Blog

  • How Small Businesses Can Use AI (Without the Hype or Overwhelm)

    How Small Businesses Can Use AI (Without the Hype or Overwhelm)

    Read more at Duct Tape Marketing’s article, How Small Businesses Can Use AI ( Without the Hype or Overwhelm ) by John Jantsch.

    Cut the Noise: A Practical AI Guide for Small Business Owners AI is everywhere, and if you’re a small business owner, you’re probably wondering:” How do I actually make this work for my business without adding complexity or draining my budget”? Here’s a quick check. You’re not only. Many small businesses are stuck between the]… ]

    Jarret Redding‘s book Win by Focusing on Your Main People can be found at Duct Tape Marketing.

    The Duct Tape Marketing Podcast with Shane Murphy-Reuter

    I spoke with Shane Murphy-Reuter, President of Go-To-Market at Calendly in this season of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast. Calendly, best known for revolutionizing planning technology, is now redefining its area by expanding deeper into relation management and SMB tools without losing sight of its core value: improving time.

    During our chat, Shane shared the behind-the-scenes approach behind Calendly’s evolution—from a basic time management tool to an intelligent, AI-powered company automation system. As the business expands, its unwavering commitment to providing solopreneurs, SMBs, and customer-centric tasks like sales and coaching has made it stand out in a crowded SaaS business. Shane emphasized the importance of matching sales, marketing, and customer experience—a essential piece of Calendly’s GTM plan that supports green SaaS development.

    Important Remarks

    • Customer Obsession Wins: Calendly’s success is rooted in its deep knowledge of time-sensitive experts like coaches, therapists, and salespeople—its most sincere people.
    • Develop Without Diluting: More than chasing every pattern, Calendly avoids becoming a “one-trick mare” by carefully expanding within its strongest client base.
    • Business Can Still Be Personal: Calendly maintains the convenience and freedom that made it popular with people even as it transitions into business planning.
    • Smart Product Expansion: By anchoring innovative products in its timing base and enhancing them with AI, Calendly innovates while staying true to its goal.
    • Blending Sales Models: Shane discussed combining a customized sales approach and product-led growth, ensuring that customers receive value whether they choose to buy now or speak with a sales representative.
    • Category Creation + Innovation: Calendly isn’t just a tool, it’s shaping how modern professionals manage relationships and time—key pillars of any successful business.

    Chapters:

    • ]00: 09 ] Introducing Shane Murphy-Reuter
    • [00:51] Extending Your Core Business
    • ]04: 47] How Hyperfocus Protects Your Business
    • Find your Unique Advantage at [06: 51]
    • ]10: 28 ] Messaging for Clients with Different Needs
    • ]15: 05 ] Shifting Mindset to Deal with Growth
    • [17 :00] Encouragement Sales Teams
    • ]19: 00] How Will AI Effect Scheduling Software

    More About Shane Murphy-Reuter

      Check out Shane Murphy-Reuter&#8217, s Website

    • Connect with Shane Murphy-Reuter on LinkedIn

    John Jantsch ( 00: 00. 93.)

    Hello and welcome to another episode of the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast. This is John Jantsch. Shane Murphy-Reuter is my guest today. He’s the president and go-to-market. You probably just call that GTM, don’t you? At Calendly, the platform helping individuals, teams, and organizations create better meeting experiences by simplifying complex scheduling. He’s focused on driving brand awareness and demand by ensuring alignment between sales.

    CX and marketing. So Shane, welcome to the show.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 00: 32.607 )

    Great to be here. Yes, we shorten it to GTM, but call it whatever you want. Yes, no, being a huge fan of the show is awesome. So great to talk.

    John Jantsch ( 00: 41.07 )

    Thank you. So I’m going to talk about, I’m going to ask this question in the context of Calendly, but I think that this applies really to a lot of businesses out there. I Calendly began with a meager notion of a scheduling technology, or simply scheduling. And it’s certainly grown to something much bigger. That’s something I believe many businesses do when you want to talk a little bit about. I know you’re

    You haven’t been there from the beginning, but you want to talk a little bit about the evolution of that thinking in Calendly?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 01: 13.087 )

    Yeah, of course. I’ve actually only been at Calendly for four months, I believe. I like to write it down, know, the expectations are lower. And so, yeah, I haven’t seen the journey from inside, but actually I’ve known Tope for, who’s the CEO of Calendly for about five or six years. I’ve been closely watching it from the sidelines, you know. And I would say also, if you look at my background, the companies that I tend to join are at a very similar stage to Calendly where

    They’ve developed some new technology to address a customer type’s pain point, and then they experience exponential growth when they sort of like market-catch a little to get that product market fit. And then they start to think about, where maybe growth is starting to slow a little bit in that original market and where to go from here. And I think Calendly has been on that journey. Originally,

    John Jantsch ( 01: 51.778 )

    Mm-hmm.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 02: 03.561 )

    we solved just that scheduling problem, that one problem around how do two people schedule meetings together. And it’s been very, very successful. But the question is now, well, how do you leave this place? And I think a lot of companies get that wrong, frankly. Like, you believe there are generally two paths, right? You either take the technology that you’ve built and apply it to different markets.

    John Jantsch ( 02: 28.077 )

    Yes.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 02: 28.409 )

    Or you take a target market or a customer segment that you have strength with with your original product and then extend the product offerings that you provide to those customers. And in all likelihood, Canley’s plan from this, and hopefully very soon, will be to release our second major, major product because we think there is a lot of potential there.

    solve other points in the relationship management lifecycle for our customers. it’s been, yeah, I’ve been here four months, but I think that the account is on like a pretty, classic journey that I’ve seen a lot of companies go through.

    John Jantsch ( 03:07.394 )

    Do you, do you feel like you are on the journey to define a category or you have defined a category? You made mention of relationship management. I don’t know that people would have applied what, what Cowan Lee initially started doing to that term. mean, do feel like you’re, you’re categorizing, you know, a new way of working.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 3: 24. 641 )

    It’s a great question. Think scheduling, our first product, we created the category, right? We are now basically the Kleenex for scheduling, which is amazing. I think the challenge though with it is different categories of different towns, right? various total markets that can be addressed. And I think for scheduling, it is a relatively narrow use case, right? Although it’s very important for our customers, it’s narrow, like it’s, but we have this incredible hook into the customer.

    John Jantsch ( 03: 28.034 )

    Yeah. Right.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 03: 54.753 )

    How can more be added? And to be fair, I think for a go-forward strategy, we think about relationship management software more generally. No, I think the new areas that we’ll go into are existing categories like, I don’t want to give up our product roadmap, but you can imagine the types of other relationship management softwares that are out there, like the CRMs, et cetera. I believe that the key to our success lies in the types of customers we’ll serve. And I think that we can

    If we can create software with a particular focus on these SMBs and solopreneurs, I believe we can achieve great success in comparison to the market’s current leaders. So to answer the question more directly, I think we’ve done this category creation thing with scheduling and we’ll continue to hopefully dominate that market. From here though, I think it’s more about innovating within how we deliver in existing categories.

    John Jantsch ( 04: 52. 974 )

    I’m sure you maybe talk about this in closed door meetings, maybe worry about it even sometimes, but how does a company like Calendar, especially in the early days when you essentially created a product that had a certain set of features and the Microsofts, the Googles of the world could easily squash that. You know, when you wake up, you say,” We’re going to do that.” How do you kind of ward off that? do you worry about, again, I know you’ve grown to the point where,

    You are likely to have more market share in scheduling than some of the big people who, you are aware, might have been able to do that. But do you ever sit around and worry about, Hey, we have to create more features or get more hooks in, so that we’re not just this one trick pony that gets squashed.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 5: 36.421 )

    Yeah, that’s a great question. And for sure, I think if you look at it from the outside, you may imagine that something like scheduling is very, very easy to replicate. And I believe that this hyperattention to your most devoted customers is crucial. If you talk to the majority of our customers, their time is their money. Many of them actually sell their time. If you’re a coach,

    John Jantsch ( 06: 03.032 )

    Sure.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 06: 03.263 )

    you know, your therapist, et cetera. And then there are people who think your time is how you get paid if you’re in sales. And therefore an incredible scheduling experience is really important. So for sure, there are many competitors out there, lots of competitors, but because they just don’t have that hyper focus like we do around the true intricacies of the details of the problem set of our customers, they have not been able to compete. And for what it’s worth,

    When we look at our data, for sure we’re hearing a little bit more about other competitors popping up as you would expect as any company scales. However, in reality, it hasn’t had the same impact on our business as I would have hoped. And so we actually think that we have a better opportunity to disrupt other incumbents than the other way around, given just how critically important this is for our customers. They’re not going to go and buy a slightly less

    John Jantsch ( 06: 53. 304 )

    Yeah.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 07: 01.419 )

    good product, but they won’t do it because they want the best.

    John Jantsch ( 07: 04.962 )

    One of the things I’ve seen software companies do as they they grew is like, let’s take on this and this and let’s do email and let’s do the CRM part of it. And it makes a lot of sense, don’t you think? It’s like, I’ve got this end to end product, but then they make compromises in every single category because it’s very hard to have the one thing that fits all. Essentially, do you believe there is a chance that someone will actually try to take market share by adding more?

    you know, more product that’s already out there and actually diluting what they’re good at.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 07: 37.345 )

    is a risk that you must be very cautious of and is an absolute risk. So every company I’ve worked at as we’ve gone on this multi-product journey, there is a constant debate around how much resource should you put into continuing to improve your core product versus how much should you put into new innovative areas. Therefore, there is a debate, and we will never stop creating new ideas for our scheduling fundamental. I do think though, as you think about like,

    the product areas that you move into, the question has to be, what’s your unique advantage to win there? And I don’t like it because I’ve seen businesses kind of go,” We’re just going to go in there, we’re going to build in,” and say,” Well, okay, well, you really thought about the strategy and it can’t just be like a price thing, right?” That’s not enough. And as I said before, I believe that the most distinctive advantage typically comes from having some sort of technological advantage that you have.

    John Jantsch ( 08: 12.792 )

    Yeah.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 08: 33.375 )

    I’ll provide an example of Webflow from the last time I worked. Webflow’s unique technology advantage was that built a way for you to manipulate code in a visual environment. Very simple for them to incorporate that technology into how you build other types of technology beyond just building websites. They have a technology advantage they can apply to different markets. For Calendly, think the reason Calendly has been so successful are two things. One,

    I do think that we have a unique penetration within a type of customer that I mentioned before, that we really understand and can, as we go into these new areas, make sure that we’re addressing their unique needs for a new product. like cars, right, before it was a Model T, you can get any color you want as long as it’s black, which is fine if you have a technology advantage like Henry Ford did. He had a technology advantage, so you mass market it.

    John Jantsch ( 09: 24.27 )

    you

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 09: 30.205 )

    Now that’s crazy because that technology advantage no longer exists. You have every single car made for a number of distinct market segments. And so as we think about our go for product strategy, think some of it, I wouldn’t say we necessarily have a technology advantage, but I think that we have a data advantage in being so hooked so clearly into the customer’s most important thing, which is their time and the data around that.

    And then we have a unique advantage, I think, in making sure that when we build those new product areas, they’re beautifully connected and integrated with scheduling and that we build for that segment. And we don’t try to build the Model T; instead, we try to create a very, very specific experience for the customer base that we believe has the greatest right to enjoy. And for what it’s worth, we also believe that the incumbents in the relationship management software market have left that market behind. And so I believe there is a…

    great opportunity for us to win. But back to the original question, yes, of course we need to balance and make sure that we’re not under-investing in our core. I say to employees at companies that if you kill the cash cow, nobody will get milk. And so, yeah, you want to make sure that the core business, which is for us scheduling, continues to, we continue innovating.

    John Jantsch ( 10: 55. 394 )

    One of the things that’s really tempting as companies grow to the size that Connolly has now, I mean, some of your original customers clicked on a button, signed up. It was just them in their house doing scheduling and it worked for them. It was fantastic. It was easy, no friction. And you’re starting to have business con now. That security and adoption and uptime and all these kinds of things really have to be sold.

    How do you message first off? Let’s say we can discuss operational issues as well, but how do you communicate to such distinctly distinct sales channels?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 11: 38.185 )

    Yes, that’s a really good question. I think about this through two different lenses. The first one is obviously the who you’re going after. And for what it’s worth, typically in enterprise companies, especially for a company like Calendly, the user within that company typically tests it out first. And the user is the person that has that problem. This is very painful scheduling because a salesperson will leave an enterprise company.

