Write an Inspirational Design Brief (IDB) – Management Assignment Help

Assignment Task

 

This is an individual assignment, and you are required to complete the task and submit it via Turnitin by the set deadline. The task is simple, you are required to identify and describe a project that aims to provide a mix of real and virtual solutions for a specified problem faced by the society. The solution will be designed to meet one of the United Nations sustainable development goals (SDG). Hence, you are tasked to write an Inspirational Design Brief (IDB) as a first iteration of your concept that will inspire action within your organisation to meet one of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The IDB needs to be based on an original concept that explains the aims, objectives and requirements of your embryonic ideas. The document must relay issues of “who, what, when, how and why” to the design team.

Assignment Guide:

Empathise, Define and generate ideas that will inspire the design team to do something fresh and exciting.
Focus on communication, education, engagement and sustainability.
Be responsible, be brave, reduce carbon, be kind.

The aim of your IDB is to relay your ideas and needs (based on requests from a range of stakeholders to external design service providers. In order to be successful, your IDB should inspire creativity and challenge the ‘status quo’, rather than describe existing solutions.

What should you write about?
First, you need to frame and plan your concept, which will outline your proposed project. Simply put, state the “problem definition” you are working on, and how you plan to learn about it through validated research (called your method). Initially you will read broadly to underpin your thinking and use this as evidence to support your rationale for change. How Might We… do things differently?
Within each theme there may be a variety of sub-problems. First, your primary research will help you to unpack the problem. In-depth knowledge of and empathy with the potential users of your solutions is critical and defining the problem is key to success.

You are expected to organise and run a focus group (workshops) and, if relevant, do some field observation (both techniques will be discussed in class and in the module materials). You will also be asked to produce and collect data in the workshop sessions.

It is important that you document all of your research properly, and you may be required to provide evidence later in the course.


Indicative Contents :

Front Cover – Include (a) an original image taken by yourself, (b) the Executive Summary from section 5, (c) Your Student Number

Introduction: Say why you chose this organisation and present your research question as a How Might We challenge (HMW?): Describe the problem, main dimensions, stakeholders, and context. Make sure the reader understands the background and what kind of solutions you are presenting.

Strategy: First outline any underlying assumptions of the business. Then describe what the project attempt to achieve and define the purpose of the project. You may wish to use the following headings to organise these sections.
Philosophy –What is the history of the company as well as its values, police, mission and strategic intent? How is the brand communicated? (Conventional metrics – Achievement of strategic goal)
Structure – Which business category does the firm operate? What is the firm’s business model and how is it vertically and horizontally integrated? What are its competitive advantages?
Innovation – What is the innovation area of the business (technology, finance, process, offering or delivery)? Is the innovation type breakthrough or incremental? What is the organisation’s level of ambition? What are the core competences of the organisation are they sufficient at this time? (Conventional metrics –Research and Development Budget, number of patents/copyrights, % of revenues of new products)

Context: In this section, discuss the core aims and objectives of the project and it’s environmental sustainability and viability. The following 3 headings will be useful.
Social/human – what are your users and other stakeholders cultural connection, identity, needs, behaviour and activities? (Conventional metrics –Satisfaction with product, satisfaction with ease of use, employee satisfaction)
Environment – what are the environmental concerns (to be mitigated)?
Viability – what are the expectations regarding market share, earnings per share, and return on investment as related to the time horizon? (Some form of Market Data/Analysis would be useful here). (Conventional metrics –Revenue/sales, market share, net income, % of new customers’ sales, % of repeat customers’ sales)

Performance: In this section you should consider collaborative working practices and partnerships. Consider issues like intellectual property, community, capacity management, openness and how this will be honoured.
Process – what is the project budget (ballpark figures), schedule and deliverables? How are these aligned and coordinated with other projects your company is involved in? (Clue: Identify some similarly scaled initiatives, to understand total project costs).
Function – What are the main functions and features of the product/service
Expression – what are the brand attributes, design language and design principles that seem to be most relevant?


