Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Below are my notes from Samantha Starmer’s presentation at IA Summit 10 on “The Holistic Customer.”

NOTE: This YouTube video is from the MX 2010 conference, but it covers the same material Samantha presented at IA Summit.

Works for REI: started in 1938, member-owned

Started with story:  Speaking at a conference in Palm Springs – got to stay in a fancy resort hotel.  But had been flying all day and was tired; wanted an adult beverage.  Wine on hotel menu cost $80.  Decided to find a grocery store nearby. But had to get out of the 13 acre resort… with a crappy map. Had to tip someone to find the exit of the hotel. After getting her alcohol, she got lost in the dark at the hotel. She gave the hotel a FAIL for explorability.

Later learned that they have a no-sign policy. They even asked conference attendees to remove their conference badges (!). No signs on the doors; no label on the ice machine door or restaurant.

Why should you care about this story?

65% of visitors to online search engine were looking for further info on a product or service they saw on TV or read about in a newspaper

53% of US products say the research products online that they later buy off-line.

Even if you think you are web-only, you are multi-channel.

Customers are interacting with your brand; they really don’t care about your channel(s).  We shouldn’t act like the channels are different ways of interacting with the customer.

Example: US Airways iPhone app and website – bad customer experiences. Gets to counter at airport, and there’s nobody at the desk, and no self-serve kiosk.

Our marketing peers are way ahead of us on this – they’re talking about cross-channel experiences.

Some guidelines.

1. Think about on ramps and off ramps.

2. Don’t assume the customer is using the front door.

3. Provide holistic experiences at all entrances.

Example of REI un-holistic experience: Award mentioned in company Tweet, but not on the corresponding webpage.

Ex 2: Best Buy store pick-up — you can’t get directions to the store from there.

Ex 3: From Google to “How to Choose a Kayak” article on REI site.

Think: Are your on-ramps and off-ramps a good experience?

4. Be consistent. (brand consistency)

REI ex: simple color schemes for print coupon, web page, store signs, etc.  Coordination & timing are crucial but challenging. It’s a “big production” to stay consistent.

4. Consistent information is important

REI ex: info on webpage and on sign in store are not the same.

5. Be consistent but optimize channel capabilities.

Ex: Surface use in hotel lobby.

Ex: Tobi: augmented reality dressing room – you can try on clothes virtually.

Ex: Target’s iPhone app – not just for advertising; provides availability and ** WHICH AISLE IT’S IN. **

How do design holistically?

A: Use metrics. Had metrics on how many people brought an ad into the store.

Related disciplines:

UX design

Service design

Customer experience

CRM

Multi-channel communications

Tools & Methods

Field experience etc.

“Wander the halls” in your organization – see what the print designers are doing, look at the signage being developed for the stores, hang out in marketing, etc.

Leave your comfort zone.  E.g., go to the store!  See how things look there from the customer’s point of view.  Go to competitors’ stores. Make friends in the call center. Go to the warehouse to learn about the logistics of packaging.

“You can’t have a completely consistent experience.”

Understand the goals of your executives. Their incentives are different from yours.

Listen “holistically” using all the usual UX research plus all other resources available (chat transcripts, social media, sentiment analysis, etc.)

Hang with a new crowd. Hang out with marketing, IT, finance, consultants, etc.

Museums are doing some fascinating things in this area, asking how attendees interact virtually as well as physically with the museum.

[Libraries too! I mentioned MAYA's work on the Carnegie Library in my Q & A comment - here's the link to their case study from that project: http://www.maya.com/portfolio/carnegie-library ]

Below are my notes from Luke’s pre-conference workshop at the IA Summit, as collected from my tweetstream from that morning.

RT @lukewdesign: For those interested in what Influencing Strategy by Design is all about: http://bit.ly/danYPN

Step 1 to Influencing Strategy by Design: Don’t get suckered into playing their game (by calculating ROI, getting an MBA, etc.) #ias10 11:44 AM Apr 8th via web

Trying to “educate” the business on the value of UX will likely fall on deaf ears or be seen as whining about lack of influence #ias10 11:47 AM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign is play-acting an inarticulate UX designer lamely explaining why they designed a game console the way they did 11:55 AM Apr 8th via web

Point: UX designers too often provide lame, subjective and unsubstantiated explanations for their design choices. This undercuts us #ias10 11:57 AM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: What limits your strategic influence within your organization? Answers: dif. languages, locations, lack of vision & resources 12:01 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: 2 common executive syndromes that hamper good design: “scoop & poop” and “sniff & piss” #ias10 12:03 PM Apr 8th via web

