THE CIRCULAR SPRINT: CIRCULAR BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION THROUGH DESIGN THINKING

УДК 005.3:338.2

Abstract

Under mounting regulatory pressure, shifting consumer expectations toward sustainability, and the imperatives of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the transition to a circular economy has become a key strategic imperative for global corporations. Existing scholarship identifies a significant gap between the declared principles of the circular economy and their practical implementation at the business model level — particularly in complex, multi-stakeholder environments where universally applicable operational frameworks remain absent. This article addresses this gap by examining Design Thinking methodology as an instrument for overcoming the "wicked problems" inherent in circular business model development. The methodological foundation of the study is a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published from 2020 to 2024, combined with a detailed analysis of the empirically validated Circular Sprint framework proposed by Santa-Maria, Vermeulen, and Baumgartner (2022). Seven sequential iterative phases of the framework are analysed, and they are; Inspire, Understand, Define, Ideate, Decide, Prototype, and Test. Three key methodological adaptations are identified: value chain mapping, back-casting, and embedded sustainability checkpoints. From a practical standpoint, the findings indicate that managers should deploy Circular Sprint workshops with cross-functional teams as a component of long-term operational strategy rather than as isolated one-off events. The relevance of the framework for emerging markets, including Nigeria, is also discussed. The article concludes that purposefully adapted Design Thinking represents a promising instrument for the early-stage development of circular business models, and recommends that future research systematically track the long-term implementation outcomes of these models across diverse international markets.

Аннотация

В условиях нарастающего регуляторного давления, смещения потребительских предпочтений в сторону устойчивости и требований Повестки дня ООН в области устойчивого развития до 2030 года переход к циркулярной экономике становится ключевым стратегическим императивом для глобальных компаний. Существующие исследования фиксируют значительный разрыв между декларируемыми принципами циркулярной экономики и их практической реализацией на уровне бизнес-моделей — особенно в условиях высококомплексной многосторонней среды и отсутствия универсальных операционных фреймворков. Настоящая статья устраняет данный разрыв, рассматривая методологию дизайн-мышления как инструмент преодоления «трудноразрешимых проблем» при разработке циркулярных бизнес-моделей. Методологической основой исследования служит систематический анализ рецензируемой литературы за 2020–2024 годы в сочетании с детальным разбором эмпирически обоснованного фреймворка «Circular Sprint», предложенного Санта-Марией, Вермюленом и Баумгартнером (2022). Анализируются семь последовательных итерационных фаз фреймворка: «Вдохновение», «Понимание», «Определение», «Генерация идей», «Принятие решений», «Прототипирование» и «Тестирование». Выявлены три ключевые адаптации методологии: картирование цепочки создания ценности, ретроспективное целеполагание и встроенные контрольные точки устойчивости. С практической точки зрения результаты исследования показывают, что менеджерам рекомендуется применять воркшопы на основе Circular Sprint с кросс-функциональными командами как часть долгосрочной операционной стратегии, а не в формате разовых мероприятий. Особое внимание уделяется применимости фреймворка в контексте развивающихся рынков, включая Нигерию. Сделан вывод о необходимости проведения долгосрочных международных исследований, отслеживающих реальные результаты реализации циркулярных бизнес-моделей на международных рынках.

Keywords: circular economy; design thinking; business model innovation; sustainability; wicked problems; UN Sustainable Development Goals; Circular Sprint framework; iterative process; prototyping; value chain mapping; back-casting; circular business models; human-centered design; co-creation.

Ключевые слова: циркулярная экономика; дизайн-мышление; инновации бизнес-моделей; устойчивое развитие; трудноразрешимые проблемы; Цели устойчивого развития ООН; фреймворк Circular Sprint; итерационный процесс; прототипирование; картирование цепочки создания ценности; ретроспективное целеполагание; циркулярные бизнес-модели; человекоцентричный подход; совместное создание ценности.

