Today I was talking to Bridget Temple of snowball training. The subject was change management and Mrs. Temple made a very interesting remark:
"Every beginning starts with an ending."
This is the central idea in a great book by William Briggs, "Transition management" The idea is that in general people are resisting change: it usually means a certain loss of comfort and control. Even the most flexible and open minded people have some habits they don't want to change. So to make a change happen you should take the time to say goodbye to the old patterns, before you can adapt the new ones.
It's like flying from trapeze to trapeze in the circus. It's so hard to say goodbye to the good solid trapeze you're holding and fly through nothingness to the other trapeze of which you're not sure you'll be able to grab it. Just letting go. It's wat funerals, marriages, baptisms, housewarmings and farewell parties are for. In snowboarding it's like pointing your board down the hill into the depth and letting go of one edge to turn on to the other one. It's so scary the first time.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Friday, June 23, 2006
Emotional Design
Emotional Design: Why we love or hate everyday things by Donald A. Norman.
Here's a book that is a waste of time. While the topic of the topic of including emotions in the design process is currently very interesting, this book is a letdown. I expected interesting tools and thinking frames to incorporate user emotions in the design process. Instead I found an endless raving about the author's private collection of artifacts. It can be interesting and even delightful to hear people tell about the stuff they like, but Mr. Norman makes shallow generalizations of his experiences, unfounded extrapolations and likes to talk in absolutes.
After the rave, the second half of the book goes on about how robots and computers should have emotions, in a discussion that is totally irrelevant for the area of product design. If you want to hear about the future of robots and intelligence go read 'On intelligence' by Jeff Hawkins.
Two notions of the book were interesting - luckily they are on the first few pages so you can put the book aside after page 50.
One is the observation that people are more focused when tense and more creative and open minded when relaxed. Although this fact is mentioned in any book about creativity, it only struck me now that this notion can be used in product design: when good focus is required the designer can try to rise the tension in the interacting user. And vice versa.
Further Mr. Norman breaks the experience of a product down into three levels. This breakdown is really just a simplified version of the abstraction model described by Korzibsky and a similar one described by Hawkins. It consists of a first impression, an unconscious impression after interacting and a conscious reasoning about the product. Don Norman is too vague for my taste about the distinction between the first impression and the interaction. Much more interesting lecture on the subject is Blink. (See one of my previous posts).
Yesterday I was meeting a person who was knowledgeable in the area of greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide. I learned that the production of books has a carbon dioxide byproduct weighing two times the weight of the book itself. This book is 400g wasted carbon dioxide.
Here's a book that is a waste of time. While the topic of the topic of including emotions in the design process is currently very interesting, this book is a letdown. I expected interesting tools and thinking frames to incorporate user emotions in the design process. Instead I found an endless raving about the author's private collection of artifacts. It can be interesting and even delightful to hear people tell about the stuff they like, but Mr. Norman makes shallow generalizations of his experiences, unfounded extrapolations and likes to talk in absolutes.
After the rave, the second half of the book goes on about how robots and computers should have emotions, in a discussion that is totally irrelevant for the area of product design. If you want to hear about the future of robots and intelligence go read 'On intelligence' by Jeff Hawkins.
Two notions of the book were interesting - luckily they are on the first few pages so you can put the book aside after page 50.
One is the observation that people are more focused when tense and more creative and open minded when relaxed. Although this fact is mentioned in any book about creativity, it only struck me now that this notion can be used in product design: when good focus is required the designer can try to rise the tension in the interacting user. And vice versa.
Further Mr. Norman breaks the experience of a product down into three levels. This breakdown is really just a simplified version of the abstraction model described by Korzibsky and a similar one described by Hawkins. It consists of a first impression, an unconscious impression after interacting and a conscious reasoning about the product. Don Norman is too vague for my taste about the distinction between the first impression and the interaction. Much more interesting lecture on the subject is Blink. (See one of my previous posts).
Yesterday I was meeting a person who was knowledgeable in the area of greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide. I learned that the production of books has a carbon dioxide byproduct weighing two times the weight of the book itself. This book is 400g wasted carbon dioxide.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Blink - Thinking without thinking
Last week on the plane I read 'Blink' by Malcolm Gladwell. It's a fun book that reads surprisingly fast. (I had to buy a new book for the return flight)
Basically Gladwell Maintains that the 'hunch' we get in the first split second we see something can be a far better and quicker judgment than if we take more time to observe and reason.
Of course it can go awfully wrong if we only go on first impressions, so the author comes up with three preconditions must be met before you can trust your hunch:
- You should have adequate experience in the situation you are judging. The patterns should be there in your subconscious. Gladwell illustrates this with marital consulting experts and face expression experts.
- You should have the right stress level. Being too relaxed makes you miss things. Being too stressed (illustrated by police officers in a firefight) makes you resort back to your 'reptilian' brain and survival instincts. Not good for judging a situation!
- You should not have too much information coming at you. This makes the rational brain kick to process all that and the wisdom of the blink is lost. Only the essential information should be there.
The point is illustrated painfully by a female trombone player who wins a blind audition with a huge lead. After the judges see that she is a woman, all of a sudden they can not believe anymore that she is a good trombone player since women were thought to be too frail to play the trombone.