UX challenges broadly categorized: organizational imbalance, market situation, lack of shared understanding & resources #ias10 12:08 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: What would you like to see happen as a result of greater strategic influence? 12:11 PM Apr 8th via web

Common desired outcomes: better collaboration, product success, company success, personal pride, satisfaction, job enjoyment. #ias10 12:12 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: To influence strategy, stop playing the role of the “victim” and take full responsibility for all design outcomes #ias10 12:15 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Make yourself response-able for design issues. “Make the problem YOUR problem” 12:16 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: To stop being the design victim, stop complaining about lack of influence and trying to “sell” UX 12:28 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Try to avoid the “camaraderie of victimhood” – emphasize what you can do to improve the situation #ias10 12:30 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Response-ability & ownership feels very dif from victimhood – more empowering but also a bit scary #ias10 12:42 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: The point is: don’t just sit there & lament your lack of influence, DO something about it #ias10 12:43 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Go and create value; people will see that & start coming to you #ias10 12:44 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: No one cares about your process – explaining it is not going to influence anyone’s behavior #ias10 12:46 PM Apr 8th via web

“Leadership is action, not position.” — Donald H. McGannon #ias10 12:47 PM Apr 8th via web

“Hierarchical command/control is becoming less relevant. This century is about distributed leadership maximizing creativity… #ias10 12:51 PM Apr 8th via web

… and collaboration with a global sensibility and focus on sustainability.” @lukewdesign #ias10 12:52 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Don’t try to mimic business talk or processes; instead, leverage the unique principles, skills & perspective of design #ias10 1:00 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: A design approach can complement the business approach, as long empathize with the business’ view #ias10

Key differentiator: where the business tries to measure outcomes, designers are more interested in actual customer activities #ias10 1:05 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Most people are visual learners, but only 10% (including designers) are visual communicators #ias10 1:06 PM Apr 8th via web

Business is profit-driven, whereas IAs are solution-driven. These complement each other. @lukewdesign #ias10 1:07 PM Apr 8th via web

Design’s core competencies: Insights, synthesis, means & meaning. – Chris Conley, IIT #ias10 1:13 PM Apr 8th via web

Alternative to IQ as measure of intelligence: general intelligence, based on visual pattern recognition. Designers excel at this #ias10 1:17 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: eBay designers showed the value of what they do by doing it – i.e. using design skills to tell a story about the data #ias10 1:26 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Creating compelling visual diagrams to explain complex issues can provide huge business value to decision makers #ias10 1:34 PM Apr 8th via web

Summary: Trying to learn business speak = huge uphill battle that puts designers at a disadvantage. Better to leverage design skills #ias10 1:37 PM Apr 8th via web

Simple visualizations of the context for the design work can lead to important strategic discussions @lukewdesign #ias10 2:11 PM Apr 8th via web

Interesting detail: @lukewdesign studied graphic design as an undergrad, working with a woman who studied with Tufte 2:13 PM Apr 8th via web

Business basics: Different market states (emergent, growth, mature, declining) require dif responses @lukewdesign #ias10 2:16 PM Apr 8th via web

The metric NetFlix cares about the most? Length of time subscribed. #ias10 2:26 PM Apr 8th via web

What is THE metric that matters most to your business? It’s not always easy to prioritize it. #ias10 2:30 PM Apr 8th via web

Designers: use the qualitative data you have to get to the crux of what matters – i.e., use Occam’s Razor. @lukewdesign #ias10 2:33 PM Apr 8th via web

Good metrics help you 1) understand the current system state, 2) measure performance toward a goal & 3) assess the viability of alternatives 2:35 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Push back on designs with lots of “Learn more” and “Read more” links – Amen to that! #ias10 2:39 PM Apr 8th via web

The people who do good design have 3 things: feedback, vision and (supportive) culture – @lukewdesign summary of Jared Spool article #ias10 2:47 PM Apr 8th via web

Recap: Treat strategic influence as a design problem, use your existing design skills & take control of the metrics @lukewdesign #ias10 2:50 PM Apr 8th via web

[Post-break public speaking exercise]

@lukewdesign demonstrating “slide madness”: creating a narrative to go along with a random selection of slides. Funny schtick #ias10 2:56 PM Apr 8th via web

@kevinmhoffman ‘s turn to improvise a narrative for random slides – brave man #ias10 2:58 PM Apr 8th via web

“Expert dessert monitors” use “the best of Buddhist values” to “bring Buddhism into the social media metaphor” – good stuff! #ias10 3:01 PM Apr 8th via web

