Category: Blog

I am a innovative. What I do is alchemy. It is a secret. I do not so little do it, since let it be done through me.

I am a artistic. Not all imaginative people like this brand. Certainly all see themselves this method. Some creative individuals see knowledge in what they do. That is their reality, and I respect it. Sometimes I even envy them, a minor. But my approach is different—my becoming is unique.

Apologizing and qualifying in progress is a diversion. That’s what my head does to destroy me. I set it aside for today. I may come back later to forgive and count. After I’ve said what I came to say. Which is challenging enough.

Except when it is simple and flows like a valley of wine.

Sometimes it does come that method. Maybe what I need to build comes in an instant. I have learned not to say it at that time, because if you admit that sometimes the idea only comes and it is the best idea and you know it is the best idea, they think you don’t work hard enough.

Maybe I work and work and work until the plan comes. Often it comes suddenly and I don’t tell people for three weeks. Maybe I’m so excited by the idea that came immediately that I blurt it out, can’t help myself. Like a child who found a medal in his Cracker Jacks. Maybe I get away with this. Maybe other people agree: yes, that is the best idea. Most times they don’t and I regret having given way to passion.

Joy is best saved for the conference where it will make a difference. Certainly the casual get-together that accompanies that gathering by two different meetings. Anyone knows why we have all these sessions. We keep saying we’re doing away with them, but then only finding different ways to have them. Sometimes they are also excellent. But other days they are a distraction from the actual labor. The percentages between when conferences are important, and when they are a sad distraction, vary, depending on what you do and where you do it. And who you are and how you do it. Once I digress. I am a innovative. That is the style.

Often many hours of hard and persistent work produce something that is rarely serviceable. Often I have to accept that and move on to the next task.

Don’t question about approach. I am a artistic.

I am a artistic. I don’t handle my goals. And I don’t handle my best tips.

I can nail apart, surround myself with information or photos, and maybe that works. I can go for a walk, and occasionally that works. I may be making breakfast and there’s a Eureka having nothing to do with sizzling oil and flowing pots. Usually I know what to do the instant I wake up. And then, nearly as often, as I become aware and part of the world once, the idea that may have saved me turns to vanishing sand in a senseless storm of nothingness. For ingenuity, I believe, comes from that other world. The one we enter in aspirations, and possibly, before conception and after death. But that’s for writers to know, and I am not a writer. I am a innovative. And it’s for theologians to large forces about in their artistic world that they insist is true. But that is another diversion. And a miserable one. Even on a much more important issue than whether I am a inventive or not. But nevertheless a tangent from what I came here to say.

Often the process is mitigation. And horror. You know the cliché about the tortured designer? It’s true, even when the artist ( and let’s put that noun in quotes ) is trying to write a soft drink jingle, a callback in a tired sitcom, a budget request.

Some people who hate being called artistic may be closeted artists, but that’s between them and their angels. No offence meant. Your wisdom is correct, too. But mine is for me.

Creatives understand creatives.

Creatives identify creatives like faggots recognize queers, like true rappers recognize true performers, like cons know cons. Creatives feel enormous regard for creatives. We love, respect, emulate, and almost deify the excellent ones. To revere any man is, of course, a dreadful mistake. We have been warned. We know much. We know people are really people. They dispute, they are depressed, they regret their most critical decisions, they are weak and thirsty, they can be cruel, they can be just as terrible as we can, if, like us, they are clay. But. But. But they make this wonderful issue. They beginning something that did not exist before them, and could not occur without them. They are the mother of suggestions. And I suppose, since it’s only lying it, I have to put that they are the mother of technology. Ba ho backside! Okay, that’s done. Continue.

Creatives belittle our personal small successes, because we compare them to those of the wonderful people. Wonderful video! Also, I‘m no Miyazaki. Now THAT is brilliance. That is glory directly from the mind of God. This half-starved small item that I made? It more or less fell off the back of the pumpkin trailer. And the carrots weren’t even clean.

Creatives knows that, at best, they are Salieri. Perhaps the creatives who are He think that.

I am a artistic. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 years, but in my hallucinations, it’s my previous artistic managers who judge me. And they are appropriate to do so. I am very lazy, overly simplistic, and when it actually counts, my mind goes blank. There is no medication for artistic function.

I am a artistic. Every date I make is an experience that makes Indiana Jones look like a retiree snoring in a balcony seat. The longer I remain a artistic, the faster I am when I do my job and the longer I brood and walk in lines and gaze blankly before I do that job.

I am also 10 times faster than people who are not artistic, or people who have just been imaginative a short while, or people who have just been properly creative a short while. It’s just that, before I work 10 times as fast as they do, I spend twice as long as they do putting the work off. I am that confident in my ability to do a great job when I put my mind to it. I am that addicted to the adrenaline rush of postponement. I am still that afraid of the jump.

I am not an artist.

I am a creative. Not an artist. Though I dreamed, as a lad, of someday being that. Some of us belittle our gifts and dislike ourselves because we are not Michelangelos and Warhols. That is narcissism—but at least we aren’t in politics.

I am a creative. Though I believe in reason and science, I decide by intuition and impulse. And live with what follows—the catastrophes as well as the triumphs.

I am a creative. Every word I’ve said here will annoy other creatives, who see things differently. Ask two creatives a question, get three opinions. Our disagreement, our passion about it, and our commitment to our own truth are, at least to me, the proofs that we are creatives, no matter how we may feel about it.

I am a creative. I lament my lack of taste in the areas about which I know very little, which is to say almost all areas of human knowledge. And I trust my taste above all other things in the areas closest to my heart, or perhaps, more accurately, to my obsessions. Without my obsessions, I would probably have to spend my time looking life in the eye, and almost none of us can do that for long. Not honestly. Not really. Because much in life, if you really look at it, is unbearable.

I am a creative. I believe, as a parent believes, that when I am gone, some small good part of me will carry on in the mind of at least one other person.

Working saves me from worrying about work.

I am a creative. I live in dread of my small gift suddenly going away.

I am a creative. I am too busy making the next thing to spend too much time deeply considering that almost nothing I make will come anywhere near the greatness I comically aspire to.

I am a creative. I believe in the ultimate mystery of process. I believe in it so much, I am even fool enough to publish an essay I dictated into a tiny machine and didn’t take time to review or revise. I won’t do this often, I promise. But I did it just now, because, as afraid as I might be of your seeing through my pitiful gestures toward the beautiful, I was even more afraid of forgetting what I came to say.

There. I think I’ve said it.

