Category Archives: Innovation

A New Blueprint for Government Innovation

Human-Centered Public Policy

LAST UPDATED: December 2, 2025 at 12:21PM

A New Blueprint for Government Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

The core dysfunction in government — whether it’s a baffling tax form, a convoluted permit process, or an inaccessible public service — stems from a design failure. Policy is often designed for the convenience of the bureaucracy, not the dignity of the citizen. This bureaucratic friction, which I call the Public Policy Drag, erodes participation, trust, and the very effectiveness of governance.

Human-Centered Public Policy (HCPP) rejects the notion that complex problems require complex solutions for the user. Instead, it applies the deep empathy and iterative testing principles of Human-Centered Design (HCD) to law and administration. HCPP demands that we understand the citizen’s true needs and pain points before drafting the first line of legislation or code. The result is policy that achieves its stated goal with maximum efficiency and fairness.

The Three Pillars of Human-Centered Policy Design

HCPP transforms the traditional policy lifecycle by emphasizing three key shifts:

1. From Political Intent to Ethnographic Empathy (Discovery)

Traditional policy starts with a high-level goal (e.g., “reduce homelessness”). HCPP starts with deep ethnographic research. Policy designers must immerse themselves in the lived experience of the target population. This means sitting in the queue at the DMV, observing a family applying for social aid, or walking the streets with those without shelter. The goal is to move beyond statistical averages and understand the emotional and procedural friction that causes programs to fail. The policy becomes a solution to a documented human problem, not an abstract legislative goal.

2. From Top-Down Rulemaking to Citizen Co-Creation (Design)

Too often, policy is written in isolation. HCPP mandates co-creation. This involves working directly with citizens, frontline workers (the ultimate policy implementers), and even advocacy groups to design the actual service delivery flow and forms. This ensures that the policy isn’t just feasible; it’s desirable and usable. When citizens have a stake in the design, they gain a sense of ownership and dignity, leading to higher compliance and engagement.

3. From Compliance Audit to Iterative Learning (Delivery)

Government traditionally measures success via budgetary compliance or output (e.g., “We processed 10,000 forms”). HCPP measures success via citizen outcomes and iterative learning. Policies must be launched as Minimum Viable Products (MVPs), with clear metrics tied to human behavior (e.g., “What percentage of eligible citizens successfully accessed the benefit?”). This rapid feedback loop allows policymakers to unlearn what doesn’t work and pivot quickly, institutionalizing Learning Velocity as a governmental core competency.

Case Study 1: Redesigning the Job Seekers’ Benefit Application

Challenge: High Drop-off Rates and Fraud Risk

A national labor department struggled with its unemployment benefit application. The form was over 50 pages long, required numerous attachments, and resulted in a 60% drop-off rate for eligible, low-literacy applicants. Simultaneously, the complexity created loopholes exploited by fraudsters. The policy was designed to prevent fraud, but in doing so, it became anti-citizen.

HCPP Intervention: Focus on the “Moment of Need”

A human-centered team began by observing applicants. They quickly realized the high cognitive load of the form, which compounded the emotional stress of unemployment. The redesign focused on the citizen journey:

The 50-page document was unlearned and replaced with a phased, conversational digital interface that dynamically asked questions based on previous answers, reducing cognitive load.
Document submission was replaced by back-end automated verification using existing government databases, eliminating the burden of citizens having to retrieve obsolete paperwork.

The Outcome:

The redesign led to a 90% completion rate among eligible users and an 80% reduction in processing time. By applying deep empathy to simplify the process, the new system paradoxically reduced fraud risk (as data capture was cleaner) while dramatically improving citizen access and restoring faith in the department’s mission.

Case Study 2: Municipal Permit Reform for Small Businesses

Challenge: Stifled Entrepreneurship via Bureaucratic Maze

A large metropolitan city noticed a sharp decline in new small business openings, particularly in marginalized neighborhoods. The key roadblock was the municipal permit process, which required navigating ten different departments, each with its own paper forms and siloed timelines. The policy was designed for departmental control, not economic growth.