@kevinmhoffman: “We’re kind of like a Twinkie moving down the road of the food industry” – live standup comedy at #ias10 3:03 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: 3 points of slide madness: enthusiasm matters, the story “between the slides” is crucial, & be ready 2 think on yr feet #ias10 3:11 PM Apr 8th via web

Pecha Kucha: business meeting meets poetry slam – http://bit.ly/cA8qeH #ias10 3:18 PM Apr 8th via web

@lukewdesign: Keep asking “What are our goals?” until the conversation hits paydirt #ias10 3:21 PM Apr 8th via web

Executives are completely removed from customers; UX designers are not. Use that to our advantage. #ias10 3:23 PM Apr 8th via web

Courtesy of Gaeten Lee: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaetanlee/421949167/

[Notes from Andrew's IA Summit presentation on Friday, April 9, 2010]

Genesis of the presentation: I kept hearing all this cool stuff about brain science and thinking about the implications of it for design.

Anecdote: I got some sugar-free gummy bears recently.  Ordered them from Amazon, then realized the customer comments said they would “make you feel really sick.”  “Gastrointestinal Armageddon,” one comment was titled (!).

He ate them. “Let’s just say, I didn’t get much sleep that night…. What the hell was I thinking??”

I do stuff all the time that get me thinking, “why the hell did I do that?”  And I realized, I’m not as rational as I think I am.

I’m like Brian of the Family Man: he’s a complete slave to his nature as a dog. [Shows hilarious videos.]

That’s what I love about Brian: he’s so human.

As designers, we often forget that we are part of the equation.  What about understanding ourselves? This presentation is really about metacognition: Thinking about how you think. It’s about self-awareness.

Some basics: learning, thinking, deciding.

- This is a brain in a jar, as though it’s somehow independent from the rest of the body.

- The brain only can do what it does b/c it grew in an organism that has sensory experience.

- As the brain grows along with the whole organism, it grows through sensory experience.

- Our brains really do need to think with objects.

As our brains grow through childhood, they grow a library of patterns.  I.e., your brain only comprehends what was easily comprehensible in the past. What you’re experiencing right now is really just based on a sliver of information that your brain can process.

So perception is largely made up of remembered patterns; your brain doesn’t “clear cache.”

The brain is made of layers that evolved over time; the structure of the brain reflects that evolution. At the core is the “old brain” or “lizard brain.” The mid-brain is where emotions get processed. (I stole these from a book called Neuro Web Design.)  [William Shatner interlude!] The new brain is basically the really rational side; it weighs all the options.

Don’t take this model too literally, though; science says the different parts are actually inter-dependent on each other.  The older parts of the brain use emotion to communicate with the newer part of the brain. This is actually what drives most of our actions. Without this, our rational brain would just dither; we’d have analysis paralysis all the time.

We make tons of decisions every day because our emotional brain tells us, “Just fuck it – do that!” If you think you’re immune to this, you’re wrong.

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging can tell in real-time what’s really going on in the brain.

We’re always making decisions; we do it all day long.  It’s sort of like a battery that runs down during the day; our decisions get worse the later in the day we get.

Another part of the brain: the amygdala. It forms & stores memories as a high (?) intellectual experience. “The world smelt, felt and sounded like this when the tiger tried to kill me.”

Wikipedia list of “cognitive biases”: check it out if you want to feel like “I’ll never be able to make a sound decision ever in my life.”  For example:

- Loss aversion (“you just can’t let go”)

- Confirmation bias (“this is particularly pernicious in design”) – where our judgments are based on prior experience rather than on what’s right in front of us.

Biases powerfully affect how we interpret data [as designers].

So what happens when you’re being created?  A recent study scanned musicians’ brain when they are planning from musical notation vs. improvising.  During the latter, the decision-making apparatus of the brain sort of steps out of the way.

People who indulge in daydreaming are better at creative tasks and improvising.

You have to “pay just enough attention without screwing it all up.”

The “Default Mode Network” is the activity that goes on beyond conscious thought; it manifests as “dark energy.”   Free (unstructured) is really important for unleashing that. Play is ancient; it’s pre-mammalian.  Play is necessary for cognitive health.  A play deficient can be as detrimental as a sleep deficit.

Play is also social; our social interactions are something we’re always playing with. It’s this social aspect of play that we especially tend to lose in the workplace.  We feel like we always have to be “on path” at work.  But it finds a non-official way to get in there, in the hallway or around the water cooler, etc.

We don’t work in a bubble.  Social conformity is really powerful as an influencer. When you’re under stress, you immediately fall under conformity’s sway.