The Collaborative Working Environment: This assessment will be completed and submitted on an individual basis and you are responsible for your own work. However, you are expected to interact and collaborate with peers (other students). Therefore, you will need to be proactive in building a collaborative, constructive working environment. Regular attendance to the taught sessions, particularly the seminars, will help you greatly as there will be focused help available in the sessions. If you are inspired by other student’s ideas in the seminars, it is good practice to reference them in your work.
 

Outstanding quality
Understanding of design thinking through the correct application of design thinking techniques (25%) The submission shows little, if any, evidence of comprehension of the module aims and contents. The submission arguments are mostly based on common sense, rather than design thinking frameworks and methods. The submission makes attempts at applying design thinking concepts and techniques to the problem. However, there are significant gaps, arguments could be clearer and/or techniques are used erroneously. The submission draws on an overall adequate understanding of the module contents. The student thinks as a designer, and applies several techniques competently, despite some contradictions or conceptual errors. The submission builds on a good grasp of the module contents, and there is evidence of good understanding of relevant concepts and techniques. Some minor mistakes remain, and relatively complex ideas are not fully explored. The submission approaches the problem as a professional designer might, and shows excellent understanding of design thinking. A variety of concepts, frameworks, and methods are applied thoroughly. As of A, but the application of design thinking is particularly insightful and skilled, beyond the concepts and techniques explicitly revised in the module.
Critical thinking and creativity in order to produce articulated arguments and original ideas (25%) The submission lacks in originality, evidencing little or no critical thinking. It is mostly descriptive and/or paraphrases third-party materials. Any ideas presented are trivial or mere replications or existing solutions There are some attempts at critical thinking. However, arguments are given with insufficient evidence. Ideas show limited originality Arguments are consistent, and adequately backed by evidence. Ideas are original, and show some creativity, even if they are not particularly insightful. Clear evidence of critical thinking. Arguments are backed up with effective evidence. The submission contemplates a range of creative design ideas Excellent critical thinking. Arguments and analysis are very consistent, articulated, and interesting. Wide range of very creative ideas, possibly including some counterintuitive and/or radically new solutions. As of A, but arguments and proposed solutions are both exceptionally original and insightful.
Meaningful primary research and handling of information (40%) The submission evidences little or lousy primary research. Large and/or vital pieces of information are missing. Arguments are not supported by evidence. There is evidence of limited primary research using adequate design thinking methods. The information obtained is incomplete, not very relevant, or interpreted confusingly. The submission draws from mostly competent primary research. Enough empirical evidence is presented to support arguments. Research could be more insightful if approached from a proper design thinking mind-set. The submission evidences thorough and competent primary research that builds on a design thinking mind-set. Excellent primary research skills. The students approaches the project as a design thinker, empathises with users, and the skilful and thoughtful research helps uncover the ultimate nature of the design challenge. As of A, but the approach to research is particularly relevant, scholarly, and insightful.

Communication
Attentions to accuracy, consistency, appearance, efficiency and usability.
Writing style is not professional. Major improvements needed in more than one or all of these areas: writing style, submission structure and presentation, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and paragraphing. No referencing standard is used. The work is hard to read. The submission conveys its intended meaning, although readability leaves room for improvement in at least one of these areas: spelling, grammar, punctuation, paragraphing, or presentation. Harvard referencing style is used inconsistently. The document follows a consistent submission structure; sections and subsections are used to enhance readability. Writing and presentation are adequate. There are several minor mistakes in terms of grammar, punctuation, referencing, or spelling. The submission is written in an effective and professional manner, and it is highly readable. Presentation is mostly correct, with a good use of tables and figures. A few minor mistakes remaining. The writing style is very clear, engaging, and easy to read. Submission structure is professional. Presentation is excellent, with skilful use of visual elements. No spelling, grammar, punctuation, referencing, and paragraphing mistakes. As of A, but presentation are structure are of an exceptionally high professional standard. Writing is also exceptionally effective and appealing, engaging the reader and greatly contributing to the appeal of the arguments.