Be Wrong to Be Right

Wrong is in vogue. A song by Depeche Mode is named “Wrong.” Seth Godin blogged about failure:http://bit.ly/fGNB1kKathryn Schultz presented at a TED Conference about the importance of being wrong. http://bit.ly/gD0kPm

Kathryn said being wrong is the source of our creativity.

In the Optimize Phase of LEO, we try to be wrong. We test variations of our best design concept from the Enrich Phase. We test the variants we expect to be good.  We test other variants we expect to be bad. If the expected good are really bad or if the expected bad are really good – we learn. We even learn if the good are good or the bad are bad in a manner different than what we expected. We learn as long as we’re wrong aboutsomething.

Tom Kelly, the founder of IDEO, once said “Fail early and fail often.”

Failure is the key to creativity.

Design failure into you development process. Assure that many low-cost failures occur before you send your products or services to your customers.

Reward failures during the design & development process.

“Great job, Jim,” say to your employee, “that idea of yours was one huge failure!”

The worst result in the Optimize Phase is to be right. Don’t fear being wrong. Don’t avoid it. Being right is the most dangerous result. We gain no knowledge. We remain ignorant. We happily avoid creativity, invention and insight.

Be wrong to be right.

Wishing we could ‘Enrich’ political campaigns

A few weeks ago Obama began his bid for re-election in 2012. Don’t worry; this won’t turn into a political blog… But when I heard this, it got me thinking. I was reminded of the last elections in 2010. I remember telling my wife during campaign/election season that it was tough to figure out how I wanted to vote in most cases because I didn’t hear much from any candidate on why they should get my vote. Instead I heard a lot about why ‘the other guy’ should not get my vote.

The reasons why I should not vote for ‘the other guy’ ranged from some that were very reasonable to some that could make you think ‘how-could-this-person-even-be-running-for-office?’ In fact, if you go to youTube and search negative campaign ads you can see for yourself. Chances are you’ll see some ads that seem quite absurd. Some are so ridiculous they’ll make you laugh. It’s sad really. The ads are full of partial truths and bits and pieces of someone’s record taken out of context. Most people, I hope, are smart enough to see through this but the ads somehow still work. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be run so often by so many candidates. What does it say about us as the electing population if this is what we respond to?

That question then led me to think what would happen if the same approach was taken in other aspects of our lives. What if companies all treated each other as ruthlessly as these politicians running for office? Can you imagine if some of the auto companies like Ford and Honda played ads featuring a dramatization of speeding, run-a-way Toyotas crashing as accelerator pedals got stuck as it had happened leading up to the 2009 Toyota brake defect/recall? The auto industry is one of the most competitive industries in the world, and even though the other companies tried to capitalize on Toyota’s mistakes and misfortune, an approach like this would not be taken. Think about why that is…

Let’s try another scenario. Let’s say you have an upcoming job interview for a position you really want. And in this case, you even know who else is being considered for the job. What do you think would happen if, when you sit for the interview, you spend 90% of the time telling the panel of interviewers why the other candidates should not be hired? Chances are you wouldn’t get the job. I think the interviewers would even be shocked and appalled by your behavior and they wouldn’t have much respect for you afterward. If you think about it, the campaign season is basically a long, drawn-out job interview. We, the voters, are the panel. Yet, we accept this behavior from people who are running for office, who are up for a job that can impact so many lives. Again, what does this say about us if this is what we respond to?

Whether we’re making decisions about what products to buy or who we should hire for a new position at work, we have a higher standard. We don’t let companies or people get away with insulting our intelligence or treating us (consumers, interviewers, etc) or each other in a disrespectful manner. Why in campaign season does that change? What would it be like if we maintained this higher standard during our elections? Would society be better off?

Service Quality

Seth Godin hits the nail on the head. http://bit.ly/fD47JR

But great service designs require more than designers signing their work. Great service designs require a process.

Listen – Observe and understand the customer. Take the time to really understand what the customer wants. Understand the why behind the what. Stop talking. Start listening. Designers must experience their customers first-hand. (No, reading tweets is not first-hand experience!) Empathize with the customer who gets a blast of cold water from the hotel’s shower head.

Enrich – Explore and discover the best alternative. Once you have a rock solid, visceral understanding of customer needs, don’t rush to the first concept that comes to mind. Take the time to explore all the concepts. Invent some new ones! Select (discover) the best design – the best design for your customer at a cost the customer is more than willing to pay.

Optimize – Improve and perfect the discovered design. Once the best design is discovered, improve that design. Break it down to the details. Combine and re-combine until you are certain that you’ve found the best version of the design. Then, take that best version of the best design and sweat every detail. What can go wrong? Play the “what-if” game. Then create a solid counteraction for every problem. Replay the “what-if” game. You’re done when you’re certain the customer will never have a bad experience.

Test your final service design and then provide it to your happy customers.