    John Jantsch ( 12: 00.429 )

    Mm.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 12: 06.625 )

    You’ll go check it out, and they’ll enter via our PLG and self-serve funnel, as I’ve heard from Cano. And there, how you sell to them and the message for them is extremely similar as the message to a solopreneur and SMB because they are the user, they have this actual direct pain of the product solves. And so I believe that when, in many ways, is consistent. Now, of course, if you’ve got that person in your funnel, right, who is the user within an enterprise,

    Your job now is to use other channels to go and directly target the procurement team, the security team, the actual economic buyer with very targeted messaging. A sales team typically handles this. We can also be using things like account-based marketing to go do that so that you bring your enterprise value proposition to them. And this SaaS classic is. This is why if you go to most SaaS websites, unless they are purely focused on the enterprise market,

    the homepage will be very directed at the end user, and they will have an enterprise section which tells the full enterprise value proposition. And the cost of the packaging: the majority of the packages are made for the real users, and there is an enterprise package made specifically for those customers you’re trying to sell to. I think it’s about, and finding the balance of that depends on your business and the degree to which it’s like your opportunities in the enterprise versus in the SMB.

    John Jantsch ( 13: 08.675 )

    Mm-hmm.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 13: 33.409 )

    So I think you needed to do both, but I think my key point there is that even in the enterprises, are where you’re to get the adoption is getting a end user to love it because they end up becoming what we call in the, in sort of go to market, the champion. They are entering, and we need to use this, boss. Here’s how much time it will save me. The champion is the only thing that you can do if you don’t get that user to care.

    John Jantsch ( 13: 50.894 )

    Sure.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 13: 59.883 )

    The security team, the procurement team, they don’t give a damn. Oops, sorry, shouldn’t have said it. They are uninterested. And so I think that’s the key thing that I think oftentimes people miss.

    John Jantsch ( 14: 09.402 )

    So, is one of the things you’ve been given to do is create a sales team, or is there already a sales team that is operational?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 14: 17.457 )

    Yes, we already had a sales team. when I joined, Cal and Lee had already gone on the journey to build an enterprise product offering an enterprise sort of package and team. think what I’m trying to do is blend the self-serve and sales experience in a more natural way. Again, a lesson I’ve learned from almost every B2B company I’ve worked for was a combination of self-serve or product-led growth and sales-led growth.

    And typically speaking, they tend to be pretty siloed on islands. So what happens is that you either have a completely self-serve experience for the customer or have a reactive support team that is essentially self-serve. And then if you’re willing to buy the enterprise package, now you go through this like really human intensive experience. The SDR goes to the AE, goes to the account management team with implementation. And it’s like, if you think about it from the beginning, it actually makes no sense. Why would it be such a big deal?

    binary distinction between the two. And so, I believe that many businesses are now realizing things like velocity sales or, you know, much more soft touch sales to support the customer while also getting out of the way if they want to just adopt and use. And so the team had already started to do some of that work, but it’s a lot of what I think about day in day out is how to blend the two in a more natural way.

    John Jantsch ( 15: 37.496 )

    Yeah.

    Just get rid of a few acronyms, right? That would be helpful. So have you found, and this may be a tough question for you to answer, you may not want to answer this, but have you found that the role that you’ve been brought into play is new and has that required a mindset shift because of the way the company’s grown, because of the company culture? Again, you don’t need to discuss your experience in particular as much as you do…

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 15: 45.353 )

    yeah.

    John Jantsch ( 16: 10.242 )

    Other businesses have certainly experienced those kinds of growing pains.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 16: 14.465 )

    Yes, that’s a really good question. Like I think what a lot of companies are starting to realize is, and in my experience is that particularly technology companies are founded by technologists. And so a lot of the time they start self-serve, right? They go, well, we can just create a signup link so that customers can simply purchase it. And then at some point a board member, somebody said, hey, you’ve got a bunch of larger customers here. An enterprise offering is necessary. They go and hire a head of sales from some enterprise company.

    John Jantsch ( 16: 25.612 )

    Yeah.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 16: 42. 591 )

    And that person brings a playbook and drops this like very classic sales experience on top of the self-serve base, creating this sort of siloed nature in this kind of like a, and so I think a lot of companies, there’s probably been about 10 years of evolution of that happening. Many businesses are beginning to understand the pain caused by that disconnect. And so it is becoming more common.

    John Jantsch ( 16: 54.082 )

    Mm-hmm.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 17: 10.305 )

    to bring in a person running all of go-to-market, particularly in companies where they have both experiences in their business for all the reasons that I described because in the traditional model of having maybe a CMO who runs the self-serve side and a CRO or head of sales who runs the sales side, that traditional model actually beds in the fact that these two things are on a silo. And so…

    John Jantsch ( 17: 35.054 )

    Sure.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 17: 37.205 )

    I do believe that it’s becoming more common for businesses to use the term CRO, whether it’s their tone or a GoToMarket president like I am.

    John Jantsch ( 17: 50.982 )

    I’m likely going to get you in trouble here. But do you think that the way that salespeople are incentivized really actually exacerbates that problem?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 18: 02.387 )

    It’s a really excellent question. actually remember listening to Bill Macias on a podcast who was the, he was head of CMO at Slack. I believe he was working at Zendesk, which he describes as a goat in the sector. He talked about, I think it was at Slack bringing in for the sales team that part of their compensation was linked also to a customer satisfaction of the sales process. And so anyway, I just thought I’d share that. However, I do believe there is a and that there is a.

    I think in the more enterprise end of sales, having incentivization to ensure that, you know, the sales team do a good job of maximizing the revenue potential is important. So, for example, if I’m not incentivized, what I’ll do is say, yeah, okay, well, maybe I’ll maximize the discount that I offer, or I’ll say, I won’t try to bother some multi-product sales. I’ll just say, just get them in and on this one product. And so in certain instances, you do want incentives for the sales team to

    John Jantsch ( 18: 50. 968 )

    Yeah, yeah.

    ( 1976 ) Shane Murphy-Reuter

    push for the largest value sell as possible and incentivization around with commission structures, et cetera, can be important there. And so, for example, at Calendly, our enterprise sales team absolutely are commission-based and I think that’s the right approach. You’re semi-helping the customer like a support in the earlier, more clocked sales model, where it might be lighter touch, right? You’re answering questions, you’re doing somewhat of a value sell but not the full thing.

    You, you, do you believe you should be very cautious in order to avoid acting like a typical model. And so for example, I currently, we don’t write their more salaries. And so I think you just need to apply the right incentive structure based on what, what are you trying to incentivize these people to do? And so, I do believe there is a place for it on a sales team, though perhaps not across the board.

    John Jantsch ( 19: 58.75 )

    Okay. Let’s end today on a product question. I think this might be a record. Think exactly 20 minutes in. And I’m the first mention of AI. So, based on what you know so far, how will AI affect the product?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 20: 16.935 )

    Yeah, that’s a great question. I mentioned that we think SMBs and solopreneurs, as well as smaller businesses, have a chance to innovate in the relationship management software market. One of the reasons that up until now, it’s been difficult to build this type of software for those customers is that typically those software types of software need like an army of operations people to set them up and manage them like

    There are like, there are like job boards of like, you know, kind of, all these ops to manage these tools if you talk to companies that have Salesforce or Marketo or any of these. And so if you’re at SMB, that’s really challenging, right? The beautiful thing is that we’re going to start entering the space just as AI is getting to the point where they can start automating a bunch of the, used to be, take a lot of operational, time and effort. And so.

    John Jantsch ( 20: 45.314 )

    Yeah.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 21: 12.033 )

    You can imagine a world where like, you know, today, a CRM, even in most cases, still looks like one of these sort of like databases, right? Line items of people or whatever. Absolutely. Right. And why is that possible? Because it was a record keeper. It was just a database, right? That all happens automatically in the world of AI. Now a CRM or relation management software can be actually about surfacing the insights and actions of things that can truly lead to you creating better relationships. And so I believe it.

    John Jantsch ( 21: 18.722 )

    Yeah, it’s just a relational database, right?

    John Jantsch ( 21: 25.422 )

    the

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 21: 41.601 )

    You have a blank sheet of paper to define how you interact with this product in an artificial intelligence first way, which I believe the incumbents will struggle with, so I think it’s a great time for any company to start thinking about innovating into a new space. And that’s why a lot of the incumbents are doing the co-pilot thing, right? We’ve got this chunky, hard to use software. So how we use AI will give you a clip.

    John Jantsch ( 22: 00.589 )

    Yeah.

    John Jantsch ( 22: 04. 162 )

    Right.

    button.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 22: 10.517 )

    to help you to figure out how to use a really hard software. The other way to do it would be to actually design it from the ground up in a way that’s really simple to use. And so anyway, we think that there’s a huge opportunity there. And for sure, AI comes first on our product roadmap from here. And we are trying to think about everything from that lens.

    John Jantsch ( 22: 28.142 )

    Yeah.

    I appreciate you stopping by the Duct Tape Marketing Podcast for a moment, Shane. Is there anywhere you’d want to invite people to connect with you? Where do you like to hang out, besides Calendly, where can you find out about the product?

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 22: 45.117 )

    LinkedIn is the best one. Although I used to work elsewhere, I believe we can still safely point people to LinkedIn for the time being.

    John Jantsch ( 22: 51.692 )

    Yes, that’s awesome. Again, appreciate you stopping by and hopefully we’ll run into you one of these days out there on the road.

    Shane Murphy-Reuter ( 22: 56.893 )

    Thank you so much, John. It was a pleasure.

    powered by
  • Daredevil: Born Again’s Successful First Season Is a Good Sign for the MCU

    Daredevil: Born Again’s Successful First Season Is a Good Sign for the MCU

    This article contains year 1 clues for Daredevil: Born Once. The information are the devil in the information. When the author’s attack forced them to halt Daredevil: Born Again, a long-awaited revival series, Marvel realized that. Although six of the 18 designed shows had been finished, Marvel fired artists Chris […]…]…

    The first episode of Daredevil: Born Again’s productive first season was a positive sign for the MCU, and it was the first post.

    The Black Mirror show 8220, Hotel Reverie, has clues in this article. &#8221,

    You know what I mean when I say that Black Mirror is about systems, but it isn’t about it.

    Sorry about that; perhaps an illustration from Hotel Reverie&#8221 would help. Issa Rae plays Brandy Friday, a current movie star who assumes the role of the female lead in the remake of her all-time favourite black-and-white classic. In this season 7, Issa Rae portrays her in the role of the female lead. Like many other Black Mirror figures, Brandy is guilty of No Reading The Instructions and is unaware that remaking the movie means online stepping in and persuasively playing her part to the finish.

    cnx. powershell. push ( function ( ) {cnx ( {playerId:” 106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530″, }). render ( “0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796” ), }),

    Hotel Reverie isn’t just about technologies, it’s. Redream is basically what initiates events, and the episode, which was directed by Haolu Wang and was written by Charlie Brooker, can address difficult issues involving digital personhood, copyright laws, and adore itself. However, the story wouldn’t be able to observe those issues in the first place without that technology as a starting point. Issa Rae’s attraction to the position was fueled by the relationship between sci-fi criticism and the human condition.

    I can recall being extremely excited to receive a Black Mirror text and also being considered for it, and then being completely immersed in each of the amounts of it. Rae tells Den of Geek and other sources at a roundtable trip that I was going to say yes anyhow, but I was unquestionably in that situation.

    Rae, a long-time Black Mirror lover, was well aware of Brandy’s trademarked systems that made its entrance to Hotel Reverie. A little device that is placed on a person’s temple to interact with a virtual reality interface has been seen before and is still relevant throughout the show’s canon. It first popped up in season 3&#8217, s &#8220, San Junipero, &#8221, then made appearances in season 4&#8217, s &#8220, USS Callister, &#8221, and season 5&#8217, s &#8220, Striking Vipers &#8221, ( where it was referred to as an &#8220, Experiencer Disk&#8221 ,). A variation of it also turns up in winter 7&#8217, s &#8220, Eulogy. The system has never had an established name up until now, and it was manufactured by TCKR Systems.

