Overall, even if the final protoype isn't everything we dreamed of (but I think it will be), I believe the overall moral of this class was to learn how to be a strategic designer. Understand that the solution comes from a ton of research, interviews, putting yourself in the users shoes, and truly understanding who your designing for and why you're designing it. And if that was the goal of the class, I believe I have reached it. It was very valuable to have insights from 2 great designers that taught us patience, persistence, and taught us how to zoom-out. Now I've learned to pursue the "why" behind the design instead of just jumping into it.

A final reflection on the class.

I really enjoyed the class overall, I believe all the resources and stories brought to us during class were valuable and actually made sense. It wasn’t just theory for the sake of theory, everything connected to the project we were working on and helped guide us in our next steps. Every session pushed me to think differently and notice things I hadn’t considered before.

The only thing I would change is the Bitácora. I know it is supposed to be a tool that helps us reflect on our actions and project, but it felt more like a chore than something that helped me make sense of my journey. Instead of the Bitácora I would propose that instead of something written, the student has the choice of presenting their reflection and journey in any format. Be it a video, a song, just a presentation, so that they don't feel obligated to write a reflection every class. I think it would remove the seriousness of the project and make students feel more comfortable on the way they share it.

Afterward, we went to Student Services where the person that helped us was far more open and helpful. Interestingly, she told us that it was actually Talent & Careers who organized and hosted that session, which completely contradicted what we had been told earlier. That contradiction alone revealed how little alignment exists between departments, and how this confusion inevitably trickles down to students.

She also explained that students have to request the visa and graduation information documents; they aren’t uploaded or made public anywhere. She also mentioned an ongoing issue with Blackboard: if she uploads a file under the Student Services section and activates notifications, it sends alerts to everyone in the IE ecosystem, including alumni, which obviously creates chaos. Because of this, she only uploads very important documents, even though we weren’t able to find anything relevant ourselves.

Hearing all of this helped us see the problem from the institutional side as well: miscommunication between teams, unreliable tech systems, and a lack of proactive information sharing. It suddenly made sense why students feel so lost, the system behind the scenes is just as messy. And understanding those gaps gave us clearer direction on how our solution could support not only students, but also the staff trying to help them with tools and processes that don’t fully work.

After mapping out the immigration process and understanding where non-EU students struggle the most, we moved into the what-ifs exercise. In class we learned that what-if questions are supposed to help you break out of your usual way of thinking and explore possibilities without judging them too quickly. Even though we kind of messed up at first and treated our what-ifs like actual solutions, the exercise still ended up being super helpful.

Before turning anything into solutions, we first placed all our what-ifs into the Futures Possibilities Cone. Sorting them into possible, probable, and preferable futures really helped us reflect on which ideas felt meaningful, realistic, and worth pursuing. That’s how we decided to focus on the preferable (possible) space, ideas that made an impact for the user but is still achievable.

Once we had this filtered set of ideas, we transformed them into how might we questions. It helped us turn our what-ifs into something more practical to design from, without jumping into a fixed solution right away.

After that, we grouped our HMWs into categories like access and availability, guidance and support, communication, system design, and structural change, just like the clusters shown in the images. Then we wrote hypotheses for each category, using them to test our assumptions and get clearer on how each direction could potentially improve the users experience.

After presenting our HMWs in class, we were asked to choose our 'favorite' ones and received great feedback on how we can move forward. We were asked to choose who we were gonna "pitch" it to, which really helped us focus on who we want to design for. We chose to make one solution that would be 'pitched' to a university (in this case IE) and one that would be 'pitched' to lawyers & users.

We kept our MVP intentionally simple and rough, keeping in mind what we talked about in class about not falling in love with ideas too soon. And bringing these early sketches back to our interviewees helped us check which direction resonated most and what kind of solution they’d actually want. Looking back, the entire process from what-ifs → futures cone → HMWs → categories → hypotheses gave us the structure we needed to understand the problem deeply and choose the direction we wanted to design for.

In the end, going through all those steps helped us make sense of the problem and decide which direction was worth pursuing.

We were able to get several responses from potential users. 57.1% of them believed that the Mentorship Program would be more helpful in the process and 85.7% belive it to be more feasible But some argued that the VisaLink platform would be more helpful, stating that "…even though it is always helpful to talk to someone that already did the entire process, you will at the end always need a lawyer to sort things out". In the end we decided to carry on with the Mentorship Program as our direction because of its relevance, feasibility, and impact.

Once we committed to the Mentorship Program, the project shifted into something more grounded. We started defining what the mentorship program would include; an information hub, student profiles, expert matching, and direct integration into IE’s platforms.

Now we move on into our next steps… narrowing down the exact features we want to include, talking to IE’s Student Services and Talent & Careers, and continuing to validate with our users. At this point, it feels like our concept is becoming more concrete, and the challenge is making sure it fits smoothly within the existing IE ecosystem while still responding to the real needs students shared with us.

