Rethinking Design Thinking: What Actually Drives Performance

A new Journal of Applied Psychology study puts Design Thinking head-to-head with After Action Review (AAR) in a randomized controlled trial. The study examined which method better supported learning, collaboration, and ultimately, performance. Researchers followed 89 teams in a Fortune 500 manufacturing company over six months. Researchers randomly assigned teams to use either Design Thinking, AAR, or a traditional team-building exercise.

The results were clear.

Design Thinking demonstrated superior performance across key metrics:

📈 Teams using Design Thinking showed greater gains in effectiveness and efficiency
🎓 Researchers linked these improvements to stronger team learning climates and clearer understanding of team member expertise
🪢 These effects persisted even in high-variety, high-complexity environments

Despite skepticism that Design Thinking has run its course, this study demonstrates that when applied with intention and structure—not as a buzzword or brainstorming session—it can drive measurable, strategic outcomes.

At Alderman+Ward, we're always curious about what actually works—not just what's popular or trendy. This research reinforces that the right method, applied with purpose, can outperform even the most established practices.

📄 Chen et al., 2025 Journal of Applied Psychology – DOI 10.1037/apl0001277
https://lnkd.in/gNKbSzc8