MMM276 Design Thinking Assessment Task 2 T1 2025 | DU

MMM276 Description 

MMM276 Purpose 

This task provides you with opportunities to apply the main principles and tools of creativity, innovation, and design thinking to design by empirically exercising design thinking principles and tools in a team context to solve complex and real-life problems (ULO1; ULO2; GLO1; GLO4). Moreover, this task allows you to professionally communicate design thinking concepts, processes and products (ULO3; GLO2). By completing this task, you will develop your skills in researching, understanding, applying, evaluating, and presenting information required for Design Thinking principles and related concepts such as creativity and innovation in solving complex and real-life problems. 

Context 

For this task, imagine you are part of a team in your future organisation and need to solve a complex problem that requires understanding your clients needs properly and coming up with a solution to meet their needs and demands. 

Specific Requirements 

In this task, you are expected to deliver a group presentation (Task 2A) and a written report (Task 2B) on solving a problem using Design Thinking principles and tools. For this task, you need to form a group of 4 members by the end of week 5. Here is some policy regarding your group formation: 

• Point 1: You must form groups with other students in the same seminar session as yourself.
• Point 2: If you do not manage to find a group (and then self-enrol yourself in one of the available groups via the unit site) by the end of week 5, then the system will automatically allocate you randomly to a new group. There is nothing your unit chair can do at this stage, unfortunately. Such random allocation by the system means you might end up being the only one in that group (and hence need to do the assignment alone). This also means you might end up being in a group with students from other seminar sessions, making it difficult to meet and work together. It also makes it difficult to submit. 
• If any of the above two points occur, you will lose 5% of your mark in this assignment for each point. 

Below are the specific requirements for Task 2A and 2B, respectively. 

TASK 2A: Understanding The Problem Through Design Thinking

Due: Monday, Week 8, 8:00 AM AEST (Online submission via CloudDeakin and in-class presentation) 

In this task, your team will engage in the first two stages of Design Thinking—Empathise and Define—to uncover a meaningful problem affecting real people. The goal is to apply design thinking principles and tools (ULO1), critically reflect on their impact (ULO2), and professionally communicate insights (ULO3). Your presentation should demonstrate your ability to gather insights, challenge assumptions, and articulate a clear problem statement, without jumping to solutions. 

Presentation Structure 

Your presentation should go for no more than 5 minutes and must address the elements set out below. You are not required to follow this guidance strictly (so you can change the order or merge elements), but by the end of your presentation, each of these criteria should be clear. When you are presenting, you must demonstrate that you are working as a collaborative team - avoid 'divide and conquer approaches'.

1. Introduction: Framing the Challenge (less than 1min)

Provide a concise introduction that includes: 

• Your team's overall focus and objectives.
• An overview of the process followed in exploring the problem space.
• Reflection on how your team collaborated and applied design thinking principles. Contributions from each team member (without focusing on rigid percentages).
• Hint: Don't spend too much time introducing your team and telling us about your strengths and contributions - instead, demonstrate that you work together well through the way you present consistent slides, you support each other in the presentation, and you demonstrate empathy and communication together. 
  Why? To demonstrate communication skills (GLO2) and reflect on the design thinking process (ULO2). 

2. Identifying the People Behind the Problem (approx. 2 mins) 

Describe the real people experiencing the challenge, emphasizing: 

• Who they are: Provide meaningful insights into their lives, behaviours, and context.
• Why it matters: What makes their problem significant?
• How you engaged: Explain how you connected with them through field observations, empathy interviews, or other design thinking and ethnographic tools.
• Hint: Your focus should be on what you learned from using the tools rather than describing what you did. Explain why you chose the tools you chose and whether they worked the way you expected them to. Use storytelling to bring their experiences to life. Why? This section of your report will help you demonstrate that you can use empathy-driven methods (ULO1, GLO1). 

3. Understanding User Perspectives Using Empathy Tools (approx. 2 mins) 

Explore the people that you're innovating for in greater depth by leveraging tools such as: 

• Empathy Maps: Capture what users think, feel, say, and do.
• Journey Mapping: Visualise their experience and pain points over time.

