As an HPT practitioner you may have observed the Design Thinking (DT) trend emerge in corporate America over the past decade or so and thought to yourself “how is this any different than what I already do?” The truth is, there are many commonalities, but there are also differences. At their core, both HPT and DT are methods used to identify and solve problems. In this post I will compare my experience with HPT Performance Analysis and DT’s Empathize and Define stages.
The HPT Model consists of four stages, supported by change management, the first three stages are linear while Evaluation is embedded into each stage. In my experience, Performance Analysis is the primary contribution of HPT, while the approach one uses to solve problems depends on the required solution (see graphic below).
The DT Model contains five stages and is a cyclical model. Two important concepts in DT are Human (User)-Centered Design, and Observe, Test, Iterate, & Learn. Don Norman (2013) said “even if we understand an object on a cognitive or intellectual level we might still hate using it, which makes that design a failure.” Human-Centered Design is an approach we might use to mitigate that risk. Observe, Test, Iterate, & Learn is a repeated cycle throughout the DT process, which you can learn more about using the link provided.
Discussion
Root Cause Analysis
The Performance Analysis stage of the HPT model would encompass the Empathize and Define stages of DT. HPT practitioners begin with a business problem, then conduct a Performance Analysis by researching and gathering information from a variety of sources, synthesizing to understand the work environment and individual performance factors, and identifying performance gaps and root causes. Tools like the Thomas Gilbert’s Behavioral Engineering Model enable practitioners to look at the business environment systemically and systemically.
Design Thinking practitioners also begin with a business problem, however, their tactics quickly shift to a human centered approach. I always say “with Design Thinking we use the business problem to point us in the right direction.” Design Thinkers gather information in the Empathize stage similar to HPT practitioners. There are essentially three approaches to gathering information: interviews, observation, and immersion. DT practitioners will most often take steps to collect just enough information to move forward and use feedback in later stages to validate their assumptions. Information is typically synthesized as it is gathered in an effort to generate themes, insights, and opportunities (root causes), which is characterized as the Define stage. Visual techniques like empathy maps and journey maps are used to understand the target audience. The 5 why’s is a typical exercise DT practitioners will use to identify root causes (which they refer to using a variety of titles other than “root cause”). Finally, root causes are re-framed into human problem statements, often in the form of a “how-might-we” statement. Because Human Centered Design is essential to Design Thinking, the re-framing of root causes to human centered statements a non-negotiable step.
In Practice
I find the HPT and DT models serve different needs and can be used together or separate depending on your situation. In my experience, HPT approaches tend to be more systemic but also typically result in business-focused problem framing. I keep Roger Chevalier’s (2012) updated Behavioral Engineering Model (BEM) in my pocket at the beginning of every project and keep it updated as I gather evidence throughout the project. Although my team may not be responsible for solving all of the problems we uncover, it can be value added in a performance conversation when stakeholders are searching for answers. Tools like the BEM are also helpful ways to identify the need for job aids and other types of tools that can be used in the workflow. My approach to research and design though follows the Design Thinking Observe, Ideate, Test, and Learn approach. Our research questions initially focus more on understanding root causes and the target audience than on task analysis (though if documentation is available we would try to put one together if there’s time). We say “you don’t want to just walk a mile in your audiences shoes, you want to walk a hundred miles.” We like to apply the 5 Why’s to the BEM or other analysis tools which lead us to what we hope are the true root causes, then we re-frame those statements to human problem statements. It’s these re-framed statements that we would use next to select interventions.
Of course, this is all very simplified, books could be written about this subject. We would love to hear your feedback in the comments below. What is your experience with HPT and Design Thinking?
References
Chevalier, R. (2002). Updating the Behavioral Engineering Model. Retrieved from: https://hpttreasures.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/updating-the-behavior-engineering-model-roger-d-chevalier.pdf
Dessinger, J. C., Moseley, J. L., & Tiem, D. M. V. (2012). Performance Improvement / HPT Model: Guiding the Progress. Performance Improvement, 51, 10-17.
Friis Dam, R. & Yu Siang, T. (2020). Design Thinking: get a quick overview of the history. Retrieved from: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/design-thinking-get-a-quick-overview-of-the-history
Friis Dam, R. & Yu Siang, T. (2020). 5 stages in the Design Thinking process. Retrieved from: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-process
HPT Manual. (2021). Gilbert’s behavioral engineering model. Retrieved from: https://hptmanual.weebly.com/gilberts-behavioral-engineering-model.html
NNG Group. (2018). Observe, test, iterate, learn. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgPppwsocRU
NNG Group. (2018). Principles of human-centered design (Don Norman). Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmM0kRf8Dbk
Norman, D. (2013). User-centered design. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl2LkzIkacM
Sudden Compass. (2021). Business question to human question. Retrieved from: Human Question: https://designsprintkit.withgoogle.com/methodology/phase1-understand/business-question-human-question
Sudden Compass. (2021). How might we. Retrieved from: https://designsprintkit.withgoogle.com/methodology/phase1-understand/hmw-sharing-and-affinity-mapping
Tedx Talks. (2016). Reframing problems. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL5ShvhyaXc&t=613s
UC Berkley. (2016). Problem framing in design thinking. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ms9TZxDx9xE
HPT Treasures - for Evidence Based Performance Improvement 
One thought on “Performance Analysis vs Design Thinking”