I’m curious to see, in a world where we’ve begun to understand much about human behavior, if there is a methodology and practice that can be offered to designers to enable them to design for the good – for themselves and their communities. I’ve started the process by examining Buddhist ethics – or Sila. Much more to come. Soon.
Thoughts being those random things that jet around our heads. Attachment being the tension/reaction when becoming aware of the thought. Awareness being the “self” or emotional state that is defined by the attachment to that thought. Letting go is becoming aware of the attachment and reaction to that thought.
Did a design workshop the other day. It was a very useful way for the team to build consensus and kickstart the project.
Getting better with using the color stickies. This one was for a story mapping session with our IBM client.
What data wants – creating learning loops to bring the customer closer. Top diagram represents a typical state – bottom diagram represents an optimal state. The more you learn – the closer you bring your customer – and the more you affect your own business model. And the more you learn.
Where the opportunity presents itself and the stakeholders/community/company respond with a whole bunch of ideas in response. Develop a governance system that begins to build and expand learning while narrowing down to a single solution. The output is not only a solution to the opportunity but also establishing a culture of learning. For it is only with a culture of learning that all can extract more meaningful relationships within organizations and with those solutions that have real resonance and tenure.
Spoke to a large gathering of our Asia Pacific team in Singapore this past week. Took them through story mapping and did a quick Jeff Patton style warm up exercise with them. If you look closely enough at the photo you’ll see the yellow stickies. I spoke for nearly two hours and answered a ton of questions. Clearly there is a real hunger for a different way to do things in our world. We are expert at narrative but not so expert at experience – yet. The audience was made up of people from our offices in Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Bangkok and Jakarta, Delhi and Seoul. It was a real pleasure to be met with such enthusiasm. They were super well informed and eager to learn. With a mobile first economy in all these places they are leapfrogging the rest of us. It’s all about delivering an experience of real value. The future of our industry relies upon it. And, more significantly, the future of companies and organizations who are looking for sustainable growth. It’s an exciting time for us and I am eager to come back for another workshop soon to help drive change. In turn I am very keen on seeing how regional sensibilities will affect what I do and teach. Watching locals interact with mobile in Singapore and now Tokyo has been eye opening to say the least. So good to be out here and get mental flossed. A big thank you to all who helped set up the workshop and to those who participated. We are definitely on the way to creating the agency of the future and radically differentiating our service offering.
Story mapping is a facilitated group activity that empowers teams to think empathically and uncover opportunities to create valued products or services. It is visual, it is active and it is meant to inform the development of a testable hypothesis that can further drive innovative ways of thinking and better solutions to opportunities that may have, at first, been hidden.
Originally developed by Jeff Patton for Agile software development I saw the possibility to apply the technique to brands – and startups. I try to plot a variant of a customer journey from awareness to advocacy as the spine of the story and have the session participants write stories – or tasks – that a person would need to complete in order to achieve a goal. A goal might be the purchase of an airline ticket or the social sharing of geolocated content via a mobile app.
I’ve done this for a number of clients over the course of my career. It is a very useful way to develop consensus amongst stakeholders and create a shared “understanding”, as Jeff Patton says, of tasks that a person might encounter along their path to completing a goal. More importantly however – it is a fantastic method to help facilitate creativity. Once tasks are identified solutions to those tasks become the jumping off points for ideation and creative problem solving. Acknowledging that everyone in the room wants to make a better product or service and identifying those opportunity points can be a very powerful force for building a better product or service and drive organizational creativity.
There are plenty of techniques to use to help facilitate and encourage participation. No single session that I’ve lead is exactly the same. Each is different and each is filled – large group or small – with individuals who may themselves, have different goals. My objective as the facilitator is to see each in the group and draw them in to collaborate and solve what sometimes might be very complicated goals.
The most successful sessions have been those where, at the end of a productive day, I can step back and point out to the group larger themes that emerge that help simplify the prioritization of tasks and help identify the solutions to those tasks that might be useful to develop as a prototype.
Last week I discovered that we had a pair at work so I went and tried them out today. It was my first time so lots of fumbling as usual first times go. But first impressions always count. And you know that feeling when you have too many electronic gadgets around the house that you don’t really use anymore? Well, that’s my first impression. Here are a few more;
- Build – for $1500 you’d expect a whole heck of a lot more. Lots of plastic and wire. They could have been better designed – less plastic – more titanium frame – more of a glasses feel perhaps. Nothing elegant or premium about them at all. Google needs help here. Though I am not sure that Warby Parker is the one to help them out. Warby Parker makes cheap eyeglasses. Glass doesn’t need cheap. They should call Jon Ive.