But in our job, when that happens, you make CRAP.

Change is painful; change physically hurts; we’re uncomfortable when we’re forced to move out of our groove. Trying to change that is hard.

Attention density shapes identity: certain types of personalities gravitate toward the same professions; being in the profession reinforces that sense of identity. “We cluster and we dig in.”

What works for changing that is being patient, taking time.

Group norms kill creativity.  Fear is the mind-killer [image of the monster from Alien].  Now, we encounter stuff that isn’t going to kill us, but our brains respond as if it might.  Your heart palpitates, you’re going sweaty… and now you’re unable to think of other options, to be creative.  You can only retreat into what the older parts of your brain know.

That’s why we act a little stupid sometimes: because we’re afraid.

So what do we do?

You either get into another line of work, or you figure out how to make ROOM TO PLAY. You need both space and time to play in; fear of doing something wrong is a play-killer.

If you want to be creative, your brain really needs time to sleep.  You also need some time to let that “dark energy” do its work.

Bill Buxton on the shape of design: it’s not a spiral of iteration; it’s more like a constant exploration of alternatives.

Mainstream management culture thinks this is wasteful and inefficient.  But design needs room to be inefficient and try out new things. That makes a lot of managers nervous.

But I would argue that getting that space for design is non-negotiable.  But also, that responsibility is up to us, and if they give us the room, we HAVE to do good work.

To be a good designer, we need to think outside our own assumptions.  We need to learn to be meta-cognitive.  Luckily, we already have great tools for this. Our design methods are what we need for this.

Example: how to avoid “the designing-for-deliverables trap.”  These things that we work with (artifacts) are important, but those artifacts are temporary, and only good for allowing us to improvise and evolve our designs: “that’s what those things are for.”

When we collide with the “project process,” that stuff is for production. The problem is, we get so caught up in creating that stuff (the deliverables) that we don’t do the more important stuff (exploration, free-play, improvisation).

The reality is that every design project is 3 design challenges in one:

1. Design the conditions for doing the work (designing for yourself and your team: you’re picking the right methods, tools and space for it).

2. Design the product itself.

3. Design the interface for collaborating with stakeholders.

I really think this distinction can help us.

To sum up: “Be metacognitive… so you’re not an asshat.”

Our a brains are a tool, and we have to learn how to use it right.

Q & A:

Joe: Does this mean that devotion to best practices is creativity-killing?

A: We need methods. You need ways to make your brain be creative.  But you can’t sleep-walk through those best practices. You can’t just use them to “fart out” the solution. A persona is just me understanding the person who is using something; that’s all it is – it’s just a manifestation of an understanding.

Q: What’s the role of empathy in this? How does it tie in with the emotional brain.

A: The key insights of the user-centered design movement was this focus on, “Hey, we’re missing out on having empathy for the people that we’re making this stuff for.  If we do that, they’re going to buy our stuff.”  But we’re trained to do all of the documentation about empathy, rather than to be empathetic.  That’s completely missing the frigging point.  But you also need empathy toward the people you’re working for; we can’t just say to business people or IT people, “you’re just a philistine.” And we might learn stuff – I’ve learned things from business people!

Q: Dave Fiorito: I’ve just recently discovered “mirrored neurons”; they only work when you’re in contact with another person.  The whole thing about empathy is that contact.

A: It’s like, somebody might try to describe the Grand Canyon to you, but you don’t know what it’s like until you’re standing there. And then you go, “Ohhh!”

RD: I’d like to ask for a favor: please sing happy birthday to my son Alex, who is 10 years old today. [And we did.]

Vanguard’s UX is quite mature and quite large, and the UX of the online channel is very important to us. Because of that, we spend a lot of time trying to improve it.  There are lots of projects in flight, each trying to make improvements to the experience.

Flight analogy: Let’s pretend one of our teams was asked to improve this aircraft to carry more cargo. And then another team decides that passenger capacity is really important.  And then another one decides speed is really critical – another redesign.

We have a problem very similar to this at Vanguard: each team has its own objective, so they lose sight of the big picture.

We didn’t have a way of facilitating a conversation about these multiple business needs and experience. They’re just trying to express their particular priorities that they’re feeling on that particular day.

“Our experience becomes very schizophrenic… it’s very difficult for them to hit this moving target.”

Images: Is this a good [fill in the blank] experience?  “I can’t say. I don’t know what ‘good’ is.”

We measure a lot of stuff at Vanguard, but mostly because we can – not necessarily because they’re an effective measure of whether the page is good or not.

In the rare case when a project comes along and establishes a reasonable metric, when the next project comes along they create a new one.

