Generated banner for Dt Methods
Generated logo for Dt Methods

Dt Methods

MicrosoftOfficialPublished by Microsoft

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Business and productivity
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Design Thinking method coaching knowledge across all nine methods including per-method techniques, deep expertise, and industry context (energy, financial services, healthcare, manufacturing, nonprofit and social impact, pharmaceuticals and life sciences, professional services, public sector, retail and CPG)
— the description by Microsoft

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

The dt-methods skill provides a structured reference system for AI agents to coach teams through the Design Thinking process. It organizes guidance into three layers: core method references for day-to-day activities, deep references for advanced facilitation and recovery, and industry-specific context to tailor vocabulary and constraints. The skill covers nine major industries, including energy, healthcare, and financial services, ensuring that coaching is grounded in the specific operational realities and regulatory environments of the user's sector.

What it does

  • Provides step-by-step guidance for nine core Design Thinking methods.
  • Offers advanced facilitation techniques and recovery strategies for complex scenarios.
  • Maps Design Thinking concepts to industry-specific terminology and constraints.
  • Integrates telemetry expectations for session artifacts to ensure observable outcomes.
  • Supplies industry-specific empathy tools and stakeholder considerations.
  • Supports tailoring of coaching based on the active method and identified industry context.

When to use it

  • When facilitating a Design Thinking session and requiring method-specific guidance.
  • When a team needs advanced troubleshooting or recovery techniques during a workshop.
  • When applying Design Thinking within a specific industry to ensure relevant vocabulary and constraints are respected.
  • When defining telemetry or audit trails for Design Thinking session artifacts.

Advantages

  • Ensures consistent coaching across the entire Design Thinking lifecycle.
  • Reduces friction by using industry-appropriate language and concepts.
  • Provides a clear path for scaling from basic methods to advanced facilitation.
  • Integrates operational and regulatory awareness into the design process.

Usage examples

“How should I facilitate a brainstorming session for a team in the energy sector?”
The agent will load the brainstorming method reference and the energy industry context, providing guidance that uses energy-specific terms like 'reliability concern' and 'forced outage rate' while emphasizing safety and regulatory constraints.
“We are stuck during the user research phase; what advanced techniques can we use?”
The agent will access the deep reference for the Design Research method to provide advanced facilitation strategies and recovery techniques to help the team overcome their current roadblock.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/dt-methods/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip dt-methods.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Microsoft

Design Thinking Methods Skill

Entrypoint for Design Thinking method coaching knowledge. The dt-coach agent loads the method reference matching the active method in coaching state, the matching deep reference when advanced technique is needed, and the industry reference when an industry context applies.

How to use this skill

  • Read the method reference for the method currently active in coaching state to ground day-to-day coaching.

  • Read the matching deep reference when the conversation needs advanced facilitation, recovery techniques, or expert frameworks beyond the core method guidance.

  • Read the industry reference when the team has identified one of the nine covered industries as their context, and weave its vocabulary, constraints, and empathy tools into method-specific guidance.

  • Read dt-coach-telemetry.md when DT session artifacts need observable telemetry expectations grounded in telemetry-foundations.

Method references

Industry context references

Load the matching reference when the team identifies its industry context.

ReferenceWhen to load
industry-energy.mdEnergy-sector vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-financial-services.mdFinancial services vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-healthcare.mdHealthcare vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-manufacturing.mdManufacturing vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-nonprofit-social-impact.mdNonprofit and social impact vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-pharmaceuticals-life-sciences.mdPharmaceuticals and life sciences vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-professional-services.mdProfessional services vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-public-sector.mdPublic sector and government vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.
industry-retail-cpg.mdRetail and consumer goods vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario.

Skill layout

.
├── SKILL.md
└── references/
    ├── method-01-scope.md
    ├── method-01-deep.md
    ├── method-02-research.md
    ├── method-02-deep.md
    ├── method-03-synthesis.md
    ├── method-03-deep.md
    ├── method-04-brainstorming.md
    ├── method-04-deep.md
    ├── method-05-concepts.md
    ├── method-05-deep.md
    ├── method-06-lofi-prototypes.md
    ├── method-06-deep.md
    ├── method-07-hifi-prototypes.md
    ├── method-07-deep.md
    ├── method-08-testing.md
    ├── method-08-deep.md
    ├── method-09-iteration.md
    ├── method-09-deep.md
    ├── industry-energy.md
    ├── industry-financial-services.md
    ├── industry-healthcare.md
    ├── industry-manufacturing.md
    ├── industry-nonprofit-social-impact.md
    ├── industry-pharmaceuticals-life-sciences.md
    ├── industry-professional-services.md
    ├── industry-public-sector.md
    ├── industry-retail-cpg.md
    └── dt-coach-telemetry.md

Files

references/industry-financial-services.md


title: Financial Services Industry Context description: Financial services industry context, vocabulary, and constraints for tailoring Design Thinking methods to this sector.

