top of page

Designing for Possibility and Growth

Writer's picture: Rachel A.WoodRachel A.Wood

Updated: Dec 17, 2024

The art of the possible meets 'jobs-to-be-done



by Rachel A.Wood
by Rachel A.Wood

In my work as a designer, I use and talk about ‘the art of the possible’ (AoP) and the ‘Jobs-to-be-Done’ (JTBD) method very often. This is mainly because I have found that they are particularly useful in creating and sustaining a growth strategy through service design.


I have found them to be incredibly insightful in terms of the why (JTBD) and the how (AoP).

I thought it would therefore be interesting to really look at depth into them with a view to exploring more about how I could further improve their use in both my research and practice. I really did not realise what I was taking on! But it did seem like a very worthwhile endeavour when the art of the possible can create futures thinking, and the Jobs-to-be-Done method can be exceptionally useful in producing actionable insights.


To do this I examined and developed:


  • The origin stories for both the concepts

  • Compare and contrast their aims and what they can achieve

  • Find out a little about the psychological theory that underpins them

  • An idea that I had for gamifying the approaches for use by practitioners and those contributing through co-design (using a health example)

  • A basic combined canvas with illustrations from a justice context



Designing for possibility and growth by Rachel A.Wood
Some of the many things that are important when designing for possibility and growth

Something that certainly surprised me in the first stage, was that the idea of the art of the possible seemingly having its origins in political theory:


“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best”

– Otto von Bismark


Even this far back the focus was on pragmatism and achieving feasible outcomes within existing constraints (which all designers work within). Since then, the concept has clearly broadened significantly to emphasise innovation, and incremental progress such as in design and strategy.


Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) on the other hand was originated in the 1990s by Clayton Christensen at Harvard. It was later developed into what it is known today as a way in which to explore the idea that people ‘hire’ products, services, or experiences to accomplish ‘Jobs-to-be-Done ’ (tasks or outcomes).


The following shows a summary of my findings about the origins of the two concepts:



The origins of designing for possibility and growth by Rachel  A.Wood
The origins of jobs-to-be-done and the art of the possible

If you are interested in finding out more, I can highly recommend the following reading:


  • Jim Kalbach (2020), Jobs-to-be-Done Playbook: Align your Markets, Organization and Strategy around Customer Needs

  • Anthony W. Ulwick (2016), Jobs-to-be-Done to be Done: Theory to Practice

  • Stephen Wunker, Jessica Whitman and David Farber (2016), Jobs-to-be-Done: A Roadmap for Customer Centred Innovation


I also found an interesting article (Friedel and Liedtka, 2007) which draws us to the attention of eight systematic ways of seeking possibility:


  • Challenging

  • Connecting

  • Visualising

  • Collaborating

  • Harmonising

  • Improvising

  • Re-orientating

  • Playing


When I read it, this felt very aligned to both service and co-design. JTBD also offers two different strategies for growth which most definitely are (they are characterised as ‘getting jobs done better’ in Ulwick and Hamilton, p5):


  • Differentiated strategy: looking after underserved people

  • Dominant strategy: for everyone


This then led me to undertake a comparison of the two concepts, and this is what I found:



The similarities and differences between the two concepts by Rachel A.Wood
Compare and Contrast

Differences:


- The art of the possible prioritises exploring new opportunities, whilst JTBD is focused on understanding current needs

- The AoP is based on creative problem solving, whilst JTBD is about functional problem solving

- There are no limits to possibility with AoP, however JTBD relies on outcomes and measurable progress

- JTBD is a structured technique with task orientation whilst, AoP is orientated as open-ended innovation

- AoP is encouraging us all to think beyond constraints to future and ideal possibilities, whilst JTBD is grounded in current problem solving, and the immediacy of the needs of those that use a service or a product


When used together they can:


- Create value by improving and creating new experiences

- Be a way of reframing and understanding challenges in a way that is focused on the experience of everyone involved (beneficiary and provider)

- Both have a reliance on beneficiary insights but approach them differently providing the opportunity for optimisation (AoP being visionary and broad scope versus JTBD which is grounded and targeted).

- Produce innovation, and target experience and satisfaction.


The psychological principles behind the art of the possible have always intrigued me. So far, I have been able to locate and link AoP to the following:


Cognitive reframing - Reframing involves changing the way individuals interpret situations to see opportunities (future possibilities) rather than limitations.


Growth mindset – Originally developed by Carol Dweck (2006) a growth mindset involves believing in the potential for development through effort and learning. The Art of the Possible echoes this by promoting the belief that outcomes are not predetermined and that barriers can be overcome with creativity and adaptability.


