| Course | ENT 588 Innovation and Design: Capstone Project (ENT/588) |
|---|---|
| Week | 2 |
| Paper type | Graduate design thinking application |
| Length | about 1,162 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ENT 588 Week 2
What Do Gear Owners Actually Want? Applying Design Thinking to a Circular Outdoor Apparel Program
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
ENT/588: Innovation and Design: Capstone Project
Week 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Timberline Outfitters, its customers, teams and findings are composites written for a model paper.
Week 1 found that Timberline Outfitters, a composite Denver maker of technical outdoor apparel, leads in incremental product innovation but has launched no new business model in eight years, while competitors attract younger customers with resale, rental and repair. The capstone challenge is to design a circular gear program that brings in new customers and extends product life without weakening a premium brand. The new exploration team, five people from product, retail, marketing, operations and finance, used design thinking to begin.
What Design Thinking Is
Micheli et al. (2019) reviewed research on design thinking and identified attributes commonly associated with it, including creativity and innovation, user centeredness and involvement, problem solving, iteration and experimentation, interdisciplinary collaboration, ability to visualize, gestalt view, abductive reasoning, tolerance of ambiguity and failure and blending rationality and intuition. They noted that definitions vary widely and that evidence on outcomes is still developing.
Seidel and Fixson (2013) studied novice multidisciplinary teams learning design thinking and found that teams benefited from design methods, especially when they combined them with reflexive practices such as discussing their own assumptions, and that applying methods mechanically produced weaker concepts. Liedtka (2015) argued that design thinking helps teams counter mental shortcuts, for instance assuming customers want what the team itself would want, that otherwise weaken innovation. These findings shaped how Timberline's team worked: methods, but with deliberate reflection.
Empathy: User Research
The team interviewed 24 people in three groups: eight loyal Timberline customers, eight lapsed customers who had not bought in two years and eight hikers and climbers under 30 who mostly buy used gear or borrow it. Each interview lasted about 45 minutes, was held in person or by video and asked about gear purchases, what happens to gear they no longer use, how they choose brands and what frustrates them. The team also observed a community gear swap in Boulder, spent a day at Timberline's small repair bench and analyzed 600 customer service emails mentioning repairs.
What the Team Heard
Loyal customers had closets of older Timberline jackets they no longer wore but would not throw away. "It still works; it just isn't my favorite anymore," one said. Several had tried selling gear online and found it a hassle.
Lapsed customers often left after a costly repair experience: sending a jacket away for six weeks and getting it back with a bill. One switched brands after a rival repaired a zipper in a store while she waited.
Young hikers wanted access more than ownership. A 24-year-old climber said she needed a serious shell twice a year for alpine trips and could not justify $450. Many trusted used gear only if they knew it had been inspected.
At the gear swap, people spent a long time examining used jackets for wear and asked strangers about waterproofing. At the repair bench, technicians said most repairs, zippers, seams and buckles, take under 30 minutes but sit in a queue for weeks.
The young climber did not want a cheaper jacket; she wanted a great jacket for ten days a year.
Reflecting on the Team's Assumptions
Following Seidel and Fixson's emphasis on reflexive practice, the team held a short session after the interviews to list the assumptions they had brought in and check them against what they heard. Three did not survive. They had assumed loyal customers would want cash for old gear; most cared more about the gear being used than about money. They had assumed rental would appeal mainly to tourists; it appealed most to young local climbers and skiers. They had assumed repair customers wanted free service; most wanted speed and would pay. Writing these down kept the team from sliding back into its starting views during ideation.
Mapping One Repair, Step by Step
To understand the repair experience in detail, the team mapped one lapsed customer's path: noticing a broken zipper before a trip, searching the website for repair options, mailing the jacket, waiting six weeks without updates, receiving a bill she did not expect and buying a rival's jacket for the trip in the meantime. Each step showed a moment where Timberline could have kept her, and the long silence during the wait stood out as the point where she gave up on the brand.
Synthesis
The team clustered findings into needs and insights. Owners need their unused gear to have a second life they feel good about, and they will act if it is easy. Young adventurers need trusted access to high-performance gear for occasional trips, and price of ownership, not quality, is the barrier. Customers who repair want speed more than free service. A further insight emerged: Timberline's reputation for durability is an asset in resale and rental, since buyers trust that its gear holds up.
Point-of-View Statements
A loyal owner with a closet of good but unused gear needs an effortless way to pass it on, because guilt about waste and hassle keep it in the closet.
A young climber planning two alpine trips a year needs trusted access to a premium shell, because owning one costs more than the trips.
An owner with a broken zipper needs a fast fix, because waiting weeks feels like the brand does not stand behind its gear.
Ideation
Framing each statement as a how-might-we question, the team ran a 90-minute session in which each member first generated ideas alone, then shared and built on them. The session produced 60 ideas, including trade-in credit at stores, a certified used section online, trip-length rentals shipped to trailheads, a subscription for seasonal gear, in-store repair while customers shop and a repair kit with video guides.