Your initial feeling about something can also go wrong by implicit subconscious associations, that may be entirely irrational. Some very interesting tests and background information are at http://implicit.harvard.edu/
I think I'll trust my snap judgements more, and although I think the above mentioned preconditions are very strict, they act as a nice warning sign when you should double check your intuition.
Basically Gladwell Maintains that the 'hunch' we get in the first split second we see something can be a far better and quicker judgment than if we take more time to observe and reason.
Of course it can go awfully wrong if we only go on first impressions, so the author comes up with three preconditions must be met before you can trust your hunch:
- You should have adequate experience in the situation you are judging. The patterns should be there in your subconscious. Gladwell illustrates this with marital consulting experts and face expression experts.
- You should have the right stress level. Being too relaxed makes you miss things. Being too stressed (illustrated by police officers in a firefight) makes you resort back to your 'reptilian' brain and survival instincts. Not good for judging a situation!
- You should not have too much information coming at you. This makes the rational brain kick to process all that and the wisdom of the blink is lost. Only the essential information should be there.
The point is illustrated painfully by a female trombone player who wins a blind audition with a huge lead. After the judges see that she is a woman, all of a sudden they can not believe anymore that she is a good trombone player since women were thought to be too frail to play the trombone.
Your initial feeling about something can also go wrong by implicit subconscious associations, that may be entirely irrational. Some very interesting tests and background information are at http://implicit.harvard.edu/
I think I'll trust my snap judgements more, and although I think the above mentioned preconditions are very strict, they act as a nice warning sign when you should double check your intuition.
Saturday, April 29, 2006
A short history of Nearly Everything
Today I finished "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson. It is a journey trough the discovery of the world around us. It is the science textbook you've always wanted to have. The book puts all mayor scientific discoveries in their context in history. You meet all of the humanity's greatest thinkers and their strange and sometimes funny habits.
Did you know for instance that a Avogadro's complete name was Lorenzo Romano Amadeo Carlo Avogadro, Count of Quarequa and Ceretto? And that Avogadro's number (about 6.022e23) is equivalent to the number of popcorn kernels needed to cover the USA up to a depth of 9 miles? Hilarious are the quarrels in the scientific world and the extreme bad luck some scientists went trough. Bill Bryson makes the abstract scientific stuff visible and imaginable and puts a face to all the famous scientists.
All the while the book is written in a tone of great respect for the planet and the unique lucky stroke that brought us here.
Plus the book has got a very handy index for fact freaks like myself!
Did you know for instance that a Avogadro's complete name was Lorenzo Romano Amadeo Carlo Avogadro, Count of Quarequa and Ceretto? And that Avogadro's number (about 6.022e23) is equivalent to the number of popcorn kernels needed to cover the USA up to a depth of 9 miles? Hilarious are the quarrels in the scientific world and the extreme bad luck some scientists went trough. Bill Bryson makes the abstract scientific stuff visible and imaginable and puts a face to all the famous scientists.
All the while the book is written in a tone of great respect for the planet and the unique lucky stroke that brought us here.
Plus the book has got a very handy index for fact freaks like myself!
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
On Intelligence
A few days ago I finished 'On Intelligence'. One of the most inspiring books I ever read. It's a very accessible, yet in depth, explanation of how the brain works. While many statements sound bold and unfounded, there is a scientific base to it, and most importantly a few falsifiable predictions are made so the theory can be scrutinized the way Carl Popper would approve it.
Jeff Hawkins explains how neural networks are no way near the way a real brain works. He also explains why the whole AI movement is on the wrong track and proposes a very interesting algorythm for the brain which integrates a lot of recent work on neurology. If you're interested in the algorythm: go read the book. I won't try to explain it in one post.
What I found stunning is that the algorythm Hawkins proposes explains a lot of patterns in human behaviour that are mentioned in other books I like. (McWhinney, Korzybski, Pirsig, etc.) It's like a giant puzzle coming together.
One of Hawkin's coworkers has modeled the algortyhm in a computer. It seems to work. I want to try that too. It seems the new LEGO NXT has a more powerful chip and programming software by the guys at National Instruments. Maybe I can build intelligent stuff with that...
My favorite quote from the book is "Consciousness is what it feels like to have a neocortex". Meaning that the hierarchical neocortical system that allows for abstraction and pattern recognition makes us experience what we call consciousness.
Jeff Hawkins explains how neural networks are no way near the way a real brain works. He also explains why the whole AI movement is on the wrong track and proposes a very interesting algorythm for the brain which integrates a lot of recent work on neurology. If you're interested in the algorythm: go read the book. I won't try to explain it in one post.
What I found stunning is that the algorythm Hawkins proposes explains a lot of patterns in human behaviour that are mentioned in other books I like. (McWhinney, Korzybski, Pirsig, etc.) It's like a giant puzzle coming together.
One of Hawkin's coworkers has modeled the algortyhm in a computer. It seems to work. I want to try that too. It seems the new LEGO NXT has a more powerful chip and programming software by the guys at National Instruments. Maybe I can build intelligent stuff with that...
My favorite quote from the book is "Consciousness is what it feels like to have a neocortex". Meaning that the hierarchical neocortical system that allows for abstraction and pattern recognition makes us experience what we call consciousness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)