I agree. The difficulty I often encounter in discussing lean, is that I see it as a process, not an event. I've never seen a lean company, or even a lean plant (although some come close), but I know what it means to lean a plant, or a company. Lean is an operator you apply to an existing tradition of work (improve SQCD by developping people's autonomy in solving their own problems together)

However, people commonly discuss lean as a thing in itself, much as one can discuss medicine without the human body. It's easy to slip in manufacturing, and easier still in engineering. Lean without a knowledge base to apply lean to doesn't make much sense - or leads to strange things. There is definitely scope to apply lean to design, but it means understanding design first :)

Michael,

Thank you, as always, for a thought-provoking post.  I apologize if my response rambles a bit, but hope it will spark some dialogue.  

I believe the shift to design thinking is also a factor of the increasing rate & pace of change.  We see this clearly in the electronics space as the announcement of new products, features, capabilities has shifted from every 5 years to every 3 years to every year and now, it seems, multiple times a year.  With long product lifecycles it is sufficient to create a product, and then focus on continuous improvement to optimize profit and/or customer value.  In the mode of short product lifecycles, companies now need to focus on how to bring these improvements into the design space.  I don't think it's just a matter of applying lean thinking to design processes (e.g., remove waste in the process flow), but instead will require a different way of thinking about design.  Yet, as Michael points out, this will be complementary to Lean, because it is still dependent on the core principle of Customer Value.  

As with Lean, there will be a small number of companies (hopefully across a range of industries) that embrace Design Thinking early.  We will then see these companies become leadership companies, and other companies will then have to quickly respond and adapt to this new way of thinking.  I believe the bigger challenge will be for those of us who are thought leaders to adapt our thought process, and to learn how Lean and Design Thinking work together.  As many of us have seen with Lean and Six Sigma (and TOC and other methodologies), we are often more successful when we use the various tools and methods in a complementary mode to address different aspects of improving our processes.  The sooner we are able to understand how, and more importantly WHEN, Design Thinking fits into the overall improvement approach, the better positioned we will be to positively influence future businesses.

Regards,

Steve

As appealing as Design Thinking can be, if we are to believe a bit of what TRIZ tells us, innovative (ie, truly "new") products are rare and few apart - most new products are usually clever pre-existing solutions used in a slightly different way.

If the purpose of Leaning an organization (as Lean is a verb rather than an adjective, less a noun) is to develop people so they thrive at work while increasing value, then I'm convinced we can help them make those small innovating steps (new designs for their work environment or the products) that will achieve the lean purpose.

Indeed, by helping them focus on what works for them sometimes and doing more of it, we can achieve this.

I see Lean Startup as being just this: a clever blend of Design Thinking (for the initial somehow innovative idea) and Lean thinking to solve the problems of making it bankable.

Finally, when you speak about "the mystery that is an individual..." you're already both steps in the field of strength-based change, as the whole sentence could have been written by an Appreciative Inquiry practitioner :-). May I remind you about some recently released book on "strength-based lean six sigma"? Like Mr Jourdain, it looks to me you're already somehow doing it ;-) 

And most probably more than anyone else (but that would require another post).