Introduction

Under multiple regulatory pressures, evolving consumer expectations, and the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, global corporations can no longer treat the circular economy (CE) as an optional ethical commitment — it has become a core strategic imperative. The prevailing "take-make-dispose" linear economic model generates accelerating resource depletion, waste accumulation, and climate instability on a planetary scale. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, only 8.6% of materials used by the global economy are currently cycled back into production, leaving a vast "circularity gap" that represents both an environmental crisis and a significant missed economic opportunity. In other words, companies cannot ignore the circular economy anymore. The old "take-make-waste" model is destroying the planet. Only 8.6% of materials get reused. Big economies (EU, US, China) are making laws that force companies to become circular. Plastic waste is a huge problem that circular models can fix. This pressure is also reaching big Nigerian companies like Dangote Refinery, Nigeria. In Nigeria, plastic waste clogs drainage systems and contributes to flooding in cities like Lagos state. Empirical research demonstrates that circular economy strategies can contribute to all 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most powerfully to SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action) [1]. The European Union's Green Deal, the United States' Inflation Reduction Act, and China's National Circular Economy Development Plan collectively signal a global regulatory convergence that renders circular business model transformation not merely desirable but legally and commercially necessary within the coming decade [1]. The scale of this transformation is further underscored by the fact that global plastic production alone exceeds 400 million tonnes annually, with the vast majority ending in landfill or ecosystems — a systemic failure that circular business model innovation is uniquely positioned to address [11].

Going circular is not easy, it has never been easy. It is not done in just small changes like using less plastic. You have to change everything: how you make money, who your partners are, how your supply chain works. Even big companies like Renault and Philips struggle with this. There is no single guidebook. Design Thinking can help fill this gap and make it less difficult than it normally should be. Operationalizing CE principles at the business model level poses distinctive and systemic challenges that go far beyond incremental process improvements. Unlike marginal optimizations which requires reducing packaging materials or improving energy efficiency within existing operations, a circular business model requires the simultaneous reconfiguration of value propositions, revenue mechanisms, stakeholder ecosystems, and supply-chain logic across divergent regulatory and cultural environments. Some popular companies such as Renault, Caterpillar, and Philips have pioneered circular practices including remanufacturing, product-as-a-service models, and closed-loop material recovery; yet even these industry leaders report that scaling circular models across global operations requires sustained organizational transformation rather than a one-time product redesign. For a company like Dangote Refinery, going circular would mean redesigning not just their bags but also making arrangements for how customers return them and how the company collects and cleans them before re-using them. This is even quite harder in most parts of Nigeria where waste collection infrastructure is limited [10]. The absence of universally applicable frameworks for guiding this multi-dimensional transformation is widely recognized in the literature, and it is into this gap that Design Thinking, which is purposefully adapted for circularity, offers a compelling and empirically supported contribution [2].

Materials and methods

This article employs a systematic literature review as its primary research method, consistent with IMRAD conventions for analytical review articles in management and sustainability science. The selection of sources was guided by three criteria: (1) publication date of 2020 or later, to ensure contemporaneity and relevance to current global discourse on circular economy and business model innovation; (2) peer-reviewed publication in indexed academic journals (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) or in scholarly edited volumes from recognized academic publishers; (3) thematic relevance to at least one of four core areas — Design Thinking methodology and its application in business strategy [6; 7; 8], circular business model innovation frameworks [11; 12], the Circular Sprint framework specifically [3], and circular economy in emerging market and African contexts [9; 10]. An initial pool of sources was identified across multiple search rounds using keyword combinations such as "circular economy business model innovation," "design thinking strategy," "circular economy Africa and Nigeria," and "Circular Sprint framework." Following deduplication and screening against the inclusion criteria, twelve sources published between 2020 and 2024 were retained for substantive analysis.

The primary analytical object of this study is the Circular Sprint framework proposed by Santa-Maria, Vermeulen, and Baumgartner (2022), selected on the basis of its methodological rigor: the framework was developed through an Action Design Research approach, validated across six workshops with a total of 107 participants across fourteen teams, and published in the Q1-ranked Journal of Cleaner Production [3]. Complementary empirical evidence is drawn from a parallel study by the same research team examining the micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities in circular business model innovation across ten incumbent firms [12]. The analytical approach adopted throughout this article follows an interpretive, theory-building design: the Introduction contextualizes the research problem and identifies the gap; the present Materials and Methods section describes the review process; the Results and Discussion section synthesizes and critically interprets the identified evidence with reference to specific framework phases, expert evaluations, and emerging-market applicability; and the Conclusion draws implications for management practice and future research. Contextual grounding in the emerging-market context — particularly within Nigeria — is incorporated throughout the Discussion to extend the framework's applicability beyond its original European and North American development context [9; 10].