When we first got there, one of the secuirty guards asked us if we had an appointment, we said no but that we had some questions regarding the entire process. He let us go inside and wait in a line for a bit to be able to talk to the receptionist. When it was finally our turn, the receptionist told us that the place we were in wasn't the Extranjería Office, while every sign in the place said it was the Extranjería Office. She then gave us a pamphlet with a QR Code to book our appointment in the actual extranjeria office (which wasn't that one) and sent us on our way. She was extremely rude and extremely unhelpful. I can't even imagine going through this process without knowing how to speak proper Spanish, which is something a lot of people need to go through. This made me sympathize even more with people who have to go through this tedious process, and made me understand that problem is lack of knowledge about the process itself and about where to find the information needed.

Mapping out these experiences forced us to slow down and look closely at each stage, not just as researchers but as users who have felt the uncertainty and frustration firsthand. Seeing the entire journey laid out made the moments of confusion and information gaps stand out almost immediately. This exercise helped us better understand where users struggle the most and highlighted the pain points that are often overlooked. Ultimately, the journey map allowed us to empathize more deeply with international graduates facing these administrative hurdles and gave us clearer direction on where meaningful improvements could be made.

We then started to branch out from each point that there was confusion, we annotated every document that was given to us with questions and dead ends. Going through this process really showed us the dimension of the problem, we encountred so many dead ends, misinformation, links that didn't work, that we felt the frustration of those that go through this.

Going through all of this made us realize how essential mapping and zooming out are in strategic design. It’s only when you step back and look at the entire process, that the real structure, gaps, and opportunities for change begin to reveal themselves.

As we moved forward, we started gathering interviews with a wide range of people: current students, recent graduates, immigration lawyers, and departments inside IE like Student Services and Talent & Careers. Hearing all these different perspectives helped us understand not just the official procces but also the informal shortcuts and fears that shape people’s experiences. We began collecting documents, personal stories, screenshots, and anything that could help us make sense of the system.

Because Julia and I are both from South America, we also had access to many friends who have gone through the process themselves. Their stories really helped us put things into perspective, giving us information we couldn't even find online. For example, a Brazilian friend who managed to get a work visa through a remote job, entirely self-funded. Most people we spoke to didn’t even know that was possible. That moment made me realize how much information is hidden, fragmented, or only accessible through personal networks. The more we spoke to people, the clearer it became that the process is extremely bureaucratic and has also built in gaps, rumors, assumptions, and things you only learn by knowing the right person.

This phase made me understand how essential real conversations are in strategic design. Research wasn’t just about collecting data, it was about digging deep and finding the invisible parts of the system and recognizing how lived experiences hold knowledge that official documents don’t.

We presented this idea to the class and got a lot of positive feedback. But most of the feedback was also that we should focus on problems that relate more to us. One process that all 4 of us had to go through was of getting our NIEs. Even though Ella, Phili and I have an European passport, it was still a a slightly tedious processs. But Julia, our 4th member, has to renew her NIE every semester, every time encountering a new problem. One of her worries too is getting a Visa to work after graduation. And I, as a Brazilian, have a lot of friends who have to do the same or that weren’t able to stay here after graduation because of the Visa.

So we chose to focus on this problem of getting a work Visa after graduation.

17.6 — Knowledge sharing and cooperation for access to science, technology and innovation
We choose this goal because we notice that there isn’t much information sharing within IE. For example, the research and theses done by students aren’t shared with others, so most people don’t know what kind of work is happening inside the institution. This makes it harder to learn from each other or build on past projects. Other universities already have systems where students can easily access and share their research, which helps create a more collaborative and innovative environment. Doing something similar at IE can make a big difference and help promote more connection and creativity among students.

17.H — Encourage effective partnerships
This sub-goal stands out to us because in a class that we have in our second year of university, we designed a service that replaces the single-use bowls that are given in the cafeteria at IE. Some months later, IE implemented Bumerang, which does exactly what we proposed. We think it is interesting to search for other cases like these to implement inside IE.

We're still trying to consider what makes sense and what is somethign that resonates with all of us.

The frameworks we saw in class helped me realize how different strategic design is from that approach. The Tools → Methods → Mindset → Culture → Worldview diagram made me understand that design isn’t only about using tools, it’s about how those tools eventually shape the way we think and interpret the world. It made me aware that strategic design requires a shift in mindset, not just a new set of techniques.

All of this is helping me understand that I want to be a designer who values process, reflection, and impact just as much as aesthetics or functionality. I’m realizing that good design isn’t about creating something beautiful right away, it’s about asking the right questions, engaging with real contexts, and designing with purpose.

Choosing SDG and Team Role

I chose SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals because it’s broad and flexible, and it can be meaningfully connected to many different issues. I liked that it didn’t limit me to a narrow topic from the beginning. It felt like an SDG with space to evolve throughout the project.

For the team roles I chose the Connector and Convener role because it’s the one I naturally take in group settings. I’m a very open and conversational person, and I genuinely enjoy bringing people together, encouraging collaboration, and making sure everyone feels heard. This also helps me in my goal of practicing and improving my Spanish, since it pushes me to communicate more, interact with different people, and bridge perspectives both inside and outside our team.