    &#8220, Charlie]Brooker ] calls it a &#8216, Nubbin, &#8217, but Awkwafina&#8217, s character calls it a &#8216, Mesmerizer. &#8217, I don&#8217, t know if that &#8217, s the vernacular version of it, &#8221, Rae says. &#8220, I didn&#8217, t have the &#8216, real&#8217, type on display. I’m supposed to reveal this, but I had a smaller, false type with double-sided audio. So I was really excited to hold a true one more just. &#8221,

    The real, real, and 8221 Nubbin that Rae recently obtained was certainly the one used to picture this season 7 meta commercial.

    @nubbin #blackmirror authentic audio &#8211, BlackMirror issa wright taking a fast trip to another real #nubbin #blackmirror

    Similar to that ad campaign, a Netflix-hosted stimulation provided the opportunity for guests to experience the device that is unquestionably called a Nubbin with a company logo and all. On this one, Charlie Brooker seems to have found a way to win. Sorry, Awkwafina&#8217, s figure!

    The use of the doohickey, which is now known as a Nubbin, has an additional level of frequency around. Hotel Reverie is ultimately a touching like story where two women make a connection between themselves and space, much like that timeless event of the show. The story also comes to an end with a San Junipero spring egg as it turns out that Brandy Friday’s address is 3049 Junipero Drive, which is revealed as &#8220. &#8221,

    Charlie claimed that this is the first season he has written for this season and that is #8220. San Junpiero has a lot of work to load, so I really hope people can look at them both differently but also enjoy them as suits to one another, Rae says.

    Netflix currently has all six bouts of Black Mirror time 7.

    The second article on Den of Geek was How Hotel Reverie Expands Upon the Black Mirror Canon.

  • Doctor Who: What’s Stopping the TARDIS From Returning to Earth?

    Doctor Who: What’s Stopping the TARDIS From Returning to Earth?

    Trailers appear in the Doctor Who show” The Robot Revolution.” Oh, the TARDIS’s endless potential. That tiny blue box can transport you through every sun that has ever existed, every event that has ever occurred or will ever occur, except when it doesn’t. That is what Belinda Chandra ( no Miss ) discovered in […]…

    What’s preventing the TARDIS from returning to Earth in Doctor Who? second appeared on Den of Geek.

    The Black Mirror show 8220, Hotel Reverie, has clues in this article. &#8221,

    You know what I mean when I say that Black Mirror is about systems, but it isn’t about it.

    Sorry about that; perhaps an illustration from Hotel Reverie&#8221 would help. Issa Rae plays Brandy Friday, a current movie star who assumes the role of the female lead in the remake of her all-time favorite hotel Reverie classic in season 7. Like many other Black Mirror figures, Brandy is guilty of not reading The Instructions and is unaware that remaking the movie means technologically stepping into the original version where she must sing her part eloquently enough to get to the end.

    cnx. command. push ( function ( ) {cnx ( {playerId:” 106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530″, }). render ( “0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796” ), }),

    Hotel Reverie isn’t just about systems, it’s. Redream is basically what initiates events, and the episode, which was directed by Haolu Wang and was written by Charlie Brooker, can address difficult issues involving electric personhood, copyright laws, and adore itself. However, the story wouldn’t be able to discover those issues in the first place without that technology as a starting point. Issa Rae’s attraction to the position was fueled by the relationship between sci-fi criticism and the human condition.

    I can recall being extremely excited to receive a Black Mirror text and also being considered for it, and then being completely immersed in each of the amounts of it. Rae tells Den of Geek and other sources at a roundtable trip that I was going to say yes anyhow, but I was unquestionably in that situation.

    Rae, a long-time Black Mirror lover, was well aware that Brandy’s method for entering Hotel Reverie was incredibly well-known. A little device that is placed on a person’s temple to interact with a virtual reality interface has been seen before and is still relevant throughout the show’s canon. It first popped up in season 3&#8217, s &#8220, San Junipero, &#8221, then made appearances in season 4&#8217, s &#8220, USS Callister, &#8221, and season 5&#8217, s &#8220, Striking Vipers &#8221, ( where it was referred to as an &#8220, Experiencer Disk&#8221 ,). A variation of it also turns up in winter 7&#8217, s &#8220, Eulogy. The system has never had an established name up until now, and it was manufactured by TCKR Systems.

    &#8220, Charlie]Brooker ] calls it a &#8216, Nubbin, &#8217, but Awkwafina&#8217, s character calls it a &#8216, Mesmerizer. &#8217, I don&#8217, t know if that &#8217, s the vernacular version of it, &#8221, Rae says. &#8220, I didn&#8217, t have the &#8216, real&#8217, type on display. I’m supposed to disclose this, but I don’t know if I’m supposed to, but I had a smaller, false version with double-sided tape. So I was really excited to schedule another one soon. &#8221,

    The real-life Nubbin that Rae recently captured was certainly the one used to picture this season 7 metaadvertisment.

    #nubbin #blackmirror unique audio &#8211, BlackMirror issa jones taking a quick trip to another fact

    Visitors may experience the unit, which is unquestionably called a Nubbin with a company trademark and everything, as well as the same ad campaign and associated Netflix-hosted activation. Looks like Charlie Brooker got his way with this one. Sorry, Awkwafina&#8217, s figure!

    The use of the doohickey we now know as a Nubbin was first used in San Junipero, and it has an additional layer of frequency. Hotel Reverie is ultimately a touching like story where two women make a connection between themselves and space, much like that timeless event of the show. The story also comes to an end with a San Junipero feast egg as it turns out that Brandy Friday’s address is 3049 Junipero Drive, which is revealed as &#8220. &#8221,

    Charlie claimed that this is the first season he has written for this season and that is #8220. I only hope that people can look at San Junpiero and San Junpiero separately and also enjoy them as supports to one another, Rae says.

    Netflix currently has all six bouts of Black Mirror time 7.

    The first article on Den of Geek: How Hotel Reverie Expands Upon the Black Mirror Canon was second published.

  • Sinners Review: Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan Throw Tasty Vampire Party

    Sinners Review: Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan Throw Tasty Vampire Party

    The Mississippi leader, blues singer, juke shared prodigy, and legend of Robert Johnson is a myth. Johnson, a guitarist who had a talent for plucked his cords that even strangers thought he had it, passed away before the age of 30 from unknown reasons. He did, however, live longer enough to spread the rumor.

    On Den of Geek, Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan’s Throw Tasty Vampire Party appeared second.

    This article contains spoilers for the Hotel Reverie show of Black Mirror. &#8221,

    You know what I mean, Black Mirror is about systems, but it isn’t about it, you know what I mean?

    *gets down * Sorry about that; perhaps an example from &#8220, Hotel Reverie &#8221, can help. Issa Rae plays Brandy Friday, a current movie star who assumes the role of the female lead in the remake of her all-time favourite black-and-white classic. In this season 7, Issa Rae portrays her in the role of the female lead. Like many other Black Mirror figures, Brandy is guilty of not reading The Instructions and is unaware that remaking the movie means technologically stepping into the original version where she must sing her part eloquently enough to get to the end.

    cnx. powershell. push ( function ( ) {cnx ( {playerId:” 106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530″, }). render ( “0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796” ), }),

    Hotel Reverie isn’t just about technologies, it’s. Redream is basically what initiates events, and Charlie Brooker and Haolu Wang’s film, which explores nuanced issues of electric personhood, copyright law, and love itself. However, the account wouldn’t be able to begin to explore those issues without that technology as a starting point. Issa Rae’s attraction to the position was fueled by the relationship between sci-fi criticism and the human condition.

    I can recall being extremely excited to receive a Black Mirror text and yet being chosen for it, and then being completely immersed in each of its various levels. Rae tells Den of Geek and other sources at a roundtable trip that I was going to say yes anyhow, but I was unquestionably in that situation, &#8221.

    Rae, a long-time Black Mirror lover, was well aware of Brandy’s trademarked technology that made its entrance to Hotel Reverie. A little plate used to activate a virtual reality interface on a person’s temple has been seen before and is repeated throughout the show’s canon. It first popped up in season 3&#8217, s &#8220, San Junipero, &#8221, then made appearances in season 4&#8217, s &#8220, USS Callister, &#8221, and season 5&#8217, s &#8220, Striking Vipers &#8221, ( where it was referred to as an &#8220, Experiencer Disk&#8221 ,). A variation of it also turns up in winter 7&#8217, s &#8220, Eulogy. The machine has never had an established name up until now, and it was manufactured by TCKR Systems.

    &#8220, Charlie]Brooker ] calls it a &#8216, Nubbin, &#8217, but Awkwafina&#8217, s character calls it a &#8216, Mesmerizer. &#8217, I don&#8217, t know if that &#8217, s the vernacular version of it, &#8221, Rae says. &#8220, I didn&#8217, t have the &#8216, real&#8217, edition on display. I’m supposed to disclose this, but I don’t know if I’m supposed to, but I had a smaller, false version with double-sided tape. So I was really excited to schedule another one soon. &#8221,

    The real-life Nubbin that Rae recently captured was certainly the one used to picture this season 7 metaadvertisment.

    @nubbin #blackmirror unique noise &#8211, BlackMirror issa jones taking a quick trip to another fact

    Visitors may experience the system, which is unquestionably called a Nubbin with a company trademark and everything, as well as the same ad campaign and associated Netflix-hosted activation. Looks like Charlie Brooker got his way with this one. Sorry, Awkwafina&#8217, s figure!

    The use of the doohickey we now know as a Nubbin was first used in San Junipero, and it has an additional layer of frequency. Hotel Reverie is ultimately a touching love story involving two women who form distance relationships with time and space, much like that timeless traditional event. As Brandy Friday’s tackle is revealed to be 3049 Junipero Drive, the story actually comes to an end with a San Junipero spring egg. &#8221,

    Charlie claimed that this is the first season he wrote for this period. [San Junpiero] has a lot of work to do, but I just hope people can look at them differently but also enjoy them as complements to one another, Rae says.

    Netflix currently has all six bouts of Black Mirror time 7.

    The first article on Den of Geek: How Hotel Reverie Expands Upon the Black Mirror Canon was second published.

  • Black Mirror: Cristin Milioti Learned to Code for USS Callister Sequel

    Black Mirror: Cristin Milioti Learned to Code for USS Callister Sequel

    The Black Mirror season” USS Callister: Into Infinity” has clues in this article. Since the beloved Black Mirror season” USS Callister” first aired on Netflix in soon 2017, a lot has happened. Three new seasons of technodystopia ( plus a choose-your-own-adventure movie ) have been released from Charlie Brooker’s beloved sci-fi anthology. [Star Trek ] has debuted…

    On Den of Geek, Cristin Milioti learned to protocol for the USS Callister movie.

    This article contains spoilers for the Hotel Reverie show of Black Mirror. &#8221,

    You know what I mean when I say that Black Mirror is about systems, but it isn’t about it.

    Sorry about that; perhaps an illustration from &#8220, Hotel Reverie &#8221, may help. Issa Rae plays Brandy Friday, a current movie star who assumes the role of the female lead in the remake of her all-time favourite black-and-white classic. In this season 7, Issa Rae portrays her in the role of the female lead. Like many other Black Mirror figures, Brandy is guilty of not reading The Instructions and is unaware that remaking the movie means online stepping into the original version where she must sing her part eloquently enough to get to the end.

    cnx. powershell. push ( function ( ) {cnx ( {playerId:” 106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530″, }). render ( “0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796” ), }),

    Hotel Reverie isn’t just about systems, it’s. Redream’s program is only what triggers events, and Charlie Brooker’s and Haolu Wang’s film explores nuanced issues of modern personhood, copyright law, and enjoy itself. However, the story wouldn’t be able to observe those issues in the first place without that technology as a starting point. Issa Rae’s attraction to the position was fueled by the relationship between sci-fi criticism and the human condition.

    I can recall being extremely excited to receive a Black Mirror text and yet being chosen for it, and then being completely immersed in each of its various levels. Rae tells Den of Geek and other sources at a roundtable trip that I was going to say yes anyhow, but I was unquestionably in that situation.

    Rae, a long-time Black Mirror lover, was well aware that Brandy’s method for entering Hotel Reverie was incredibly well-known. A little device that is placed on a person’s temple to interact with a virtual reality interface has been seen before and is still relevant throughout the show’s canon. It first popped up in season 3&#8217, s &#8220, San Junipero, &#8221, then made appearances in season 4&#8217, s &#8220, USS Callister, &#8221, and season 5&#8217, s &#8220, Striking Vipers &#8221, ( where it was referred to as an &#8220, Experiencer Disk&#8221 ,). A variation of it also turns up in winter 7&#8217, s &#8220, Eulogy. The system has never had an established brand up until now, and it was reportedly manufactured by TCKR Systems.

