Title: A comparative study between design thinking, agile, and design sprint methodologies

Authors: Ketmanto Wangsa; Ritesh Chugh; Shakir Karim; Raj Sandu

Addresses: Kent Institute, 10 Barrack St, Sydney, New South Wales, 2000, Australia ' School of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, 120 Spencer St, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia ' School of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, 400 Kent St, Sydney, New South Wales, 2000, Australia ' School of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, 400 Kent St, Sydney, New South Wales, 2000, Australia

Abstract: Choosing a suitable problem-solving methodology is vital for project success. Three popular approaches are design thinking, agile and design sprint. To date, a comparative review of these three approaches is missing. This paper provides a comparative outlook between design thinking, agile, and design sprint through a literature review lens. Critical aspects of differentiation between the three approaches centre on time, team composition, flexibility, main focus, goal setting and challenges, whereas the similarities are around problem-solving collaboration and user-centricity. Design thinking applies human-centred design as a key to addressing problem-solving needs. Agile is known for its iterative and incremental processes and is beneficial when uncertainty prevails. Design sprint focuses on a unique five-day process for designing, prototyping, and testing to bridge the gap between design thinking and agile. This study offers insights that will benefit project managers, designers, engineers, or anyone wanting to choose an appropriate approach for problem identification and resolution.

Keywords: design thinking; agile; design sprint; methodologies; comparative; literature review; project management.

DOI: 10.1504/IJASM.2022.124916

International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, 2022 Vol.15 No.2, pp.225 - 242

Received: 21 Apr 2021
Accepted: 06 Jan 2022
Published online: 16 Aug 2022 *

Full-text access for editors Full-text access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article