The value of design
Design is
really about
creating value.

Design thinking is a diagnostic tool. A strategic business problem is never limited to the effects that are seen, but always to a deeper problem. Investigating such problems is what opens the door to new strategic opportunities. We believe that understanding business issues requires that we look at the influence of the diverse vectors of technology, culture, language, and behavior.

It’s a different way of thinking about the purpose and value of design. Some people call it business design or design thinking. Many of the world’s leading business strategists say that design thinking is a powerful tool for building value-creating companies. Design thinking develops deeper, richer, more sustainable models of profitability and value.

Strategy is
the design
of value.

We believe that the task of strategy is to design how an organization creates value.

Design is an innovation tool. Treating a business problem as a problem of design leads to a diversity of unique insights into its causes and effects. A deeper understanding of the problem’s dynamics focuses attention on creating alignment between the organization and its strategy for creating value.

Our greatest ambition as designers is to improve the businesses we serve.

What is seen and
what is unseen.

Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850)

“In the economic sphere an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them.

There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.

Yet this difference is tremendous; for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the later consequences are disastrous, and vice versa. Whence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good that will be followed by a great evil to come, while the good economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.”

How we work Partners Contact