    &#8220, Charlie]Brooker ] calls it a &#8216, Nubbin, &#8217, but Awkwafina&#8217, s character calls it a &#8216, Mesmerizer. &#8217, I don&#8217, t know if that &#8217, s the vernacular version of it, &#8221, Rae says. &#8220, I didn&#8217, t have the &#8216, real&#8217, edition on display. I’m supposed to reveal this, but I had a false, smaller type with double-sided strip. So I was really excited to schedule a second one soon. &#8221,

    The real-life Nubbin that Rae recently captured was certainly the one used to picture this season 7 metaadvertisment.

    @nubbin #blackmirror unique audio &#8211, BlackMirror issa jones taking a quick trip to another fact

    Visitors may experience the unit, which is unquestionably called a Nubbin with a company trademark and everything, as well as the same ad campaign and associated Netflix-hosted activation. On this one, Charlie Brooker seems to have found a way to win. Sorry, Awkwafina&#8217, s figure!

    The use of the doohickey we now know as a Nubbin was first used in San Junipero and has an additional touch of polarization. Hotel Reverie is ultimately a touching like story where two women make a connection between themselves and space, much like that timeless show of the show. The story also comes to an end with a San Junipero spring ovum as Brandy Friday’s address is revealed to become 3049 Junipero Drive, and it ends with a San Junipero spring egg. &#8221,

    Charlie claimed this was his first season of this year and that it was titled &#8220. San Junpiero has a lot of work to load, so I really hope people can look at them both differently but also enjoy them as suits to one another, Rae says.

    Netflix is currently streaming all six of the seventh year of Black Mirror.

    The second article on Den of Geek was How Hotel Reverie Expands Upon the Black Mirror Canon.

  • Daredevil: Born Again Finale Sets Up A Major Comic Arc for Season 2

    Daredevil: Born Again Finale Sets Up A Major Comic Arc for Season 2

    Episode 9 of Daredevil: Born Once year 1 show 9 contains trailers. Netflix’s Daredevil has been “born repeatedly” in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, despite some who feared the end of the world. Daredevil: Born Again eventually brings the Man Without Anxiety full-time into the MCU, despite taking nearly seven times and undergoing a significant creative reform. ]… ]

    Den of Geek‘s second article: Daredevil: Born Once Finale Sets Up A Major Comic Arc for Season 2.

    This article contains spoilers for the Hotel Reverie season of Black Mirror. &#8221,

    You know what I mean when I say that Black Mirror is about systems, but it isn’t about it.

    Sorry about that; perhaps an illustration from Hotel Reverie&#8221 would help. Issa Rae plays Brandy Friday, a current movie star who assumes the role of the female lead in the remake of her all-time favorite hotel Reverie classic in season 7. Like many other Black Mirror figures, Brandy is guilty of not reading The Instructions and is unaware that remaking the movie means online stepping into the original edition where she must sing her part eloquently enough to get to the end.

    cnx. powershell. push ( function ( ) {cnx ( {playerId:” 106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530″, }). render ( “0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796” ), }),

    Hotel Reverie isn’t just about systems, it’s. Redream is basically what initiates events, and Charlie Brooker and Haolu Wang’s film, which explores nuanced issues of electronic personhood, copyright law, and love itself. However, the account wouldn’t be able to begin to explore those issues without that technology as a starting point. Issa Rae’s attraction to the part was fueled by the relationship between sci-fi criticism and the human condition.

    I can recall being extremely excited to receive a Black Mirror text and also being considered for it, and then being completely immersed in each of the levels of it. Rae tells Den of Geek and other sources at a roundtable trip that I was going to say yes anyhow, but I was unquestionably in that situation.

    Rae, a long-time Black Mirror lover, was well aware that Brandy’s method for entering Hotel Reverie was incredibly well-known. A little device that is placed on a person’s temple to interact with a virtual reality interface has been seen before and is still relevant throughout the show’s canon. It first popped up in season 3&#8217, s &#8220, San Junipero, &#8221, then made appearances in season 4&#8217, s &#8220, USS Callister, &#8221, and season 5&#8217, s &#8220, Striking Vipers &#8221, ( where it was referred to as an &#8220, Experiencer Disk&#8221 ,). A variation of it also turns up in winter 7&#8217, s &#8220, Eulogy. The system has never had an established name up until now, and it was manufactured by TCKR Systems.

    &#8220, Charlie]Brooker ] calls it a &#8216, Nubbin, &#8217, but Awkwafina&#8217, s character calls it a &#8216, Mesmerizer. &#8217, I don&#8217, t know if that &#8217, s the vernacular variation of it, &#8221, Rae says. &#8220, I didn&#8217, t have the &#8216, real&#8217, edition on display. I’m supposed to disclose this, but I don’t know if I’m supposed to, but I had a smaller, false version with double-sided tape. So I was really excited to schedule a second one soon. &#8221,

    The real, real, and 8221 Nubbin that Rae recently held was certainly the one that was used to film this season 7 meta commercial.

    #nubbin #blackmirror unique noise &#8211, BlackMirror issa jones taking a quick trip to another fact

    Visitors may experience the unit, which is unquestionably called a Nubbin with a company trademark and everything, as well as the same ad campaign and associated Netflix-hosted activation. On this one, Charlie Brooker seems to have found a way to win. Sorry, Awkwafina&#8217, s figure!

    The use of the doohickey we now know as a Nubbin was first used in San Junipero and has an additional touch of frequency. Hotel Reverie is ultimately a touching love story involving two women who form distance relationships with time and space, much like that timeless traditional event. As Brandy Friday’s tackle is revealed to be 3049 Junipero Drive, the story actually comes to an end with a San Junipero spring egg. &#8221,

    Charlie claimed that this is the first season he wrote for this period. I only hope that people can look at San Junpiero and San Junpiero separately and also enjoy them as supports to one another, Rae says.

    Netflix is currently streaming all six of Season 7 of Black Mirror.

    The first article on Den of Geek was How Hotel Reverie Expands Upon the Black Mirror Canon.

  • Beware the Cut ‘n’ Paste Persona

    Beware the Cut ‘n’ Paste Persona

    A machine learning algorithm is used to create human faces on this man does not occur. It takes actual photos and recombines them into false human faces. We just squirted past a LinkedIn post that claimed this site might be helpful “if you are developing a image and looking for a photo.”

    We agree: the computer-generated heads could be a great fit for personas—but not for the purpose you might think. Ironically, the website highlights the core issue of this very common design method: the person ( a ) does not exist. Personas are deliberately created, just like in the photos. Data is taken out of natural environment and recombined into an isolated preview that’s detached from reality.

    However, oddly enough, people are personalities to serve as a source of inspiration for architecture in the real world.

    Personas: A action up

    Most manufacturers have created, used, or come across personalities at least once in their job. The Interaction Design Foundation defines profile as “fictional characters that you create based upon your research in order to represent the various consumer types that might use your company, product, page, or brand,” according to their article” Personas- A Simple Introduction.” In their most complete expression, personas typically consist of a name, profile picture, quotes, demographics, goals, needs, behavior in relation to a certain service/product, emotions, and motivations ( for example, see Creative Companion’s Persona Core Poster ). According to design firm Designit, the goal of personas is” to make the research relatable, ]and ] easy to communicate, digest, reference, and apply to product and service development.”

    The decontextualization of identities

    Personas are common because they make “dry” research information more realistic, more people. However, this approach places a cap on the author’s ability to analyze the data in a way that excludes the subjects from their particular contexts. As a result, personalities don’t describe important factors that make you realize their decision-making method or allow you to connect to users ‘ thoughts and behavior, they lack stories. You are aware of the persona’s actions, but you lack the knowledge to know why. You end up with images of people that are really less people.

    This “decontextualization” we see in identities happens in four way, which we’ll discuss below.

    People are assumed to be dynamic, according to people.

    Although many companies still try to box in their employees and customers with outdated personality tests ( referring to you, Myers-Briggs ), here’s a painfully obvious truth: people are not a fixed set of features. You think, act, and think differently in various circumstances. You appear distinct to different people, you may act pleasant to some, tough to others. And you change your mind all the time about selections you’ve taken.

    Current psychologists concur that while individuals typically act in accordance with specific patterns, how people act and make decisions is influenced by a combination of both context and environment. The context—the atmosphere, the effect of other people, your feelings, the whole story that led up to a situation—determines the kind of person you are in each particular time.

    Personas provide a consumer as a predetermined set of features in an effort to improve reality, but do so without taking this variability into account. Like character testing, personas seize people away from real life. Even worse, individuals are reduced to a brand and categorized as” that kind of guy” with no means to practice their inherent flexibility. This behavior defies stereotypes, diminishes variety, and doesn’t reveal reality.

    Personas rely on people, not the setting

    In the real world, you’re creating content for a situation, no an entity. Each individual lives in a community, a group, an habitat, where there are environmental, social, and cultural factors you need to consider. A pattern is not meant for a single customer. Instead, you create a product that is intended to be used by a certain number of people. Personas, yet, show the customer alone rather than define how the consumer relates to the environment.

    Do you make the same choice over and over again? Maybe you’re a dedicated vegan but also decide to buy some meats when your family are coming across. As they depend on various situations and characteristics, your decisions—and behavior, thoughts, and comments —are no absolute but extremely contextual. Because it doesn’t explain the grounds of your decisions, the persona that “represents” you doesn’t take into account this interdependence. It doesn’t provide a explanation of why you act the way you do. People practice the well-known attribution error, which states that they too often attribute others ‘ behavior to their personalities and not to the circumstances.

    As mentioned by the Interaction Design Foundation, identities are often placed in a situation that’s a” specific environment with a problem they want to or have to solve “—does that mean environment actually is considered? Unfortunately, what often happens is that you take a fictional character and based on that fiction determine how this character might deal with a certain situation. How could you possibly comprehend how someone you want to represent behave in new circumstances given that you haven’t even fully investigated and understood the current context of the people you want to represent?

    Personas are meaningless averages

    A persona is depicted as a specific person in Shlomo Goltz’s introduction to Smashing Magazine, according to Shlomo Goltz’s introduction article. It is instead made up of observations from numerous people. A well-known critique to this aspect of personas is that the average person does not exist, as per the famous example of the USA Air Force designing planes based on the average of 140 of their pilots ‘ physical dimensions and not a single pilot actually fitting within that average seat.

    The same limitation applies to mental aspects of people. Have you ever heard a famous person say something like,” They took what I said out of context!” They used my words, but I didn’t mean it like that”. The reporter didn’t explain the context of the celebrity’s statement or explain the non-verbal expressions, but the celebrity’s statement was literally reported. As a result, the intended meaning was lost. You do the same when you create personas: you collect somebody’s statement ( or goal, or need, or emotion ), of which the meaning can only be understood if you provide its own specific context, yet report it as an isolated finding.

    However, personas go one step further, combining a decontextualized finding with another decontextualized finding from another. The resulting set of findings often does not make sense: it’s unclear, or even contrasting, because it lacks the underlying reasons on why and how that finding has arisen. It lacks any significance. And the persona doesn’t give you the full background of the person ( s ) to uncover this meaning: you would need to dive into the raw data for each single persona item to find it. What, then, is the usefulness of the persona?

    The validity of personas is deceiving.

    To a certain extent, designers realize that a persona is a lifeless average. Designers invent and add “relatable” details to personas to make them resemble real people in order to overcome this. Nothing captures the absurdity of this better than a sentence by the Interaction Design Foundation:” Add a few fictional personal details to make the persona a realistic character”. In other words, you add non-realism in an attempt to create more realism. Wouldn’t it be much more responsible to emphasize that John is only an abstraction while deliberately obscuring the fact that” John Doe” is an abstract representation of research findings? If something is artificial, let’s present it as such.

    After accepting that people’s personalities are fixed, ignored the importance of their environment, and hidden meaning by joining isolated, non-generalizable findings, designers create new context to create ( their own ) meaning. In doing so, as with everything they create, they introduce a host of biases. As phrased by Designit, as designers we can” contextualize]the persona ] based on our reality and experience. We make connections that are well-known to us. This practice reinforces stereotypes, doesn’t reflect real-world diversity, and gets further away from people’s actual reality with every detail added.

    Everyone should use their own empathy and develop their own interpretation and emotional response if we want to conduct good design research by reporting the reality “as-is” and making it relatable for our audience.