Load this file when the team identifies financial services as their industry context. It provides financial services-specific vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and a reference scenario that the coach weaves into method-specific guidance.

Industry Profile

  • Sector: Banking (retail, commercial, investment), insurance (property & casualty, life, health), payments, wealth management, fintech

  • Key stakeholders: Relationship managers, underwriters, claims adjusters, compliance officers, credit risk officers, traders, operations teams, AML analysts, fraud analysts, actuaries, product managers, regulators

  • Decision cadence: Real-time (payments, trading), intraday (liquidity monitoring), daily (settlement, reconciliation), quarterly (regulatory reporting, capital planning), annual (compliance cycles, rate filings)

  • Regulatory environment: Dodd-Frank (U.S.), Basel III/IV (banking), GLBA/GDPR/CCPA (privacy), PCI DSS (payments), FINRA/FCA/MiFID II (market conduct), CFPB (consumer protection), state insurance regulators (NAIC), OFAC/BSA/AML (sanctions), CCAR stress testing (banking capital), fair lending laws

  • Missing voices to seek out: Back-office operations staff, remote branch employees, customers with limited financial literacy, customers outside core market segments (immigrants, gig workers, minorities affected by fair lending concerns)

Vocabulary Mapping

Bridge DT language and financial services language bidirectionally. Use financial services terms when coaching finance teams.

DT ConceptFinancial Services Term
Stakeholder mapRACI chart, three-lines-of-defense alignment
Pain pointFriction in customer journey, operational loss event
User journeyCustomer onboarding flow, loan origination path, claims lifecycle
Observation / field studyBranch shadowing, call center side-by-side, ops center watch
PrototypeControlled experiment, champion-challenger test, sandbox pilot
IterationAgile sprint, staged rollout (cohort expansion)
EmpathyCustomer perspective, operational staff perspective
Success metricNPS, CSAT, STP rate (straight-through processing), first-call resolution
Workflow mappingProcess swimlane, settlement workflow, approval workflow
Risk assumptionConduct risk, model risk, operational risk, fair lending risk
Constraint-driven designCompliance gate, regulatory approval requirement
Alert system conceptAML SAR trigger, fraud alert, risk dashboard alert
Integration timingSettlement window, regulatory reporting deadline

Constraints and Considerations

Regulatory Gating

Every meaningful change touches at least two regulatory frameworks. Dodd-Frank, Basel III, GLBA, GDPR, CCPA, PCI DSS, fair lending laws, and state insurance regulations create overlapping approval requirements. Customer-facing redesigns require legal and compliance pre-approval before any external testing. Solutions involving lending, pricing, or payments require regulatory review before pilot deployment. The review timeline is measured in weeks to months, not days.

Three-Lines-of-Defense Governance

Financial institutions operate under a three-lines model: (1) business units manage day-to-day risk, (2) risk and compliance functions provide oversight and regulatory interface, (3) audit provides independent assurance. DT activities must engage all three lines from scope conversations forward. Business unit sponsors champion discovery. Risk/compliance teams have pre-deployment veto authority. Audit scrutinizes documentation and control effectiveness. Coaches must map all three lines and secure alignment before ideation.

Conduct Risk

Financial services organizations operate in a "conduct risk" framework where customer harms, regulatory violations, or reputational damage cascade quickly. Conduct risk is career-affecting for managers whose business units generate incidents. Frame "fail fast" as rapid learning cycles within sandboxed environments (simulation, test data), not permission to deploy before regulatory approval. Staged rollout from low-risk cohorts (internal staff, low-balance accounts) to high-risk cohorts is the standard risk mitigation pattern.

Operational Windows and Settlement

Financial systems operate in discrete operational windows tied to clearing, settlement, and regulatory reporting deadlines. End-of-day trade settlement (T+1 or T+2) has fixed cutoff times; no changes after cutoff. OFAC/KYC screening runs in batch windows (24-48 hours) during account onboarding; onboarding delays during these windows are non-negotiable. CCAR stress-test cycles (Feb-June) consume key stakeholders in risk, finance, and treasury; schedule DT activities during post-CCAR windows (July-Sept) to ensure stakeholder availability.

