designing "at" people is destined to fail

one of my favorite parts of the obsessed with design podcast, is the question about red flags. miles, the host, asks interviewees what signs they have learned to see that give them hints that their client might be a bad one.

mark palmer said that this is one of his red flags (paraphrasing):

“when people expect you to design at them, it’s a big red flag for me. when a client doesn’t believe that they need to be involved in the design process you don’t get buy-in. without buy-in, it’s much easier for a client to change their mind during the process without much reasoning. additionally, without client involvement, it almost always means the final design will be lacking critical information. good design must include those who want the design (usually clients) and those that the design is ultimately for (usually end-users).”

this resonates with me on so many levels. from a design standpoint, it’s unbelievably obvious when this is happening. when clients expect that design is going to be a silver bullet to their problems, their expectations often derail projects late in the process. when they haven’t been brought along, giving their thoughts and being a part (or at least informed of) major decisions, it’s super easy to say “hm. i don’t like that, but i’m not sure why. can you go back to an earlier stage and come up with some more ideas?” people usually won’t do that if they were a part of the decision. hopefully because they really incorporated their thinking at the decision point. but even if not for that reason, at least they won’t because they won’t want to contradict themselves.

from a process standpoint, this insight parallels the stakeholder engagement thinking in facilitative leadership methodology. the less you involve people the process that leads up to any decision, the more likely it is that they won’t be happy with or implement the outcome. as some of my colleagues used to always says “even if the decision was in their favor, if people don’t trust the process, they won’t like (and may even block) the outcome.”

personal practice: being mentored and mentoring

the more people i meet, the more i realize that i have a set of practices that are really different from most. i’m not exactly sure why i’m like this nor do i ever want to boast about it. that said, when i share them, people tend to appreciate it. so here’s to sharing.

one of these practices is to always have a mentor and to always be a mentor.

i think this started in the tallahasee christian youth group scene. from a very young age i remember being in bible study groups taught by older people (mostly men). and then as i got older, i was tasked with teaching those same groups i had gone through. it started slow; sometimes when an established teacher was out, they’d ask one of the younger of us to step in. and then, over time, we got asked to lead/teach more regularly.

and then i realized there was a whole web outside of the formal structures (sunday school, bible studies, sunday night group). there were a set of older guys (roshad, ben k, stuart, the same crew from which i learned the importance of hugging) who had a cadre of guys that they mentored. it was always an honor (cool) to be close with (discipled by) one of those guys.

then, as the guys in my age group got older (especially once we got cars), we were encouraged to start and deepen those same types of relationships with guys younger than us. we would pick them up from school or give them rides to the church when their parents couldn’t or whatever. it really was a great time in my life.

the lessons i took away from that time are really what was important for me. and they are two-fold:

1. being mentored helps you learn.
   
   having someone to talk to about life and give you advice as an amazing benefit (and as james altucher says, “advice is autobiography”). additionally, explaining what you’re going through helps you realize that you’re not the first to go through stuff. this had the simultaneous impact of making me realize that i wasn’t special but also that because i’m not special, neither are “they” (the cool kids/my role models), and i have the same potential to have impact as “they” did.
   
   
2. being a mentor helps you see that you DO have experience, no matter how much you think you don’t.
   
   it adds validity to your experiences. being able to help someone else go through a difficult time based on lessons you’ve learned makes going through even the most terrible of situations feel valuable.

of course, finding people to mentor or be mentored by is a totally different topic (maybe for a future post). it’s also surprising over time how relationships shift with mentors and mentees (that, too, is maybe writing for a different post).

so yea. i genuinely believe that my practice being mentored and having mentors helps me have a perspective on life that keeps me grounded and needed. and given that i think we’ve forgotten how important it is to need and be needed, i think this practice will really help if adopted by more folks. it also adds connectivity to our societies and we need more of that, too.

on specialization, expertise, and needing each other

“yes, i designed that thing in 30 seconds but it took me 30 years to get to the point where i could design that in 30 seconds.” - michael bierut (quoting paula scher) on design matters

as technology becomes increasingly democratized, some people have predicted the decline of expertise. some have gone so far as to advocate for it. they believe that the most successful people will be generalists (i’ll come back and find some sources for this someday).

i don’t buy it. at my last job, we believed strongly in this idea:

“do what you do best and connect to the rest.”