    Dynamic Selves: The alternative to personas

    If we shouldn’t use personas, what should we do instead?

    Designit suggests using mindsets rather than personas. Each Mindset is a” spectrum of attitudes and emotional responses that different people have within the same context or life experience”. It challenges designers to avoid getting fixated on just one person’s way of being. Unfortunately, while being a step in the right direction, this proposal doesn’t take into account that people are part of an environment that determines their personality, their behavior, and, yes, their mindset. Therefore, Mindsets are also not absolute but change in regard to the situation. What determines a certain Mindset, remains to be seen.

    Another alternative comes from Margaret P., author of the article” Kill Your Personas“, who has argued for replacing personas with persona spectrums that consist of a range of user abilities. For instance, a visual impairment could be permanent ( blindness ), temporary ( recovery from eye surgery ), or situational (screen glare ). Persona spectrums are highly useful for more inclusive and context-based design, as they’re based on the understanding that the context is the pattern, not the personality. Their limitation, however, is that they have a very functional take on users that misses the relatability of a real person taken from within a spectrum.

    We want to change the traditional design process to be context-based by creating an alternative to personas. Contexts are generalizable and have patterns that we can identify, just like we tried to do previously with people. So how do we learn these patterns? How do we ensure truly context-based design?

    Understand real individuals in multiple contexts

    Nothing can be more relatable and inspiring than reality. Therefore, we have to understand real individuals in their multi-faceted contexts, and use this understanding to fuel our design. This approach is known as Dynamic Selves.

    Let’s take a look at what the approach looks like, based on an example of how one of us applied it in a recent project that researched habits of Italians around energy consumption. We drafted a design research plan aimed at investigating people’s attitudes toward energy consumption and sustainable behavior, with a focus on smart thermostats.

    1. Choose the right sample

    We frequently get slammed for saying,” Where are you going to find a single person that encapsulates all the information from one of these advanced personas ]” when we debate personas. The answer is simple: you don’t have to. You don’t need to have information about many people for your insights to be deep and meaningful.

    In qualitative research, accuracy comes from accurate sampling rather than quantity. You select the people that best represent the “population” you’re designing for. You can infer how the rest of the population thinks and acts if this sample is chosen wisely and you have a deep understanding of the sampled people. There’s no need to study seven Susans and five Yuriys, one of each will do.

    Similarly, you don’t need to understand Susan in fifteen different contexts. You have understood Susan’s plan of action once you have seen her in a few different settings. Not Susan as an atomic being but Susan in relation to the surrounding environment: how she might act, feel, and think in different situations.

    It becomes clear why each person should be portrayed as an individual because each already represents an abstraction of a larger group of people in similar circumstances because each person is representative of a portion of the population you’re researching. You don’t want abstractions of abstractions! These selected people need to be understood and shown in their full expression, remaining in their microcosmos—and if you want to identify patterns you can focus on identifying patterns in contexts.

    However, the question remains: how do you select a sample representative? First of all, you have to consider what’s the target audience of the product or service you are designing: it might be useful to look at the company’s goals and strategy, the current customer base, and/or a possible future target audience.

    We were creating an application for those who already have a smart thermostat in our example project. In the future, everyone could have a smart thermostat in their house. Right now, though, only early adopters own one. We had to understand the causes behind these early adopters ‘ development in order to create a sizable sample. We therefore recruited by asking people why they had a smart thermostat and how they got it. There were those who had made the decision to purchase it, those who had been influenced by others to do so, and those who had located it in their homes. So we selected representatives of these three situations, from different age groups and geographical locations, with an equal balance of tech savvy and non-tech savvy participants.

    2. Conduct your research

    After having chosen and recruited your sample, conduct your research using ethnographic methodologies. This will give you more examples and anecdotes to enrich your qualitative data. In our example project, given COVID-19 restrictions, we converted an in-house ethnographic research effort into remote family interviews, conducted from home and accompanied by diary studies.

    To gain an in-depth understanding of attitudes and decision-making trade-offs, the research focus was not limited to the interviewee alone but deliberately included the whole family. Each interviewee would provide a story that would later become much more interesting and precise with the additions made by their spouses, partners, kids, or occasionally even pets. We also focused on the relationships with other meaningful people ( such as colleagues or distant family ) and all the behaviors that resulted from those relationships. This extensive field of study gave us the ability to create a vivid mental image of dynamic situations involving multiple actors.

    It’s essential that the scope of the research remains broad enough to be able to include all possible actors. Therefore, it normally works best to define broad research areas with macro questions. Follow-up questions will be written down in a way that is best suited for an interview, and they should be conducted in a semi-structured manner. This open-minded “plan to be surprised” will yield the most insightful findings. One of our participants responded,” My wife has not installed the thermostat’s app; she uses WhatsApp instead,” when we asked how his family controlled the house temperature. If she wants to turn on the heater and she is not home, she will text me. I am her thermostat”.

    3. Analysis: Create the Dynamic Selves

    You begin to represent each individual with several Dynamic Selves, each” Self” representing one of the circumstances you have examined throughout the research analysis. The core of each Dynamic Self is a quote, which comes supported by a photo and a few relevant demographics that illustrate the wider context. The research findings themselves will show which demographics are relevant to show. In our case, the important demographics were family type, number and type of houses owned, economic status, and technological maturity because our research focused on families and their way of life to understand their needs for thermal regulation. ( We also included the individual’s name and age, but they’re optional—we included them to ease the stakeholders ‘ transition from personas and be able to connect multiple actions and contexts to the same person ).

    Interviews must be recorded on video and verbatim whenever possible in order to capture precise quotations. This is essential to the truthfulness of the several Selves of each participant. In the case of real-life ethnographic research, photos of the context and anonymized actors are essential to build realistic Selves. These photos should be taken directly from field research, but an evocative and representative image will do as well as that, as long as it’s accurate and depicts meaningful actions that you associate with your participants. For example, one of our interviewees told us about his mountain home where he used to spend every weekend with his family. Therefore, we depicted him taking a hike with his young daughter.

    At the end of the research analysis, we displayed all of the Selves ‘” cards” on a single canvas, categorized by activities. Each card displayed a situation, represented by a quote and a unique photo. All participants had several cards about themselves.

    4. Identify potential designs

    Once you have collected all main quotes from the interview transcripts and diaries, and laid them all down as Self cards, you will see patterns emerge. These patterns will highlight the opportunity areas for new product creation, new functionalities, and new services—for new design.

    There was a particularly intriguing insight around the concept of humidity in our example project. We realized that people don’t know what humidity is and why it is important to monitor it for health: an environment that’s too dry or too wet can cause respiratory problems or worsen existing ones. This made clear that our client had a significant opportunity to train users about the concept and work as a health advisor.

    Benefits of Dynamic Selves

    When you use the Dynamic Selves approach in your research, you start to notice unique social relations, peculiar situations real people face and the actions that follow, and that people are surrounded by changing environments. One of the participants in our thermostat project, Davide, is described as a boyfriend, dog lover, and tech nut.

    Davide is an individual we might have once reduced to a persona called “tech enthusiast”. However, there are also those who are wealthy or poor, who are tech enthusiasts and have families or are single. Their motivations and priorities when deciding to purchase a new thermostat can be opposite according to these different frames.

    Once you have understood Davide in multiple situations, and for each situation have understood in sufficient depth the underlying reasons for his behavior, you’re able to generalize how he would act in another situation. You can infer what he would think and do in the circumstances ( or scenarios ) you design for using your understanding of him.

    The Dynamic Selves approach aims to dismiss the conflicted dual purpose of personas—to summarize and empathize at the same time—by separating your research summary from the people you’re seeking to empathize with. This is crucial because scale affects how we feel empathy for people; the bigger the group, the smaller it is to feel empathy for others. We feel the strongest empathy for individuals we can personally relate to.

    If you take a real person as inspiration for your design, you no longer need to create an artificial character. No more developing plot devices to “realize” the character, and no more need for additional bias. It’s simply how this person is in real life. We all know that these characters don’t really exist, so in our experience personas quickly turn into nothing more than a name in our priority guides and prototype screens.

    Another powerful benefit of the Dynamic Selves approach is that it raises the stakes of your work: if you mess up your design, someone real, a person you and the team know and have met, is going to feel the consequences. It might stop you from taking shortcuts and will remind you to conduct daily checks on your designs.

    Finally, real people in their specific contexts provide a better foundation for anecdotal storytelling and are thus more effective at persuasion. Documentation of real research is essential in achieving this result. It reinforces your design arguments by adding more weight and urgency:” When I met Alessandra, the conditions of her workplace struck me. Noise, bad ergonomics, lack of light, you name it. If we go for this functionality, I’m afraid we’re going to add complexity to her life”.

    Conclusion

    In their article on Mindsets, Designit mentioned that “design thinking tools offer a shortcut to deal with reality’s complexities, but this process of simplification can occasionally flatten out people’s lives into a few general characteristics.” Unfortunately, personas have been culprits in a crime of oversimplification. They fail to account for the complex nature of our users ‘ decision-making processes and don’t take into account the fact that people are immersed in environments.

    Design needs simplification but not generalization. You have to look at the research elements that stand out: the sentences that captured your attention, the images that struck you, the sounds that linger. Use those to characterize the person in all of their contexts, and portray them. Both insights and people come with a context, they cannot be cut from that context because it would remove meaning.

    It’s high time for design to break away from fiction and use reality as our guide and inspiration, in all of its messy, surprising, and unquantifiable beauty.

  • That’s Not My Burnout

    That’s Not My Burnout

    Do you like to read about people who are dying as they experience exhaustion and are unable to connect to me? Do you feel like your feelings are invisible to the earth because you’re experiencing burnout different? Our main comes through more when stress starts to press down on us. Beautiful, quiet souls get softer and dissipate into that remote and distracted fatigue we’ve all read about. But some of us, those with fires constantly burning on the sides of our key, getting hotter. I have hearth in my brain. When I face fatigue I twice over, triple down, burning hotter and hotter to try to best the issue. I don’t fade; I’m suffocated by a passionate stress.

    But what on earth is a zealous stress?

    Envision a person determined to do it all. She is homeschooling two wonderful children while her father, who works remotely, is furthermore working remotely. She has a demanding customer weight at work—all of whom she loves. She wakes up early to get some movement in ( or frequently catch up on work ), prepares dinner while the kids are having breakfast, and works while positioning herself near the end of her “fourth grade” to watch as she balances clients, tasks, and budgets. Sound like a bit? Yet with a supportive group both at home and at work, it is.

    Sounds like this person needs self-care and has too much on her disk. But no, she doesn’t have occasion for that. She begins to feel as though she’s dropping balloons. No accomplishing enough. There’s not enough of her to be here and there, she is trying to divide her head in two all the time, all time, every time. She begins to question herself. And as those thoughts creep in more and more, her domestic tale becomes more and more important.

    She immediately KNOWS what she needs to accomplish! She really Would MORE.

    This is a painful and dangerous period. Know the reasons? Because when she doesn’t end that new purpose, that storyline will get worse. She instantly starts failing. She isn’t doing much. SHE is not enough. She’ll discover more she may do because she might neglect, or perhaps her home. She doesn’t nap as much, proceed because much, all in the attempts to do more. Trying to prove herself to herself, but not succeeding in any endeavor. Always feeling “enough”.

    But, yeah, that’s what zealous burnout looks like for me. It doesn’t develop overnight in some great gesture, but it does rather develop gradually over the course of several weeks and months. My burning out process looks like speeding up, hardly a man losing focus. I move quickly and steadily, and then I simply quit.

    I am the one who was

    It’s interesting the things that shape us. Through the camera of my youth, I witnessed the battles, sacrifices, and fears of a person who had to make it all work without having much. I was happy that my mom was so competent and my dad sympathetic, I never went without and also got an extra here or there.

    Growing up, I didn’t feel shame when my mom gave me food passports; in fact, I would have likely sparked debates about the subject, orally eviscerating anyone who dared to criticize the disabled person who was attempting to ensure all of our needs were met with so little. As a child, I watched the way the worry of not making those begins meet impacted people I love. As the non-disabled people in my home, I did take on many of the real things because I was” the one who was” make our lives a little easier. I soon realized that putting more of myself into it was linked to fears or confusion; I am the one who does. I learned first that when something frightens me, I can double down and work harder to make it better. I am in charge of the problem. When people have seen this in me as an child, I’ve been told I seem brave, but make no mistake, I’m not. If I seem courageous, it’s because this behavior was forged from another person’s fears.

