{"id":19559,"date":"2020-04-13T10:00:40","date_gmt":"2020-04-13T09:00:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/marvel7077.wpengine.com\/?p=19559"},"modified":"2020-09-01T08:23:56","modified_gmt":"2020-09-01T07:23:56","slug":"known-unknowns-framework-design-thinking","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shopjessicabuckley.com\/blog\/known-unknowns-framework-design-thinking\/","title":{"rendered":"The Knowns and Unknowns Framework for Design Thinking"},"content":{"rendered":"

On the 12th of February 2002<\/a>, Donald Rumsfeld, back then Secretary of State of the US, used an until then little known framework to help him in making the case for the invasion of Iraq: the Knowns and Unknowns framework. I think it is fair to say that the reception by the press was mixed: some accused him of playing with words with little meaning, while others saw some method<\/a> in what he was trying to do.\"\"\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Rumsfeld\u2019s words have been turned into a poem, written by an unknown poet (very appropriately!) and included in a collection of poems all based on speeches by Donald Rumsfeld, Pieces of Intelligence<\/em><\/a>, by Hart Seely (here in an edited version by Daase and Kessler<\/a>):<\/p>\n

As we know,
\nThere are known knowns.
\nThere are things we know we know.
\nWe also know
\nThere are known unknowns.
\nThat is to say
\nWe know there are some things
\nWe do not know.
\nBut there are also unknown unknowns,
\nThe ones we don\u2019t know
\nWe do not know.
\nFinally, there are unknown knowns
\nThe knowns
\nWe do not want to know.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

What is it?<\/h2>\n

The Knowns and Unknowns categorisation has been used since the Greek era and in many areas of knowledge. It is a powerful tool to surface what we know and don\u2019t know about a problem.<\/p>\n

The apparent simplicity of the Knowns and Unknowns framework is deceiving: it can byte you and get people thinking that you are just playing with words, as happened to Rumsfeld. So you\u2019ve been warned, be careful with it. And please don\u2019t let it into the hands of war seekers.<\/p>\n

The framework can help us to understand our approach to knowledge, to research: What do we know already (known knowns)? Are we conscious of what we are not exploring (unknown unknowns)? What about biases and unconscious decisions (unknown knowns)? Are we aware of our assumptions (known unknowns)?<\/p>\n

The known and the unknown have to be treated in very different ways. We need to adapt our methods to the type of knowledge (including our lack of knowledge, which is also knowledge, if we are aware of it).<\/p>\n

If you are working with your unknowns (the Unknown Knowns or the Unknown Unknowns) you need to use exploratory techniques: How might we surface some of those unknowns? How might we prepare for the surprises ahead?<\/p>\n

If instead you are investigating what you already know about a problem (the Known Knowns or the Known Unknowns) you have to work in an inductive way: how might we use those facts to learn new things? How might we test our hypotheses?<\/p>\n

We will explore some ways of making sure that we take all our knowledge and lack of it into account as part of our research or Design Thinking methods. Before that, I have a few interesting stories about this framework.<\/p>\n

You could argue that Socrates was using it indirectly when he said (according to Plato) \u201cI only know that I don\u2019t know anything<\/a>\u201d. But the first use of the method comes much later, in the thirteenth century, by the islamic philosopher Ibn Yami. This is how he categorised human beings according to their knowledge:<\/p>\n

One who knows and knows that he knows\u2026 his horse of wisdom will reach the skies.
\nOne who knows, but doesn\u2019t know that he knows\u2026 he is fast asleep, so you should wake him up!
\nOne who doesn\u2019t know, but knows that he doesn\u2019t know\u2026 his limping mule will eventually get him home.
\nOne who doesn\u2019t know and doesn\u2019t know that he doesn\u2019t know\u2026 he will be eternally lost in his hopeless oblivion!<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

He tells us that the act of acquiring knowledge is as important as what we already know.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/a>The Johari Window. Diagram by Simon Shek \u2014 http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Image:Johari_Window.PNG<\/a><\/p>\n

In the 1950s two psychologists, Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham, developed the Johari Window<\/a>, a method to help people evaluate what they think about themselves in contrast with what others think of them. A Blind Spot, for instance, is something that we don\u2019t know or think about ourselves but others do see in us. As a side note, the method uses adjective cards similar to those used in usability evaluation tools like Microsoft\u2019s Reaction Cards<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The link between NASA, Rumsfeld and the Unknown<\/h3>\n

A few decades later, NASA reported that they were using the framework as part of risk analysis in space missions to uncover Unknown Unknowns. In a presentation from 2003<\/a>, we can see how they used the framework to evaluate the risks in the return journey of the Space Shuttle. They concentrate on moving the unknowns to the known realm.<\/p>\n

Donald Rumsfeld re-appears in this short history of the Knowns and Unknowns: it is believed that it was a senior engineer from NASA that told Rumsfeld about the framework before he made use of it in the famous press conference in 2002. Rumsfeld made the framework more popular than NASA, for good or bad.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"<\/a>Slavoj Zizek. Photo by Andy Miah<\/p>\n

The chaos and the bees<\/h3>\n

Slavoj Zizek<\/a> is a Slovenian philosopher well known for his controversial statements, like this one: \u201cWe are all basically evil, egotistical, disgusting\u201d. He also has something to say about our framework. In his article \u201cRumsfeld and the bees<\/a>\u201d, Zizek tells us that the most important category of knowledge for humanity is the Unknown Knowns: those things that we know but remain hidden as unconscious biases and prejudices that we are not aware of when making decisions. He gives the example of Climate Change: we all know it is happening, but we fail to act on it on our daily decisions.<\/p>\n

In decision making it has been used to identify different environments and how organisations should proceed in each of them. The Chaotic environment, for instance, corresponds to our Unknown Unknowns. The way to deal with chaos is by being prepared to respond to eventualities: agility and adaptability are key. Organisations that insist on doing forecasting and detailed planning in a chaotic environment will fail.<\/p>\n

The South China Sea disputes<\/h3>\n

Risk analysis is another area that uses this framework in an interesting way. For instance, in the South China Sea disputes<\/a>, the countries involved often create Unknown Knowns on purpose, so the other contenders are left in a state of limbo, not knowing for sure the sea borders recognised by others or how willing they would be to defend them, which creates unknown geopolitical risks.<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Looking for anything<\/h3>\n

Alistair Croll & Benjamin Yoskovitz used the Knowns and Unknowns framework in their book Lean Analytics<\/a> to describe different ways of looking at data. This is how they recommend to use the four knowledge categories:<\/p>\n