HCPP Intervention: A Unified Permit Journey

The innovation team mapped the small business owner’s journey — the end-user. They discovered the owner didn’t care about the internal departmental structure; they cared about a single, predictable timeline. The intervention:

Created a single digital Small Business Portal (the MVP) that served as the sole entry point for all permits and licenses, acting as an internal orchestrator.
Mandated an internal unlearning of departmental silos, replacing the individual forms with a single, integrated data submission that populated all necessary back-end systems simultaneously.
Implemented a public-facing service standard: a maximum 30-day decision deadline, creating reciprocal accountability between the city and its citizens.

The Outcome:

The permit reform dramatically increased the number of new small business registrations, particularly in the target neighborhoods. The city unlearned its rigid, siloed structure, proving that policy simplicity for the citizen drives the desired economic outcome more effectively than bureaucratic control.

A New Covenant of Trust

Human-Centered Public Policy is not just a framework for better government services; it is a blueprint for rebuilding the covenant of trust between the governed and the governing. When citizens encounter policy that is intuitive, respectful, and effective, they regain faith in the system’s competence and intent.

Leaders in government must stop writing policies that sound good in a committee room and start designing services that work brilliantly in a citizen’s life. Embrace the empathy required to understand the friction, the courage to challenge obsolete procedures, and the humility to launch policies as MVPs ready for iteration.

“The measure of good government is not the wisdom of its laws, but the effectiveness with which those laws translate to human dignity and ease of use.”

Frequently Asked Questions About Human-Centered Public Policy

1. How does HCPP differ from standard policy development?

Standard policy development is often top-down, driven by legislative goals and budget. HCPP is bottom-up, starting with deep ethnographic research to understand the lived experience and pain points of the citizen (the end-user) before any rules or regulations are drafted. It prioritizes maximizing citizen outcomes and minimizing systemic friction.

2. What is “Public Policy Drag”?

Public Policy Drag is the term for the systemic friction and complexity created by policy and procedure that makes government services difficult, confusing, or inaccessible for the citizen. This drag erodes trust, lowers compliance, and reduces the overall effectiveness of a government program.

3. What role does “Co-Creation” play in HCPP?

Co-creation involves actively designing services and policy mechanisms with citizens and frontline workers, not just for them. By including the end-users in the design process, HCPP ensures the policy is not only feasible but also usable and desirable, leading to higher levels of citizen engagement and dignity.

Your first step toward Human-Centered Public Policy: Gather a cross-functional team of policymakers, IT experts, and front-line staff. Choose one high-friction citizen process (e.g., getting a required license). Ask the team to go through the process as if they were the citizen — no using internal shortcuts. Document the emotional and procedural friction points, then use these insights to co-create a single-page improvement plan.

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The End of the Lone Genius Myth

Leave a reply

Building Collective Confidence

The End of the Lone Genius Myth

LAST UPDATED: December 1, 2025 at 5:55PM

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

Innovation is rarely a bolt of lightning striking a solitary mind. Look closer at history’s greatest inventions, and you’ll find a network of collaborators, financiers, critics, and technical experts. Yet, in business, we persistently mythologize the Lone Genius — the charismatic individual who will single-handedly disrupt the market. This myth is more than just bad history; it’s bad strategy, creating fragile, single-point-of-failure dependencies and actively diminishing the potential of entire workforces.

The human-centered change leader knows that sustainable, continuous innovation flows from Collective Confidence — the shared belief among team members that their group is competent, capable of generating novel solutions, and resilient enough to overcome inevitable failures. It is the core mechanism that allows an organization to embrace ambiguity and initiate radical change without succumbing to fear or internal politics.

Individual confidence is essential, but it is Collective Confidence that translates great ideas into scaled reality. This is the difference between a brilliant patent and a world-changing product pipeline.