I’ve been fascinated by shows since I was a child. I loved the heroes and the excitement—but most of all the stories. I aspired to be an artist. And I believed that I’d get to do the things that Indiana Jones did and go on exciting activities. Yet my friends and I had movie ideas to make and sky in. But they never went any farther. However, I did end up working in user experience ( UI). Today, I realize that there’s an element of drama to UX— I hadn’t actually considered it before, but consumer research is story. And to get the most out of customer studies, you must tell a compelling story that involves stakeholders, including the product team and decision-makers, and piques their interest in learning more.

Think of your favourite film. It probably follows a three-act narrative architecture: the layout, the conflict, and the resolution, which is prevalent in literature. The second act shows what exists now, and it helps you get to know the figures and the challenges and problems that they face. The fight begins in Act 2, which introduces the issue. Here, issues grow or get worse. And the quality is the third and final work. This is where the issues are resolved and the figures learn and change. This construction, in my opinion, is also a fantastic way to think about consumer research, and it might be particularly useful for introducing user research to others.

Use story as a framework for conducting research

It’s sad to say, but many have come to view studies as being inconsequential. Research is typically one of the first things to go when expenses or deadlines are tight. Instead of investing in study, some goods professionals rely on manufacturers or—worse—their personal judgment to make the “right” options for users based on their experience or accepted best practices. That may get groups a little bit out of the way, but that approach is therefore easily miss out on resolving people ‘ real issues. To be user-centered, this is something we really avoid. Design is enhanced by consumer study. It keeps it on record, pointing to problems and opportunities. Being aware of the problems with your goods and taking action can help you be ahead of your competition.

In the three-act structure, each action corresponds to a part of the process, and each part is important to telling the whole story. Let’s take a look at the various functions and how they relate to consumer research.

Act one: layout

The fundamental research comes in handy because the layout is all about understanding the background. Basic research ( also called conceptual, discovery, or original research ) helps you understand people and identify their problems. You’re learning about the difficulties people face now, what options are available, and how those challenges impact them, just like in the films. To do basic research, you may conduct cultural inquiries or journal studies ( or both! ), which may assist you in identifying both prospects and problems. It doesn’t need to get a great investment in time or money.

What is the least feasible ethnography that Erika Hall can do is spend fifteen minutes with a consumer and say,” Walk me through your day yesterday. That’s it. Give that one ask. Opened up and listen to them for 15 days. Do everything in your power to keep yourself and your pursuits out of it. Bam, you’re doing ethnography”. According to Hall, “[This ] will definitely prove quite fascinating. In the very unlikely event that you didn’t learn anything new or helpful, carry on with increased confidence in your way”.

This makes perfect sense to me. And I love that this makes consumer research so visible. You can only attract participants and do it! You don’t need to create a lot of documentation. This can offer a wealth of knowledge about your customers, and it’ll help you better understand them and what’s going on in their life. That’s exactly what work one is all about: understanding where people are coming from.

Maybe Spool talks about the importance of basic research and how it really type the bulk of your research. If you can substitute what you’ve heard in the fundamental research by using more customer information that you can obtain, such as surveys or analytics, or to highlight areas that need more research. Together, all this information creates a clearer picture of the state of things and all its inadequacies. And that’s the start of a gripping tale. It’s the place in the story where you realize that the principal characters—or the people in this case—are facing issues that they need to conquer. This is where you begin to develop compassion for the characters and support their success, much like in films. And maybe partners are now doing the same. Their business may lose money because users can’t finish particular tasks, which may be their love. Or probably they do connect with people ‘ problems. In either case, work one serves as your main strategy to pique the interest and interest of the participants.

When stakeholders begin to understand the value of basic research, that is open doors to more opportunities that involve users in the decision-making procedure. And that can help product teams become more user-centric. This benefits everyone—users, the product, and stakeholders. It’s similar to winning an Oscar in terms of filmmaking because it frequently results in your product receiving good reviews and success. And this can be an incentive for stakeholders to repeat this process with other products. The secret to this process is storytelling, and knowing how to tell a compelling story is the only way to entice stakeholders to do more research.

This brings us to act two, where you iteratively evaluate a design or concept to see whether it addresses the issues.

Act two: conflict

Act two is all about digging deeper into the problems that you identified in act one. This typically involves conducting directional research, such as usability tests, where you evaluate a potential solution ( such as a design ) to see if it addresses the issues you identified. The issues could include unmet needs or problems with a flow or process that’s tripping users up. Additional problems will arise in the course of act two of a film. It’s here that you learn more about the characters as they grow and develop through this act.

Usability tests should typically consist of five participants, according to Jakob Nielsen, who found that that number of users can typically identify the majority of the issues:” As you add more and more users, you learn less and less because you will keep seeing the same things again and again… After the fifth user, you are wasting your time by observing the same findings repeatedly but not learning much new.”

There are parallels with storytelling here too, if you try to tell a story with too many characters, the plot may get lost. With fewer participants, each user’s struggles will be more easily recalled and shared with other parties when discussing the research. This can help convey the issues that need to be addressed while also highlighting the value of doing the research in the first place.

Usability tests have been conducted in person for decades, but you can also conduct them remotely using software like Microsoft Teams, Zoom, or other teleconferencing software. This approach has become increasingly popular since the beginning of the pandemic, and it works well. You might consider in-person usability tests like attending a play and remote sessions as more of a movie watching experience. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Usability research in person is a much more extensive experience. Stakeholders can experience the sessions with other stakeholders. Additionally, you’ll also hear their reactions in real-time, including surprises, disagreements, and discussions of what they’re seeing. Much like going to a play, where audiences get to take in the stage, the costumes, the lighting, and the actors ‘ interactions, in-person research lets you see users up close, including their body language, how they interact with the moderator, and how the scene is set up.

If conducting usability testing in the field is like watching a play that is staged and controlled, where any two sessions may be very different from one another. You can take usability testing into the field by creating a replica of the space where users interact with the product and then conduct your research there. Or you can conduct your research by meeting users at their locations. With either option, you get to see how things work in context, things come up that wouldn’t have in a lab environment—and conversion can shift in entirely different directions. You have less control over how these sessions run as researchers, but this can occasionally improve your understanding of users. Meeting users where they are can provide clues to the external forces that could be affecting how they use your product. In-person usability tests add a level of detail that is frequently absent from remote usability tests.

That’s not to say that the “movies” —remote sessions—aren’t a good option. Remote training sessions can reach a wider audience. They allow a lot more stakeholders to be involved in the research and to see what’s going on. Additionally, they make access to a much wider user base geographically. But with any remote session there is the potential of time wasted if participants can’t log in or get their microphone working.

