These signs are all over SOHO, right near the Core77 world HQ. Could they be a promotion for Design 2.0?

Although I often take the role of curmudgeon, it was a pleasant surprise at Overlap to see others taking that role. That said, I sometimes can be negative about those who are cheerleaders. One notable exception is when they are cheering for me, as in this post from Business Week’s Bruce Nussbaum, who calls me a “a really smart innovation consultant” while talking up the imminent Design 2.0 event where I’ll be speaking.

Tags: bruce nussbaum, cheerleader, compliment, core77, design 2.0, encouragement, event, innovation

This past weekend at Asilomar we put together a small (50-person) “unconference” referred to as Overlap, nominally set up to address the (perhaps emerging) confluence of design and business. The emphasis was not on the typical conference top-down presentations by “experts”, but on the creation of discussion moments.

But in planning the event, we took a open-ended approach. We didn’t define or even seek to define what the Overlap really meant or what the outcome of this conference should be. We conceived of an approach where presenters were asked to keep their remarks extremely brief, and work with another person to really facilitate a targeted discussion. Unfortunately, that didn’t play out in execution. Presenters ended talking for much longer than I had expected, and then it was thrown open, often without a mechanism for facilitating either the speakers or the topic. And 50 people piling on was often unmanageable – it takes a fair amount of force to jump into a discussion with that many inhabitants (not participants; that’s my point, you couldn’t easily participate unless you were loud and fast, at least).

It wasn’t chaos, it was engaging and it had an energy, but it was not fully inclusive, and it was rather tiring. We had highly spirited discussion, and even some persistent disagreement that I think was extremely healthy (in contrast to the hushed horror seen at DUX and other events when an idea was challenged) without being excessively personal or inappropriate in tone.

Tom Mulhern opened the event by asking everyone to go around the circle and talk about what they thought the Overlap was between. What were the endpoints? The answers were fascinating and grew in depth as the circle proceeded. This was truly a group looking to bust some paradigms, with exciting, diverse backgrounds and an intensity towards moving towards…something. Indeed, this discussion (and our effective warmup intros via email, in the days leading up to the event) made me feel better about various insecurities. Feeling like I don’t fit, or don’t have a clear identity, or the identity that I want were all themes that other participants echoed flavors of, while offering up fantastic credentials and passions…hmm, if these people are so awesome, why do they have the same troubling feelings I do? Maybe there’s some lesson to be learned here. Indeed, I returned to the blogosphere to find rather similar thoughts from PeterMe.

Some of Tom’s presentation [Note - I took a few notes about a few different parts of the event. I'm not summarizing every aspect of every presenter and I won't mention some presenters. That doesn't imply that there was nothing of value. I'm lazy, and some presentations don't easily translate to a blog posting. I imagine more exhaustive notes will emerge over the next while] about the things that design can bring to business, or the “products” of design, were built on his structure of Grease, Grit, and Glue.

Grease – the power of design to align people, i.e., make people work in a team – if you are going to have the pleasure of becoming unconfused, you have to allow yourself to be confused

Grit – we encounter people taking on Newspeak terms about the future, about their products or business, but bringing a real person into the process (a real “user”) brings the 15,000 foot view down to a real level (and prototyping is a way to do this even further)

Grout – taking things and holding them together – i.e., a wall doesn’t work without grout, but the grout is not really what it’s about, this is helping people connect stuff, such as communication design, i.e., creating a brand “bible” that everyone would believe in

After Tom’s piece, something changed when Richard Farson led the first session the next morning.

Richard said a lot of great stuff in a direct and articulate voice of authority. For example
- design is one of the few industries that is dominated by its clients and this is not healthy
- we are a business not a profession
- we have a vendor mentality when we approach clients, not as peers (he referenced the period in history when architects were at the highest level of a society and mixed with presidents)
- we must move from a market orientation to a goal orientation; from meeting wants to meeting needs
- (designed )situations are more powerful creators of behavior than [a long list that included genetics etc.] – i.e., “no one smokes in church”

But this shifted into a discussion of social responsibility or rather Social Responsibility that seemed off-topic. But had tremendous gravity for the group. It became this underlying theme for the event (why, I am not sure).