The Three Pillars of Collective Confidence

Collective confidence is not built through motivational posters or annual retreats; it is engineered through three core, systemic pillars:

1. Engineered Psychological Safety

The single most powerful predictor of team effectiveness is Psychological Safety — the shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking. If an engineer fears ridicule for suggesting a crazy idea, or if a junior employee risks reprisal for questioning a flawed decision, innovation dies. Collective Confidence requires institutionalizing safety through: a) Leadership modeling vulnerability and failure; and b) Process design that frames experiments as learning opportunities, not judgment opportunities. When teams know they can fail safely, they will dare to succeed boldly.

2. Shared Context and Innovation Language

Confidence is impossible without clarity. Teams cannot feel confident about solving a complex problem if they don’t share a common language for defining the problem, measuring progress, and articulating risk. This means moving beyond departmental jargon to create a common, human-centered language (e.g., using “minimum viable product” and “discovery phase” consistently across engineering, marketing, and finance). This shared context minimizes miscommunication, builds trust, and ensures everyone is confidently pulling in the same direction — even if the path forward is ambiguous.

3. Reciprocal Accountability, Not Individual Blame

In the Lone Genius model, if a project fails, a single person is blamed and removed. In the Collective Confidence model, accountability is reciprocal. It is a shared responsibility to ensure success and to support the process of learning from failure. When a project hits a roadblock, the question shifts from “Who made the mistake?” to “What did our process allow to happen, and how can we, as a team, strengthen our controls for the next iteration?” This shared burden of responsibility reinforces trust and encourages team members to speak up early when risks are identified.

Case Study 1: The Manufacturing Firm’s Quality Transformation

Challenge: Inconsistent Quality Control and Blame Culture

A precision parts manufacturing firm (“PrecisionCo”) struggled with unacceptable error rates. Their existing culture relied on a “Quality Genius” — a single, highly experienced supervisor responsible for final sign-off. When failures occurred, the supervisor was blamed, which led the rest of the team to practice defensive mediocrity — avoiding responsibility and relying solely on the genius’s final check.

The Collective Confidence Intervention: Decentralizing Quality Ownership

PrecisionCo decided to deliberately dismantle the Quality Genius role. Instead, they:

Implemented mandatory cross-functional training, teaching every line worker not just their task, but the context of the next person’s task.
Introduced a rule: Errors were investigated, not to find the individual responsible, but to identify the process step that failed.
Empowered every team member with the stop work authority, encouraging them to halt production if a process felt wrong, making their voice a valued tool, not a potential liability.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

The shift was profound. By building Collective Confidence in the process and in each other, error rates dropped dramatically. The value was not in creating 100 individual geniuses, but in creating a system where the collective capability of the team — backed by psychological safety — eliminated the need for a single hero.

Case Study 2: The Design Agency’s Client Pitch Success

Challenge: Dependence on the Principal Designer for High-Stakes Pitches

A renowned digital design agency (“DesignPro”) often won major contracts, but only when the celebrated Principal Designer (the “Genius”) led the pitch. Junior designers, fearing the Principal’s perfectionism, rarely contributed their best work until it was safe, resulting in bottlenecks and burnout for the lone star.

The Collective Confidence Intervention: Structured Co-Creation and ‘Shitty First Drafts’

DesignPro focused on teaching the team to confidently engage with ambiguity early. They instituted:

The “Shitty First Draft” (SFD) ritual: Every project phase required a deliberately low-fidelity, unfinished draft from every team member to normalize imperfection and minimize the fear of judgment.
Reciprocal Feedback Systems: Instead of the Principal critiquing down, junior members were mandated to lead critique sessions for the Principal’s work, encouraging Psychological Safety and flattening the expertise hierarchy.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

The result was a dramatic decrease in the Principal Designer’s pitch lead rate, and a massive increase in overall client pitch wins led by various team members. The Collective Confidence enabled the entire firm to innovate consistently. The Principal Designer, freed from the necessity of being the lone hero, shifted into a strategic coaching role, enhancing the firm’s overall innovation capacity.