Ideation: Exploring a Range of Possibilities 

Describe your ideation process and how you generated multiple ideas without narrowing too soon. Consider: 

• Diverse perspectives: How did you leverage different viewpoints within your team and stakeholders?
• Creative techniques: What methods did you use to generate ideas (e.g., brainstorming, SCAMPER, mind mapping, bodystorming)?
• Idea selection criteria: How did you decide which ideas to take forward for prototyping and testing?
• Encourage students to focus on the breadth and depth of their ideation process, showing how they avoided early convergence and allowed unexpected possibilities to emerge.
• Key Focus: Demonstrate creativity and an openness to exploring unconventional solutions. 

Why?This demonstrates the ability to apply design thinking tools (ULO1, GLO1) to generate diverse ideas, focusing on exploration rather than premature convergence on a single solution. Remember that your team should approach ideation broadly and creatively before locking in on a single solution - you'll be assessed on the quality of the process you engaged in rather than whether we think your idea is a good one 

Evaluating and Selecting a Concept 

What to include: 

• The criteria your team used to evaluate and prioritise potential solutions.
• How did you balance desirability, feasibility, and viability? 
• Explanation of why the chosen concept aligns best with user needs.
• Stakeholder perspectives are considered in decision-making. 

Why? This element addresses critical thinking skills (ULO2, GLO4), requiring students to make informed decisions based on user insights and practical constraints, rather than personal biases or assumptions. 

Prototyping for Learning, Not Perfection 

Illustrate how your team created and used low-fidelity prototypes to test assumptions and gain insights. 

What to include: 

• Prototyping approach: What types of prototypes did you create (e.g., sketches, role-playing, digital mock-ups)?
• HINT - A picture is better than 1000 words! Include your diagram or a photo of your prototype and use your word count to describe its purpose and how it helped you understand the problem or your proposed solution. Did your prototype simply help you articulate your idea, or did it help you test or validate an assumption or hypothesis of some kind?
• Purposeful iteration: How did prototypes help clarify the problem or validate key assumptions?
• The testing plan includes how you will gather feedback from users.
• Key metrics or observations that will inform further refinement.
• A reflection on potential biases or assumptions in your testing process.
• HINT: Focus on learning from both successes and failures, highlighting a growth mindset and adaptability.
• HINT: Key Focus: Demonstrate a structured and ethical approach to gathering and analysing feedback.
• HINT: You are encouraged to embrace low-cost/no-cost, quick iterations and recognize prototypes as learning tools rather than final products. 

Why? Focusing on the iterative nature of prototyping and testing (ULO1, ULO3, GLO1) allows students to demonstrate how they validate ideas with real users and refine their concepts based on evidence rather than assumptions. 

Final Proposal and Next Steps 

What to include: 

• A summary of the proposed solution and its key features/benefits.
• Potential next steps in development or implementation.
• Considerations for ongoing refinement and iteration.
• A reflection on the learning journey and team collaboration. 

Why? Professional communication (ULO3, GLO2) is crucial here, as students need to clearly and persuasively articulate their work, ensuring it is well-structured, engaging, and audience-appropriate.

MMM276 Learning Outcomes 

This task allows you to demonstrate your achievement towards the Unit Learning Outcomes (ULOs), which have been aligned to the Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs). Deakin GLOs describe the knowledge and capabilities graduates acquire and can demonstrate on completion of their course. This assessment task is an important tool in determining your achievement of the ULOs. If you do not demonstrate achievement of the ULOs, you will not be successful in this unit. You are advised to familiarise yourself with these ULOs and GLOs as they will inform you on what you are expected to demonstrate for successful completion of this unit. 

The learning outcomes that are aligned to this assessment task are:

Extensions 

Extensions can only be granted for exceptional and/or unavoidable circumstances outside of your control. Requests for extensions must be made by noon on the submission date using the online Extension Request form under the Assessment tab on the unit CloudDeakin site (below picture). All requests for extensions should be supported by appropriate evidence (e.g., a medical certificate in the case of ill health). There is NO NEED to email the Unit Chair directly with your request, as the Unit Chair will be notified of your submission via CloudDeakin. Please do ensure that you have considered the policy grounds for extension and provided the required supporting documentation (extension request will be denied without the appropriate support). 

Referencing and Academic Integrity 

Deakin takes academic integrity very seriously. It is important that you (and if a group task, your group) complete your work in every assessment task. Any material used in this assignment that is not your original work must be acknowledged as such and appropriately referenced. You can use any referencing style (e.g., APA, Chicago, Harvard, etc.), but please note that the referencing style needs to be consistent. 

Please refer to the rubric for Assignment 2B to find out more about the number of expected references.