Unique Storyboard Method

The process of using receipt tape to lay out ideas and transitions was more interesting to me than watching the final result. In the video, I found the visuals to be a little distracting - I had to listen to her voice and try to figure out the drawings at the same time. Therefore, I choose to focus on her voice rather than the specifics of the drawing. Nancy Duarte has a very soothing and calm voice - she is pleasant to listen to. I like how she took time to breathe and used pausing wisely. She knew when to slow down her words, pause to provide time for us to catch up, and then when to speak faster and with more energy. This aspect of presentations seems to get the least attention from the design field. I think we focus primarily on how visuals look rather than voice or content. In an information age, where we are exposed to thousands of messages a day, I think it is important to not get too distracted by how visuals look to compose a complete message. I actually think it is easy to hide behind a powerpoint or visual presentation - and that speeches with no or few visuals require a different kind of boldness and energy. I like how Kevin O'Malley said "Use slides only as support. They support you - not the other way around."

I also appreciated how she mentioned transitions. This is one of the hardest parts for me - creating smooth transitions between different point of information. I can easily lay out the main points and what needs to be said - but struggle to make it all work together as one complete story. Do you have any tips for how to make great transitions?

The Value of Teams

I am currently working on two product design projects - sporting equipment for disabled athletes and teapots. The latter project is being designed by a team while the former is an individual undertaking. One notable difference between the processes (I've noticed this especially in the last few days/weeks) is that group projects enable me to overcome uncertainty quicker and smarter. I believe that the mutual support and purpose found in a group boosts my confidence and decision-making skills. For example, with the sporting equipment project I often spend a great deal of time finding reliable people to answer specific questions. Today I was working on designing a metal piece for a wheelchair and ran into some questions I could not answer or find out on my own - so I tried a local sporting goods store who then redirected me to a local metal shop. Though the welder/metal smith was incredibly helpful - I spent a good portion of the day on one small aspect of the project. There were several other questions still waiting for my attention. I think I may be "wasting" a lot of time deciding where to start when I am working by myself - especially when I hit a "wall" or challenge that I am not sure how to overcome. However, when I am working in teams, these challenges seem easier to overcome because I can rely on the group's collective intelligence while receiving affirmation on good ideas - in other words it helps filter out the bad or weaker ideas faster.

The teapot has moved at a much quicker pace in comparison. The team is able to make quick and confident decisions due to the group's thoughtfulness and mutual commitment to the project/purpose. A mutual commitment makes a significant difference in my ability to work well with others. If I doubt a teammates dedication or interest I am unable to fully trust them - which usually results in me doing most of the work and restricting their role - whether directly or indirectly (whether I deliberately choose to or instinctively do so). It is one aspect of my work that I have noticed and attempted to change - I try to give others the benefit of the doubt and allow them the freedom to explore in their own ways. As someone who places a strong sense of ownership into everything that I do - it can be hard for me to let others in. Though in a place like CCA, where I am surrounded by talented artists and designers, I rarely have this problem.

Regarding the Harvard Business Review article, "The Disciple of Teams", there was one quote that reminded me of my past experience with an architecture firm. On page 11 the author suggests that some corporations constrain themselves by assigning team roles based on positions rather than skills. In my last architecture job, the principals decided to form a special team to clarify a company document. As I was considered one of the better writers in my department, I was nominated to be a part of the team. I was very excited about it and invested significant time into the project - working with the others to help with the document. When our team went to present our ideas to the others (two principals) they did not let us share our ideas - in fact before we could even begin to speak they assumed control over the team and disregarded all the work that we had done completely. It was extremely frustrating and I was very frustrated with the company - who frequently boasts about how they empower their employees to develop their skills, etc. These two principals continued to edit the document according to their own agenda and it was a terrible piece of work. Because they were in higher positions in the company they ignored the input from their younger staff to achieve a weaker result. In fact, they eventually acknowledged their ideas were weak and opted to keep the document as it was originally. I wish I could have cited this article at the time of the final meeting!

Operational Efficiency

As an aspiring product designer, I've focused on how objects are made concerning materials but not necessarily on how this affects the business productivity. Therefore, I can think of several companies that are modeling innovative material use (such as Targus which offers vinyl free backpacks) but I struggle to identify operational advantages.

The first thing that came to mind is Berkeley grocery stores that sell local produce specific to northern California such as the Monterey Market.

