DT to RPI Integration

Design Thinking and RPI connect through structured handoff artifacts. When a DT session reaches a natural exit point, the DT Coach prepares an artifact containing validated findings, confidence markers, and stakeholder maps that the RPI phase skills consume as input.

Handoff Pipeline Overview

flowchart TD
    DT["DT Coach Session"]

    subgraph problem["Problem Space"]
        M13["Methods 1-3<br/>Scope · Research · Synthesis"]
    end

    subgraph solution["Solution Space"]
        M46["Methods 4-6<br/>Brainstorm · Concepts · Low-Fidelity Prototypes"]
    end

    subgraph implementation["Implementation Space"]
        M79["Methods 7-9<br/>High-Fidelity Prototypes · Testing · Iteration"]
    end

    DT --> M13 --> M46 --> M79

    M13 -.->|"Exit 1 · problem statement complete"| RR["rpi-research"]
    M46 -.->|"Exit 2 · concept validated"| RR
    M79 -.->|"Exit 3 · implementation spec ready"| RR

    RR --> RP["rpi-plan"] --> RI["rpi-implement"] --> RV["rpi-review"]
    RR -.->|"return when DT assumptions need revision"| DT

Each exit point produces a handoff artifact with the current contract fields: exit_point, dt_method, dt_space, handoff_target, date, artifacts, constraints, and assumptions. The coach keeps the session state in .copilot-tracking/design-thinking-sessions/{project-slug}/, while the handoff artifacts live alongside project artifacts in docs/design-thinking/{project-slug}/.

exit_point: "implementation-spec-ready"
dt_method: 9
dt_space: "implementation"
handoff_target: "rpi-research"
date: "2026-06-26"

artifacts:
  - path: "docs/design-thinking/{project-slug}/method-09-iteration-at-scale.md"
    type: "iteration-summary"
    confidence: validated

constraints:
  - description: "The rollout must fit existing deployment windows"
    source: "stakeholder-review"
    confidence: assumed

assumptions:
  - description: "Support staff can monitor the pilot environment"
    confidence: unknown
    impact: "high"

Subagent Handoff Workflow

When the DT Coach detects handoff readiness, it can dispatch assessment, compilation, and validation subagents to make the transition more reliable. The workflow checks artifact readiness, compiles the handoff payload into the current schema, and validates the generated RPI entry artifact before rpi-research consumes it. At Method 5b, the workflow can also generate image prompts that help turn concept artifacts into visual directions for downstream review.

Exit Points

Problem Statement Complete (Methods 1-3 to rpi-research)

After completing Scope Conversations, Design Research, and Input Synthesis, the team has a validated problem statement backed by multi-source evidence. rpi-research uses this framing to:

• Scope technical research around stakeholder-validated needs rather than assumed requirements
• Treat assumed items as verification targets
• Treat unknown items as primary research targets
• Investigate from each stakeholder perspective identified in the handoff

Concept Validated (Methods 4-6 to rpi-research)

After Brainstorming, User Concepts, and Low-Fidelity Prototypes, the team has a stakeholder-validated concept with known constraints. rpi-research receives these richer artifacts to:

• Validate the narrowed solution directions through technical investigation
• Resolve constraints marked assumed or unknown from low-fidelity prototype testing
• Assess feasibility of tested concepts across stakeholder perspectives
• Investigate integration and scaling concerns before planning begins

Implementation Spec Ready (Methods 7-9 to rpi-research)

After High-Fidelity Prototypes and User Testing, the team has functionally validated specifications. rpi-research receives the richest artifact set to:

• Investigate production readiness, scaling gaps, and integration concerns
• Verify items where testing evidence was limited or conflicting
• Assess whether architecture decisions hold under production constraints
• Narrow research scope significantly because extensive DT validation already occurred

Per-Phase Input Mapping

Each RPI phase applies DT-specific adjustments when it receives the handoff evidence.

rpi-research

Standard Behavior	DT-Informed Behavior
Technical feasibility focus	Stakeholder impact and technical feasibility
Single-perspective analysis	Multi-stakeholder analysis across roles and contexts
Binary findings (works/doesn't)	Quality-marked findings (validated/assumed/unknown)
Forward-only to planner	May return to DT coach when findings warrant it

When research reveals that the DT problem statement needs revision, fundamental assumptions are invalidated, or unrepresented stakeholders emerge, the researcher recommends returning to DT coaching rather than proceeding to planning.