    And here I am, more than 30 years later, also feeling the urge to aimlessly force myself forward when faced with daunting tasks in front of me, assuming that I am the one who is and consequently does. I find myself driven to prove that I can make things happen if I work longer hours, take on more responsibility, and do more.

    I don’t see people who struggle financially as failures because I have seen how strong that tide can be; it pulls you along the way. I truly get that I have been privileged to be able to avoid many of the challenges that were present in my youth. That said, I am still” the one who can” who feels she should, so if I were faced with not having enough to make ends meet for my own family, I would see myself as having failed. Despite my best efforts and education, the majority of this is due to good fortune. I will, however, allow myself the arrogance of saying I have been careful with my choices to have encouraged that luck. My sense of identity comes from the notion that I am” the one who can” and feel compelled to accomplish the most. I can choose to stop, and with some quite literal cold water splashed in my face, I’ve made the choice to before. But that choosing to stop is not my go-to, I move forward, driven by a fear that is so a part of me that I barely notice it’s there until I’m feeling utterly worn away.

    So why all the history? You see, burnout is a fickle thing. Over the years, I’ve read and heard a lot about burnout. Burnout is real. Especially now, with COVID, many of us are balancing more than we ever have before—all at once! It’s difficult, and the avoidance, shutting down, and procrastination have an impact on so many amazing professionals. There are important articles that relate to what I imagine must be the majority of people out there, but not me. Not at the time of my burnout, though.

    The dangerous invisibility of zealous burnout

    A lot of work environments see the extra hours, extra effort, and overall focused commitment as an asset ( and sometimes that’s all it is ). They see someone attempting to overcome obstacles, not a person who is ensnared in fear. Many well-meaning organizations have safeguards in place to protect their teams from burnout. However, in situations like this, those alarms don’t always ring, and some organization members are surprised and depressed when the inevitable stop happens. And sometimes maybe even betrayed.

    Parents—more so mothers, statistically speaking—are praised as being so on top of it all when they can work, be involved in the after-school activities, practice self-care in the form of diet and exercise, and still meet friends for coffee or wine. Many of us have watched endless streaming episodes of COVID to see how challenging the female protagonist is, but she is strong and funny, and can do it. It’s a “very special episode” when she breaks down, cries in the bathroom, woefully admits she needs help, and just stops for a bit. Truth be told, countless people are hidden in tears or doom-scrolling to escape. We know that the media is a lie to amuse us, but often the perception that it’s what we should strive for has penetrated much of society.

    Women and burnout

    I adore men. And though I don’t love every man ( heads up, I don’t love every woman or nonbinary person either ), I think there is a beautiful spectrum of individuals who represent that particular binary gender.

    Despite this, especially in these COVID stressed out times, women are still more likely than their male counterparts to be burnout vulnerable. Mothers in the workplace feel the pressure to do all the “mom” things while giving 110 %. Mothers not in the workplace feel they need to do more to” justify” their lack of traditional employment. Women who are not mothers frequently feel the need to work even more because they aren’t under that much pressure at home. It’s vicious and systemic and so a part of our culture that we’re often not even aware of the enormity of the pressures we put on ourselves and each other.

    And there are costs that go beyond happiness. Harvard Health Publishing released a study a decade ago that “uncovered strong links between women’s job stress and cardiovascular disease”. The CDC noted,” Heart disease is the leading cause of death for women in the United States, killing 299, 578 women in 2017—or about 1 in every 5 female deaths”.

    According to what I’ve read, this connection between work stress and health is more dangerous for women than it is for their non-female counterparts.

    But what if your burnout isn’t like that either?

    That might not be you either. After all, each of us is so different and how we respond to stressors is too. It’s part of what makes us human. Don’t put too much emphasis on how burnout looks; instead, learn to recognize it in yourself. Here are a few questions I sometimes ask friends if I am concerned about them.

    How are you feeling? This simple question should be the first thing you ask yourself. Chances are, even if you’re burning out doing all the things you love, as you approach burnout you’ll just stop taking as much joy from it all.

    Do you feel like you have the authority to decline? I have observed in myself and others that when someone is burning out, they no longer feel they can say no to things. Even those who don’t” speed up” feel pressured to say “yes” to avoid apprehension.

    What are three things you’ve done for yourself? Another observance is that we all tend to stop doing things for ourselves. anything from avoiding conversations with friends to skipping showers and eating poorly. These can be red flags.

    Are you using justifications? Many of us try to disregard feelings of burnout. Over and over I have heard,” It’s just crunch time”,” As soon as I do this one thing, it will all be better”, and” Well I should be able to handle this, so I’ll figure it out”. And it could be just one more thing you need to learn, or it might just be crunch time. That happens—life happens. BE CRUD if this doesn’t stop. If you’ve worked more 50-hour weeks since January than not, maybe it’s not crunch time—maybe it’s a bad situation that you’re burning out from.

    Do you have a plan to stop feeling this way? If something has an exit route with a pause button if it is truly temporary and you do need to simply push through, it does.
    defined end.

    Take the time to listen to yourself as you would a friend. Be honest, allow yourself to be uncomfortable, and break the thought cycles that prevent you from healing.

    So now what?

    What I just described is a different path to burnout, but it’s still burnout. There are well-established approaches to working through burnout:

    • Get enough sleep.
    • Eat healthy.
    • Work out.
    • Go outside.
    • Take a break.
    • Practice self-care in general.

    Those are hard for me because they feel like more tasks. If I’m in the burnout cycle, doing any of the above for me feels like a waste. Why would I take care of myself when I’m dropping all those other balls, according to the narrative? People need me, right?

    Your inner voice might already be pretty bad if you’re deeply in the cycle. If you need to, tell yourself you need to take care of the person your people depend on. If your roles are pushing you toward burnout, use them to help make healing easier by justifying the time spent working on you.

    I have come up with a few things that I do when I start to feel like I’m going into a zealous burnout to help me remember the airline attendant advice to put the mask on yourself first.

    Cook an elaborate meal for someone!

    Okay, since I’m a “food-focused” person, I’ve always been a fan of cooking for people. There are countless tales in my home of someone walking into the kitchen and turning right around and walking out when they noticed I was” chopping angrily”. But it’s more than that, and you should give it a try. Seriously. It’s the perfect go-to if you don’t feel worthy of taking time for yourself—do it for someone else. Because the majority of us work in a digital world, cooking can pique your interest and make you feel present in the moment in all your ways. It can break you out of your head and help you gain a better perspective. In my house, I’ve been known to pick a place on the map and cook food that comes from wherever that is ( thank you, Pinterest ). I enjoy making Indian food because it’s warm and the bread needs just enough kneading to keep my hands busy, and the process requires real attention because it’s not what I was raised to do. And in the end, we all win!

    Vent like a sniveling jerk.

    Be careful with this one!

    I have been making an effort to practice more gratitude over the past few years, and I recognize the true benefits of that. Having said that, sometimes you just need to let it all out, even the ugly ones. Hell, I’m a big fan of not sugarcoating our lives, and that sometimes means that to get past the big pile of poop, you’re gonna wanna complain about it a bit.

    When that is required, turn to a trusted friend and give yourself some pure verbal diarrhea, yelling at you all the way through. You need to trust this friend not to judge, to see your pain, and, most importantly, to tell you to remove your cranium from your own rectal cavity. Seriously, it’s about getting a reality check here! One of the things that I admire most about my husband is how he manages to simplify things down to the simplest. ” We’re spending our lives together, of course you’re going to disappoint me from time to time, so get over it” has been his way of speaking his dedication, love, and acceptance of me—and I could not be more grateful. Of course, it required that I remove my head from that rectal cavity. So, again, usually those moments are appreciated in hindsight.

    Pick up a book!

    There are many books out there that are more like you sharing their stories and how they’ve come to find greater balance than they are self-help. Maybe you’ll find something that speaks to you. Among the titles that have stood out to me are:

    • Thrive by Arianna Huffington
    • Tools of Titans by Tim Ferriss
    • Girl, Stop Apologizing by Rachel Hollis
    • Dare to Lead by Brené Brown

    Or, a tactic I enjoy using is to read or listen to a book that is NOT related to my work-life balance. I’ve read the following books and found they helped balance me out because my mind was pondering their interesting topics instead of running in circles:

    • The Drunken Botanist by Amy Stewart
    • Darin Olien’s Superlife
    • A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived by Adam Rutherford
    • Toby Hemenway’s Gaia’s Garden is available.

    If you’re not into reading, pick up a topic on YouTube or choose a podcast to subscribe to. I’ve watched countless permaculture and gardening topics in addition to how to raise chickens and ducks. For the record, I don’t currently have a particularly large food garden or raise any kind of livestock. I just find the topic interesting, and it has nothing to do with any aspect of my life that needs anything from me.

    Give yourself a break.

    You are never going to be perfect—hell, it would be boring if you were. It’s OK to be broken and flawed. Being tired, depressed, and worried is human nature. It’s OK to not do it all. Although being imperfect is terrifying, you cannot be brave without being fearful.

    This last one is the most important: allow yourself permission to NOT do it all. You never promised to be everything to everyone at all times. We are stronger than the anxieties that motivate us.

    This is hard. It is challenging for me. It’s what’s driven me to write this—that it’s OK to stop. It’s OK that your unhealthy habit that might even benefit those around you needs to end. You can still succeed in life.

    I recently read that we are all writing our eulogy in how we live. What will your professional accomplishments say, knowing that yours won’t be mentioned in that speech? What do you want it to say?

    Look, I get that none of these ideas will “fix it”, and that’s not their purpose. None of us has complete control over our surroundings, but only how we react to them. These suggestions are to help stop the spiral effect so that you are empowered to address the underlying issues and choose your response. They are the things that largely work for me. Maybe they’ll work for you.

    Does this sound familiar?

    If this sounds familiar, you’re not just going to know about it. Don’t let your negative self-talk tell you that you “even burn out wrong”. It is not improper. Even if rooted in fear like my own drivers, I believe that this need to do more comes from a place of love, determination, motivation, and other wonderful attributes that make you the amazing person you are. We’re going to be OK, ya know. When we stop and look around, the only eyes that judge us are usually the ones who look in the mirror, so the lives that unfold before us might never seem to be the same as the story in our heads.

    Do you remember that Winnie the Pooh sketch that had Pooh eat so much at Rabbit’s house that his buttocks couldn’t fit through the door? Well, I already have a strong connection to Rabbit, so it was surprising when he unexpectedly declared that this was unacceptable. But do you recall what happened next? He put a shelf across poor Pooh’s ankles and decorations on his back, and made the best of the big butt in his kitchen.

    We are resourceful and aware that we can push ourselves when necessary, even when we are exhausted or have a ton of clutter in our room. None of us has to be afraid, as we can manage any obstacle put in front of us. And maybe that means we need to redefine success in order to make room for comfort for being uncomfortable human, but that doesn’t really sound that bad either.

    So, wherever you are right now, please breathe. Do what you need to do to get out of your head. Give thanks and take precaution.

  • Asynchronous Design Critique: Giving Feedback

    Asynchronous Design Critique: Giving Feedback

    One of the most successful soft skills we have at our disposal is feedback, in whatever form it takes, and whatever it may be called. It helps us collaborate to improve our designs while developing our own abilities and perspectives.

    Feedback is also one of the most underestimated equipment, and generally by assuming that we’re now great at it, we settle, forgetting that it’s a skill that can be trained, grown, and improved. Bad opinions can lead to conflict on projects, lower morale, and long-term, undermine trust and teamwork. Quality opinions can be a revolutionary force.

    Practicing our knowledge is absolutely a good way to enhance, but the learning gets yet faster when it’s paired with a good base that programs and focuses the exercise. What are some fundamental components of providing effective opinions? And how can input be adjusted for isolated and distributed function settings?

    A long history of sequential opinions can be found online: code was written and discussed on mailing lists before becoming an open source standard. Currently, engineers engage on pull calls, developers post in their favourite design tools, project managers and sprint masters exchange ideas on tickets, and so on.

    Design analysis is often the label used for a type of input that’s provided to make our job better, jointly. So it generally adheres to many of the principles with comments, but it also has some differences.

    The material

    The content of the feedback serves as the foundation for every effective analysis, so we need to start there. There are many versions that you can use to design your information. The one that I personally like best—because it’s obvious and actionable—is this one from Lara Hogan.