Mindfulness and Presence - The ability to be present in the moment without resistance can unlock creativity and novel solutions. Zander and Zander (2008) describe this as "being present to the way things are without resistance" (p. 101), which creates the mental clarity necessary to envision alternative paths.


Self Determination Theory (SDT) – This theory emphasizes autonomy, competence, and relatedness as drivers of motivation. The Art of the Possible resonates with this by encouraging individuals to see themselves as active contributors, thereby fostering intrinsic motivation. This theory is also very aligned to the principles of JTBD.


Social Constructivism - The Art of the Possible leverages the concept that reality is often socially constructed and can be reshaped by changing perceptions. This aligns with the psychological idea that narratives shape our understanding of what is achievable.


Positive Psychology - The focus on strengths, hope, and envisioning the best possible outcomes is deeply rooted in positive psychology. By asking “How will I make a contribution today?” the Art of the Possible shifts focus from fear and inadequacy to purpose and potential, promoting well-being and resilience.


JTBD on the other hand is also aligned to the following:


Motivation theory – looks at the external and internal motivation of needs (such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs)


Behavioural decision making – has a focus on why we make decisions when we benefit from a service. This has a focus on the ‘why?’ behind our actions. For example, someone buying a milkshake for breakfast may be addressing functional needs (hunger) and emotional goals (improving the experience of a commute) at the same time.


Functional (practical Jobs-to-be-Done), emotional (addresses feelings) and social (external perceptions such as identity and status) dimensions – this was highlighted in system 1 and 2 thinking (Kahneman, D, 2011).


Context and Situational Awareness – In JTBD there is an emphasis on the importance of context in relation to behaviours. This is highlighted in Field theory (Lewin, 1939).


Progress orientated thinking – This is the idea that people align themselves to things and experiences which bring about a desired transformation (job completion).


The combination of the JTBD technique and the art of the possible certainly seem to be a powerful combination. They can help ensure that future solutions are both deeply aligned with human needs and innovation, whilst pushing the boundaries for designing for possibility:

Anchored in real needs: As JTBD (the ‘why’) focuses is on uncovering emotional, functional, and social drivers of behaviour. Doing this ensures that our designs are rooted in genuine needs rather than assumptions or surface level desires. The art of the possible (the ‘how’) in conjunction helps us to be creative in our thinking, and what could come to being without current constraints.


Balancing feasibility with ambition: Using JTBD means that designers have a focus on key tasks and ensure that the solution we are looking for remains practical. On the other hand, the art of the possible encourages us to look at radical innovation or to prioritise using emerging technologies.


Encouraging empathy and creativity: Having a depth understanding of the Jobs-to-be-Done that people need to do requires a real focus on ensuring that we understand goals and gains, ‘pain points’ and dreams and ambitions. By using the art of the possible we can explore how we can imagine experiences that may not have yet been articulated.


Driving transformative innovation: Prioritising the use of JTBD means looking at opportunities to be transformative rather than working incrementally. Through the art of the possible we are more likely to create visions that are ‘ground breaking.’


Aligning customer or user goals which are future proofed and ready for potential solutions: JTBD provides us with a structured way of working that is human centred towards what people are trying to achieve. AoP extends this by helping us be future ready by leveraging innovative technologies, methods or a mindset which enhances outcomes.


As I know from my own practice life the Jobs-to-be-Done method can be highly effective in-service design, as it focuses on understanding customer goals and designing experiences to meet those needs. By identifying the “Jobs-to-be-Done” that need to be achieved can help us as designers to align all touchpoints to meet these. This helps us not only solve real problems, but also provides measurable value.


The following are great *conversation starters to explore JTBD that I have found useful:


1. Do you have any Jobs-to-be-Done in using the service?

2. What solutions that we provide are you not using?

3. What ‘work arounds’ do you need to do to deal with this?

4. What tasks in the service do you avoid altogether or most of the time?

5. Are there any surprising uses of our services that you have found?


* Adapted from Christensen et. al, 2016 and Merriam and Tisdell, 2016


Here are some example Jobs-to-be-Done statements that can be produced as the result:


“When I want to learn a new skill. I need something that will provide a structured interactive resource and progress tracking. This will really help me stay motivated and achieve what I need to learn.”


“When I plan a trip, I want to compare travel options and accommodation, so I can create an itinerary that suits my personalised needs and fits my budget and schedule without giving me any unnecessary stress”.


An example of how both the concepts can be used together:


Art of the Possible: a company is looking into how drones can deliver to rural areas and explores what technologies and partnerships may enable this to happen.