Immediately the discussion turned to ways we can start to address the list of social ills that Richard presented, and whether his public/private sector perspective was the way to handle it. And the “we” became “designers.” I started hearing that dreadful “As designers, we….” preface to statements from every corner of the room. I can’t stand when people start doing that. Suddenly people were acting as if we were a bunch of designers on a retreat somewhere to talk about design which therefore means saving the world. We weren’t people with multiple professions and identities, we were one thing: designers. I tried to flag this for the group, but the language didn’t change; the traditional behaviors are hard to break, perhaps.

There were lots of other presentations, some with breakout exercises where we might try and design a solution to a complex problem. Brad Nemer gave us a task where we looked at a range of media sources or artifacts (Reese’s Pieces in E.T., Fox News, blogs, “4 out of 5 dentists”, NYT, Oscars, and 25 more) and asked us to deconstruct the issues of trust within those sources, and then to design solutions. I was struck by the framing of the exercise, where “the problem with society and media” was baked in, rather than being more open-ended.

Unpacking the issues of trust was fascinating our breakout group. But our design was an unsexy Google-News-on-steroids that would automagically do a lot of shit better. One other group came up with the same thing. And three other groups couldn’t finish. It was a bummer – I saw none of the “sweeeeet” moments in the entire event – where someone comes up with something that maybe isn’t fully realized, but is elegant in a way that grabs you in the gut and brain simultaenously, making you utter in a low voice “sweeeet!” without even thinking about it. I don’t know if the exercise was at fault, or the framing, or the save-the-world tone that pervaded the groupthink by that point.

A fascinating, if troubling, exercise was led by Erin Liman and Marc Levine. 1/3 of the group was brought up to be Influencers. The rest of us sat in our chairs and were Influencees. The exercise was for the Influencers to get the Influencees to try drinking some buttermilk.

But first a bit more context – this was an enormously social experience. We dined together at special tables for Overlap in the dining hall. We stayed together in one or two buildings that were exclusively Overlap folks. We talked extensively during the many breaks, during meals, with beer (which people independently purchased and shared), during walks. There were many familiar faces, other faces put to names, and other new people met. It was really a great connection where everyone was pretty much really nice to each other, convivial, welcoming and collaborative.

And that informed the exercise and my feelings about it.

Structurally, the Influencers would have some time to go plan their approach, then some time with the Influencees (which I was one of), then more time to revise their approach, and then a final session with us.

What happened was fascinating as a story if unnerving as an experience: the Influencers did what seemed very natural in the setting of a workshop exercise. They play-acted. They did improv, taking on characters that were enormously familiar. They parroted the language of telemarketers and informercials.

Watching them do it was amusing and kind of meta-ironic. But then they wanted us to actually do something. To take an action. To drink something. It wasn’t about the drinking of the buttermilk, it was about the feeling of being treated that way. Insincerely. Manipulated. And these were new friends acting this way.

Funny to see this hugh macleod image today.

That really sums it up. I had people standing in front of me and channeling every awful camp counselor/peer pressure/telemarketer/religious zealot/scammer – people with whom I had developed these great relationships. It was horrifying, and in a couple of cases I was not even really able to repair the post-exercise relationship.

And of course it didn’t work. What worked was people who approached each other sincerely, even acknowledging the frame of the exercise. The fact we had to learn that insight so viscerally through failure is really a drag.

I’m not entirely sure how this was an Overlap-relevant experience, but again that was one of the risks with such a (deliberately) ill-defined brief.

The nearest thing to a “sweeet” moment happened in this session, however. The Influencers realized that buttermilk was good in other foods, say, pancakes. They went to the Asilomar kitchen and in the space of a few minutes managed to get them to make some buttermilk pancakes. Sadly, they arrived as the session was concluding and so it didn’t serve to persuade us (too late), but it would have been pretty cool. The fact that they pulled that off is a tribute to the power of creative thinking and extroversion.

The event ended with a discussion of what comes next, and I think that’s still being sorted out. There’s some real passion for an outcome, I’m not sure if there’s too much around a specific outcome (we’ve talked about future events, regional events, taking on projects, creating a publishable archive of what we’ve done, or what we will go and do, etc.), or even the individual leadership to take on any of those outcomes (because we’ve all been in groups where there’s clear energy towards doing something, but have seen the success or failure when a single person does or doesn’t step up and move things forward).

I’m not fascinated by fixing the world and those big-picture initiatives – at least where they are now. When they get “real” I can definitely get on board, but I was so burned out from the hard work of the experience (and lack of sleep) that I couldn’t see how that will happen. I am fascinated by more personal connections and more insights into who we are and how we do what we all do, and I think that will be an outcome in one form or another.