    Although this equation is typically used to provide feedback to individuals, it likewise fits really well in a style criticism because it finally addresses some of the main inquiries that we work on: What? Where? Why? How? Imagine that you’re giving some comments about some pattern function that spans several screens, like an onboard movement: there are some pages shown, a stream blueprint, and an outline of the decisions made. You notice a flaw in the situation. If you keep the three components of the equation in mind, you’ll have a mental unit that can help you become more precise and effective.

    Here is a post that could be included in some feedback, and it might appear fair at first glance because it appears to merely fit the equation. But does it?

    Not confident about the keys ‘ patterns and hierarchy—it feels off. May you alter them?

    Observation for style feedback doesn’t really mean pointing out which part of the software your input refers to, but it also refers to offering a viewpoint that’s as specific as possible. Do you offer the user’s viewpoint? Your expert perspective? A business perspective? From the perspective of the project manager? A first-time user’s perspective?

    When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back.

    Impact is about the why. Just pointing out a UI element might sometimes be enough if the issue may be obvious, but more often than not, you should add an explanation of what you’re pointing out.

    When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow.

    The question approach is meant to provide open guidance by eliciting the critical thinking in the designer receiving the feedback. Notably, in Lara’s equation she provides a second approach: request, which instead provides guidance toward a specific solution. While that’s a viable option for general feedback, in my experience, going back to the question approach typically leads to the best solutions because designers are generally more at ease with having an open space to experiment with.

    The difference between the two can be exemplified with, for the question approach:

    When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Would it make sense to unify them?

    Or, for the request approach:

    When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same pair of forward and back buttons.

    At this point in some situations, it might be useful to integrate with an extra why: why you consider the given suggestion to be better.

    When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.

    Choosing the question approach or the request approach can also at times be a matter of personal preference. I spent a while working on improving my feedback, conducting anonymous feedback reviews and sharing feedback with others. After a few rounds of this work and a year later, I got a positive response: my feedback came across as effective and grounded. Until I changed teams. Surprise surprise, my next round of criticism from a specific person wasn’t very positive. The reason is that I had previously tried not to be prescriptive in my advice—because the people who I was previously working with preferred the open-ended question format over the request style of suggestions. However, there was a member of this other team who preferred specific guidance. So I adapted my feedback for them to include requests.

    One comment that I heard come up a few times is that this kind of feedback is quite long, and it doesn’t seem very efficient. No, but also yes. Let’s explore both sides.

    No, this kind of feedback is effective because the length is a byproduct of clarity, and giving this kind of feedback can provide precisely enough information for a sound fix. Also if we zoom out, it can reduce future back-and-forth conversations and misunderstandings, improving the overall efficiency and effectiveness of collaboration beyond the single comment. Imagine that in the example above the feedback were instead just,” Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons”. Since the designer receiving this feedback wouldn’t have much to go by, they might just make the change. In later iterations, the interface might change or they might introduce new features—and maybe that change might not make sense anymore. The designer might assume that the change is about consistency without the explanation, but what if it wasn’t? So there could now be an underlying concern that changing the buttons would be perceived as a regression.

    Yes, this style of feedback is not always efficient because the points in some comments don’t always need to be exhaustive, sometimes because certain changes may be obvious (” The font used doesn’t follow our guidelines” ) and sometimes because the team may have a lot of internal knowledge such that some of the whys may be implied.

    Therefore, the above equation serves as a mnemonic to reflect and enhance the practice rather than a strict template for feedback. Even after years of active work on my critiques, I still from time to time go back to this formula and reflect on whether what I just wrote is effective.

    The atmosphere

    Well-grounded content is the foundation of feedback, but that’s not really enough. The soft skills of the person who’s providing the critique can multiply the likelihood that the feedback will be well received and understood. It has been demonstrated that only positive feedback can lead to sustained change in people. It can be determined by tone alone whether content is rejected or welcomed.

    Since our goal is to be understood and to have a positive working environment, tone is essential to work on. I’ve tried to summarize the necessary soft skills over the years using a formula that resembles the one for content: the receptivity equation.

    Respectful feedback comes across as grounded, solid, and constructive. It’s the kind of feedback that, whether it’s positive or negative, is perceived as useful and fair.

    Timing refers to the moment when the feedback occurs. To-the-point feedback doesn’t have much hope of being well received if it’s given at the wrong time. When a new feature’s entire high-level information architecture is about to go live, it might still be relevant if the questioning raises a significant blocker that no one saw, but those concerns are much more likely to have to wait for a later revision. So in general, attune your feedback to the stage of the project. Early iteration? Iteration that was later? Polishing work in progress? Each of these needs varies. The right timing will make it more likely that your feedback will be well received.

    Attitude is the equivalent of intent, and in the context of person-to-person feedback, it can be referred to as radical candor. That entails checking before writing to see if what we have in mind will actually help the person and improve the project overall. This might be a hard reflection at times because maybe we don’t want to admit that we don’t really appreciate that person. Although it’s possible, and that’s okay, it’s hoped not to be the case. Acknowledging and owning that can help you make up for that: how would I write if I really cared about them? How can I avoid being passive aggressive? What can I do to encourage constructive behavior?

    Form is relevant especially in a diverse and cross-cultural work environments because having great content, perfect timing, and the right attitude might not come across if the way that we write creates misunderstandings. There could be many reasons for this: some words might cause particular reactions, some non-native speakers might not understand all the nuances of some sentences, and other times our brains might be different and we might perceive the world differently. Neurodiversity must be taken into account. Whatever the reason, it’s important to review not just what we write but how.

    A few years back, I was asking for some feedback on how I give feedback. I was given some helpful advice, but I also found a surprise in my comment. They pointed out that when I wrote” Oh, ]… ]”, I made them feel stupid. That wasn’t my intention at all! I felt really bad, and I just realized that I provided feedback to them for months, and every time I might have made them feel stupid. I was horrified … but also thankful. I quickly changed my spelling mistake by adding “oh” to my list of replaced words (your choice between aText, TextExpander, or others ) so that when I typed “oh,” it was immediately deleted.

    Something to highlight because it’s quite frequent—especially in teams that have a strong group spirit—is that people tend to beat around the bush. It’s important to keep in mind that having a positive attitude doesn’t necessarily mean passing judgment on the feedback; rather, it simply means that you give it constructive and respectful feedback, whether it be difficult or positive. The nicest thing that you can do for someone is to help them grow.

    We have a great advantage in giving feedback in written form: it can be reviewed by another person who isn’t directly involved, which can help to reduce or remove any bias that might be there. When I shared a comment and asked someone I trusted,” How does this sound,”” How can I do it better,” or even” How would you have written it,” I discovered that the best, most insightful moments for me occurred when I saw the two versions side by side.

    The format

    Asynchronous feedback also has a significant inherent benefit: it allows us to spend more time making sure that the suggestions ‘ clarity and actionability meet two main objectives.

    Let’s imagine that someone shared a design iteration for a project. You are reviewing it and leaving a comment. There are many ways to accomplish this, and context is of course important, but let’s try to think about some things that might be worthwhile to take into account.

    In terms of clarity, start by grounding the critique that you’re about to give by providing context. This includes specifically describing where you’re coming from: do you have a thorough understanding of the project, or is this your first time seeing it? Are you coming from a high-level perspective, or are you figuring out the details? Are there regressions? Which user’s point of view are you addressing when offering feedback? Is the design iteration at a point where it would be okay to ship this, or are there major things that need to be addressed first?

    Even if you’re giving feedback to a team that already has some project information, providing context is helpful. And context is absolutely essential when giving cross-team feedback. If I were to review a design that might be indirectly related to my work, and if I had no knowledge about how the project arrived at that point, I would say so, highlighting my take as external.

    We frequently concentrate on the negatives and attempt to list all the things that could be improved. That’s of course important, but it’s just as important—if not more—to focus on the positives, especially if you saw progress from the previous iteration. Although this may seem superfluous, it’s important to remember that design has a number of possible solutions to each problem. So pointing out that the design solution that was chosen is good and explaining why it’s good has two major benefits: it confirms that the approach taken was solid, and it helps to ground your negative feedback. In the longer term, sharing positive feedback can help prevent regressions on things that are going well because those things will have been highlighted as important. Positive feedback can also help to lessen impostor syndrome as an added bonus.

    There’s one powerful approach that combines both context and a focus on the positives: frame how the design is better than the status quo ( compared to a previous iteration, competitors, or benchmarks ) and why, and then on that foundation, you can add what could be improved. This is powerful because there is a big difference between a critique of a design that is already in good shape and one that is critiqued for a design that isn’t quite there yet.

    Another way that you can improve your feedback is to depersonalize the feedback: the comments should always be about the work, never about the person who made it. It’s” This button isn’t well aligned” versus” You haven’t aligned this button well”. Just before sending, review your writing to make changes to this.

    In terms of actionability, one of the best approaches to help the designer who’s reading through your feedback is to split it into bullet points or paragraphs, which are easier to review and analyze one by one. You might also consider breaking up the feedback into sections or even across multiple comments if it is longer. Of course, adding screenshots or signifying markers of the specific part of the interface you’re referring to can also be especially useful.

    One approach that I’ve personally used effectively in some contexts is to enhance the bullet points with four markers using emojis. A red square indicates that it is something I consider blocking, a yellow diamond indicates that it should be changed, and a green circle indicates that it is fully confirmed. I also use a blue spiral � � for either something that I’m not sure about, an exploration, an open alternative, or just a note. However, I’d only use this strategy on teams where I’ve already established a high level of trust because it might turn out to be quite demoralizing if I deliver a lot of red squares, and I’d have to reframe how I’d communicate that.

    Let’s see how this would work by reusing the example that we used earlier as the first bullet point in this list:

    • 🔶 Navigation—When I see these two buttons, I anticipate one to go forward and the other to go back. But this is the only screen where this happens, as before we just used a single button and an “×” to close. This seems to be breaking the consistency in the flow. Let’s make sure that all screens have the same two forward and back buttons so that users don’t get confused.
    • � � Overall— I think the page is solid, and this is good enough to be our release candidate for a version 1.0.
    • � � Metrics—Good improvement in the buttons on the metrics area, the improved contrast and new focus style make them more accessible.
    • Button Style: Using the green accent in this context, which conveys that it is a positive action because green is typically seen as a confirmation color. Do we need to explore a different color?
    • Given the number of items on the page and the overall page hierarchy, it seems to me that the tiles should use Subtitle 2 instead of Subtitle 1. This will keep the visual hierarchy more consistent.
    • � � Background—Using a light texture works well, but I wonder whether it adds too much noise in this kind of page. What is the purpose of using that?

    What about giving feedback directly in Figma or another design tool that allows in-place feedback? These are generally difficult to use because they conceal discussions and are harder to follow, but in the right setting, they can be very effective. Just make sure that each of the comments is separate so that it’s easier to match each discussion to a single task, similar to the idea of splitting mentioned above.

    One final note: say the obvious. Sometimes we might feel good or bad about something, so we don’t say it. Or sometimes we might have a doubt that we don’t express because the question might sound stupid. Say it, that’s fine. You might have to reword it a little bit to make the reader feel more comfortable, but don’t hold it back. Good feedback is transparent, even when it may be obvious.

    Asynchronous feedback also has the benefit of automatically guiding decisions, according to writing. Especially in large projects,” Why did we do this”? There’s nothing better than open, transparent discussions that can be reviewed at any time, which could be a question that arises from time to time. For this reason, I recommend using software that saves these discussions, without hiding them once they are resolved.

    Content, tone, and format. Although each of these subjects offers a useful model, focusing on improving eight of the subjects ‘ focus points, including observation, impact, question, timing, attitude, form, clarity, and actionability, is a lot of work to complete at once. One effective approach is to take them one by one: first identify the area that you lack the most (either from your perspective or from feedback from others ) and start there. Then the second, followed by the third, and so on. At first you’ll have to put in extra time for every piece of feedback that you give, but after a while, it’ll become second nature, and your impact on the work will multiply.

    Thanks to Brie Anne Demkiw and Mike Shelton for reviewing the first draft of this article.

  • Asynchronous Design Critique: Getting Feedback

    Asynchronous Design Critique: Getting Feedback

    ” Any feedback?” is perhaps one of the worst ways to ask for opinions. It’s obscure and unfocused, and it doesn’t give a clear picture of what we’re looking for. Getting good opinions starts sooner than we might hope: it starts with the demand.