So we can’t measure our level of success over time.

The root cause: the lack of a common language for describing what our designs are supposed to do and for describing the objectives of the experience.

Terminology:

- Goals: Users have goals, and the business has goals. But these goals are really too high-level to be helpful in designing experiences.

- Tasks: Users do stuff so they can meet their goals. The business also wants users to complete certain tasks.

- Emotions: Users also have feelings about their goals & tasks, and the business wants users to feel certain ways: confident, independent, trusting.

- Capabilities: These capabilities help users complete the tasks they want to complete. And this experience is across channels – we’re not just talking about the web here.

- Projects: These capabilities are created or changed by projects over time.

Framework:

- Made up of about 90 user tasks grouped into 8 high-level categories.

- There are also 45 business-driven tasks divided into 7 categories.

- In the middle are 635 capabilities (and counting)…

Two tools:

- Capability strategy sheet

- Experience strategy map

Let’s follow the Rollover Offer capability. To create this capability sheet, we extract out and identify all of the tasks that this capability has to satisfy. E.g., this capability relates to two main user-driven tasks, which can be re-worded for this particular context/capability. There are also 3 main business-driven tasks (with subtasks).

Q from audience: “What initiates this particular capability?” [Will go into later.]

They then take all the related tasks and prioritize them. And this again is a great discussion. The process of getting the tasks into priority is what really matters, not where exactly they fall in the list – b/c it brings out the rationale behind the prioritization.

Sometimes the tasks get linked together – b/c the users want to do something, and we want them to do the same thing.

We then think about: emotional considerations, the high-level approach, and our success criteria: “how do we know what is a good experience?”

Determining the success criteria is the most difficult piece of the puzzle; they need to be specific enough to be measurable, and clear enough to not lead to subjective interpretations.

They then number the tasks that are represented on the particular (current state) page. “Now we have some rationale to talk to the business” about the design options.

Capability Strategy Sheet:

This lets us do 3 things:

1. Ensure that project teams are aware of everything they need to be aware of when they’re considering re-designing a capability.

2. Help sponsors stay focused on tasks and their priorities rather than [particular] design decisions.

3. Support the controlled evolution of capabilities by providing a stable framework to evaluate success or failure.

Note: These are not “project sheets”; projects come and go, but capabilities are forever.

[Transfers the mike to Rob Weening]

Experience Strategy Map:

- Derived from Indi Young and Adaptive Path’s concept of mental models.

We take the high-level categories and spread them out across the top. Below that are tasks that users want to complete when they are completing that activity.

Below that are rows for the different channels users might touch.  Where the channels cross the tasks (columns), we have the capabilities. This map shows that a single capability performs multiple tasks.

Every item has a measure associated with it, using a traffic light metaphor (green, yellow, red tags).

So what you’re seeing is a little conceptual corner of what is a huge map. This huge “dashboard-like thing” allows us to do several things:

1. See which capabilities support which tasks across all the channels.  “It’s like a huge map of our UX world.”

2. You can evaluate the consistency of different approaches to supporting specific, related tasks. You can do a “disciplined consistency check.”

3. Check the health of the entire experience. This helps sponsors prioritize which capabilities should be improved.

Say an intersection is red, and you decide that you want to fix that. What if 1 in 10K users visit that capability; would you decide to fix it?  This creates a bigger context for prioritizing “where there is smoke in the UX” and decide whether there is really a fire that you need to fix.

How are we going to make this wonderful model work in the context of the larger organization? What are some other potential uses for the framework?

Reaction when they share the framework to others in the business: “You are boiling the ocean, and we don’t have time for this.” The good news: when you take the capabilities one at a time, the framework is actually pretty simple to use. It only takes about 2 or 3 hours to build a capability strategy sheet.

That’s how we’re going to proceed in the short-term: we’re going to select the ones that we think we need to write capability strategy sheets for, and slowly introduce the idea and gain momentum.

We need our business partners to spread the idea through the organization.

Future vision of other applications: We’re thinking maybe this could be used to affect an even larger organizational change, with regard to the yearly budgeting and prioritization process. The projects under consideration are described in 2-3 page “project charters”; more often than not, those documents contain design directions, such as “move this link over here” or “create a whole new silo.”

It’s very natural for the business to want to express their objectives in terms of concrete physical things.  The downside of this is that, from the very get-go, the business is in the business of user experience design.  “Somehow, we keep on hoping that’s our job.”  What we’d like to do is work with a few business partners to develop some project briefs that identify the tasks and capabilities that they want to change, and decide how to adjust them to make them better – i.e., to identify the business problems involved, rather than the specific design solutions.