The Monterey Market has partnered with several local farmers to provide fresh, seasonal produce to its customers. The store focuses primarily on produce with a limited variety of dairy products. They sell dry goods, such as grains and nuts, in bulk containers as well. They do not sell any meat products. The produce is displayed in large crates that sit in rows outside and inside the building.

The store does not need any warehouse or storage space - they display everything they have in the crates. The farmers are responsible to deliver their goods to the store on a weekly basis. The Monterey Market does not have to maintain as much as other grocery stores - with simple concrete floors, little refrigeration, no storage, and hand written signage. Their setup allows them to adjust very quickly to seasonal changes. They do not discriminate between large farms and small farms, providing both and allowing the customer to choose what they prefer. I think this is a good example of operational efficiency because it has been so successful. They have been able to sell a high quality product in an effective and trustworthy way. They have empowered the farmer to sell more directly to the customer.

Debt Fear

Business finances and money management intimidate me. The numbers and math themselves do not bother me - it is the amount of detail and responsibility associated with these aspects of business that cause concern. My personal finances already add enough anxiety to my life!

A Pentagon employee, and close friend, recently told me that "the greatest threat to the United States is debt." It is the number one issue that crosses his desk each day. Other friends, primarily living in Kansas, strongly recommend the Dave Ramsey programs to reduce and eliminate personal debt. In today's economy, becoming debt free seems to be becoming a priority to avoid further conflicts. Yet, as potential business entrepreneurs, debt seems unavoidable, even necessary in order to translate an idea into a profit. Though we can obtain legal status to protect our personal finances, the risk of financial failure, loss or debt is daunting. This potential failure is the reason that business finances intimidate me. The idea itself can be paralyzing.

Aside from the fear of financial loss and debt, the other aspects of business money management, such as how to accept cash, credit cards, and checks is understandable. My father, as a dedicated Citibank employee, explained banking principles and credit technologies to me - it took me awhile to understand the technology required by credit cards and all the hidden fees, etc. that business must pay to use. Though it is a complicated process, with processing equipment and transaction fees, its benefits far outweigh these costs, as the article, "The Basics of Money Management" suggested. I have even began to wonder when cash will no longer be used, except as an educational tool for children.

I do have one question from the article, concerning checks. It suggested writing down the customer's driver license number on the check - how does this help protect your business? Does it simply provide a way to track down the customer upon trying to cash a fraudulent check?

Vision, Mission and Values

As part of my CCA application I included a short description of my core values as a designer. I was inspired to do this by my husband's organization, Mosaic, because their values are so clear and defining. In my opinion, core values are the most important part because they will determine how you accomplish your goals. The goals themselves, like the mission, can change, but the values will, or should, hold (relatively) steady. I understand a business' core values as similar to a person's character - they reflect what is most important and enduring. As a person's character should not easily change (as that would reflect a lack of integrity) so I think that core values should not be easily changed (without great consideration).

Though I am sure my core values will change as I continue through grad school... these are what I started with before I was accepted.

Core Values:

Vision: Without vision people perish. I think I chose this as a core value because I wanted to signify its importance to me. As a designer, I work best when there is a common and clear vision to move towards. I think I included this for potential employers - when I worked as an architect, I had a hard time finding employers that had a clear and compelling vision.

Character: Talent is important but the shape of your character is the shape of your future. A person's character determines if his/her talent is to be used for creatively good or creatively destructive purposes. I choose this core value, again for potential employers to see how I value character development and consideration in the workplace.

Change: Innovation requires change and a new way of thinking. Inspired by a quote from Einstein, "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." Change is vital to innovation. This shows I am aware of how quickly life can change and wish to maintain an attitude that is open to change - in order to be the most creative and responsive to the needs of the time.

Creativity: Creativity is reliant upon one's understanding of the essence or core. This connection unleashes innovation beyond existing structures and systems. I value ethnographic research and designing with a community rather than for a community. I wish to be an involved, compassionate designer who empowers local communities rather than be an isolated designer removed from the context and consequences of the project.

Courage: Courage isn't the absence of fear; it is the presence of hope. Those who are driven by the hope of what could be create the future. I chose this as a core value because I knew I would face intimidating challenges and obstacles and wanted to remind myself to bravely face forward - to not let fear undermine hope.

