humans are “intertwined with the natural environment and the ecological systems” [8].

This notion can also be reflected for the innovation of sustainable solutions. While researchers recognize the potential of Design Thinking to innovate sustainable solutions, they note that Design Thinking only leads to sustainable product and service innovations within a sustainable framework [29,30]. With this regard, the idea of ecodesign, “a systematic approach, which considers environmental aspects in design and development with the aim to reduce adverse environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of a product” [31] is gaining importance as a concept that, in combination with Design Thinking, leads to sustainable innovation of solutions. Ecodesign is understood as a product-centered concept [30], which is based on the idea of Life-Cycle Thinking, that can lead to environmentally friendly and resource-saving innovation of solutions, and can also result in cost advantages, new market opportunities, and a better image for companies [30,31,32].

“Life cycle thinking means the consideration of environmental aspects relevant to a product during its entire life cycle. This implies considering consecutive and interlinked stages, such as: material acquisition; design and development; manufacturing; delivery and installation; use (including reuse, maintenance, repair, remanufacturing, refurbishing and upgrading); end-of-life treatment; disposal” [31]. And so further standardizations, such as the ISO 59000 standards, which will be implemented in 2024 [33] “to harmonize the understanding of the circular economy” [34], are being developed in order to create a uniform understanding of sustainable innovation that will give more companies certainty to act [35].

However, it should be considered that companies also face challenges in the implementation of ecodesign standards, such as the perceived complexity and costly implementation of ecodesign tools and lack of knowledge regarding policy changes and information on the most significant environmental impacts [36]. In addition, companies see a hurdle in the demand for more “environmentally sound products” [36]. Landeta-Manzano et al. have drawn similar conclusions and call for changes at the economic and social levels; public and private institutions should use various instruments to promote the development of these practices, especially in large companies, so that they can have a pull effect on other companies [37]. The scholars see the promotion of public–private research so that more ecodesign tools are available to companies, the introduction of various types of eco-taxes or tax deductions, or the establishment of more demanding laws on environmental issues as instruments to supporting the diffusion of ecodesign in companies [37]. In this regard, it would be interesting for further research to accompany the establishment of ecodesign and, in particular, to investigate the extent to which the legal framework currently being developed supports the diffusion of ecodesign into companies through the development of standards and legal certainty or tends to hinder it through additional bureaucracy.

In any case, sustainable Design Thinking, which supports the transformation of a company on the basis of sustainable visions and merges with the concept of ecodesign at the level of innovation of solutions, can on the one hand support the achievement of the SDGs [38] and on the other foster the adaptability of companies and strengthen their resilience. Considering that in volatile markets characterized by uncertainty, rapid change, and complex challenges, a company’s ability to adapt and maintain resilience is critical to long-term success, Design Thinking incorporating Industry 5.0 principles and product-level merging with the concept of ecodesign can strengthen companies in developing solutions that are flexible, sustainable, human-centric, and thus not only responsive to immediate demands but also strengthening of long-term resilience and adaptability in a constantly changing market environment.

Summarizing this section:

Design Thinking can be utilized not only for product and service innovation, but also for organizational and strategic transformation.
Design Thinking Dynamic capabilities need to be cultivated to utilize Design Thinking.
The pursuit of sustainable visions and goals is crucial to establishing Design Thinking as a tool for sustainable transformation. Here, the integration of Industry 5.0 principles into company visions and goals enables sustainable organizational and strategic transformation through Design Thinking, which as a result can strengthen the company’s resilience.
The integration of Design Thinking with the concept of ecodesign fosters sustainable transformation on the product and service levels.

6. Discussion: How E-Ventures’ Organizational DNA Can Drive Business Innovation through Design Thinking

Scholars call for research on the organizational factors required to utilize the full potential of Design Thinking in companies [11]. This section discusses the findings from the previous section, answering the research question of this paper around cultures and diversity that enable the utilization of Design Thinking. It discusses in particular how orchestrating a purposeful diverse staff and implementing the Love–Trust–Do mantra help to realize the full potential of Design Thinking.