Selecting Concepts
Ideas were rated against user needs, fit with the premium brand, feasibility within a year and potential to reach new customers. Three concepts were selected for prototyping: Trade-Up, store and mail-in trade-in for credit with inspected resale under a certified label; Trip Kits, rental of premium shells and packs for one to three weeks; and Fix-It-Fast, same-day repair of common issues in flagship stores.
Concepts Set Aside
Several popular ideas were set aside for now. A seasonal subscription scored well on reaching new customers but raised complex inventory questions. A repair kit with video guides was cheap but did little for the brand's premium image. Trailhead delivery of rentals excited the team but would be costly to operate at first.
What Changed
Before the research, the team assumed resale would be the main opportunity and rental a niche. The interviews with young hikers made rental central, and the lapsed customers' stories elevated repair from an afterthought to a potential driver of loyalty.
Conclusion
Design thinking moved Timberline's team from a general idea of being circular to three concrete concepts grounded in what owners and potential customers need. Research on design thinking guided the process and warned against mechanical use. Week 3 will build and test prototypes of Trade-Up, Trip Kits and Fix-It-Fast.
References
Liedtka, J. (2015). Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925-938. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12163
Micheli, P., Wilner, S. J. S., Bhatti, S. H., Mura, M., & Beverland, M. B. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12466
Seidel, V. P., & Fixson, S. K. (2013). Adopting design thinking in novice multidisciplinary teams: The application and limits of design methods and reflexive practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(S1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12061
What the ENT 588 Week 2 instructions ask
In the second ENT 588 paper, MBA students apply design thinking to an innovation challenge. Prompts usually ask students to explain the design thinking process, such as empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test, conduct or describe user research, synthesize findings into needs and problem statements and generate ideas, sometimes using tools like personas, experience maps or how-might-we questions. Some versions ask students to evaluate design thinking's strengths and limits. Work on the challenge defined in Week 1, show real or realistic user evidence and how it shaped the problem and ideas and cite research on design thinking in APA. Select a few concepts to prototype and explain the choice.
How this ENT 588 Week 2 example is built
Our worked paper starts with user research: 24 interviews with Timberline customers, lapsed customers and young hikers who buy used gear, plus observation at a gear swap and the company's repair bench. Research on design thinking describes it as a human-centered approach combining user understanding, iteration and prototyping, while studies of novice teams caution that methods without reflection can produce shallow results. Synthesis surfaces needs that surprised the team: customers want their old jackets to have a second life they can trust, young hikers want gear for a single trip without owning it and many owners would repair rather than replace if repairs were fast. Point-of-view statements frame three problems, a structured ideation session produces 60 ideas and three concepts are selected for prototyping.
ENT 588 Week 2 grading rubric: where the points go
Graduate graders reward design thinking that changes the problem, not just decorates the solution. Strong papers explain the process with research support, show real user evidence and how it was synthesized into needs and insights and write clear problem statements. Credit goes to ideation that produces many options, to selection criteria tied to user needs and business goals and to awareness of design thinking's limits. Graders also value surprises from the research and how they shifted the team's thinking. Graders also look for reflection on the team's own assumptions. User quotes, organized synthesis and peer-reviewed sources in APA complete the paper.
ENT 588 Week 2 help: mistakes to avoid
Design thinking papers often list the five stages and then describe a solution the team already had in mind. Show how user research changed the problem or the ideas. Another frequent gap is thin user research, such as a short survey; interviews and observation reveal needs people cannot easily state. Include them. Students also skip synthesis, jumping from interviews to ideas; group findings into needs and insights first. Some papers present design thinking as a cure for everything; research notes its limits, such as shallow application by inexperienced teams. Address them. Finally, select concepts to prototype using criteria, not preference. A tutor can help you organize interview notes into themes.
Related ENT 588 sample papers
Other ENT 588 week samples
- ENT 588 Week 1: Leading Innovation
- ENT 588 Week 3: Prototypes and Testing
- ENT 588 Week 4: Financing Innovation
- ENT 588 Week 5: Planning to Scale
- ENT 588 Week 6: Capstone Innovation Proposal
More MBA sample papers
- ECO 535 Week 2: Platforms and Network Effects
- ENT 527 Week 2: Generating Ideas
- FIN 571 Week 2: Estimating Cash Flows
- FIN 591 Week 2: Real Estate Valuation Methods
ENT 588 Week 2 questions, answered
What does ENT 588 Week 2 usually cover?
It usually covers applying design thinking: user research, synthesizing needs and insights, defining problems, generating ideas and selecting concepts to prototype.
Where can I find a free ENT 588 Week 2 sample paper?
Above is the full ENT 588 Week 2 design thinking study of gear owners for a circular apparel program, free to read.
What is design thinking?
A human-centered approach to innovation that starts with understanding users' needs, frames problems from their perspective, generates many ideas and tests them through quick prototypes.
What is a point-of-view statement?
A short problem statement that combines a specific user, a need and an insight, used to focus ideation on what matters to that user.
What are the limits of design thinking?
Teams new to it may apply methods mechanically, user research may be too shallow and good ideas still need business models, resources and execution to succeed.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All ENT 588 week samples · All courses