You can ask real users questions to understand their thoughts and understanding of the solution as a result of usability testing, whether it is conducted remotely or in person. This can help you not only identify problems but also glean why they’re problems in the first place. Additionally, you can test your own hypotheses and determine whether your reasoning is correct. By the end of the sessions, you’ll have a much clearer picture of how usable the designs are and whether they work for their intended purposes. The excitement is in the second act, but there are also potential surprises in the third. This is equally true of usability tests. Unexpected things that participants say frequently alter the way you look at things, and these unexpected revelations can lead to unexpected turns in the narrative.

Unfortunately, user research is sometimes seen as expendable. Usability testing is also frequently the only research technique that some stakeholders believe they ever need, and too frequently. In fact, if the designs that you’re evaluating in the usability test aren’t grounded in a solid understanding of your users ( foundational research ), there’s not much to be gained by doing usability testing in the first place. That’s because you’re narrowing down the area of focus on without considering the needs of the users. As a result, there’s no way of knowing whether the designs might solve a problem that users have. In the context of a usability test, it’s just feedback on a particular design.

On the other hand, if you only do foundational research, while you might have set out to solve the right problem, you won’t know whether the thing that you’re building will actually solve that. This demonstrates the value of conducting both directional and foundational research.

In act two, stakeholders will—hopefully—get to watch the story unfold in the user sessions, which creates the conflict and tension in the current design by surfacing their highs and lows. And in turn, this can encourage stakeholders to take action on the issues raised.

Act three: resolution

The third act is about resolving the issues raised by the first two acts, whereas the first two are about comprehending the context and the tensions that can compel action. While it’s important to have an audience for the first two acts, it’s crucial that they stick around for the final act. That includes the entire product team, including developers, UX experts, business analysts, delivery managers, product managers, and any other interested parties who have a say in the coming development. It allows the whole team to hear users ‘ feedback together, ask questions, and discuss what’s possible within the project’s constraints. Additionally, it enables the UX design and research teams to clarify, suggest alternatives, or provide more context for their choices. So you can get everyone on the same page and get agreement on the way forward.

Voiceover narration of this act is typically used with audience input. The researcher is the narrator, who paints a picture of the issues and what the future of the product could look like given the things that the team has learned. They provide the stakeholders with their suggestions and suggestions for how to create this vision.

Nancy Duarte in the Harvard Business Review offers an approach to structuring presentations that follow a persuasive story. The most effective presenters employ the same methods as great storytellers: By reaffirming the status quo and then revealing a better way, they create a conflict that needs to be resolved, writes Duarte. ” That tension helps them persuade the audience to adopt a new mindset or behave differently”.

This type of structure aligns well with research results, and particularly results from usability tests. It provides proof for “what is “—the issues you’ve identified. And “what could be “—your recommendations on how to address them. And so forth and forth.

You can reinforce your recommendations with examples of things that competitors are doing that could address these issues or with examples where competitors are gaining an edge. Or they can be visual, like quick sketches of how a new design could look that solves a problem. These can help generate conversation and momentum. And this continues until the session is over, when you’ve concluded by bridging the gaps and offering suggestions for improvement. This is the part where you reiterate the main themes or problems and what they mean for the product—the denouement of the story. The stakeholders will now have the opportunity to take the next steps, and hopefully the will-power to do so!

While we are nearly at the end of this story, let’s reflect on the idea that user research is storytelling. The three-act structure of user research contains all the components for a good story:

Act one: You meet the protagonists ( the users ) and the antagonists ( the problems affecting users ). The plot begins here. In act one, researchers might use methods including contextual inquiry, ethnography, diary studies, surveys, and analytics. These techniques can produce personas, empathy maps, user journeys, and analytics dashboards as output.

Act two: Next, there’s character development. The protagonists face problems and difficulties, which they must overcome, and there is conflict and tension. In act two, researchers might use methods including usability testing, competitive benchmarking, and heuristics evaluation. Usability findings reports, UX strategy documents, usability guidelines, and best practices can be included in the output of these.

Act three: The protagonists triumph and you see what a better future looks like. Researchers may use techniques like presentation decks, storytelling, and digital media in act three. The output of these can be: presentation decks, video clips, audio clips, and pictures.

The researcher plays a variety of roles, including producer, director, and storyteller. The participants have a small role, but they are significant characters ( in the research ). And the audience are the stakeholders. But the most important thing is to get the story right and to use storytelling to tell users ‘ stories through research. In the end, the parties should leave with a goal and an eagerness to fix the product’s flaws.

So the next time that you’re planning research with clients or you’re speaking to stakeholders about research that you’ve done, think about how you can weave in some storytelling. In the end, user research is beneficial for everyone, and all you need to do is pique stakeholders ‘ interest in how the story ends.

I’ve lost count of the times I’ve watched promising thoughts go from zero to warrior in a few days before failing to deliver within weeks as a product developer for very long.

Financial items, which is the industry in which I work, are no exception. It’s tempting to put as many features at the ceiling as possible and hope someone sticks because people’s true, hard-earned money is on the line, user expectations are high, and a crammed market. However, this strategy is a formula for disaster. Why, you see this:

The perils of feature-first growth

It’s easy to get swept up in the enthusiasm of developing innovative features when you start developing a financial product from scratch or are migrating existing client journeys from papers or telephony channels to online bank or mobile applications. You might be thinking,” If I can only put one more thing that solves this particular person problem, they’ll appreciate me”! But what happens if you eventually encounter a roadblock as a result of your security team’s negligence? don’t like it, right? When a battle-tested film isn’t as well-known as you anticipated or when it fails due to unforeseen difficulty?

The concept of Minimum Viable Product ( MVP ) comes into play in this area. Even though Jason Fried doesn’t usually refer to it that way, his podcast Rework and his guide Getting Real frequently address this concept. An MVP is a product that offers only enough significance to your users to keep them interested without becoming too hard or frustrating to use. Although the idea seems simple, it requires a razor-sharp eye, a ruthless edge, and the courage to stand up for your position because it is easy to fall for” the Columbo Effect” when there is always” just one more thing …” to add.

The issue with most funding apps is that they frequently turn out to be reflections of the company’s internal politics rather than an experience created exclusively for the customer. Instead of offering a distinct value statement that is focused on what people in the real world want, the focus should be on delivering as some features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and wants of competing inside sections. As a result, these products can very quickly became a mixed bag of misleading, related, and finally unhappy customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

The significance of the foundation

What is a better strategy, then? How can we create products that are user-friendly, stable, and, most importantly, stick?

The concept of “bedrock” comes into play in this context. The mainstay of your product is really important to users, and Bedrock is that. The foundation of value and relevance over time is built upon it.

The bedrock must be in and around the regular servicing journeys in the retail banking industry, which is where I work. People only look at their current account once every five minutes, but they also look at it daily. They purchase a credit card every year or every other year, but they at least once a month check their balance and pay their bills.

The key is in identifying the core tasks that people want to complete and working relentlessly to make them simple, reliable, and trustworthy.