Diversity is a “necessary prerequisite for a healthy reflexive discourse on our technological futures and must be preserved and appreciated” [19], understanding diversity as “significant human expertise…in all the domains that comprise the system” [19]. Tavanti also emphasizes the idea of diversity, especially for sustainability: “Sustainable leaders should work to build a diverse workforce that reflects the communities in which their organization operates, and that encourages diversity of thought, experience, and perspective” [23]. Then, in Meinel and Leifer, Ardoin broke it down for Design Thinking by finding, in their survey results, that diversity is an important principle of Design Thinking when it comes to sustainability [9], which is underpinned by Santa-Maria, who points out the potential of Design Thinking to foster the integration of a diversity of perspectives through the inclusion of multidisciplinary and diverse teams, thereby generating sustainable innovation [27]. Hence, the importance of diversity for sustainable transformation through Design Thinking is indisputable. However, it is too late to start considering the aspect of diversity when staffing Design Thinking teams, since this would mean that the actors can only rely on the resources that are available to them. It is therefore more important to already pay attention to the staffing of the organization regarding the right level of diversity needed to meet the challenges faced by the company. E-Ventures uses four central criteria to find the right balance; see Table 1. In addition to the diversity criteria, the management also pays attention to the hiring process in identifying candidates who come with a purpose, match with the company’s sustainable vision “building a sustainable world by providing green energy charging for everyone, everywhere”, build trust, and perform as creators in uncertain and turbulent environments. These can be considered as further important factors that help to create a culture in which adaptability trough Design Thinking can be developed and fostered. As Rösch noted, Design Thinking requires “a culture that allows participants to be creative and considers failures to be important insights” [11].

Next, for a sustainable vision [21,23] that is shared by all actors, a foundation needs to be established for the development and implementation of sustainable innovations of solutions or directions. Based on their vision of “building a sustainable world by providing green energy charging for everyone, everywhere” in combination with their drive to operationalize their vision through a network of sustainable partnerships, E-Ventures already seeded the idea of a shared vision that consists of the main characteristics of Industry 5.0, “Human-centricity”, “Sustainability” (incorporating the SDGs) and “Resiliency” (“the ability of a system to keep or recover quickly to a steady state”) [12], and drives commitment through love in their company DNA. To what extent this set-up has also led to an integration of the idea of ecodesign could not be explicitly observed, but it can be noted that the company provides 100% certified green energy at its charging stations, which underlines the aim of resource-saving innovation. In any case, it could be observed that ensuring a common sustainable direction happens in the seed stage, even before cultivating the needed Dynamic Design Thinking capabilities; see Figure 5. This corresponds with the recommendations from research that sustainable development must be integrated into the entire business process “rather than merely adding ‘sustainability’ as an additional need” [29].

Trust works in several ways, as an enabler and amplifier of Design Thinking Dynamic Capabilities; see Figure 5. First, a sound foundation of trust in the ability of the actors to draw the right conclusions, trust in best purpose and efforts, see Figure 2, cultivates the capabilities of extending, debating, and cropping [22] because in an age of complexity and ambiguity, the “discomfort of not knowing” [56] arises, and so the company leaders need to trust in the actors’ ability to appropriately “re-frame problems, examine possibility, and make meaning” [56]. Conversely, the actors also need to be able to trust in their stakeholders’ ability to observe and assess their environment. Second, to foster the Design Thinking Dynamic Capability of “recombining”, both the Design Thinking actors and their sponsors need to trust in the designers’ capabilities [57]. As the design leader Jon Kolko noted in his work for the Michigan Institute of Technology, “there is no visible connection between the input and the output; often, even the designers themselves are unable to articulate exactly why their design insights are valuable” [57]. Third, trust creates transparency, and the actors open up and share successes and failures, which leads to the foundation of iterative learning loops and, moreover, fosters a culture that considers “failures to be important insights” [11].