I had a good time and I approached Overlap with few in-depth expectations, and so I’m not upset or disappointed by what happened. I’m a bit surprised, sure, but we did frame this in the organizing as a planning meeting, keeping it relatively unconstrained, so the results do seem appropriate for that. There’s a desire among most of us to further define this thing we’ve unleashed, and I may find more comfort or my own personal niche as that definition gets refined.

I think people brought a lot of passion, insight, hard work, commitment and other good-tasting-ingredients to Overlap and I’m so appreciative of that. I’m okay with things not working, or not working the way I want; that’s part of letting go and riding the experience. I wouldn’t have changed the approach too much, even with what I know now (I’d do it differently next time, but I wouldn’t have done it differently this time). I look forward to ongoing connections with the new friends I’ve made.

See my Overlap pics at flickr.

Tags: asilomar, conference, erin liman, marc levine, pacific grove, richard farson, theoverlap, Tom Mulhern, unconference

(This one is for Gene!)

It looks like a freakin’ teapot. You pull up to flush. And there’s no range of flush intensity available (say, based on how high you pull up or how long you hold it) that I could determine.

Tags: asilomar, design, flush, interface, teapot, toilet

Some bad government usability on a notice we received from the county

The aplication requests an Off-Street Parking Exception to allow for 1 uncovered tandem parking space within the existing driveway, where 1 free-and-clear arking space is required for a second dwelling unit. The application has requested this exception to allow the required parking space to be located in tandem to existing covered parking spaces.

I read this several times, looked at the diagram on the back of the page, walked over the house in question, read this again, and I’m still really confused. Really confused.

Tags: communication, government, Montara, parking, san mateo, tandem, usability

As part of the improv group I was involved in a couple of years ago, we would do the occasional standup night. Standup has very little in common with improv – there is performance and humor, but the fundamental approaches of being in the moment versus being scripted are very much at odds. However, your fellow performers (and their friends and families) make for a very support environment to try something new.

I’ve uploaded some videos of myself doing some short routines from a couple of years ago.

Notes: 2002 video has choppy audio, it settles down but it never gets perfect. And yes, there’s a lot of long hair to be seen. 2003 video starts off about a minute into the routine.

There’s definitely riffs in those clips that have appeared on this blog, or in FreshMeat. Why not repurpose pithy observations?

I’ll be headed to NYC and environs next week for a couple of days. Not a lot of downtime, but I am hoping to check out the Apple store. Any other suggestions? It’s been six months or so since I’ve been there.

Tags: apple store, Manhattan, New York, New York City, ny, NYC, travel, trip

JPod is a new book by Douglas Coupland. I consider myself quite loyal to Coupland, having been significantly moved by Generation X to stick through a variety of highs (i.e., Hey Nostradmaus!) and lows (there have been several) over the years. But as I’ve written before, when an author introduces himself into the story as a character, I must quickly step aside. To me it seems like a cheap trick (akin to some Very Special Episode cliches from TV like the clip show, or the homage to It’s A Wonderful Life) that suggests the author’s ability to observe the world has been ruined by their own success (since the world that now includes the author). It could be a clever post-modern trick, but aren’t we really really tired of cutesy pomo hackery? Maybe I’m missing out on a great book or something, but I’m just a little bit offended by someone who I have long respected and enjoyed.

Tags: author, books, coupland, diegesis, douglas coupland, ego, jpod, narrative, pomo, post modern, post modernism, self, writing

Here’s a package design where form deceptively implies function. The deliberateness of it all is just a little bit evil.

Here’s a jug of maple syrup. It’s made of plastic, but the color might make you think of a ceramic jug. It’s got a jaunty handle, and for your pouring convenience, a spout.

Whoops. That’s not a spout. That’s just a jutting piece of the form below the opening but that is definitely separated from the hole. It’s the shape of a spout.

And look what happens when you use it. A big freaking mess. Every time.

The evil irony is that the jug form makes it even harder to pour (given the small finger handle and the wide heavy base) without dripping.

A spout – an important function in a pouring package – is an aesthetic detail, the suggestion of spout-ness, without the inclusion of any actual spout. So they had the presence to consider the value of a spout, but made that decision while at the same time choosing a non-spout form factor.

This is a bad thing.