Results and discussion

A "wicked problem", simply put, is a problem with no single right answer. Everything is connected. Different groups (factories, customers, government, recyclers) want different things. It means that you cannot fully test a solution before trying it out. Design Thinking helps because it works in loops: understand, test, learn, then try again. Circular economy business model innovation is, in the terminology of Rittel and Webber (1973), a prototypical "wicked problem": a challenge defined by complex interdependencies, the absence of a definitive problem formulation, and solutions that cannot be fully pre-tested before implementation. The transition involves conflicting stakeholder interests — manufacturers, consumers, regulators, and recyclers who frequently hold incompatible priorities — uncertain consumer adoption patterns, multi-jurisdictional regulatory ambiguity, and technological co-dependencies that make any single "correct" solution impossible to identify in advance. Design Thinking addresses these qualities precisely through an iterative cycle of empathy, problem definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing, embracing ambiguity rather than resolving it prematurely and enabling cross-functional teams to make informed decisions under conditions of uncertainty [8]. For example, Nigerian consumers may want cheaper products, while the government may want less waste, and companies want to protect their profits. This is why no single solution works for all Nigerian markets. This means that what works in Lagos may fail in Kano.

Design Thinking's human-centered orientation is of particular relevance in the circular economy context, where the willingness of consumers to participate in reverse logistics, product-service systems, and extended-use models is a critical and often underestimated variable. For circular economy to work, customers must comply to returning products, sharing instead of owning, or using products longer. Most companies underestimate how hard this can be. A comprehensive bibliometric and systematic review by Kurek et al. (2023) shows Design Thinking helps in four ways: (1) focusing on users, (2) working across teams, (3) capturing value, (4) testing ideas. Most business models do not do enough testing — Design Thinking fills that gap [2]. Crucially, the same review identifies prototyping and experimentation as the most underexplored area in existing sustainable business model frameworks — a deficit that Design Thinking is uniquely positioned to close [2]. In Nigeria, getting customers to return empty cement bags or drink bottles will require understanding local behaviors and creating simple return systems. Dangote could start by testing a small return system in one city like Lagos before rolling it out nationally [9]. When embedded at the strategic organizational level — beyond its traditional application in product innovation — Design Thinking will strengthen a firm's adaptive capacity within the volatile, uncertain environments that characterize global operations, rendering it a durable organizational capability rather than a one-time workshop exercise [6; 7].

The recognition that conventional Design Thinking does not inherently contain sustainability logic has motivated the development of purpose-adapted frameworks for circular business model innovation. The most rigorously validated of these is the Circular Sprint, proposed by Santa-Maria, Vermeulen, and Baumgartner (2022) in the Journal of Cleaner Production [3]. Built through an Action Design Research methodology — iteratively synthesizing four streams of academic literature alongside feedback from sixteen domain experts and six workshops involving a total of 107 participants across fourteen teams — the framework adapts the classical Design Thinking process into seven sequential yet iterative phases: Inspire, Understand, Define, Ideate, Decide, Prototype, and Test, supported by twelve purposefully modified activities designed to integrate sustainability and circularity considerations from the very outset of the innovation process [3]. Regular Design Thinking does not automatically include sustainability, and that is why researchers created this special version called the "Circular Sprint," containing the seven phases listed. In the Inspire phase, participants are immersed in real-world circular economy examples, emerging regulatory trends, and market cases — such as the Renault Choisy-le-Roi re-manufacturing plant or Interface's closed-loop carpet tile system — to calibrate shared understanding and stimulate systemic thinking. The Understand phase employs stakeholder mapping and life-cycle analysis to identify material flows, value creation points, and systemic dependencies across an entire product or service ecosystem. The Define phase synthesizes insights into a problem statement that explicitly encompasses environmental and social dimensions alongside commercial ones, resisting the tendency to narrow the challenge prematurely into familiar solution spaces. During the Ideate phase, teams generate circular solutions unconstrained by current operational models, drawing on principles such as product longevity, resource recovery, servitization, and platform-based sharing. In the Decide phase, a "sustainability scan" checkpoint evaluates proposed concepts against predefined circularity criteria before further resources are committed, functioning as an institutional safeguard against greenwashing. The Prototypephase translates selected concepts into low-fidelity but testable representations of circular business models — including mock value propositions, revenue scenarios, and stakeholder interaction flows — and the Test phase gathers structured feedback from end-users, supply-chain partners, and sustainability experts to guide further iteration [3]. A Nigerian manufacturing company, for example, could use these seven phases to design a reusable packaging system in five days. The Inspire phase could show examples from Kenyan companies that have successfully implemented circular models.