Finally, “a fundamental tenet of human-centered design is to do” [58]. By injecting do into its corporate DNA, E-Ventures supports its actors to trust in themselves, accept failures as part of the game, take action, and actively engage, which aligns support to create and win; see Figure 4. Through this mindset, actors can reach a mode of acceptance, relax their minds [59] and, as a result, create a Design Thinking framework where experimentation, learning, and recombination occur rapidly until the desired transformation into innovations of solutions or directions is achieved; see Figure 5.

Thus, Love–Trust–Do does not only help in seeding a sustainable vision and cultivating Dynamic Design Thinking Capabilities but also supports the operationalization of sustainable Design Thinking that leads to sustainable transformations. In turn, Design Thinking can also have a positive effect on the company mindset, especially for those with a high level of domain expertise [24], since “over time, expertise tends to become cognitively entrenched, leading to a loss of flexibility” [24]; thus, it allows for new experiences and learning from stakeholders, holistic thinking, and consideration of new perspectives for adapting to changing conditions [24]. When the establishment of Design Thinking focuses on its users instead of the dogmatic implementation of the method itself [24], it can help domain experts “tune their existing schemas to develop flexibility in expertise” [24].

Summarizing this section:

The E-Ventures DNA, consisting of a purposefully orchestrated diversity of employees in combination with the company mantra “Love–Trust–Do”, impacts all transnational levels of the organization, laying a foundation through which the full potential of Design Thinking can be realized
The sustainable company vision, which considers the principles of Industry 5.0, is essential for the realization of sustainable transformations through Design Thinking.

7. Conclusions

This paper recognizes the potential of Design Thinking when based on sustainable visions and integrating the concept of ecodesign at the level of product innovation. By integrating Design Thinking into the cycle of continuous improvement of management systems, innovations of products, and transformations on the organizational and strategic levels, companies can enable sustainable transformations of their business. It can be concluded that Design Thinking offers a method for companies to innovate products and transform businesses sustainably, which can result in strengthening the companies’ adaptability and resilience in turbulent environments. To leverage its full potential, certain organizational factors must be in place. This study contributes to identifying these factors, emphasizing the importance of diversity and team composition on the one hand and, on the other hand, presents an orchestration of diversity that can support utilization of the full potential of Design Thinking. So, this study underscores the strategic recruitment of employees who are aligned with the company’s purpose. It further points out how a balance between domain expertise, management experience, corporate work experience, and entrepreneurial spirit fosters the company’s intended level of diversity. This diversity supports systemic thinking and human-centric innovation, enhancing resilience and adaptability.

Our research underscores additional factors crucial for harnessing Design Thinking’s potential, addressing a gap in the literature regarding the cultivation of these elements. The concept of Love–Trust–Do emerges as pivotal in fostering a culture that underpins the organization’s sustainable vision, encouraging fearless and proactive engagement with uncertainty and ensuring ownership across all levels. This approach, combined with the company’s intended level of diversity and sustainable leadership, amplifies innovation and the company’s sustainable impact, and can be seen as an essential foundation for sustainable Design Thinking.

This case study also has obvious limitations. On the one hand, it is limited to a young, growing company whose sustainable success will have to be demonstrated in the coming years. Nevertheless, it can be stated that this young company has already grown to having over 5000 charging points in several European countries in recent years.

In addition, the extent to which these results can be transferred to companies of other sizes and sectors as well as to other countries and cultures still needs to be examined. The fact that E-Ventures already operates in various European countries could be a first indicator of the transferability to other European companies of a similar size and with a similar business model.

Future research could accompany E-Ventures in its development and further explore the extent to which this mantra has sustainably strengthened adaptability and how this adaptability has, in turn, contributed to sustainable development and economic success.

In summary, it can be said that the findings of this case study based on a theoretical model developed in Section 5 provide insights into factors that help in realizing the full potential of Design Thinking for sustainable business transformation. Its practical applicability needs to be investigated in further research.

[ad_2]