Upate: Dan Reich writes (that’s hard to say out loud): Here (pic1 pic2) is a product that managed to get it right. Despite its obvious similarities to your example, note that Trader Joe’s syrup does not feature a bogus spout bulge, but when the top is opened, a reasonably useful spout is thoughtfully provided.

Tags: design, form, form follows function, function, package, packaging, pour, pouring, spout, syrup, vernacular

The word innovation continues to be devalued by overusage. Last night I saw two consecutive TV ads for ordinary consumer products using the buzzword right in their advertising: spray paint and kitty litter. We could debate whether these products are or aren’t innovative (and of course that requires the elusive definition of innovation) but my point is more that the word itself is seemingly being used without much discrimination, and of course, is rapidly losing value, being presented now as a commodity.

Krylon has even claimed the word for their corporate slogan. I thought 3M had that one already.

Tags: 3M, advertising, arm and hammer, buzzword, cat litter, innovation, kitty litter, krylon, latex, marketing, spray paint

Recent searches that led people to this blog

aflac duck animated
‘jim spagg’ pics
san francisco indian consultate
In which country were The Smurfs created
ben jones signs in gatlinburg
current women’s clothing style Italy
cereal treats
make epson printer use non-genuine ink
steve’s snuba,maui
Nathan M. Gale
no sugar tonight
wellsfargo ebpp
wendy’s commercial with a solid and a liquid
kegelmaster 2000
what year did they pain Balmy Alley
mick keith
motivational seminar stock footage
vin diesel
pantera, break up
flip clock
Smart Parts Burn Canadian Flag Barrel Cover
“engineering-management service”
renova black
iCE-T
Renova Black
“vanilla sky” “name of the company”
live strong magnets
entertain; flush; animation

http://chittahchattah.blogspot.com

playboy badge pics
smarties candy
reception spit shield
55 pastor Houston mexico @hotmail.com,@yahoo.com,@aol.com may 2006
healthy meal replacement tax parody act
“Entered USPS Facility – SCF”
ROSSDRESSFORLESS
food in Portigal
grapples
Renova Black
cinnabon
carrington ppo dental plan
refill ink cartridges in Redmond, WA
Vicki D. Hogman
homemade cereal bars
mumbai mirror sexpert
grapples the fruit
man grilling
slogan portigal
kellogg tiger power taste
ann kauth chicago
renova black

From Innovation Weblog (via The Business Innovation Insider)

Simply put, ethnography – as it applies to innovation – is the process of doing observational research, going into the field to watch how customers utilize your products. Often used in consumer new product research, ethnography is an excellent way to uncover new opportunities for product improvement.

For example, speaker Pam Rogers, who is corporate director of global customer excellence and innovation, explained how the inspiration for a pedestal/storage unit for its Duet front-loading washers and dryers came from observing a woman who had placed her Whirlpool dryer upon cinderblocks, to make it easier to load and unload it without having to bend over.

Okay, yes, I guess, but really, no. It’s not simply about observation. That seems to be the easy part to explain and so that’s the part that gets spoken about. I’ve written a bit about ethnography here

So often, companies go to the trouble of studying customers, only to address the opportunities revealed by usage. For example, an award-winning snow shovel was redesigned when the design team went out to watch how their product was being used, found that women instead of men were shoveling, and so they made the handle smaller.

But there’s much more that can be revealed. What is the shoveling occasion (or, if you will, ritual) really about? What meanings does it hold? Does it hearken back to childhood? Or does it represent female independence? Or the nurturing of motherhood? Or the abandonment by men? Probably it’s none of those, but the point is that within the ordinary activity of shoveling we can find deep meanings that can provide enormous opportunities for innovation as we question the basic assumptions about what the product could possibly be.

I’ve found the word ethnography to be a troubling one, frankly. It’s a mouthful, it reeks of academic snootery and hand-waving inconclusiveness. It’s gets confused with anthropology and various parties have tried to claim the pure methodology only for those with the right doctorate. And I’ve been an advocate for stepping aside from the word and pointing to the key elements (getting out of your own context, observing and interviewing, and synthesizing something new). But that is troubling for some.

Grant McCracken has written a strongly-worded piece about the coming-of-age of ethnography in business in 2006, and there’s a spirited discussion in the comments below his piece, including several entries from me, including one where I advocate ignoring the word and just getting to the root of it (as I said above). Grant doesn’t take too well to that.