The Call to Action for Human-Centered Leaders

Stop searching for the next Lone Genius. The genius is already within your walls, diffused across your teams, waiting for the right conditions to emerge. Your role as a leader is to stop rewarding individual heroism and start engineering the systems that build Collective Confidence.

This means moving from a culture of individual brilliance to a culture of systemic capability. The breakthroughs you need won’t come from a single hero’s desk, but from the collaborative, confidently ambiguous work of teams that trust their process and, most importantly, trust each other.

“Individual brilliance gets you a great idea. Collective Confidence gets you a sustainable organization capable of perpetual innovation.”

Frequently Asked Questions About Collective Confidence

1. What is the difference between Individual and Collective Confidence?

Individual confidence is a person’s belief in their own capability to perform a task. Collective Confidence (or team efficacy) is the shared, reciprocal belief among team members that their group, as a whole, can successfully organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given levels of attainment, especially when facing ambiguous or complex problems.

2. How does the “Lone Genius” myth harm organizational innovation?

The myth harms innovation by creating single points of failure, suppressing employee voice (lowering psychological safety), and encouraging “defensive mediocrity” where employees avoid responsibility and rely on the identified “genius” instead of contributing their own creative input. This slows down learning and reduces organizational resilience.

3. How do you “engineer” Psychological Safety?

Psychological Safety is engineered, not wished into existence, through formal processes: 1) Leadership explicitly modeling vulnerability and admitting mistakes; 2) Implementing formal feedback loops that focus on process learning instead of individual blame; and 3) Decentralizing decision-making (like the “stop work” authority) to empower all voices equally.

Your first step toward building Collective Confidence: Next time an experiment fails, deliberately avoid asking, “Who was responsible?” Instead, ask the entire team, “What weakness in our shared process or communication enabled this outcome? And what will we change next time?”

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Integrating AI into the Innovation Pipeline

Leave a reply

From Ideation to Execution

LAST UPDATED: November 30, 2025 at 8:21AM

Integrating AI into the Innovation Pipeline

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

The quest for innovation has always been constrained by human bandwidth: the time it takes to conduct research, synthesize data, and test concepts. Artificial Intelligence shatters these constraints. However, simply using AI to generate more ideas faster leads to digital noise. True competitive advantage comes from using AI to enhance the quality of human judgment and focus our finite human empathy where it matters most: the Moments of Insight.

We must move beyond the narrow view of AI as just a tool for cost reduction and embrace it as a partner that dramatically accelerates our Learning Velocity. The innovation pipeline is no longer a linear process of discovery, design, and delivery; it is a Synergistic Loop where AI handles the heavy lift of data synthesis, freeing human teams to focus on unstructured problem-solving and radical concept generation.

The AI Augmentation Framework: Three Critical Integration Points

To integrate AI mindfully, we must define clear roles for the human and the machine at three stages of the pipeline:

1. Deepening Empathy through AI Synthesis (Discovery Phase)

The Discovery Phase is traditionally dominated by ethnographic research. While human observation remains irreplaceable for capturing nuance and emotion, AI excels at processing vast, disparate datasets that inform that empathy. An AI system can ingest millions of customer service transcripts, social media sentiment, competitor product reviews, and historical sales figures to immediately generate a prioritized list of friction points and unmet needs. This doesn’t replace the human ethnographer; it provides the ethnographer with a laser-focused map, allowing them to spend their time understanding the why behind the patterns AI found, rather than manually searching for the patterns themselves.

2. Augmenting Ideation through AI Diversification (Design Phase)

Human teams tend to cluster around familiar solutions (Affinity Bias). AI breaks this pattern. In the Design Phase, after the human team defines the core problem, AI can be tasked with generating radical concept diversification. By training an AI on solutions from entirely different industries (e.g., applying aerospace logistics solutions to retail inventory management), it can suggest analogous concepts that humans would never naturally connect. The human team’s role shifts from generating 100 average ideas to selecting the best 5 from 1,000 machine-generated, diverse, and well-researched concepts — a massive multiplier on human creativity.

