Skip to main content

Barrier archetypes

These represent the most important barrier archetypes encountered in the practice of strategic design interventions. They highlight recurring obstacles that undermine alignment, creativity, and systemic impact, providing a critical lens for diagnosing and addressing challenges in the design process.

Divergent ambition mapping

This issue arises when the absence of a shared framework results in mismatched expectations between stakeholders and designers. Stakeholders may envision transformative outcomes, while the design process, operating without defined dimensions, defaults to incremental or tactical outputs. Divergent ambition mapping disrupts alignment, complicates decision-making, and introduces inefficiencies, ultimately risking the derailment of projects.

Surface-level complexity framing

When complexity is addressed superficially, design processes focus on visible symptoms rather than exploring the systemic dynamics beneath them. Surface-level complexity framing reflects a reductionist mindset that prioritizes quick fixes over deeper engagement. This results in incomplete solutions, limited impact, and the perpetuation of entrenched challenges.

Deliverable myopia

In the absence of structured dimensions, design efforts often prioritize tangible outputs—such as maps, personas, or prototypes—over systemic outcomes. Deliverable myopia locks teams into output-centric thinking, overshadowing the broader transformational goals of strategic design. This narrow focus limits the potential for long-term, systemic impact.

Assumption lock-in

Without the structure to interrogate assumptions, design processes frequently default to established paradigms, such as technological solutionism or market-driven innovation. Assumption lock-in stifles creativity and diversity, reinforcing the status quo and restricting opportunities to explore alternative, equitable, or sustainable futures.

Participation void

The lack of inclusive dimensions leads to a participation void, where marginalized voices and underrepresented perspectives are excluded from the design process. This creates outputs that fail to resonate with diverse communities and perpetuates inequities by prioritizing dominant stakeholder narratives over those most impacted by systemic challenges.

Complexity paralysis

When teams face ambiguity without a structured framework, they risk falling into complexity paralysis. This occurs when uncertainty becomes overwhelming, leading to reactive or oversimplified approaches. Complexity paralysis inhibits adaptive problem framing and prevents the iterative exploration necessary for navigating systemic challenges.

Incremental default

Without dimensions to frame systemic ambitions, design processes often default to incremental changes that fail to address structural problems. Incremental default reflects a reliance on small-scale fixes and missed opportunities for transformative action. It results in interventions that sustain the status quo rather than challenging or reimagining it.