But how do you reach the foundation? By focusing on the” MVP” approach, giving simplicity precedence, and working iteratively toward a clear value proposition. This means avoiding pointless extras and putting your users first, making the most of them.

It also requires having some guts, as your coworkers might not always agree with you immediately. And in some cases, it might even mean making it clear to customers that you won’t be coming over to their house to prepare their meal. Sometimes you may need to use the sporadic “opinionated user interface design” ( i .e. clunky workaround for edge cases ) to test a concept or to give yourself some room to work on something more crucial stuff.

Practical methods for creating stick-like financial products

What are the main learnings I’ve made from my own research and experience, then?

1. What problem are you trying to solve first, and make a clear “why”? For whom? Make sure your goal is unmistakable before beginning any work. Make sure it also complies with the goals of your business.
2. Avoid the temptation to add too many features at once by focusing on one, core feature and focusing on getting that right before moving on to something else. Choose one that actually adds value, and work from there.
3. Give simplicity the precedence it deserves over complexity when it comes to financial products. Eliminate unnecessary details and concentrate on what matters most.
4. Accept continuous iteration as Bedrock is a dynamic process rather than a fixed destination. Continuously collect user feedback, make product improvements, and advance in that direction.
5. Stop, look, and listen: You must test your product frequently in the field rather than just as part of the delivery process. Use it for yourself. Run the A/B tests. User feedback on Gatter. Talk to the users of it and make adjustments accordingly.

The bedrock paradox

Building towards bedrock implies sacrificing some short-term growth potential in favor of long-term stability, which is an interesting paradox at play here. But the payoff is worthwhile because products built with a focus on bedrock will outlive and outperform their rivals over time and provide users with long-term value.

How do you begin your journey to bedrock, then? Take it gradually. Start by identifying the underlying factors that your users actually care about. Focus on developing and improving a single, potent feature that delivers real value. And most importantly, test constantly because, whatever you think, Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker are all in the same boat! The best way to foretell the future is to create it, he said.

Voices are available on the internet. But if our manufacturing processes.

Designing methods as living cultures

Designing languages are living languages, not portion libraries. The elements are phrases, patterns are phrases, and sentences are layouts. Tokens are phonemes. Our goods ‘ stories are the product of the conversations we have with people.

The more tones a language you assistance without losing its meaning, the more smoothly it is spoken. English in Scotland and English in Sydney are clearly different, but both are undeniably English. The terminology adapts to the situation while maintaining its fundamental meaning. As a Brazilian Portuguese speech who learned English with an American highlight and resides in Sydney, this couldn’t be more visible to me.

Our pattern processes may operate similarly. weak systems that break under the influence of cultural pressure are the result of rigid adhesion to visual rules. Fluidic devices can bend without bridging.

Consistent behavior turns into a captivity

Regular components would speed up development and bring together experiences, which was a promise of design systems. But as methods evolved and products developed more sophisticated, that claim has grown to the point of being a prison. Team submit hundreds of “exception” demands. Alternatively of system parts, products start with solutions. Designers devote more time defending regularity than resolving consumer issues.

Our design techniques must acquire the ability to respond dialects.

A pattern pronunciation is a comprehensive adaptation of a design system that maintains its foundational principles while creating novel patterns for particular situations. Dials maintain the state’s necessary language while expanding its vocabulary to provide various customers, environments, or constraints, unlike one-off customizations or product themes.

When Perfect Consistency Is A Problem

I at Booking.com learned this lesson the hard way. Everything we A/B tested was color, version, button styles, also logo colors. I found this stunning as a skilled with a background in graphic design and company type guides. While people adored Airbnb’s flawless design program, Booking grew into a giant without ever taking into account physical consistency.

The conflict taught me things important: solved problems are solved, not regularity.

At Shopify Our crown jewel was Polyris ( ), a mature design language that worked well for laptop manufacturers. We were expected to follow Polaris as-is as a product group. Then my accomplishment team said,” Oh, Ship!” momentous as we had to create an app for inventory pickers using our program on shared, battered Android scanners in dark aisles, wearing heavy gloves, scanning dozens of items per moment, some with only minimal levels of English comprehension.

Polaris common: 0 % task execution.

Every element that worked wonders for retailers entirely failed to satisfy pickers. Bright backgrounds produced brightness. The goals of 44px tap were obscuring with covered fingers. Sentence-case names took too long to interpret. Multi-step flows confounded non-native listeners.

Polaris had to be completely abandoned, or we had to tell it inventory language.

The Birth of a Pronunciation

We favored creation over trend. We developed what we now refer to as a style dialect by adhering to Polaris’s key principles of clarity, efficiency, consistency.

As a result, tasks have increased from 0 % to 100 % of the time. From three days to one change, onboard time was cut.

This was a dialect, not a modification or theming; it was a systematic translation that preserved Polaris ‘ fundamental grammar while creating new words for a particular context. It had picked up the language of storehouse and not failed.

The Flexibility Framework

Working on the Jira platform, which is a component of the larger Atlassian method, at Atlassian, I advocated for formalizing this understanding. We needed organized mobility because dozens of products shared a style language across various versions, but we built straight into our ways of working. The previous model, which required exception requests and specific approvals, was failing on a scale.

To help creators determine how flexible their elements should remain, we created the Flexibility Framework.

We tied down every component of a tracking redesign. International search and logo remained steady. The actions of cultural contexts and breadcrumbs changed to flexibility. Product team could quickly identify areas where persistence and technology were important.

The Decision Ladder

Freedom requires restrictions. We built a straightforward rope to determine when rules if obstruct:

Good: Send with already-existing system parts. Strong, reliable, and proven.

Better: somewhat bend a part. Document the shift. Bring developments up to the program so that everyone can use it.

Best: First, create the ideal practice. Update the system to support it if consumer assessment validates the profit.

Which choice allows users to achieve the quickest, in your opinion?

Guidelines are tools, not replicas.

Unity Beats Uniformity

Google, Drive, and Maps all speak with their own accent, but they are clearly Google. They achieve cohesion through shared rules, no copied parts. About$ 30K in engineer time is spent on one additional month of key color debate.

Competency is a person outcome, while unification is a brand outcome. Edge the customer when the two conflict.

Gates ‘ Gates’ Law:

How can alignment be maintained while enabling languages? Treat your body like a life diction:

Document every change, such as dialects or warehouses. director with photos and justifications before and after.

Promote shared patterns, which are when three teams freely adopt a slang and evaluate it for primary inclusion.

Retire ancient idioms using flags and migration notes; deprecate with context; not a big-bang purge.

A living vocabulary performs better than a freezing code.