3. Accelerating Validation through AI Simulation (Delivery Phase)

The most time-consuming step is validation (prototyping, testing, and iterating). AI, specifically in the form of digital twins and sophisticated simulation models, can dramatically accelerate this. For complex physical products (like self-driving cars or new materials), AI can run thousands of scenario tests in a virtual environment before a single physical prototype is built. This shifts the human team’s focus from slow, expensive physical validation to data interpretation and hypothesis refinement. The human only builds the prototype when the AI simulation suggests a 95% likelihood of success, maximizing the efficiency of capital and time.

Case Study 1: The Financial Institution and Regulatory Forecasting

Challenge: Slow Time-to-Market Due to Regulatory Risk

A global financial institution (FinCorp) found its innovation pipeline paralyzed by regulatory uncertainty. Every new product launch required months of legal review and risked fines if the regulatory landscape shifted mid-deployment. The fear of compliance risk stifled breakthrough innovation.

AI Integration: Predictive Compliance Synthesis

FinCorp deployed an AI system trained on global regulatory history, legal documents, and legislative debate transcripts. This AI was integrated into the Discovery Phase:

The AI scanned new product proposals and immediately generated a “Compliance Risk Score” based on predicted future regulatory shifts.
It identified regulatory white space — areas where new products could be safely launched with minimal legal friction.
Human compliance officers shifted their role from reactive policing to proactive strategic guidance, advising innovation teams on how to shape products to be future-compliant.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

The AI removed the fear of the unknown, boosting the team’s psychological safety. Time-to-market for new financial products was reduced by 40% because the human teams were empowered to innovate within a clear, AI-forewarned boundary. The risk management was automated, freeing the humans to focus on value creation.

Case Study 2: The Consumer Goods Company and Material Innovation

Challenge: Years-Long Material R&D Cycle

A major consumer goods company (ConsumerCo) required years to develop new sustainable packaging materials, involving countless failed lab experiments due to the sheer volume of possible chemical combinations.

AI Integration: Generative Material Design

ConsumerCo integrated a generative AI model into the Ideation and Delivery Phase. This model was given constraints (e.g., “must be compostable in 90 days, withstand $180^\circ$C, and cost less than $0.05 per unit”).

The AI generated millions of hypothetical chemical formulas and simulated their real-world properties instantly (Accelerated Validation).
The human material scientists reviewed the top 0.1% of AI-generated formulas, using their expertise to filter for manufacturing feasibility and supply chain reality.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

The AI transformed the material scientists’ job from performing repetitive, blind experiments to becoming expert filters and hypothesis builders. This augmentation reduced the R&D cycle from four years to 18 months, leading to a massive increase in the Learning Velocity of the entire organization. The result was a successful launch of a proprietary, highly sustainable packaging line, directly attributing its success to the speed of AI-driven simulation.

The Future: Human-AI Co-Creation

The integration of AI into the innovation pipeline must be governed by a single rule: AI handles the volume, humans retain the veto and the empathy. Leaders must focus on training their teams not in how to use the AI, but how to ask it the right, human-centered questions.

Embrace the Synergistic Loop. Use AI to synthesize complexity, diversify ideas, and accelerate validation. Use your people for vision, ethics, and the profound, qualitative understanding of the human condition. That is how you drive sustainable, breakthrough innovation.

“AI does not make humans less creative; it removes the repetitive labor that prevented them from being creative in the first place.”

Frequently Asked Questions About AI in the Innovation Pipeline

1. What is the biggest risk of integrating AI into the innovation pipeline?

The biggest risk is relying on AI to generate ideas without human oversight, which leads to “algorithmic echo chambers” — innovations that are merely optimizations of past successes, not true breakthroughs. Humans must retain the veto and inject radical new, empathetic concepts that defy historical data.