Data Sensitivity and Privacy

Customer financial data falls under GLBA (U.S.), GDPR (EU), and CCPA (California) with severe breach penalties. Prototyping with real customer data requires legal clearance or data residency/de-identification approval. Payment card data must never appear in prototypes outside PCI-certified environments. Regulatory data (audit reports, compliance findings) may be classified. Prototypes handling financial data need privacy review even in pilot form.

Model Risk and Fair Lending

Banking and insurance rely on statistical/ML models for credit underwriting, pricing, and risk assessment. Federal Reserve Supervisory Guidance (SR 11-7) requires independent model validation and bias testing for models affecting customer decisions. Fair lending laws (ECOA) require demonstrable neutrality in credit underwriting models and disparate impact analysis. Model redesigns cannot be prototyped rapidly; bias audit and explainability validation are pre-deployment gates, not post-launch learning activities.

Empathy Tools

Branch / Call Center Shadowing

Observe relationship managers, tellers, and customer service representatives during real customer interactions. Track questions asked repeatedly, moments of customer confusion, workarounds for system limitations, and handoffs to operations or compliance. Note the gap between what customers are told (e.g., "we need this document") and what information actually flows back to operations. Shadow during peak hours (morning deposits, quarter-end) and during off-peak hours to capture different operational rhythms.

Customer Journey Diary (Multi-week)

Structured observation of customer experience during account opening, loan origination, or claims processing. Request a volunteer to complete a daily journal across 2-4 weeks capturing wait times, information requests, rework, delays, and emotional moments (frustration at ambiguous rejections, relief at approval). This reveals system friction invisible from staff perspective — particularly in regulatory gates where customers receive ambiguous rejection reasons or multi-day delays with no explanation.

Back-Office Operations Observation

Watch reconciliation teams, AML analysts, and settlement operations during peak activity. Observe how they resolve exceptions, handle failed transactions, and coordinate across systems. Note where system constraints force manual workarounds. Identify the invisible handoff failures between front-office (customer-facing) and back-office (operations). Exception handling often surfaces the highest-value use cases.

Anonymized Complaint and Regulatory Finding Review

Use customer complaints, regulatory examination findings, and conduct-incident documentation as empathy artifacts. These reveal repeated failure modes, systemic pain points, and the customer's experience of system failures. Fair lending complaints show where models or processes created unintended disparities. Claims complaints expose where customers felt treated unfairly or received inadequate information.

Reference Scenario

Context: A regional bank's account opening process takes 3-5 days and has a 15% abandonment rate. Customer satisfaction during onboarding is the lowest NPS detractor in the quarterly survey.

Discovery (Methods 1-3): Scope conversations reveal the initial request is "build a mobile account opening app." Customer journey diaries and call center shadows uncover the real problem: KYC/AML batch screening windows (24-48 hours) and ambiguous rejection reasons create customer anxiety and repeated support calls. Customers don't understand why they're rejected or what documents to provide. Back-office reconciliation observations reveal 40% of onboarding exceptions are documentation mismatches that staff manually resolve. The core friction is not form-filling complexity; it's information asymmetry and regulatory batch-window timing.

Solution (Methods 4-6): Brainstorming generates solution themes: proactive status communication during screening windows, clear rejection reason explanations, self-serve document re-submission, and account pre-staging (allow deposits while KYC completes). Lo-fi prototypes — paper mockups of status page templates, revised rejection email templates, and decision trees for self-remediation — reveal that customers need different communication during each KYC/AML phase (initial submission, review, approval). Compliance escalation surfaces OFAC requirements (sanctions list matching must complete before account activation) and fair lending risk (status communication must not vary by protected characteristics).

Implementation (Methods 7-9): Hi-fi prototypes validate status communication integrated with the core banking system, tested through the KYC/AML batch environment before customer rollout. User testing reveals night-time/weekend account openings queue until Monday morning when compliance staff work — communicate this proactively. Staged rollout begins with existing customers adding linked accounts (low-risk), then new customers (high-risk). NPS improves 18 points during pilot. Iteration focuses on rejection handling — customers report clearer explanations reduce support volume and re-abandonment.

  • All DT coaching artifacts are scoped to .copilot-tracking/dt/{project-slug}/. Never write DT artifacts directly under .copilot-tracking/dt/ without a project-slug directory.

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: GitHub Copilot, Claude Code

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Claude Code frontmatter

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
Microsoft
Publisher
Microsoft (Official)
Source
microsoft/hve-core · .github/skills/design-thinking/dt-methods · commit f425e94
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft or Microsoft.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download dt-methods.zip