Begin With Your First Dialect:

Are you ready to offer languages? Begin with a bad practice:

Get one user flow this week where best consistency prevents tasks from being completed. Could be that mobile users have trouble with desktop-sized components or mobility issues that your standard patterns don’t target.

What causes normal patterns to fail in this context of documentation? climate restrictions person capabilities intensity of the process?

Design one consistent change: prioritize actions over looks. If gloves are the issue, bigger targets are actually serving the customer rather than “broken the technique.” Create the adjustments and render them purposeful.

Assess and test: Does the shift make tasks more effective? Time to increase performance? consumer satisfaction

Show the benefits: Fluency has paid for itself if that pronunciation frees perhaps half a jump.

Beyond the Component Library

We are now cultivating layout languages, no managing design systems. language that develop along with their listeners. voices without losing their significance in language. language that prioritize the needs of people over visual ideals.

Our buttons breaking the style guide didn’t matter to the warehouse workers who went from 0 % to 100 % on their jobs. They were concerned that the knobs would suddenly function.

Your people share your opinion. Give your program permission to use their speech.

Picture this: Two people are conversing in what appears to be the same talk about the same pattern issue in a conference room at your tech company. One is talking about whether the staff has the right abilities to handle it. The various examines whether the answer really addresses the user’s issue. Similar room, the same issue, and entirely various perspectives.

This is the lovely, sometimes messy fact of having both a Design Manager and a Guide Designer on the same group. And you’re asking the right question if you’re wondering how to make this job without creating confusion, coincide, or the feared” to some cooks” situation.

The conventional solution has been to create clear traces on an organizational chart. The Design Manager handles persons, the Lead Designer handles art. Problem solved, is that correct? Except that fresh organizational charts are fantasy. In fact, both roles care greatly about crew health, style quality, and shipping great work.

When you start thinking of your style organization as a pattern organism, the magic happens when you embrace the collide rather than fighting it.

The biology of a good design team

Here’s what I’ve learned from years of being on both sides of this formula: consider of your design team as a living organism. The design manager has a focus on the internal safety, career advancement, team dynamics, and other aspects. The Lead Designer is more focused on the body ( the user-generated design standards, the handcrafted skills ), than the hands-on work that is done.

But just like mind and body aren’t totally separate systems, but, also, do these tasks overlap in significant ways. Without working in harmony with one person, you can’t have a good man. The technique is to recognize those overlaps and how to manage them gently.

When we look at how good team really function, three critical devices emerge. Each role must be combined, but one has to assume the lead role in keeping that structure sturdy.

The Nervous System: Citizens & Psychology

Major caregiver: Design Manager
Supporting position: Lead Designer

Signs, comments, emotional health are all important components of the nervous program. When this technique is good, information flows easily, people feel safe to take risks, and the staff may react quickly to new problems.

The main caregiver is around, the Design Manager. They are making sure the team’s emotional pulse is healthier, creating the ideal environment for growth, and keeping track of the team’s psychological pulse. They’re hosting job meetings, managing task, and making sure no single burns out.

However, the Lead Designer has a vital enabling position. They’re offering visual feedback on build development needs, identifying stagnant design skills in someone, and pointing out potential growth opportunities that the Design Manager might overlook.

Design Manager tends to:

• development planning and job conversations
• emotional stability and dynamics of the team
• Job management and resource planning
• Performance evaluations and opinions management methods
• Providing understanding options

Direct Custom supports by:

• Providing craft-specific evaluation of team member creation
• identifying opportunities for growth and style talent gaps
• Providing design mentoring and assistance
• indicating when a group is prepared for more challenging tasks.

The Muscular System: Design & Execution

Major custodian: Lead Designer
Supporting position: Design Manager

Power, cooperation, and skill development are the hallmarks of the skeletal system. When this technique is healthy, the team can do complicated design work with precision, maintain regular quality, and adjust their craft to fresh challenges.

The Lead Designer is the main caregiver at this place. They are raising the bar for quality work, providing craft instruction, and ensuring that shipping work is done to the highest standards. They’re the ones who can tell you if a design decision is sound or if we’re solving the right problem.

However, the Design Manager has a significant supporting role. They’re making sure the team has the resources and support they need to perform their best work, such as proper nutrition and time for an athlete recovering.

Lead Designer tends to:

• Definition of system usage and design standards
• Feedback on design work that meets the required standards
• Experience direction for the product
• Design choices and product-wide alignment are important.
• advancement of craft and innovation

Design Manager supports by:

• ensuring that all members of the team are aware of and adopt design standards
• Confirming that a direction of experience is being pursued
• Supporting practices and systems that scale without bottlenecking
• facilitating design alignment among all teams
• Providing resources and removing obstacles for outstanding craft work

The Circulatory System: Strategy &amp, Flow

Shared caretakers: Lead Designer and Design Manager, respectively.

The circulatory system is concerned with how the team’s decisions and energy are distributed. When this system is healthy, strategic direction is clear, priorities are aligned, and the team can respond quickly to new opportunities or challenges.

This is the true partnership that occurs. Although both roles are responsible for maintaining the circulation, they both have unique perspectives to offer.

Lead Designer contributes:

• The product fulfills the user’s needs.
• overall experience and product quality
• Strategic design initiatives
• User needs based on research for each initiative

Contributes the design manager:

• Communication to team and stakeholders
• Stakeholder management and alignment
• Team accountability across all levels
• Strategic business initiatives

Both parties work together on:

• Co-creation of strategy and leadership
• Team goals and prioritization approach
• organizational structure decisions
• Success frameworks and measures

Keeping the Organism Healthy

Understanding that all three systems must work together is the key to making this partnership sing. A team with excellent craftmanship but poor psychological protection will eventually burn out. A team with great culture but weak craft execution will ship mediocre work. A team that has both but poor strategic planning will concentrate on the wrong things.

Be Specific About the System You’re Defending.

When you’re in a meeting about a design problem, it helps to acknowledge which system you’re primarily focused on. Everyone has context for their input.” I’m thinking about this from a team capacity perspective” ( nervous system ) or” I’m looking at this through the lens of user needs” ( muscular system ).

This is not about staying in your own path. It’s about being transparent as to which lens you’re using, so the other person knows how to best add their perspective.

Create Positive Feedback Loops

The partnerships that I’ve seen have the most effective partnerships that create clear feedback loops between the systems:

Nervous system signals to muscular system:” The team is struggling with confidence in their design skills” → Lead Designer provides more craft coaching and clearer standards.

The nervous system receives the message” The team’s craft skills are progressing more quickly than their project complexity.”

We’re seeing patterns in team health and craft development that suggest we need to adjust our strategic priorities, both systems say to the circulatory system.

