II Design Thinking Camps: Three Days of Value Propositions, UI and KPIs

The second CIRC-2-ZERO Design Thinking Sessions (3–5 March 2026), organized by the project partner TalTech, brought the project consortium together in Tallinn, Estonia. These intensive three-day sessions focused on refining the Digital Twin Demo Platform (DTDP) from three complementary perspectives: SME-facing value propositions, scenario building and user journeys, and the development of a shared KPI framework.

Across the sessions, participants collaborated to translate user needs into structured platform logic, interface flows, scenario parameters, and measurable performance indicators for the Engineered Wood Products and Electronics sectors. The objectives of the two camps were:

II Desing Thinking Camp – Value Proposition and KPIs

• to develop a consolidated set of SME-facing value propositions, linked to relevant indicators and organized across the Triple Bottom Line.
• to define and prioritize a common KPI structure for the DTDP, including Circularity, Energy, and Economic & Business dimensions, and to discuss their relative importance and threshold values.

II Design Thinking Camp – Scenarios, UI unification, use cases

• to identify industry-specific hotspots and transform them into Tier-2, platform-ready levers and scenario parameters.
• to co-create a first draft specification of the DTDP user experience by aligning module flows, shared terminology, and persona-based use cases across partners.

Through all three days, participants were working to answer the key questions: How can DTDP create clear and measurable value for SMEs in the target sectors? Which process hotspots and controllable levers should SMEs be able to explore using realistic Tier-2 data? How should the platform guide users from project creation and data input to result preview, scenario comparison and reporting? Which indicators and KPIs are most relevant for evaluating circularity, energy and business performance in the target sectors? And how can the DTDP present results in a way that is understandable, useful and actionable for different SME personas?

Day 1 – Value proposition and scenarios

The first day commenced with a brief facilitated engagement exercise led by the K8 Institute, which helped participants enter a productive and collaborative mindset for the Value Propositions and Scenarios sessions.

Main Value Proposition Themes Emerging from the Session

The scenario work was conducted through a structured, multi-step process beginning with a plenary introduction that aligned participants on the DTDP context, the Hotspot–Lever–Impact model, and the Tier 2 boundary. Participants first reviewed sector-specific process stages and identified potential impact hotspots using the provided workshop materials. In sector-specific groups, they then selected and justified the three most relevant hotspots for Engineered Wood Products and Electronics, combining operational, sustainability, and technical perspectives to assess both impact relevance and platform feasibility.

These hotspots were subsequently translated into one or two actionable, platform-ready levers per hotspot, with defined baseline-to-target logic and proposed user interface formats. The session concluded with a plenary convergence phase to align results, refine assumptions, and ensure that all proposed inputs remained within Tier 2 data availability constraints.

Throughout the exercise, the methodology deliberately maintained a Tier 2 perspective, meaning that all proposed inputs had to be answerable through monthly utility data, basic bills of materials, datasheets, and simple process records rather than complex real-time monitoring systems.

Day 2 – User Interface – scenarios, indicators & KPIs

The second day also began with a short, facilitated warm-up exercise led by the K8 Institute, helping participants re-engage and prepare for the day’s collaborative work.

During the UI unification sessions, participants mapped the expected DTDP workflow using sticky notes and simplified UML activity-diagram logic. Following a plenary introduction to the platform framework, terminology, and module structure, participants worked in four groups, each focusing on a defined cluster of platform functions, ranging from the Scenario Builder and indicators to project planning, reuse, and navigation. Rather than designing isolated screens, the groups developed connected activity diagrams that described end‑to‑end user journeys across the platform. The work was structured around flow checks following the sequence Enter – Do – See – Continue, helping participants clarify user actions, visible outputs, and next navigation steps. This approach also made it possible to identify open connectors and dependencies between modules and to discuss how data, user actions, and results should move coherently through the system.

As a result, the sessions moved beyond general UI discussions and delivered an initial user‑centred specification of the DTDP. Key user journeys were clarified, including project creation and loading, modular project building, data input via catalogues, and the role of intermediate results and data‑quality signals during the workflow. Scenario comparison, reporting, and privacy features were positioned within a coherent end‑to‑end experience. The use of flow checks and glossary‑based themes ensured a solid foundation for subsequent UX/UI sketching and mock‑up development.

Based on the recorded pairwise comparisons, Circularity emerged as the highest-priority dimension (57.1%), followed by Economic & Business (28.6%) and Energy (14.3%). Within Circularity, the highest-ranked KPIs were Lifecycle Carbon Footprint (29.5%), Repairability (18.5%), and Design for Disassembly/Modularity (18.5%). Within Energy, the strongest priorities were Energy Usage per Unit of Product (39.0%), Energy Intensity per Product (22.8%), and Total Electricity Consumption (11.4%). Within Economic & Business, Circular Revenue ranked highest (28.5%), followed by Recycling BCR and Reuse BCR (13.8% each), while Take-back Cost/Unit, Disassembly Cost/Unit, and Scrap Rate formed the next priority group (10.8% each). The recorded comparisons showed acceptable consistency levels and provided a first quantitative basis for integrating weighted performance evaluation into DTDP.

Day 3 – User Interface (UI)

Third day focused on clarifying user interface, possible solutions and digital tools that Platform will offer to the target group sectors, Engineered Wood Product and Electronics.

Working with a shared glossary and activity-diagram logic, participants mapped how users would enter the platform, create or load projects, structure modular projects, provide inputs, preview intermediate results, compare scenarios, and generate reports. Particular attention was given to module connectors and hand-offs between the landing page, project builder, input catalogue, indicator catalogue, result preview, scenario planner, reporting functions, and privacy/access-control features.

The Camps Key Takeaways

The three-day Design Thinking Sessions were intense and highly productive. Key outcomes included a structured and digitally captured set of SME-facing value propositions, a first scenario framework based on hotspots and Tier-2 levers for both target sectors, and a shared cross-partner understanding of DTDP modules and end-to-end user flows.

In parallel, the consortium established an initial KPI structure with weighted dimensions and indicator priorities, together with proposed performance thresholds to support future platform evaluation and reporting. With clear next steps, consortium partners agreed to continue the work through the development of the first UI mock-up / platform prototype, the further refinement of persona-based use cases and platform examples, and continued integration of scenarios, indicators, database fields and workflow logic. These outputs were planned to feed directly into the next Design Thinking Session in Krakow, Poland.

Programme Manual Online

Choose