Jobs-to-be-Done: the same company interviews residents in the rural area to identify what specific needs are. They find that the majority of those that they talk to would like reliability and speed in their deliveries.


Next to bring this all together I thought it might be helpful to explore what the bringing together of the two concepts might look like in a specific service design challenge, and this is what I produced as an illustration:


Health Experience Innovation Game (HEIG) for service and co-designers.


The Challenge Brief: This game enables service designers, public health professionals, and service beneficiaries as co-designers to design whilst tackling a ‘real world’ health system challenge.


Core features of the game:


1. Role playing – as stakeholders enables you to assume a variety of design roles such as:

a. Service beneficiaries - with unmet needs such as managing chronic health conditions and booking appointments.

b. Health administrators – balancing system constraints including managing budgets and resources.

c. Service designers – working with other stakeholders to discover, define and develop a reimagined range of services and activities that could help.


Each of the above roles will be informed by interacting with each other in the game to develop personas, user stories, and ‘Jobs-to-be-Done to be Done (JTBD)’ statements such as:


“Help me book an appointment without waiting endlessly so that I can manage my time better.”


“Help me request a range of activities that do not require a complex set of paperwork, so that I can focus on my recovery.”


2. Levels based on real challenges – each level (aligned to discovery, define, development, delivery and evaluation from the double/triple diamond of design) represents a specific service design challenge that will help take forward the brief such as reducing appointment times, improving access to those that need it the most, or creating streamlined processes for appointment. This will include a series of on-going testing for usability, appropriacy and safety. The challenge will incorporate the ‘Art of the Possible (AoP)’ by encouraging players to think beyond particular and perceived constraints and by experimenting with innovative ideas together.

3. Points System – Players can earn points for achieving measurable improvements such as reducing ‘Did not Attends,’ increasing satisfaction (CSAT) rates and net promoter scores (NPS), linking the activity to the evidence base and known effectiveness (fidelity), as well as reducing effort and cost to service (CtS). Special gain points will be obtained for ethical design and adhering to the principle of ‘do no harm.’

The highest bonus points will be awarded for aligning innovations with the JTBD principles such as creating designs that address functional, emotional, or social ‘Jobs-to-be-Done ’ (things that need to be achieved).

4. Prototyping – the game will include tools to support players with:

- Journey mapping and service blueprints

- Pre-set prompts and service patterns inspired by existing evidence-based health service designs (known to work)

- Players will get co-design bonus points when they have completed parts of the game with others rather than on their own.

5. Making ‘live’ and evaluation/impact mapping – the players will have the opportunity for their proposals to have feedback from a panel of others using the game. The ideas with the best potential for social return on investment, and beneficiary outcomes will be placed on a continually updated leader board. Each challenge undertaken will allocate a badge for each player which they can choose to display on the game. Example ‘I achieved an idea that is possible, and I used it with JTBD.’


To finish this exploration, I also had a go at combining and making a canvas that uses both concepts. The following shows the early version result using an example illustration in the context of justice:



Combined art of the possible and jobs to be done canvas by Rachel A.Wood
My early emerging combined art of the possible and jobs-to-be-done canvas

Both the gamification and this early combined canvas are something I will look to develop further.


Although I knew it already, having a deep focus on both the concepts has made it even clearer how they can be used extremely effectively together. Most importantly they do it in a way that is realistic and implementable by designers. The need to look at possibility and growth in this way has never been greater in the areas that I research and work in, and I look forward to taking the next steps in my own small way…


References:


Christensen, C.M., Hall, T., Dillon, K., and Duncan, D.S. (2016), Know Your Customer Jobs-to-be-Done to be Done, Harvard Business Review, 94 (9), pp 54 - 60.

Dweck, C. (2006), The New Psychology of Success, Random House

Friedel, R. and Liedtka, J. (2007), Possibility Thinking: Lessons from Breakthrough Engineering, Journal of Business Strategy, 28 (4), 30 – 37

Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking Fast and Slow, Macmillan

Lewin, K. (1939), Field Theory and Experiments in Social Psychology, American Journal of Sociology, 44 (6), 868 - 896

Merriam, S.B and Tisdell, E.J. (2016), Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th Ed.), Jossey-Boss, San Fransisco, CA

Ulwick, A.W and Hamilton, P. (2016), The Jobs-to-be-Done -to-be-Done Growth Strategy Matrix, The Marketing Journal

Zander, R.S. and Zander, B. (2008), The art of possibility




7 views

Recent Posts

See All
A drawn image portraying Roberts Brain the web CV and portfolio of Rachel A.Wood

"Mindful by Design"

Connecting the dots: One small step at a time

Design | Research | Psychology

© Robert's Brain 2023

bottom of page