2. How does AI enhance “Discovery” without replacing human ethnographers?

AI enhances discovery by acting as a powerful data synthesizer. It processes massive, unstructured datasets (like customer reviews and call transcripts) to identify patterns, friction points, and statistically significant unmet needs. This information guides the human ethnographer to focus their high-touch observation time on the most critical and complex qualitative problems.

3. What is “Learning Velocity” and how does AI affect it?

Learning Velocity is the speed at which an organization can generate, test, and codify actionable insight from experiments. AI dramatically increases Learning Velocity by accelerating the “Test & Refine” stage through simulation and digital twins, minimizing the time and cost required for physical prototyping and validation.

Your first step toward AI integration: Identify your most time-consuming, data-intensive manual synthesis task in your current Discovery phase (e.g., manually summarizing customer feedback). Prototype an AI solution to automate only that synthesis, then measure how much more time your human ethnographers spend on direct customer interaction rather than data processing.

Image credit: Dall-E

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The Innovation Premium and How Culture Translates to Market Value

Leave a reply

LAST UPDATED: November 29, 2025 at 10:08AM

The Innovation Premium and How Culture Translates to Market Value

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the modern economy, financial valuation is less about the assets you currently own (buildings, cash, inventory) and more about the future value you can create. This gap between the book value and the market capitalization is what I call the Innovation Premium. It is the quantifiable reward the market assigns to a company whose culture and processes demonstrate a reliable, repeatable capacity for disruptive innovation and human-centered adaptation.

Innovation is often dismissed as a “soft” topic, a cultural flourish that looks good on an internal memo but doesn’t move the stock price. This is profoundly incorrect. A culture that fosters psychological safety, rapid learning, and deep customer empathy is the engine that drives perpetual growth, and the market sees it, values it, and pays a premium for it.

The Innovation Premium is not just about a single breakthrough product; it’s about the organizational resilience to produce the next breakthrough, and the one after that. It is the market’s belief in your company’s long-term adaptability.

The Three Cultural Drivers of the Premium

The premium is built upon three non-negotiable cultural pillars:

1. Learning Velocity, Not Output Velocity

Companies that command a premium prioritize learning over raw output. A culture focused on learning embraces small, contained failures as valuable data, not as career-limiting events. They don’t just “fail fast”; they learn faster. The market rewards this because accelerated learning cycles reduce long-term risk and ensure the organization corrects course before major capital expenditure.

2. Psychological Safety and Voice

Innovation stops dead when employees fear reprisal for suggesting a radical idea or — crucially — for pointing out flaws in an executive’s favored project. A culture of Psychological Safety ensures that the best ideas, regardless of hierarchy, can rise to the top. The market recognizes companies where information flows freely, because free-flowing information is a prerequisite for rapid, high-quality decision-making.

3. Deep, Ethnographic Empathy

The highest premiums are paid to companies that consistently solve problems customers don’t even know they have yet (the unmet needs). This capability is rooted in a culture of Deep Empathy — a commitment to ethnographic, human-centered research that goes beyond surveys and focus groups. This cultural practice ensures the innovation pipeline is filled with breakthrough ideas, not just incremental improvements.

Case Study 1: The Legacy Manufacturing Giant’s Digital Dividend

Challenge: Stagnant Stock Price and Obsolete Business Model

A century-old industrial equipment manufacturer (let’s call it “IndustrialCo”) suffered from low investor confidence. The market only valued its physical assets and depreciating machinery. Its Innovation Premium was near zero; it was viewed as a static utility.

Cultural Intervention: Designing for Digital Empathy

IndustrialCo’s leadership initiated a human-centered cultural transformation, shifting the focus from selling machines to selling uptime and efficiency. The change was explicitly cultural, demanding:

Mandatory training in human-centered design for all product engineers.
Redeployment of sales staff to function as ethnographers, tasked with documenting customer process friction, not just closing deals.
Creating Psychological Safety for employees to kill legacy products if data proved a digital solution was superior.