Mission and Vision are harder for me to determine - especially right now as I am a new graduate student, however, I will try to draft a version below.

Mission: To be a holistic product designer who considers multiple factors in designing solutions for complex environments.

Vision: Be a designer who only creates good. It is not only neutral (creating no bad) but must have a positive impact. (This is extremely idealistic but aren't visions supposed to be nearly unattainable? Just attainable enough to keep you moving forward?)

Forgetting who the customers are

"The main reason business' fail is because they forget who their customers are." (Steve Arnold, Polaris Ventures)

This comment, given by a guest lecturer last week, immediately stood out to me. Its simplicity and clarity enabled me to understand its meaning at once - though I have limited business experience. As a designer, I realize how easy it is to focus on improving small details while losing sight of the whole. I also struggle with the pressure to serve a broad audience, which often accumulates in not serving any one group well.

The article, "What is Strategy?" gave language and examples to what losing sight of the client might looks like. One of the most memorable examples mentioned is Maytag. Pressured by dealers and worried about growth, they tried to extend their standard product line (laundry and dish washers) to include refrigerators and cooking products. Though the company grew, the return on sales declined. (Harvard Business Review, Page 76) Did they forget who their customer was? I don't think it is quite that simple, though in this example, they appear to have compromised for the sake of growth. The end result was an expanded company with less profits. They went from serving a select customer group well to serving a broad group with average results. I would argue that they lost confidence in who they were (strengths) and who they were serving. They gave in to the external pressure and to other people's ideas of success.

This leads me to revisit the definition of success - is it being the largest, most expansive company or serving a clearly defined set of needs well? This conversation reminds me of the film, Food Inc. I was deeply impressed by the organic, free range farmer interviewed. He spoke of his mission or desire "to just feed people so they can be healthy." His primary commitment is to health, not wealth. Therefore, he resists expansion and rapid growth that would lead to a short term higher profit - with a compromise on quality and values. His definition of success is linked directly to his investment in human health, not in buying more land, producing higher yields, and being able to compete with large corporations.

The article, "What is Strategy" can be summarized in one sentence - "The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do." (page 70) The organic farmer was strategic in that he knew what he wanted, who his customers are, and where to draw the line.

We must ask better questions.

My husband often says, "Whoever asks the question controls the conversation." And as I've listened to him speak (he frequently gives public lectures/presentations) and engage in Q & A sessions, I can see how these questions guide the conversation and limit his responses. Even in simple, one on one conversations, I've noticed that the way a question is asked is important. For example, he often asks others, "What are you passionate about?" Very few people can respond to this question quickly - they usually say they need some time to process or even that they aren't quite sure.

In an attempt to aid those who feel overwhelmed by this question, I've found a way to reword it to help uncover an answer. I ask - "What do you lose track of time doing?" or " What do you enjoy doing so much that you lose track of time?" Most people can respond to this question quickly and with confidence. Perhaps, for some, the first question is too open ended - too full of possibility - and this freedom intimidates and confuses the respondent to a point where they doubt themselves and forget what they already know to be true. In Barry Schwartz's Ted Talk, The Paradox of Choice, he talks about how too many options hinders people from making any choice at all. In the absence of constraints, people grow uncertain and uncomfortable and are prohibited from making any progress at all.

In the article, "Breakthrough Thinking from Inside the Box", the Harvard Business Review argues that "most people are not very good at unstructured, abstract brainstorming." Questions set up a particular approach to a problem. They will determine whether you are able to discover anything new - in how broad or specific they are and in what they address. Unfortunately, learning to ask good questions is often overlooked. In my experience, it is easier to stick to the most familiar set of questions, that will lead to common answers, rather than try to come up with something new to ask.

CCA's Design Research class emphasized the importance of asking thoughtful questions in an attempt to discover what isn't being spoken - the "latent needs" as the article mentioned above calls it. How can we bring this method into internal, business strategy sessions? Perhaps the mindmap exercise that we've engaged in recently will help. I am not sure. It does encourage questioning how two seemingly unrelated things might work together in new and unexpected ways. For example, on our mindmap, we had "landscape restoration" and "golf". We then asked ourselves how golf might work with restoration - and came up with an idea for golfballs that contain seeds or soil improvement mixtures. I prefer this method over simply looking for ways to incrementally improve an existing idea - innovation is much harder to find in these situations.