Handle Handoffs Gracefully

When something switches from one system to another, this partnership’s most crucial moments occur. This might occur when a design standard ( muscular system ) needs to be implemented across the team ( nervous system ) or when a tactical initiative ( circulatory system ) requires specific craft execution ( muscular system ).

Make these transitions explicit. I’ve defined the new component requirements. Can you give me some ideas on how to get the team up to speed? or” We’ve agreed on this strategic direction. From here, I’ll concentrate on the particular user experience approach.

Stay curious and avoid being territorial.

The Design Manager who never thinks about craft, or the Lead Designer who never considers team dynamics, is like a doctor who only looks at one body system. Even when they aren’t the primary caretaker, great design leadership requires both people to be as concerned with the entire organism.

Rather than making assumptions, one must ask questions. ” What do you think about the team’s craft development in this area”? or” How do you think this is affecting team morale and workload?” keeps both viewpoints present in every choice.

When the Organism Gets Sick

This partnership can go wrong even with clear roles. What are the most typical failure modes I’ve seen:

System Isolation

The Design Manager ignores craft development and concentrates solely on the nervous system. The Lead Designer ignores team dynamics and concentrates solely on the muscular system. Both people retreat to their comfort zones and stop collaborating.

The signs: Team members receive conflicting messages, work conditions suffer, and morale declines.

Reconnect with other people’s goals in the treatment. What are you both trying to achieve? Great design work typically arrives on time from a strong team. Discover how both systems accomplish that goal.

Poor Circulation

There is no clear strategic direction, shifting priorities, or accepting responsibility for keeping information flowing.

The symptoms are: Team members are unsure of their priorities, work is duplicated or dropped, and deadlines are missed.

The treatment: Explicitly assign responsibility for circulation. Who is communicating with whom? How frequently? What’s the feedback loop?

Autoimmune Response

One person feels threatened by the expertise of the other. The Design Manager thinks the Lead Designer is undermining their authority. The Design Manager is alleged to believe that the Lead Designer doesn’t understand craft.

The signs: defensive behavior, territorial disputes, team members sucked into the middle.

The treatment: Remember that you’re both caretakers of the same organism. When one system fails, the entire team suffers. The team thrives when both systems are healthy.

The Payoff

Yes, this model calls for more interaction. Yes, both parties must be able to assume full responsibility for team health. But the payoff is worth it: better decisions, stronger teams, and design work that’s both excellent and sustainable.

The best of both worlds can be found in the combination of strong people leadership and deep craft expertise. When one person is overly sick, on vacation, or overworked, the other can help keep the team’s health. When a decision requires both the people perspective and the craft perspective, you’ve got both right there in the room.

Most importantly, the framework is flexible. As your team expands, you can use the same system thinking to new problems. Need to launch a design system? Both the muscular system ( standards and implementation ), the nervous system (team adoption and change management ), and both have a tendency to circulate ( communication and stakeholder alignment ).

Bottom Line

The relationship between a Design Manager and Lead Designer isn’t about dividing territories. It’s about multiplying impact. Magic occurs when both roles realize they are tending to various aspects of the same healthy organism.

The mind and body work together. The team receives both the craft excellence and strategic thinking they need. And most importantly, users benefit from both perspectives when they receive the work.

So the next time you’re in that meeting room, wondering why two people are talking about the same problem from different angles, remember: you’re watching shared leadership in action. And if it’s functioning well, your design team’s mind and body are both strengthening.

Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, a long-gestating initiative meant to highlight more young personalities as they enter the stars, will take the company to a new level. The line will follow Star Trek: Discovery’s events, which will take place in the 32nd era.

On Den of Geek, the second article” Don’t Hope to See Much of This Common Experience on Star Trek: Starfleet Academy” was originally published.

Westeros is home to many, let’s say, less-than-humble personalities, according to George R. R. Martin. Large-than-life figures like Cersei Lannister, Stannis Baratheon, and Daemon Targaryen are certainly appealing to the fantasy world depicted in Martin&#8217, s&#8220, A Song of Ice and Fire&#8221, books, and the HBO set Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. These individuals are more than likely aware of their enormous reputation.

With the most recent prelude to Game of Thrones, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms, things are all set to alter. This version of Martin &#8217, s &#8220, Tales of Dunk and Egg &#8221, novellas may also add the viewpoints of the Seven Kingdoms &#8217, lower class, as seen through the eye of this franchise &#8217, one of the most endearingly self-aware characters.

There&#8217, s no wonderful way to put this but&#8230, Ser Duncan the Tall a. k. a. &#8220, Dunk&#8221, ( Peter Claffey ) is a bit of an idiot and he knows it. In the Dunk and Egg tales, his domestic speech is a constant source of frustration and self-loathing. The poor man wasn’t born in a tower and subjected to the same level of education as the noble of Westeros. He rather had to consider his own path, just like the rest of us farmers. He is therefore the most uncommon of the Westerosi themes: a large, charming dummy. The George R. R. Martin and Ira Parker-created line has Dunk&#8217’s description down pat, based on the second video for A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms.

In this two-minute presentation, Peter Claffery &#8217 ;s Dunk is portrayed as the beautiful, flawless moron he is no fewer than five times. When Lord Baelor Targaryen’s slave tries to find his horses past his enormous body, he is standing like a pile in front of him. Later, Prince Aerion Targaryen ( Finn Bennett ) will conclude that Dunk lacks the intelligence to be a stableboy. Then Dunk is completely owned by his brand-new young squire Egg ( Dexter Sol Ansell ), as the boy correctly states that he does n’t have any dogs to hunt him down. Dunk also maintains the impression that he is meant for bigger things.

He intones about halfway through the tape,” I know I’m really a hedge knight, but I sometimes think I could be more,” he intones. The World of Ice and Fire users will be aware of how accurate he is.

Ser Duncan is a ( literally ) big reason why Game of Thrones is at its best and A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will serve as its warmest counterpart. Despite the moral gray of every person in Martin &#8217’s dream world, Dunk is one of its more talented soldiers, and Egg and the series that follows him appear to be following his lead. The video makes that clear with a lighter colour scheme and artist Dan Romer’s cheery score, which replaces Ramin Djawadi’s epic bombast and composer Dan Romer’s lighter color palette.

Sir Duncan the Tall may not be the Prince who was promised, but he might just be the protagonist that Westeros desperately needs in the year 209 AD. A Knight of the Seven Kingdom&#8216, the biggest, dumbest boy, has a chance to effect real change now that the creatures are long gone, House Targaryen’s power is waning, and the ( first ) Blackfyre Rebellion is in the back.

On HBO Max, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will be airing on January 18.

The Knight of the Seven Kingdoms video originally appeared on Den of Geek, and the title follows.