The Circular Sprint has three special features:

1. Value chain map instead of customer journey map — This is to track everything: where materials come from, where waste goes, who touches the product.
2. Back-casting — Start by imagining a perfect circular future (e.g., zero waste by 2035), then work backwards to figure out what to do now.
3. Sustainability checkpoint — This stands as a filter to stop fake "green" ideas that sound circular but are not [3; 4; 5].

Research by Bocken et al. (2023) further confirms that Design Thinking tools can catalyze sustainable circular innovation when they combine principles of human-centeredness, future-orientation, holistic thinking, co-creativity, and experimentation — qualities directly embodied in each of the Circular Sprint's seven phases [4]. For Dangote Company, back-casting could mean imagining a future where no cement bags go to landfill, then planning backwards to 2026 to set milestones. The sustainability checkpoint would prevent Dangote from launching a 'reusable bag' that actually cannot be reused more than twice. Sedini et al. (2024) similarly argue that for Design Thinking to realize its full potential within the circular economy paradigm, it must be integrated with systemic sustainability frameworks rather than applied as a stand-alone creative method, and that the transition from linear to circular design thinking requires a fundamental reframing of how innovation processes define value, stakeholders, and success criteria [5]. Knight, Daymond, and Paroutis (2020) further demonstrate that when Design Thinking is embedded in strategic management — rather than confined to product design teams — it enables organizations to identify new value-creating opportunities, align stakeholders, and accelerate business model transformation in uncertain, complex environments [6]. This finding is especially relevant for large African conglomerates such as Dangote Group, which operate across multiple national regulatory contexts simultaneously.

Experts like the Circular Sprint but they say that two things need improvement: (1) helping teams create full business models (not just product ideas), and (2) making it faster. Success depends on the company, the project, and the facilitator. One key lesson to note however is that sustainability must be part of every step, not added at the end [3]. These findings are consistent with broader empirical evidence from adapted Design Thinking workshops: the approach demonstrably builds shared understanding from a life-cycle perspective, enables structured ideation within constrained timeframes, and supports the design of novel business models, but outcomes are sensitive to organizational context, project maturity, and the quality of facilitation provided [3]. Santa-Maria, Vermeulen, and Baumgartner's (2021) IMRAD-structured empirical study of ten incumbent firms found that the most critical micro-foundations of circular business model innovation include adopting a lifecycle perspective, developing a sustainability strategy and culture, and engaging stakeholders in the business ecosystem — all of which map directly onto the Circular Sprint's phase architecture [12]. In the Nigerian context, speed is very important. A 5-day Circular Sprint workshop may be more realistic than a 3-week process for the busy Nigerian managers. The facilitator must understand both Design Thinking and the local Nigerian business environment. A multi-stakeholder workshop format involving experts from academia, industry, the public sector, and non-governmental organizations has further confirmed that Design Thinking is a plausible method for conceptualizing CE-based solutions — provided sustainability logic is actively woven throughout the process rather than appended at its conclusion. Akinwale (2023) documents that among Nigerian MSMEs, awareness of circular economy principles is moderately high but adoption remains low, with the main drivers of uptake being top management commitment, digital technology, regulatory incentives, and financial resources — factors that a well-facilitated Circular Sprint workshop is directly designed to activate [9].

