Over the past two decades, the importance of design and the value of design thinking as a tool for innovation have been recognized by both business and government. Firms such as Apple, Samsung, and Dyson have exploited design to translate technological innovation into products that deliver compelling customer experiences, and have come to dominate their respective industry sectors. Design thinking has also been applied successfully to public service innovation—a notable example is the U.K. Government, which championed the use of design with its GOV.UK portal, now internationally lauded. In the domain of digital consumer technologies, design has become a strategic tool for business, helping to translate technological innovation into user value, connecting with consumer needs, and creating compelling product and service experiences that leading firms have, in turn, successfully transformed into business value. The firms that have consistently applied design as a tool for innovation have outperformed their competitors , according to the UK Design Council (2005) and the Cox Review of Creativity in Business prepared for the U.K. Treasury (Cox & Dayan, 2005). For several decades, management scholars have fo-cused on the role of design management and design thinking as a tool for innovation in both products and services, and have studied its impact on business performance (e.g., value of a more " designerly " approach, beyond products and services, for business processes and public service innovation has been led by firms such as IDEO, universities such as Stanford and its d-School, and organizations such as the U.K.'s Design Council. Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, has highlighted the increasing adoption of " design thinking " as a tool for innovation, from banking to the public sector, citing examples in the financial services such as Bank of America and in healthcare with the U.S. Kaiser Permanente and the Indian Ara-vind Eye Care System (Brown, 2008). By " design thinking, " we refer to a human-centered approach to innovation that puts the observation and discovery of often highly nuanced, even tacit, human needs right at the forefront of the innovation process. It considers not just the technological system constraints but also the sociocultural system context. In Figure 1, we provide a stylistic model contrasting the approach of business-, engineering-and design-led innovation. A designer's approach to a design challenge begins with an acute observation of the users and of the system's context and constraints, in what is referred to as the discovery phase. This may involve ethnography, visual anthropology, and the use of design probes and co-creation workshops. The next phase involves developing insights and framing the problem, the define phase; before moving into the ideation phase, which explores, through prototypes and visualizations, alternative potential solutions and how different types of users and stakeholders might interact with those solution concepts; and then concluding with the final delivery phase. In this phase, the prototypes are tested not only in terms of their technical robustness and effectiveness, but also of their fit with users' needs and the broader context of their lives. The process is highly iterative, as it moves backwards and forwards through the phases; it is collaborative, involving users and other stakehold-ers in the framing of the problem, as well as in scop-ing the opportunity for design interventions; and it is interdisciplinary, involving technical, design, and business disciplines in each of the phases. It combines a very concrete approach to both observation and analysis in the discovery phase, a switch into the world of the imagination in the definition and design ideation phases, and then moves back into the material realm as concepts are prototyped and tested with users before implementation. By contrast, a more businesslike approach to such a challenge may begin with defining a potential problem or market opportunity through personal insights and market analysis; move into a more concrete phase by testing the problem definition and potential solutions to it through primary and secondary market research and testing; and, finally, move back into the more conceptual level by developing a business plan based on estimates