This content appears in the newest problem of DEN OF GEEK publication. These are all of our magazine stories to read. According to Edgar Wright, the filmmaker and genre expert who has produced modern gems like Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, and Baby Driver, he estimates he was about 13 years old when he read” the Bachman Books” [ …].

The Operating Man: Edgar Wright and Glen Powell Chat Stephen King’s Dystopia in 2025 first appeared on Den of Geek.

Westeros is home to many, let’s say, less-than-humble heroes, according to George R. R. Martin. Large-than-life characters like Cersei Lannister, Stannis Baratheon, and Daemon Targaryen are not wanted in the fantasy world depicted in Martin&#8217, s &#8220, A Song of Ice and Fire&#8221, novels and the HBO series Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. These individuals are more than likely aware of their enormous reputation.

With the most recent prelude to Game of Thrones, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms, things are all set to alter. This version of Martin &#8217, s &#8220, Tales of Dunk and Egg &#8221, novellas may also add the viewpoints of the Seven Kingdoms &#8217, lower class, as seen through the eye of this franchise’s most endearingly self-aware numbers.

There&#8217, s no wonderful way to put this but&#8230, Ser Duncan the Tall a. k. a. &#8220, Dunk&#8221, ( Peter Claffey ) is a bit of an idiot and he knows it. His inner speech in the Dunk and Egg tales is a constant stream of frustration and self-loathing. The poor man wasn’t born in a mansion and subjected to the same level of education as the noble of Westeros. He rather had to consider his own path, just like the rest of us farmers. He is therefore the most uncommon of the Westerosi themes: a large, charming dummy. The George R. R. Martin and Ira Parker-created set has Dunk&#8217’s description straight out of the box.

In this two-minute display, Peter Claffery’s Dunk is portrayed as the lovely, flawless buffoon he is no less than five days. When Lord Baelor Targaryen’s slave tries to find his horses past his enormous body, he is standing like a pile in front of him. In the future, Prince Aerion Targaryen ( Finn Bennett ) will conclude that Dunk is not intelligent enough to be a stableboy. Then Dunk is completely owned by his brand-new young squire Egg ( Dexter Sol Ansell ), who correctly states that he doesn’t have any dogs to hunt him down. Dunk also maintains the impression that he is intended for greater items.

He turns toward the end of the picture,” #8221,” because I know I’m only a wall knight, but occasionally I think I could be more. The World of Ice and Fire users will be aware of how accurate he is.

Sir Duncan will play a significant role in Game of Thrones ‘ most heartfelt role, and a Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will do so. Despite the moral gray of every person in Martin &#8217’s dream world, Dunk is one of its more talented soldiers, and Egg and the series that follows him appear to be following his lead. The video makes that clear with a lighter colour scheme and artist Dan Romer’s cheery score, which replaces Ramin Djawadi’s epic bombast and composer Dan Romer’s lighter color palette.

Sir Duncan the Tall may not be the Prince who was promised, but he might just be the hero that Westeros desperately needs in the year 209 AD. A Knight of the Seven Kingdom‘s biggest, dumbest boy has a chance to effect real change now that the dragons are long gone, House Targaryen’s power is waning, and the ( first ) Blackfyre Rebellion is in view.

A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms airs on HBO Max on January 18th.

The Knight of the Seven Kingdoms video for Dunk Is But Wonderfully Dumb first appeared on Den of Geek.

Doctor Who and Star Trek share more in popular than most people might think. Both series, which feature two of sci-fi television’s most important adult leaders, have spent the past six decades influencing our understanding of what this style is meant to be and do ( although technically, Trek won’t change 60 until next year ). Unlike many of the […]

The first postOn Den of Geek: Star Trek Has Often Loved Doctor Who, Odd New Worlds Made It Official appeared first.

Westeros is home to many, let’s say, less-than-humble heroes, according to George R. R. Martin. Large-than-life figures like Cersei Lannister, Stannis Baratheon, and Daemon Targaryen are certainly appealing to the fantasy world depicted in Martin&#8217, s&#8220, A Song of Ice and Fire&#8221, books, and the HBO set Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. These individuals are more than likely aware of their enormous reputation.

With the most recent Game of Thrones prequel line, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms, all of that is all set to alter. This version of Martin &#8217, s &#8220, Tales of Dunk and Egg &#8221, novellas may also include the viewpoints of the Seven Kingdoms &#8217, lower class, as seen through the eye of this franchise &#8217, one of the most endearingly self-aware characters.

There&#8217, s no great way to put this but&#8230, Ser Duncan the Tall a. k. a. &#8220, Dunk&#8221, ( Peter Claffey ) is a bit of an idiot and he knows it. His inner speech in the Dunk and Egg tales is a constant stream of frustration and self-loathing. The poor man wasn’t born in a mansion and subjected to the same level of education as the noble of Westeros. He rather had to consider his own path, just like the rest of us farmers. He is therefore the most uncommon of the Westerosi themes: a great lovable dummy. The George R. R. Martin and Ira Parker-created set has Dunk&#8217’s description down pat, based on the second video for A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms.

In this two-minute display, Peter Claffery’s Dunk is portrayed as the lovely, flawless fool he is no less than five days. When Lord Baelor Targaryen’s servant tries to find his horses past his massive frame, he is standing like a pile it. In the future, Prince Aerion Targaryen ( Finn Bennett ) will conclude that Dunk is not intelligent enough to be a stableboy. Then Dunk is completely owned by his brand-new young squire Egg ( Dexter Sol Ansell ), as the boy correctly states that he does n’t have any dogs to hunt him down. Dunk also maintains the impression that he is meant for bigger things.

He intones about halfway through the clip,” I know I’m really a hedge knight, but I sometimes think I could be more,” he intones. The World of Ice and Fire users will be aware of Martin’s error.

Ser Duncan is a ( literally ) big reason why Game of Thrones is at its best and A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will serve as its warmest counterpart. While every person in Martin &#8217’s dream world is morally unworthy, Dunk is one of its more talented soldiers, and Egg looks to get following his lead. The video makes that clear with a lighter colour scheme and artist Dan Romer’s cheery score, which replaces Ramin Djawadi’s epic bombast and composer Dan Romer’s lighter color palette.

Sir Duncan the Tall may not be the Prince who was promised, but he might just be the protagonist that Westeros desperately needs in the year 209 AD. A Knight of the Seven Kingdom‘s biggest, dumbest boy has a chance to effect real change now that the dragons are long gone, House Targaryen’s power is waning, and ( first ) Blackfyre Rebellion is in view.

A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms airs on HBO Max on January 18th.

The Knight of the Seven Kingdoms video originally appeared on Den of Geek, and the title follows.