Another insight: The same goals, tasks & emotions can often describe the current and future state.  “You want to know where the user experience is going to go in the next 5 years.  This just records the change – it doesn’t direct it.” [Pitch for Jared Spool's talk tomorrow on the importance of having a vision for the user experience.]

Imagine having an experience strategy map for the FUTURE. The core goals, tasks & emotions will remain the same, while the approach might change in the future state.

To close: the journey is as important as the destination. This language we created that this language enabled people on cross-functional teams to come together and collaborate with each other.  They came together to talk about this object: the task.  “Everybody understood everybody else much more quickly than before.”

Would this work in your organization? It might, if your organization is like ours.

Q & A:

Stacy Surla: How do you reflect the capabilities and change in your framework?

Rob W.: We’re going to talk with a bunch of business people, and we’re going to iterate on the map, and draw in where the change will be.

RD:  We have two columns in the map: one of the current state, and one of the possible future state.

Dan opened by describing a “horrible meeting” back when he was working as an IA for Razorfish in San Francisco.  The meeting motivated him to write his book “The Back of the Napkin.”  To get started on the book, he consulted with Steve Krug and Lou Rosenfeld, and he credits the IA community with giving him the impetus for it as well as its “essential base of information.”

Writing the book itself was “an extraordinarily difficult thing” and “no fun at all.”  Background: Dan was very impressed that pictures are used to guide the construction of the largest Boeing airplanes l well as the development of complicated bills in the Senate.  “Every problem we have can be solved through pictures,” he asserted.

He then ran through thru 3 related questions:

1. Which problems are we talking about? Answer: ANY problem.

2. Which pictures are we talking about? Answer: The “most bone-headedly simple ones.” He then had us draw a simple stick figure on pre-distributed napkins to prove his point?

3. Who can draw these pictures? Answer: Anyone.

Tidbits: More of our brain is dedicated to visual processing than anything else. Visual thinking unwritten rule #1: “Whoever best describes the problem is the one most likely to solve it.” (And: Whoever draws the best picture gets the funding.”)

The greatest napkin drawing story of all time happened in Texas in 1967. It led to the establishment of SWest Airlines, the most financially successful airline of all time.

Dan then described going to the Senate in DC to describe the use of simple pictures to solve problems.  Tidbit: George Washington was trained as a mapmaker.  Dan then showed some drawings by presidents Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan – all very revealing of the personalities behind them.  (E.g., Reagan’s drawings were of horses, cowboys and stereotypical Chinamen.)

The best political napkin drawing ever? By Arnold (?) Laffer in 1974: a simple X-Y plot with $ tax rate on the horizontal axis and the amount of $ collected by the govt. from taxation on the vertical axis.  He then added the “Laffer curve” to illustrate how reducing the amounting of taxes increases the amount of $ the govt. collects. The two chiefs of staff took the napkin drawing back to the Reagan economic team, and became the basis for “Reaganomics.”

It turns out President Obama is “an extraordinarily good drawer” and left-handed.  Tidbit: 5 of the last 7 U.S. presidents have been left-handed.  Reagan was naturally left-handed but was forced to become right-handed while growing up.  Dan’s question to Obama: Why don’t you use your drawing skills to explain complicated political issues to the American people?  (Interesting idea.)  Problem: “It’s not that most people disagree with what Washington says. It’s that nobody understands what Washington says.”  This is perfectly illustrated by the recent healthcare debates.

Who has the “big picture” behind the healthcare debate?  Funny moment: in 1447 pages of the Healthcare Reform bill, there’s not a single diagram or visual depiction.  “This is not an understandable document.”

What if someone tried to draw some pictures of what this healthcare debate is all about? Dan worked with a healthcare specialist to do exactly that. He then shared the simple drawings he created to illustrate the core issues of the debate.  One, for example, shows a seesaw with the Providers on one side, Payers on the other, and “me” (taxpaying citizens) stuck in the middle. The drawings progress to show how the citizen is the only source of money in the equation, and how the focus of the healthcare effort was all on the insurance payers and not on the healthcare providers.  “It should have been called ‘insurance reform,’ not healthcare reform,” he concluded.

Dan posted his napkin sketches to Slideshare and there have been 1/4 of a million downloads of it to date.  The end result: “Now that we all understand what we’re talking about, we can go ahead and eviscerate each other” (!).

Dan was then invited to go on Fox during prime time to explain the essentials of American healthcare with his pictures. He then got a call from the Whitehouse Office of Communications: “Dan, we have to talk.”