It’s a very troubling issue that is perhaps eating away at the development of an excellent practice and community of practice around that excellence. But I do think the terminology wars and the discipline battles are painful, frustrating, and perhaps fruitless. I look at the “interface” community which has split into many different professional networks based on what term they agree with (IxD, UxD, UX, UD, IX, ID, etc.) or what end of the egg they prefer to break open.

Yesterday I was in a conference call with a prospective client. We were proposing some work and hadn’t used the word ethnography at all. An internal person from another part of the organization was very interested in displaying her own mastery of the research process, and made numerous references to some ongoing work as “my ethnography.” Only she couldn’t even comfortably pronounce ethnography. And she wasn’t doing it; she was sending it out to the “only” provider that did this, apparently (?). And what were they doing? Inviting cool kids to an art gallery in Miami. [Okay, I don't get this at all].

At a conference the other week I participated in a side conversation that included this snippet “Oh that’s not ethnography, that’s just depth-interviewing.”

I may be coming around to Grant’s way of looking at this. We have a problem. I’ve got my explanation, sure, but so does everyone else, whether they have more experience than I do, or worse pronunciation than I do. We’ve got experts like the Innovation Weblog getting it badly wrong, Pam Rogers perhaps missing some of the point, my recent encounters (presumed experts in their own peer group?) with their own versions of what we’re doing, and on and on.

Unfortunately, I have no solutions. And I don’t see a culture that is ready to reach a solution, establish a common language, speak in one voice (not millions), establish standards, or even work together on this.

Tags: community, community of practice, ethnography, expertise, Grant McCracken, innovation, language, research, strategy, terminology

There are just a couple of spaces remaining for the Overlap, an unconference being held at Asilomar (above) in Pacific Grove, CA. The event is about “merging business practices with design-centric problem solving and customer understanding.” It’s May 26-28.

We’ve got an email list going where we’re all introducing ourselves and I’m just amazingly impressed with the people so far; I’m the most excited about the experience now than in the many months we’ve been planning it. Let me know if you’re interested in attending; all it costs is your room-and-board at Asilomar, there are no conference fees.

Tags: asilomar, conference, overlap, overlap 2006, overlap2006, the overlap, unconference

We recently saw an amazing production of the play A number

The dramatic premise is as deceptively simple as it is uncompromisingly topical. In five short scenes — ‘Number’ packs an astonishing amount of thought and entertainment into less than an hour — a father, Salter (Bill Smitrovich), meets with three embodiments of his son. Two, both named Bernard, are the son he fathered and the clone he raised. The other, Michael, is a stranger to him, in more ways than he can comprehend. That each is instantly recognizable as a distinct individual, despite an exact physical resemblance, is a testament to the skills of Josh Charles, who plays all three roles.

There was a Q&A afterwards where we heard about a British production (the play was originally produced in London, I believe) in which the actor playing the three different sons had more degrees of freedom in how he presented the three characters – since class can be denoted through accent in a more significant way for the Brits. It was another interesting example of small and large shifts in meaning seen from a shift in context.

Now, I noticed recently that they changed the voice actor who does the voice for the Geico gecko. He’s gone from a somewhat refined sounding English accent to a rougher Cockney (or what sounds like Cockney to me) tone. That would have significant meaning in the UK. What does it mean to us in North America? First off, it’s odd that it changed so drastically after several years of advertisements, but what are we supposed to take away from the revoicing? I honestly don’t know. Here’s what Geico’s website says

Even when the gecko becomes annoyed with people calling him at home on the phone by mistake when they�re trying to reach GEICO, he always maintains his decorum in a very proper English tone.

I think they need to update that part of their site! And there’s speculation about who the new voice actor is (described as “less posh”) here and here while others rant about the change in the character’s voice (originally Kelsey Grammer in the first ad) and purpose right out of the gate.

Tags: a number, accent, class, cockney, gecko, geico, play, voice

The landscape is forever changing in little ways, writes SF Chron architecture critic John King, and he identifies several defining artifacts of 2006

• Security barriers
• Solar panels
• Traffic calmers
• Anti-skateboard clips
• Wireless cafes

Of course, it’s not the list itself that is noteworthy, but his articulate and provocative analysis that underlies the reasons for these newly emergent artifacts. What do these things tell us about what’s going on around us? Context is king, isn’t it? I highly encourage you to check out the article!

Tags: architecture, context, john king, place, public space