in effect, it’s a lean in to the idea of specialization. the paula scher quote explains why. over time, skills developed by individuals creates incredible efficiency gains. the same thing that may take an expert 30 seconds, may take a notive 30 hours.

and as i deepen my thinking (with ross) on snap and also personal branding, in order to build a world that works, two things are necessary:

1. we need people who are going to be able to contribute effectively, and
2. we are going to have to learn how to need each other in non-destructive, healthy, even generative ways.
   

of course, i don’t think that means people should (or would ever actually) be singularly skilled. but if someone has intentionally developed skills in specific areas, those should be capitalized upon.

stressing out (plants) and strength

the phenomenon i’m about to describe has been a part of farmer knowledge for centuries (probably). it turns out that certain types of stress improves certain aspects of plants and crops.

examples that i’ve heard of:

• apples that go through one or two hard freezes get sweeter
  
• some veggies (carrots, kale, beets) get sweeter with light front
• tomato plants that are starved for water put more nutrients into their fruit (which means more delicious tomatoes)

the knowledge of this has been spreading (even to tech-farmers like the ones at mit)!

why does this happen? protection. here’s how it works in the freeze examples. when water freezes inside of plants, it creates ice crystals. ice crystals slice through plant cells and cause damage to the plant, sometimes killing it. however, plants have learned (yes, plants learn, it’s just slower than humans) that converting water to sugar prevents crystals from forming. so now at signs of cold, some plants create sugar to protect themselves and live a little longer.

not only do i love this phenomenon, but i know (from experience) that it has some direct implications on human development. thich nhat hanh said something similiar in a recent onbeing episode:

“It’s like growing lotus flowers. You cannot grow lotus flowers on marble. You have to grow them on the mud. Without mud, you cannot have a lotus flower. Without suffering, you have no ways in order to learn how to be understanding and compassionate… Suffering and happiness, they are both organic, like a flower and garbage. If the flower is on her way to become a piece of garbage, the garbage can be on her way to becoming a flower… That is why you are not afraid of garbage. I think we have suffered a lot during the 20th century. We have created a lot of garbage. There was a lot of violence and hatred and separation. And we have not handled — we don’t know how to handle the garbage that we have created. And then we would have a sense to create a new century for peace. That is why now is very important for us to learn how to transform the garbage we have created into flowers.”
— thich nhat hanh, onbeing: being peace in a world of trauma

of course, one shouldn’t seek struggle. but when it comes (and it will come because suffering is the way of the world says buddhism), know that it’s possible that it will make you stronger.

on the importance of personal branding

the other day i had a conversation about a new project with my friend, allentza. at one point during the conversation, i was explaining why i’m so interested in personal branding. she stopped me and said “have you written about this?” i said, “nope, but i will soon!” so here we are:

in my opinion, branding is the aesthetic manifestation of systems thinking.

however, many folks in (social) change circles feel like branding (and more acutely, marketing) is pretty skeezy. the perception is that branding creates positive spin in dishonest ways. it’s also typically framed as “this will bring in more money.”

of course, it may bring in more money (and other resources), but i have a different perspective on why it’s important.

for one, i think (unconfirmed) i have a stronger passion for personal branding than any other scale. developing personal brands doesn’t happen much because most individuals can’t pay branding firms the rates it would take for that work to make the firm money.

still, i think personal branding is only going to become more important.

why?

because in order to contribute effectively to… well… anything… you have to know what you’re good at. the process of developing a brand, imo, is really about exploring core values, shaping them into an identity, and then experimenting with how to express that identity in the world.

so, in line with the snap assessments that i think we are all going to need, by understanding your brand, you are able to be clear about your skills and passions. this allows you to understand how to create value that helps you get your needs met. and i mean needs in the broadest sense (imo, people have many needs and money isn’t actually one of them [counter-cultural, i know, i know]. we use money to help us meet our needs [except for those of us that chase money for the sake of money], but money is a just convention and it’s not even always a helpful one).

ok, so the other big reason i believe personal branding is important is because having a clear brand helps you understand how to give to your community. and in a world that i think needs more and more generosity, i believe that knowing and then contributing what you’re good at can trigger cycles of giving that strengthen your community in ways that far surpass your own bottom line and make your community more resilient. and when you live in a resilient community, even when shit gets rough for you, your community is there to provide support.

so. yea. personal branding. into it.

ps - thanks, allentza, for the nudge to write about this!