Tidbit: It turns out that the Whitehouse cannot hire consultants. Dan has since worked with the Dept of State and Dept of Defence to figure out how to use pictures to conceptualize some huge problems.

Why are the communications coming out of Washington so difficult to understand?

In any meeting, about 25% of attendees are “black pen people” who can’t wait to run up to the whiteboard and start drawing out their ideas.  50% are “yellow pen” people or highlighters, whose minds are excited by the drawings and usually ask the drawer, “do you mind if I add something?”  The other 25% are “red pen” folks who skeptically “watch those idiots at the whiteboard” and think it’s all being oversimplified.  It really bothers those people that so many nuances are being left out by the simple drawings.

Exercise 1: If you’re in a meeting with a whiteboard, what would you do (choose from 5 possibilities). My answer: #2 – “Go to the board and start writing lists.”

Ex 2: What do I do? #3: “I can’t draw…but draw anyway.”

Ex 3: Someone gives me a complicated spreadsheet and asks me to look it over.  My answer: #1: “Glaze over and hope it will go away.”

Ex 4: If I’m asked to explain what to do, I… My answer: #5: “Start talking about someone interesting.”

Ex 5: As an astronaut floating is space, I… Me: #2:  “Pull out my camera.”

What does nobody in DC draw pictures? “It goes back to our educational system.” At an NEA meeting, 100% of the audience self-identified as “red pen” people (!).  “No wonder we’re afraid to draw.”

“I debated heavily whether I’ll show you the next picture” – the xPlane poster for the Summit!  “It’s beautiful, but it explains absolutely nothing about how a website gets made.”

The rest of the session was dedicated to the audience’s drawing simple pictures to solve “any problem you want to.”

Tidbit: The brain chemicals that get activated when we’re excited are the same ones that get activated when we understand something.

Dan followed with a story about Rob Walton of WalMart and Peter Seligman of Conservation International.  It turns out they are very good friends who like to travel outdoors with their families.  Seligman started taking Walton and his family to places where you can literally see the effect of global warming. The point was to understand the connection between human consumption and its impact on our planet.

WalMart decided to incorporate environmental sustainability into its business plan. But they had to commit Lee Scott, the then-CEO, first. So they did a pilot project, developing “organic cotton yogawear.”  It sold out in 3 months at an enormous profit.

In 2005 when Katrina took place, WalMart was down in New Orleans “instantly.”  This prompted Scott to ask, “Why can’t WalMart be the company every day that we were during those days of Katrina?”

As a result, WalMart became the flagship company for environmental responsibility. The problem is, “all WalMart has is a tremendous amount of data.” Dan responded: Why don’t we use pictures to create a little scale model of WalMart’s entire supply chain?

They did this, but “those were not the pictures that mattered.”  The ones that mattered were the simple sketches that were drawn up by decision-makers as they end drawing was being developed.

Visual thinking unwritten rule #2: We like pictures that map the things the mind sees.  Dan illustrated this through a sequence of drawings illustrating the passage of time.  “We just saw every fundamental piece of our visualization process in action.”

We’re beginning to understand that “vision is an extraordinarily complicated process.”  It works in 6 different ways, overloading the brain.  But the brain has figured out how to “divide up” that work among six pathways: The “what” pathway, the “how” pathway, the “where” pathway, the “how many” pathway, the “when” pathway and the “why” pathway.  This division of the process led Dan to articulate the “6 x 6″ rule.

Illustration: “Let’s draw in 6 slices” on a napkin to demonstrate the pathways.  Note: “We have an emotional response from stick figures!”

Conclusion: Why does visual thinking matter? Dan ended with 5 minute story to illustrate “why visual problem solving is so good for us?” Where did visual thinking begin?  In France. In the caves of Chauvet in south central France. There’s a beautiful natural bridge there; in 1993 a spelunker named Chauvet discovered the entrance to a cave on the backside of that arch. They discovered a complex series of caves with “unbelievably beautiful” ancient pictures. People kept coming back to this cave over the course of 800 years, drawing similar pictures.

These pictures were drawn 32,000 years ago.  How long ago is that? Dan drew a chart showing the course of human generations from Chauvet’s time to today. It turns out not really all that many; you can draw it on a napkin.  “2,000 years ain’t nothing’” his illustration showed; it’s only 200 generations.  Going back 32,000 years (to the time of Chauvet), Dan could fit it on another napkin.

How did visual thinking begin? Dan showed a picture of the brain’s development.

Why did visual thinking begin? Picture of a wild animal chasing a human.

> Listen to the podcast of this talk on Boxes and Arrows.

