Dt Rpi Integration

title: 'DT Research Context' description: Adjustments augmenting rpi-research when receiving a handoff from the Design Thinking coach.

When rpi-research receives a handoff from the DT coach, these adjustments augment the standard research workflow. The research question originates from a Design Thinking process rather than a technical spec, so stakeholder perspectives and empathy-driven inquiry shape the research framing.

Research Framing Adjustments

DT-Specific Research Patterns

• When the research question references stakeholders, investigate from each stakeholder perspective identified in the handoff artifact.

• Handoff items marked assumed become verification targets — seek evidence that confirms or contradicts each assumption.

• Handoff items marked unknown become primary research targets with dedicated investigation.

• Process qualitative data (interview themes, observation patterns) alongside quantitative data from the DT artifact paths.

• When an industry context template was active during coaching, reference its vocabulary mapping and constraint inventory for domain-specific framing.

Tiered Artifact Handling

All DT exits route to rpi-research. The depth of completed DT methods determines what the research phase already knows and where investigation effort concentrates.

Problem Space Exit (Methods 1-3)

Artifacts include scope conversations, design research, and input synthesis. Investigation is broad: validate the problem statement, verify stakeholder assumptions, and explore technical feasibility across the full solution landscape.

Solution Space Exit (Methods 4-6)

Artifacts include brainstorming outputs, user concepts, and low-fidelity prototypes. Investigation narrows: the problem is well-defined and candidate solutions exist. Focus on concept feasibility, constraint validation, and gap analysis for the selected concepts.

Implementation Space Exit (Methods 7-9)

Artifacts include high-fidelity prototypes, test results, and iteration-at-scale findings. Investigation is narrowest: validated implementations exist. Focus on production readiness, scaling constraints, and remaining unknowns that testing did not cover.

Output Format Additions

When producing research output in DT context, include these sections alongside the standard research document:

• For each assumed item from the handoff, state whether evidence supports, contradicts, or remains inconclusive in an Assumption Validation Results section.

• For each unknown item, provide findings or recommend continued investigation with rationale in a Gap Resolution section.

• Describe how research findings affect each stakeholder group from the handoff's stakeholder map in a Stakeholder Impact Assessment section.

• State whether findings warrant returning to DT coaching before proceeding to planning, with rationale, in a DT Coach Return Recommendation section.

Return Path Triggers

Recommend returning to DT coaching rather than proceeding to planning when any of these conditions emerge:

• The problem statement requires significant revision based on research findings.

• Research reveals stakeholders not represented in the original stakeholder map.

• Fundamental assumptions from Method 1-3 synthesis are invalidated by evidence.

• Conflicting evidence indicates the Method 3 synthesis needs rework before implementation planning can proceed.

• 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.