Conclusion

In conclusion, companies must act on circular economy now. Regular planning does not work for "wicked problems." The Circular Sprint is a much better way. Managers should invest in workshops with teams from different departments. They should not treat workshops as one-time events. Rather, they should make them part of an ongoing process. The biggest missing research is long-term studies tracking whether circular business models actually work in different countries over time [1; 2; 3; 4; 5]. For Nigerian companies like Dangote, starting with a pilot Circular Sprint in one product line (e.g., cement packaging) could prove the value before expanding to other divisions. Future research should also study how Nigerian manufacturing companies adapt the Circular Sprint to local infrastructure constraints [9; 10]. This article has shown that circular economy is not just for rich countries but it is equally relevant for Nigeria, where waste management is mostly a daily challenge. The most critical gap for future scholarship remains the near-absence of longitudinal, multi-country studies that track the real-world implementation and commercial performance of business models developed through these processes — research that could ultimately close the persistent distance between circular economy ambition and circular economy practice [1; 2]. Implementing Design Thinking at the organizational level requires specific conditions — strategic vision, leadership commitment, cultural readiness, and supportive facilities — all of which managers must invest in proactively if the Circular Sprint is to deliver durable business model transformation rather than a short-term creative exercise [7].

References:

1. Ortiz-de-Montellano C. G. S., Samani P., van der Meer Y. How can the circular economy support the advancement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? A comprehensive analysis // Sustainable Production and Consumption. – 2023. – Vol. 40. – P. 352–362. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2023.06.021
2. Kurek J., Grebski M. E., Grebski W., Mazur Á. Sustainable business models innovation and design thinking: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review of literature // Sustainability. – 2023. – Vol. 15. – No. 2. – P. 988. DOI: 10.3390/su15020988
3. Santa-Maria T., Vermeulen W. J. V., Baumgartner R. J. The Circular Sprint: Circular business model innovation through design thinking // Journal of Cleaner Production. – 2022. – Vol. 362. – P. 132323. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132323
4. Bocken N., Baldassarre B., Keskin D., Diehl J. C. Design Thinking Tools to Catalyse Sustainable Circular Innovation // Routledge Handbook of Design for Sustainability / Ed. by J. Lockton, S. Forlizzi. – London : Routledge, 2023. – P. 261–275. DOI: 10.4324/9781003267492-21
5. Sedini C., Bianchini M., Maffei S., Cautela C. Shifting Design Thinking to a Circular Design Perspective: Reframing the Process of Circular Innovation // The International Journal of Design Management and Professional Practice. – 2024. – Vol. 18. – No. 1. – P. 1–22.
6. Knight E., Daymond J., Paroutis S. Design-Led Strategy: How To Bring Design Thinking Into The Art of Strategic Management // California Management Review. – 2020. – Vol. 62. – No. 2. – P. 30–52. DOI: 10.1177/0008125619897594
7. Wrigley C., Nusem E., Straker K. Implementing Design Thinking: Understanding Organizational Conditions // California Management Review. – 2020. – Vol. 62. – No. 2. – P. 125–143. DOI: 10.1177/0008125619897606
8. Daymond J., Knight E. Design Thinking in Business and Management: Research History, Themes, and Opportunities // Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. – 2023. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.386
9. Akinwale Y. O. Awareness and adoption of circular economy in the consumption and production value-chain among MSMEs towards sustainable development // African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development. – 2023. – Vol. 15. – No. 6. – P. 669–681. DOI: 10.1080/20421338.2023.2247924
10. Nijman-Ross E., Umuhire Umutesi J., Turay J., Shamavu D., Atanga W. A. Toward a preliminary research agenda for the circular economy adoption in Africa // Frontiers in Sustainability. – 2023. – Vol. 4. – P. 1061563. DOI: 10.3389/frsus.2023.1061563
11. Geissdoerfer M., Pieroni M., Pigosso D. C. A., Soufani K. Circular business models: A review // Journal of Cleaner Production. – 2020. – Vol. 277. – P. 123741. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123741
12. Santa-Maria T., Vermeulen W. J. V., Baumgartner R. J. How do incumbent firms innovate their business models for the circular economy? Identifying micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities // Business Strategy and the Environment. – 2021. – Vol. 31. – No. 4. – P. 1336–1359. DOI: 10.1002/bse.2956