The timely Doctor Who subsidiary, The War Between the Land and the Sea, has no known release date. The sequence is potentially going to explore how society copes with an mysterious threat when the Doctor isn’t there to assist. Primarily focused on the no-longer-quite-so-secret U.K. government company known as UNIT. The]… ]

The first article on Den of Geek was” It’s Time to Allow This Doctor Who Bond Suddenly Become Canon.”

Westeros is home to many, let’s say, less-than-humble personalities, according to George R. R. Martin. Large-than-life characters like Cersei Lannister, Stannis Baratheon, and Daemon Targaryen are certainly appealing to the fantasy world depicted in Martin&#8217, s&#8220, A Song of Ice and Fire&#8221, books, and HBO’s Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. These individuals are more than likely aware of their enormous reputation.

With the most recent Game of Thrones prequel line, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms, all of that is all set to shift. This version of Martin &#8217, s &#8220, Tales of Dunk and Egg &#8221, novellas may also include the viewpoints of the Seven Kingdoms &#8217, lower class, as seen through the eye of this franchise &#8217, one of the most endearingly self-aware characters.

There&#8217, s no good way to put this but&#8230, Ser Duncan the Tall a. k. a. &#8220, Dunk&#8221, ( Peter Claffey ) is a bit of an idiot and he knows it. His inner speech in the Dunk and Egg tales is a constant stream of frustration and self-loathing. The poor man wasn’t born in a tower and subjected to the same level of education as the noble of Westeros. He rather had to find his own path to becoming a knight like the rest of us farmers. He is therefore the most uncommon of the Westerosi themes: a huge, lovely dummy. The George R. R. Martin and Ira Parker-created set has Dunk&#8217’s description down pat, based on the second video for A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms.

In this two-minute presentation, Peter Claffery &#8217 ;s Dunk is portrayed as the beautiful, flawless moron he is no fewer than five times. When Lord Baelor Targaryen’s maid tries to ride his horses past his enormous body, he is standing like a pile in front of him. Later, Prince Aerion Targaryen ( Finn Bennett ) will conclude that Dunk is not intelligent enough to be a stableboy. Then Dunk is completely owned by his brand-new young squire Egg ( Dexter Sol Ansell ), who correctly states that he doesn’t have any dogs to hunt him down. Dunk also maintains the impression that he is intended for greater items.

He intones about halfway through the video,” I know I’m really a fence knight, but I sometimes think I could be more,” he intones. The World of Ice and Fire users will be aware of Martin’s error.

Ser Duncan is a ( literally ) big reason why Game of Thrones is at its best and A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will serve as its warmest counterpart. While every person in Martin &#8217, s dream world is morally unharmed, Dunk is one of its more talented heroes, and the series that follows him and Egg appears to be following his lead. The video makes that clear with a lighter colour scheme and musician Dan Romer’s cheery score, which replaces Ramin Djawadi’s epic bombast and composer Dan Romer’s lighter color palette.

Sir Duncan the Tall may not be the Prince who was promised, but he might just be the protagonist that Westeros desperately needs in the year 209 AD. A Knight of the Seven Kingdom‘s biggest, dumbest boy has a chance to effect real change now that the dragons are long gone, House Targaryen’s power is waning, and the ( first ) Blackfyre Rebellion is in view.

On HBO Max, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will be airing on January 18.

The Knight of the Seven Kingdoms truck originally appeared on Den of Geek, and the title follows.

This article was produced in collaboration with Sony Pictures and appears in Den of Geek magazine’s NYCC 2025 matter. Some animation, like Chainsaw Man, have completely redefined the public’s perception of what is feasible in the method. The anime hasn’t just redefined animation because it is based on Tatsuki Fujimoto’s well-known comic, Weekly Shonen Jump [ …].

The second article on Den of Geek was Chainsaw Man: The Movie: Reze Arc Representing a Beloved Manga.

Westeros is home to many, let’s say, less-than-humble heroes, according to George R. R. Martin. Large-than-life characters like Cersei Lannister, Stannis Baratheon, and Daemon Targaryen are certainly appealing to the fantasy world depicted in Martin&#8217, s&#8220, A Song of Ice and Fire&#8221, books, and HBO’s Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. These individuals are more than likely aware of their enormous reputation.

With the most recent Game of Thrones prequel line, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms, all of that is all set to shift. This version of Martin &#8217, s &#8220, Tales of Dunk and Egg &#8221, novellas may also add the viewpoints of the Seven Kingdoms &#8217, lower class, as seen through the eye of this franchise &#8217, one of the most endearingly self-aware characters.

There&#8217, s no good way to put this but&#8230, Ser Duncan the Tall a. k. a. &#8220, Dunk&#8221, ( Peter Claffey ) is a bit of an idiot and he knows it. His inner monologue in the Dunk and Egg tales is a constant stream of frustration and self-loathing. The poor man wasn’t born in a mansion and subjected to the same level of education as the noble of Westeros. He rather had to get his own path to becoming a knight like the rest of us farmers. He is therefore the most uncommon Westerosi archetype: a large, lovely dummy. The George R. R. Martin and Ira Parker-created line has Dunk&#8217’s description down pat, based on the second video for A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms.

In this two-minute display, Peter Claffery’s Dunk is portrayed as the lovely, flawless buffoon he is no less than five days. When Lord Baelor Targaryen’s slave tries to find his horses past his massive frame, he is standing like a pile it. Later, Prince Aerion Targaryen ( Finn Bennett ) will conclude that Dunk is not intelligent enough to be a stableboy. Then Dunk is completely owned by his brand-new young squire Egg ( Dexter Sol Ansell ), as the boy correctly states that he does n’t have any dogs to hunt him down. Dunk also maintains the impression that he is meant for bigger things.

He intones about halfway through the tape,” I know I’m really a hedge knight, but I sometimes think I could be more,” he intones. The World of Ice and Fire users will be aware of Martin’s error.

Ser Duncan is a ( literally ) big reason why Game of Thrones is at its best and A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will serve as its warmest counterpart. While every person in Martin &#8217, s dream world is morally unharmed, Dunk is one of its more talented heroes, and the series that follows him and Egg appears to be following his lead. The video makes that clear with a lighter colour scheme and artist Dan Romer’s cheery score, which replaces Ramin Djawadi’s epic bombast and composer Dan Romer’s lighter color palette.

Sir Duncan the Tall may not be the Prince Who Was Promised, but he might just be the protagonist that Westeros desperately needs in the year 209 AC. A Knight of the Seven Kingdom‘s biggest, dumbest boy has a chance to effect real change now that the dragons are long gone, House Targaryen’s power is waning, and the ( first ) Blackfyre Rebellion is in view.

On HBO Max, A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms will be airing on January 18.

The Knight of the Seven Kingdoms truck originally appeared on Den of Geek, and the title follows.