    Starting the process of receiving feedback with a question may seem counterintuitive, but it makes sense if we consider that receiving input can be seen as a form of pattern research. In the same way that we wouldn’t perform any studies without the correct questions to get the insight that we need, the best way to ask for feedback is also to build strong issues.

    Design criticism is never a one-time procedure. Sure, any great comments process continues until the project is finished, but this is especially true for layout because architecture work continues iteration after iteration, from a high level to the finest details. Each stage requires its unique set of questions.

    And suddenly, as with any great research, we need to examine what we got up, get to the base of its perspectives, and take action. Iteration, evaluation, and issue. This look at each of those.

    The query

    Being available to input is important, but we need to be specific about what we’re looking for. Any comments,” What do you think,” or” I’d love to hear your view” at the conclusion of a presentation are likely to generate a lot of divergent thoughts, or worse, to make people follow the lead of the first speaker. And next… we get frustrated because vague issues like those you turn a high-level moves review into folks rather commenting on the borders of buttons. Which topic may be a wholesome one, so it might be difficult to get the team to switch to the subject you wanted to concentrate on.

    But how do we get into this scenario? It’s a combination of various components. One is that we don’t often consider asking as a part of the input method. Another is how healthy it is to keep the issue open and assume that everyone else will agree. Another is that in nonprofessional debate, there’s usually no need to be that exact. In summary, we tend to undervalue the value of the issues, and we don’t make any improvements to them.

    The work of asking good questions guidelines and focuses the criticism. It’s even a form of acceptance because it specifies what kind of opinions you’d like to receive and how you’re open to them. It puts people in the right emotional state, especially in situations when they weren’t expecting to give opinions.

    There isn’t a second best method to request suggestions. It simply needs to be certain, and precision may take several shapes. The concept of stage than level is a design for design criticism that I’ve found to be particularly helpful in my coaching.

    Stage” refers to each of the steps of the process—in our event, the design process. The type of input changes as the customer research moves forward to the final design. But within a single stage, one might also examine whether some assumptions are correct and whether there’s been a suitable language of the amassed opinions into updated designs as the task has evolved. The layers of user experience could serve as a starting point for future inquiries. What do you want to know: Project objectives? user requirements? Functionality? the content Interaction design? Information architecture UI design? design of navigation Visual design? Branding?

    Here’re a few example questions that are precise and to the point that refer to different layers:

    • Functionality: Is it desirable to automate account creation?
    • Interaction design: Take a look through the updated flow and let me know whether you see any steps or error states that I might’ve missed.
    • Information architecture: This page contains two competing pieces of information. Is the structure effective in communicating them both?
    • User interface design: What do you think about the top-most error counter, which ensures that you can see the next error even when the error is outside the viewport?
    • Navigation design: From research, we identified these second-level navigation items, but once you’re on the page, the list feels too long and hard to navigate. Are there any ways to deal with this?
    • Visual design: Are the sticky notifications in the bottom-right corner visible enough?

    The other axis of specificity is determined by how far you’d like to go with the information being presented. For example, we might have introduced a new end-to-end flow, but there was a specific view that you found particularly challenging and you’d like a detailed review of that. This can be especially helpful when switching between iterations because it’s crucial to highlight the changes made.

    There are other things that we can consider when we want to achieve more specific—and more effective—questions.

    A quick fix is to get rid of the generic qualifiers from questions like “good,” “well,” “nice,” “bad,” “okay,” and” cool.” For example, asking,” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is this interaction good”? is it possible to look specific, but you can spot the “good” qualifier and make the question” When the block opens and the buttons appear, is it clear what the next action is” look like?

    Sometimes we actually do want broad feedback. Although that’s uncommon, it can occur. In that sense, you might still make it explicit that you’re looking for a wide range of opinions, whether at a high level or with details. Or perhaps just say,” At first glance, what do you think”? so that it’s clear that what you’re asking is open ended but focused on someone’s impression after their first five seconds of looking at it.

    Sometimes the project is particularly broad, and some areas may have already been thoroughly explored. In these situations, it might be useful to explicitly say that some parts are already locked in and aren’t open to feedback. Although it’s not something I’d recommend in general, I’ve found it helpful in avoiding falling into rabbit holes like those that could lead to further refinement but aren’t what’s important right now.

    Asking specific questions can completely change the quality of the feedback that you receive. People who have less refined critique abilities will now be able to provide more useful feedback, and even experienced designers will appreciate the clarity and effectiveness gained from concentrating solely on what is required. It can save a lot of time and frustration.

    The iteration

    Design iterations are probably the most visible part of the design work, and they provide a natural checkpoint for feedback. Many design tools have inline commenting, but many of them only display changes as a single fluid stream in the same file. In addition, these kinds of design tools automatically update shared UI components, make conversations disappear and require designs to always display the most recent version, unless these would-be useful features were manually disabled. The implied goal that these design tools seem to have is to arrive at just one final copy with all discussions closed, probably because they inherited patterns from how written documents are collaboratively edited. That approach to design critiques is probably not the best approach, but some teams might benefit from it even if I don’t want to be too prescriptive.

    The asynchronous design-critique approach that I find most effective is to create explicit checkpoints for discussion. For this, I’ll use the term iteration post. It refers to a write-up or presentation of the design iteration followed by a discussion thread of some kind. This can be used on any platform that can accommodate this structure. By the way, when I refer to a “write-up or presentation“, I’m including video recordings or other media too: as long as it’s asynchronous, it works.

    Using iteration posts has a number of benefits:

    • It creates a rhythm in the design work so that the designer can review feedback from each iteration and prepare for the next.
    • Decisions are made immediately available for future review, and conversations are also always available.
    • It creates a record of how the design changed over time.
    • It might also make it simpler to collect and act on feedback depending on the tool.

    These posts of course don’t mean that no other feedback approach should be used, just that iteration posts could be the primary rhythm for a remote design team to use. From there, there can be additional feedback techniques ( such as live critique, pair designing, or inline comments ).

    I don’t think there’s a standard format for iteration posts. However, there are a few high-level components that make sense as a baseline:

    1. The goal
    2. The layout
    3. The list of changes
    4. The querys

    Each project is likely to have a goal, and hopefully it’s something that’s already been summarized in a single sentence somewhere else, such as the client brief, the product manager’s outline, or the project owner’s request. Therefore, I would repeat this in every iteration post, literally copy and pasting it. The idea is to provide context and to repeat what’s essential to make each iteration post complete so that there’s no need to find information spread across multiple posts. The most recent iteration post will have everything I need if I want to know about the most recent design.

    This copy-and-paste part introduces another relevant concept: alignment comes from repetition. Therefore, repeating information in posts is actually very effective at ensuring that everyone is on the same page.

    The design is then the actual series of information-architecture outlines, diagrams, flows, maps, wireframes, screens, visuals, and any other kind of design work that’s been done. In essence, it’s any design work. For the final stages of work, I prefer the term blueprint to emphasize that I’ll be showing full flows instead of individual screens to make it easier to understand the bigger picture.

    Because it makes it easier to refer to the objects, it might also be helpful to have clear names on them. Write the post in a way that helps people understand the work. It’s not much different from creating a strong live presentation.

    For an efficient discussion, you should also include a bullet list of the changes from the previous iteration to let people focus on what’s new, which can be especially useful for larger pieces of work where keeping track, iteration after iteration, could become a challenge.

    Finally, as mentioned earlier, it’s crucial that you include a list of the questions to help you guide the design critique in the desired direction. Doing this as a numbered list can also help make it easier to refer to each question by its number.

    Not every iteration is the same. Earlier iterations don’t need to be as tightly focused—they can be more exploratory and experimental, maybe even breaking some of the design-language guidelines to see what’s possible. Then, later, the iterations begin coming to a decision and improving it until the design process is complete and the feature is ready.

    I want to highlight that even if these iteration posts are written and conceived as checkpoints, by no means do they need to be exhaustive. A post might be a draft, just a concept to start a discussion, or it might be a cumulative list of all the features that have been added over the course of each iteration until the full picture is achieved.

    Over time, I also started using specific labels for incremental iterations: i1, i2, i3, and so on. Although this may seem like a minor labeling tip, it can be useful in many ways:

    • Unique—It’s a clear unique marker. Everyone knows where to go to review things, and it’s simple to say” This was discussed in i4″ with each project.
    • Unassuming—It works like versions ( such as v1, v2, and v3 ) but in contrast, versions create the impression of something that’s big, exhaustive, and complete. Attempts must be exploratory, incomplete, or partial.
    • Future proof—It resolves the “final” naming problem that you can run into with versions. No more files with the title “final final complete no-really-its-done” Within each project, the largest number always represents the latest iteration.

    The wording release candidate (RC ) could be used to indicate when a design is finished enough to be worked on, even if there are some areas that still need improvement and, in turn, require more iterations, such as” with i8 we reached RC” or “i12 is an RC” to indicate when it is finished.

    The review

    What typically occurs during a design critique is an open discussion that can be very productive between two people. This approach is particularly effective during live, synchronous feedback. However, using a different approach when we work asynchronously is more effective: adopting a user-research mindset. Written feedback from teammates, stakeholders, or others can be treated as if it were the result of user interviews and surveys, and we can analyze it accordingly.

    Asynchronous feedback is particularly effective because of this shift, especially around these friction points:

    1. It removes the pressure to reply to everyone.
    2. It lessens the annoyance of snoop-by comments.
    3. It lessens our personal stake.

    The first friction point is having to press yourself to respond to each and every comment. Sometimes we write the iteration post, and we get replies from our team. It’s simple, straightforward, and doesn’t cause any issues. But other times, some solutions might require more in-depth discussions, and the amount of replies can quickly increase, which can create a tension between trying to be a good team player by replying to everyone and doing the next design iteration. If the respondent is a stakeholder or a person directly involved in the project, this might be especially true. We need to accept that this pressure is absolutely normal, and it’s human nature to try to accommodate people who we care about. When we treat a design critique more like user research, we realize that we don’t need to respond to every comment, and there are alternatives: In asynchronous spaces, responding to all comments can be effective.

      One is to let the next iteration speak for itself. The response is received when the design changes and a follow-up iteration is made. You might tag all the people who were involved in the previous discussion, but even that’s a choice, not a requirement.
    • Another tactic is to formally acknowledge each comment in a brief response, such as” Understood. Thank you”,” Good points— I’ll review”, or” Thanks. In the upcoming iteration, I’ll include these. In some cases, this could also be just a single top-level comment along the lines of” Thanks for all the feedback everyone—the next iteration is coming soon”!
    • One more thing is to quickly summarize the comments before proceeding. Depending on your workflow, this can be particularly useful as it can provide a simplified checklist that you can then use for the next iteration.

    The swoop-by comment, which is the kind of feedback that comes from a member of the project or team who might not be aware of the context, restrictions, decisions, or requirements —or of the discussions from earlier iterations. On their side, there’s something that one can hope that they might learn: they could start to acknowledge that they’re doing this and they could be more conscious in outlining where they’re coming from. Swoop-by comments frequently prompt the simple thought,” We’ve already discussed this,” and it can be frustrating to have to keep coming back and forth.

    Let’s begin by acknowledging again that there’s no need to reply to every comment. However, if responding to a previously litigated point might be helpful, a brief response with a link to the previous discussion for additional information is typically sufficient. Remember, alignment comes from repetition, so it’s okay to repeat things sometimes!

    Swoop-by commenting can still be useful for two reasons: first, they might point out something that isn’t clear, and second, they might have the power to fit in with a user’s perspective when they are seeing the design for the first time. Sure, you’ll still be frustrated, but that might at least help in dealing with it.

    The personal stake we might have in the design could be the third friction point, which might cause us to feel defensive if the review turned into a discussion. Treating feedback as user research helps us create a healthy distance between the people giving us feedback and our ego ( because yes, even if we don’t want to admit it, it’s there ). In the end, presenting everything in aggregated form helps us to prioritize our work more.

    Always remember that while you need to listen to stakeholders, project owners, and specific advice, you don’t have to accept every piece of feedback. You must examine it and come to a decision that can be justified, but sometimes “no” is the best choice.

    As the designer leading the project, you’re in charge of that decision. In the end, everyone has their area of expertise, and as a designer, you are the one with the most background and knowledge to make the right choice. And by listening to the feedback that you’ve received, you’re making sure that it’s also the best and most balanced decision.

    Thanks to Mike Shelton and Brie Anne Demkiw for their contributions to the initial draft of this article.