The Innovation Premium Result:

The result was a pivot to selling “Power-as-a-Service” through digitally enabled equipment and predictive maintenance. Within five years, IndustrialCo’s P/E ratio surpassed its peer group. The market premium was paid not for the new digital products, but for the cultural agility to embrace a service-based business model and successfully monetize data, moving them from a cyclical commodity stock to a technology enabler.

Case Study 2: The E-Commerce Pioneer and the Failure Feedback Loop

Challenge: Maintaining Exponential Growth in a Crowded Market

A leading e-commerce firm (let’s call it “E-Retail”) needed to maintain its high Innovation Premium, which was based on its reputation for constant customer-centric improvement. The threat was that rapid growth would lead to organizational rigidity and fear of failure.

Cultural Intervention: Codifying Learning from Failure

E-Retail deliberately codified a culture where failure was expected and managed. Instead of simply firing or punishing people for failed experiments, the company introduced the Failure Feedback Loop:

Mandatory, non-judgemental “After Action Reviews” for every major initiative, focusing exclusively on what was learned.
Tying promotion criteria not just to success metrics, but to the quality and transparency of learning documented from failed projects.
Allocating specific budget lines to “risk capital,” explicitly designed for experiments with a high probability of failure but a high potential for breakthrough insight.

The Innovation Premium Result:

This culture maintained E-Retail’s ability to innovate at scale. While competitors became paralyzed by internal politics and fear of making multi-million dollar mistakes, E-Retail’s culture allowed them to launch and discard hundreds of small features quickly. Their sustained, high Innovation Premium was a direct reflection of the market’s trust in their repeatable, low-cost learning methodology, proving that cultural mechanisms for managing risk are key market differentiators.

The Human-Centered Call to Action

The Innovation Premium is the CEO’s ultimate report card on culture. If your organization’s valuation hovers near its tangible book value, it means the market has no faith in your ability to adapt or surprise. Your culture is blocking your growth.

To unlock the premium, stop focusing solely on R&D expenditure, and start investing in the Human-Centered Change capabilities that make that R&D valuable:

Measure how quickly teams pivot and learn, not just how fast they ship.
Incentivize honest failure and transparent learning.
Make ethnographic empathy a required skill, not a specialized department function.

Your culture is not a soft side project. It is the hard math of future valuation.

“The market doesn’t pay a premium for what you currently own; it pays a premium for your documented, cultural capacity to acquire what’s next.”

Frequently Asked Questions About the Innovation Premium

1. What is the definition of the Innovation Premium?

The Innovation Premium is the difference between a company’s market capitalization (the total value assigned by the stock market) and its tangible book value (the value of its physical assets and cash). It represents the intangible value the market places on the company’s expected future growth, largely driven by its capacity for innovation.

2. How does a company’s culture directly influence this premium?

Culture influences the premium by determining the organizational capacity for change. A culture built on psychological safety, rapid learning, and deep customer empathy (Human-Centered Change) signals to the market that the company can reliably adapt, pivot, and generate new, high-value revenue streams, justifying a higher valuation.

3. What is “Learning Velocity” and why is it more important than “Output Velocity”?

Output Velocity measures how fast a team ships products or code. Learning Velocity measures how quickly a team can generate, test, and codify actionable insight from experiments (including failures). Learning Velocity is critical because it minimizes the long-term risk of solving the wrong problem, ensuring that future output delivers maximum market impact.

Your first step toward calculating your Innovation Premium: Calculate the ratio of your Market Capitalization to your Tangible Book Value. If this number is low, your next priority must be a cultural audit, asking: “Where does fear of failure or political rigidity slow down our learning cycle?” Use the answers to design a small, safe-to-fail experiment with an immediate reward for the team that documents the best insight from failure.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

8 Design Thinking Flaws and How to Fix Them

Leave a reply

8 Design Thinking Flaws and How to Fix Them

by Braden Kelley and Adam Radziszewski

Design Thinking attempts to extract the mindset of a designer, an artist, a creator, or even a child into a series of steps that can be applied to any discipline (even business or politics) to solve human-centered problems. Its steps are so logical that we can’t imagine anyone opposing them.