- Function – the only thing I could really do with any consistency was to take a picture. The two available gestures on the temple were awkward for me – tap (to activate Glass) and swipe forward or back on the touchpad. There is a third gesture, the head wakeup, but I didn’t try it as I have always had a hard time with the hair flip so I stuck with the stroke pad – it is more of a stroke pad than a touch pad. It was difficult for me to access Maps and it was very strange to have to tap or stroke the temple piece and speak out loud, “ok glass”, and then have this voice whisper into your right ear. Very weird. Very off putting.
- Display – seriously? I had to look up and to the right to make any sense of it and I can imagine what that experience would be like if I was walking or driving anything. It is nothing like the HUD experience I was expecting at all and a completely different experience than the screenshots you’ve seen on the web. I imagine that it could be very very distracting. But then the glasses weren’t adjusted to my face so maybe it was just me – but I doubt it.
- Camera – so I took a photo on a tap and immediately Glass had it up on the screen for me in preview mode. I’m not sure if you could turn off preview mode – but when it came up the resolution was very low, distractingly so, and the display naturally motivated me to look up and to the right. I also found myself looking for an uncluttered background onto which I could rest my focus and move my attention to the display. Imagine doing that in a car or on the street.
- Apps – well, beyond Maps and the Camera I couldn’t see or find anything worthwhile. I did see the new Evernote app for Glass but all that I saw useful in it was popping up a shopping list on Glass. There is a minimal amount of text that the display can accommodate and still be legible – think Twitter but up in the right corner of your eye. I suppose a shopping list from Evernote displayed in Glass might help – if I couldn’t remember the four things I had on it.
- Physical Experience – as to the experience of wearing Glass they were very very conspicuously perched on my face. It was hard to look or do anything with them without people staring at you as if some part of you had already started to assimilate to the borg. They are not for the socially awkward or even – for that matter – the socially well adjusted. When I turned to look at someone the response I got (albeit in an office full of the technologicially curious) was this desire to lean in and look close. I would turn to face someone and that someone would in turn lean in and check out Glass. Is that thing on? Can I try them? I can’t imagine what it would be to walk out on the street with them.
- User Experience – this is an interesting one. As a whole it needs improvement (well, duh). But the mental model that Glass represents as a relational device runs counter and quite opposite to the efforts of all of us out in the field who are designing experiences, applications and technologies that want to blend in with our daily lives (for a great discussion on this idea of “no interface” and an introduction to some of the technologies that epitomize this interaction watch Golden Krishna’s presentation – here – and a wonderful application of it here – helios bars) I can’t imagine any field research that I have done in the past where I might have spoken to someone who might have described the solution to her unmet need as “a talking pair of glasses without lenses”. A mobile device is only as successful as it supports our efforts to be human and offers us the choice of connectedness to others and the vast web of knowledge the internets offer. While the UI of Glass supports this idea (whisper a command and I’ll get an answer projected somewhere near me) the physical expression and fabrication do not. The experience of wearing Glass is as if you took a hood ornament off an old Mercedes and stuck it on the end of your nose. Or worse, it is the technological equivalent of wearing a mink coat on a hot summer day – on your face.
But kudos to Google for giving it a try. I’ll be watching the development of Glass to see if it represents, in the end, a true paradigm shift in social interaction where the reward of wearing a mink coat on your face in summer far outweighs the inconvenience. This is obviously a very early release and very much of a proof of concept – an expensive minimally viable product. For that I’d give Google a high five. Strategically Glass gives Google an edge and is a stake in the ground for wearables. And they do certainly set the bar for any answer from the other companies in the room, Apple, Samsung, Microsoft et al. Those guys are going to be seen as me-too if they release anything close to this.
There is no question that Glass has brought Google a mass of publicity. Which is pretty interesting as a marketing strategy. Spend tens of millions on a traditional advertising campaign or try to make something cool that would get you the same amount of eyeballs and elevate the brand – as an experience. Compare that marketing message to Coke or some of the other global brands that rule the top ten. Google delivered.
I’d say that Google is probably about two to three years away from launching them as a really usable device – something that won’t end up in the drawerful of forgotten electronics that we all seem to have nowadays. And I would guess that Google released them this early in the game because they can afford to – and they knew it would take that long for the device to become truly practical and socially acceptable.