Resmini started off with an illustration of the change in users’ experience of traveling to Phoenix over the past 10 years, showing that it’s easier to organize and “save” the experience now, but still not optimal. “Do we have to play a tiresome game anytime we engage in complex experiences bridging different media?”

Resmini’s speculation on the same experience 10 years from now: lots of embedded info, digital tickets, in-air browsing & other futuristic stuff.  Question: Who designs this and how?

“Cyberspace is not a place you go to but rather a layer tightly integrated into the world around us.” We call this “ubiquitous ecologies”: different products, services and things that move around all around us.  “Everything is connected.”

How do we design for this? “We need to design for the process, not the object.”  Physical, digital, augmented, paper – all need to be woven into a single experience.

Interface becomes Experience: we design cross-media experiences: “that’s the challenge that’s awaiting information architecture.”

How do we do this?  They’ve developed a five-part “heuristic” consisting of: place-making, consistency, resilience, reduction and correlation.

  • Place-making example: Facebook has provided a social “square” where people can congregate. Space & place & time are tightly correlated in this model.
  • Illustration of the library from “The Name of the Rose.” “This is a mind labyrinth; it’s a mnemonic tool for people to spell out places.”
  • Consistency: the ability to provide and sustain internal external, in-context, on-task coherence. But that coherence “is not a given; it’s very much in-context.”
  • Resilience: the… ability to shape and adapt to the needs [of the users].  Example: Twitter.
  • Reduction: to reduce the cognitive load and frustration. Example: electronic scale in supermarket.
  • Correlation: to suggest relevant connections between pieces of information, services, users and goods.

IA needs to attend to “not a single touchpoint, but the whole process.”

Rosati is putting their theory to the test with an attempt to redesign the experience of the hospital. Illustration of all of the touchpoints and different environments or media involved, mapped against the 5 parts of the heuristic.

Case Study: The actual paper trail that doctors have to follow “is insane.”  They started by analyzing the experience of entering the emergency room at the hospital.

2nd Study: Of the personal transport system in the second largest city in Sweden.  “We need to take it all the way down to the real-time displays in the street.”

3rd Study: University library – integrated the physical space and the website.

Conclusion: “I think there’s more questions than answers right now.”

Pervasive IA Book: http://pervasiveia.com

Slideshare:

Really enjoyed the half-day workshop on this topic provided by Luke Wroblewski at the IA Summit today. If you’re curious about this subject you can read my tweets from the workshop on Twitter. Or, for a quick overview see this interview with Luke.

Just posted some first impressions of Phoenix to Flickr. Had a nice morning walk around the hotel after breakfast.

My paved-over past

I’m headed back to Phoenix, where I lived from age 12 to around 20, for the first time in 18 or so years. Out of curiosity I looked up my old address on Google Maps to see what the house I grew up in looks like nowadays.  Turns out the patch of property now serves as the fast lane of the Squaw Peak Parkway.  Here’s what Google’s street view shows:

Google street view of the spot where I grew up

Street view of 3315 E. Lupine Ave., Phoenix AZ

I’m guessing this return to my now paved-over past is going to be a bit surreal. Details to follow…

Headed to the Summit

I’m in the process of packing and making final preparations to head out to the IA Summit, which I last attended in 2008, when I presented on the project described in these slides:

I’m happy to report as a follow-up to that presentation that the library not only has a new, WordPress-based web site–the maintenance of which the librarians have happily taken complete control of (so please excuse the cheesy clip art!)–but a Facebook page and Twitter account as well.  Unfortunately, with the downturn in the economy we’ve had to put our plans for the building renovation and the broader aim of integrating the library’s virtual and physical spaces on hold for now.  But I’m confident that once the library’s new fundraising efforts come to fruition, the framework we created to pursue that experience integration will come in handy.

I’m excited to see that several of the sessions at this year’s Summit–particularly this one by Luca Rosati and Andrea Resmini–will be addressing the topic of experience integration, or “pervasive IA” as Rosati and Resmini phrase it.  And I couldn’t agree more with this statement of theirs:

As every artifact, product, or service, is now part of a larger ecosystem  largely based on information, social patterns, people, and devices, IA has to become the connector between these different environments and contexts, and become pervasive.

As I’ve been saying for a while, the emergence of techniques for embedding information within physical objects–enabling the goal of “ambient findability,” to use Peter Morville’s now five-year-old (!) term–is going to open a whole new world of opportunities for the IA community. I’m looking forward to finding out more about how IAs are beginning to tackle the challenges that the latest developments in this area are bringing our way.