Source: direct from DT handoff.

rpi-plan

Standard Behavior	DT-Informed Behavior
Production-quality deliverables	Space-appropriate fidelity (rough/scrappy/functional)
Linear phase execution	Iteration-aware phases with return paths to earlier methods
Technical success criteria	Stakeholder-segmented success criteria
Forward-only validation	Validation incorporating DT coach return triggers

Plans include a DT Reconnection phase that assesses whether findings warrant returning to DT coaching before downstream implementation.

Source: indirect, via the upstream rpi-research output.

rpi-implement

Standard Behavior	DT-Informed Behavior
Production-quality code	Space-appropriate fidelity
Complete feature delivery	Constraint-validated scope matching DT prototype specs
Technical correctness focus	Stakeholder experience validation alongside correctness
Full polish and optimization	Anti-polish: functional core without premature optimization

The implementation phase enforces fidelity constraints from the originating DT space and references DT artifact paths in change evidence.

Source: indirect, through the upstream rpi-research and rpi-plan artifacts.

rpi-review

Standard Behavior	DT-Informed Behavior
Code correctness focus	Coaching quality and method fidelity focus
Pass/fail assessment	Space-appropriate fidelity assessment
Style guide conformance	Think/Speak/Empower coaching identity conformance
Single output evaluation	Multi-stakeholder coverage evaluation

The review phase checks that all identified stakeholder groups are represented, confidence markers are applied correctly, and output fidelity matches the originating space.

Confidence Markers

Every handoff artifact tags its contents with confidence markers that downstream agents use to calibrate their work:

Marker	Meaning	Downstream Treatment
validated	Confirmed through multi-source evidence	Treat as reliable input
assumed	Believed true but not yet verified	Include verification steps
unknown	Information gap requiring investigation	Primary research or resolution target
conflicting	Evidence points in multiple directions	Must resolve before downstream work proceeds

Iteration Support

The DT-to-RPI handoff is not one-way. When rpi-research encounters issues that trace back to DT assumptions, it recommends returning to DT coaching:

• rpi-research returns directly to DT Coach when the problem statement needs revision, unrepresented stakeholders emerge, or fundamental assumptions are invalidated.
• rpi-plan and rpi-implement route DT-related evidence gaps back to rpi-research, which may recommend returning to DT.
• rpi-review flags items that need DT method re-entry based on artifact quality criteria.

TIP

Returning to DT from RPI is a sign of thoroughness, not failure. The integration is designed for non-linear iteration across both frameworks.

Shared Prompts

Three prompts compile DT artifacts for the single RPI entry point at rpi-research:

• dt-handoff-problem-space.prompt.md: Packages Problem Space artifacts (Methods 1-3) for rpi-research
• dt-handoff-solution-space.prompt.md: Packages Solution Space artifacts (Methods 4-6) for rpi-research
• dt-handoff-implementation-space.prompt.md: Packages Implementation Space artifacts (Methods 7-9) for rpi-research

Each prompt collects the relevant method outputs, confidence markers, and open questions into a structured handoff that rpi-research consumes directly. Later exit prompts produce richer artifacts that narrow the Research phase scope.

Related Resources

• Tutorial: Handing Off from DT to RPI: Step-by-step guide with practical examples at each exit point
• Design Thinking Guide: Overview of all nine methods and three spaces
• DT Coach Guide: How to use the DT Coach agent
• RPI Workflow: Research, Plan, Implement, Review framework

🤖 Crafted with precision by ✨Copilot following brilliant human instruction, then carefully refined by our team of discerning human reviewers.