Design Thinking: What is Design Thinking & Creative Intelligence?

Within corporate environments, design and delivery work often spans the full lifecycle of a problem or opportunity: from identification and framing through to solution design, implementation, and eventual retirement. Across this landscape, one recurring challenge is the tendency of organisations to pursue “silver bullet” solutions or adopt the latest management and delivery trend—whether ITIL, UML, RUP, Agile, or otherwise—without fully understanding the intent, discipline, or conditions required for their effective use. As a result, tools and methods are often applied superficially, misaligned to context, or forced onto problems for which they are poorly suited.

To address the relationship between design thinking and creative intelligence meaningfully, it is useful to define each concept separately before considering their connection.

Figure 1. (Gibson et al., 2015)

Design thinking is commonly understood as a systematic and collaborative approach to identifying and creatively solving problems. Luchs et al. (2016) frame it broadly in terms of two major phases: identifying problems and solving problems. While there is no single universally accepted definition, the concept is generally treated as a structured approach to design-oriented inquiry and action. As Lockwood (2011) notes, design thinking is not an exact science, nor does it have one definitive interpretation. Even so, it can be understood as a set of principles and practices that guide how problems are framed, explored, and addressed through design.

Creative intelligence, by contrast, refers to the capabilities involved in generating, developing, locating, scrutinising, envisaging, and making assumptions about ideas. Jager and Muller (2020) describe creative intelligence as being shaped both by environmental conditions and by the cognitive processes used in different contexts, including the search for novel possibilities, the recognition of unexpected opportunities, and the formulation of responses to customer needs or complex problems. Benedek et al. (2014) further suggest that intelligence and working memory can enhance the perception and integration of stimuli during creative thought, thereby strengthening the quality of creative outcomes.

Taken together, design thinking and creative intelligence are closely related. Design thinking provides a structured process for moving through uncertainty, while creative intelligence supports the generation, interpretation, and refinement of ideas within that process. One offers discipline and direction; the other expands the range and richness of what may be conceived.

Gibson et al. (2015) present an eight-step approach to design thinking that captures this interplay particularly well. The approach begins by framing a specific challenge and committing attention to the problem. It then moves into research: reviewing existing work, drawing on known knowledge, and studying the subject in depth. This is followed by immersion, in which the problem is explored persistently and a wide range of potential solutions is considered using the knowledge available.

From there, the process recognises an important but often overlooked stage: reaching a roadblock and experiencing creative frustration. Rather than treating frustration as failure, the model positions it as a natural phase within creative effort. The next step is relaxation—stepping back, detaching from the problem, and allowing it to incubate in the unconscious mind. This period of disengagement is not unproductive; rather, it creates the mental conditions for insight.

The later stages involve arriving at an illuminating insight that shifts perspective, encouraging active daydreaming and allowing emerging ideas to flourish, and then experimenting with and testing those ideas in a spirit of judgement, iteration, and creative development. This sequence reflects an important principle of design thinking: insight is not simply an act of inspiration, but the outcome of disciplined engagement, cognitive release, and practical testing.

Gibson et al. (2015) also compare this approach with Thomas Edison’s working methods. Edison’s practice illustrates how intensive focus, exhaustive research, experimentation, frustration, detachment, and eventual insight can function together within a creative process. According to Gibson’s account, Edison approached design and invention with a consuming focus on clearly defined challenges. He began by studying prior work extensively, using existing knowledge as the foundation for further inquiry. From there, he engaged in relentless experimentation, testing possibilities through repeated trial and error until a workable solution began to emerge.

This process inevitably involved repeated dead ends and moments of frustration. Yet Edison’s method also included deliberate breaks, changes of activity, and periods of rest that allowed ideas to incubate. In this sense, his approach reinforces a central lesson of design thinking: sustained effort is essential, but so too is the ability to step back. Insight often arises not at the peak of force, but after force has been released.

Edison’s work on the incandescent light bulb provides a particularly useful example. His team investigated thousands of potential filament materials before identifying a commercially viable direction. The process was not linear, nor was it guided by immediate certainty. Instead, it moved through research, experimentation, failure, reflection, and synthesis. The eventual insight was not isolated from this process; it was produced by it.

This relationship between immersion and release is central to both design thinking and creative intelligence. Saturation in the problem space builds familiarity, depth, and tension. Temporary disengagement creates the mental flexibility required for new combinations and perspectives to emerge. Once an idea begins to take shape, it can be refined, developed, and tested for practical value. Even when an idea fails, progress has still been made: inertia has been broken, learning has occurred, and the creative process continues to move forward.

In this sense, design thinking is not simply a method for solving predefined problems. It is also a disciplined way of engaging uncertainty, complexity, and possibility. Creative intelligence strengthens this process by enabling the perception of patterns, opportunities, and connections that might otherwise remain unseen. Together, they form a powerful basis for innovation, particularly in environments where complexity resists formulaic solutions.

References

Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Sommer, M., Arendasy, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: The common and differential involvement of executive functions in intelligence and creativity. Intelligence, 46, 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.007

Gibson, R. (2015). Part 4: How big ideas are built. In The four lenses of innovation: A power tool for creative thinking (pp. 204–285). John Wiley & Sons.

Jager, C. de, & Muller, A. (2020). Chapter 3: Creative intelligence (CQ). In Creative intelligence CQ@play: Shaping your future in the fourth industrial revolution (pp. 39–45). Knowledge Resources.

Lockwood, T. (2011). Thinking from both sides. In Design thinking: Integrating innovation, customer experience and brand value (p. 13). Allworth Press.

Luchs, M. G., Swan, K. S., & Griffin, A. (2016). Design thinking: New product development essentials for the PDMA. Wiley.