Why wouldn’t you speak with customers and observe them?
Why wouldn’t you collect diverse perspectives and research before choosing a problem to solve?
Why wouldn’t you come up with lots of ideas, prototype the most promising and test those prototypes?
If you’re selling to people, to humans, why wouldn’t you use a human-centric approach?

Because people can quickly understand the power (or promise) of Design Thinking, companies, consultants, and universities have latched on to the methodology and quickly accelerated it to the top of the hype curve. This has created a lot of problems for both expert Design Thinking practitioners and for the methodology itself.

So, let’s look at eight Design Thinking flaws and how to fix them:

Click here to continue reading on CustomerThink.com

Accelerate your change and transformation success

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

7 Steps to Building Stronger Sales Relationships with Human-Centric Problem Solving

Leave a reply

7 Steps to Building Stronger Sales Relationships with Human-Centric Problem Solving

by Braden Kelley and Adam Radziszewski

Building strong sales relationships is all about trust and demonstrating how the product/solution will make the customer’s life better. But is traditional selling getting you where you want to go?

If you’re looking to close more business and feeling stuck, try injecting some human-centric problem solving into your sales process.

What is human-centric problem solving?

Human-centric problem solving goes beyond what people say they do. Instead, it looks for what people actually do.

The approach helps you investigate the distinctly human elements that go beyond what sales tools can tell you about a prospect. It can also help you discover the true problem worth solving for the prospect.

Sometimes, you’ll even find a new problem the customer doesn’t even know they have.

Click here to continue reading on Sales Hacker

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

25 Free Futures Research and Futurology Resources

Leave a reply

25 Free Futures Research and Futurology Resources

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

One of the biggest barriers to getting started in futurology or futures research is knowing where to go to find information to educate and inform oneself about some of the basics of becoming a futurist and for raw materials to use in support of your first future studies or futurology efforts.

To help with that I have compiled a list of twenty-five resources to get you started in addition to this web site and Braden Kelley’s very excellent FutureHacking™ tools. So, without further delay, here is the list:

1. The Institute for the Future:

https://www.iftf.org/ – The Institute for the Future is a research organization that is focused on understanding emerging trends and long-term changes in the world.

2. The World Future Society

https://www.wfs.org/ – The World Future Society is a global network that works to explore and shape the future.

3. The Millennium Project

http://www.millennium-project.org/ – The Millennium Project is an independent global think tank that works to create a vision and action plan for a better future.

4. The Foresight Institute

https://www.foresight.org/ – The Foresight Institute is an organization that seeks to promote the responsible development of nanotechnology and other emerging technologies.

5. The Institute for New Economic Thinking

https://www.ineteconomics.org/ – The Institute for New Economic Thinking is a global think tank that works to promote critical economic analysis and new economic models.

6. The Hub of Futurism

https://www.hubof-futurism.com/ – The Hub of Futurism is a platform that brings together and connects futurists, thinkers, and innovators.

7. The Center for Science and the Imagination

https://scifi.asu.edu/ – The Center for Science and the Imagination is a research center dedicated to exploring the intersection of science and culture.

8. The Future of Life Institute

https://futureoflife.org/ – The Future of Life Institute is a research center that works to study, protect, and promote the future of life on Earth.

9. The Futurist Magazine

https://www.wfs.org/futurist – A magazine published by the World Future Society that features articles on technological, social, and economic changes and their implications on the future.

10. IEEE Spectrum

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ – A magazine published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers that covers the technological advances and their effects on the future.

11. Singularity Hub

https://singularityhub.com/ – A website featuring articles on topics related to artificial intelligence, robotics, biotechnology, nanotechnology and their implications for the future.

12. Futurism

https://futurism.com/ – A website featuring news and opinion pieces about developments in science, technology, and the future.

13. The Futurist Podcast

https://thefuturistpodcast.com/ – A podcast featuring interviews with leading experts and thought leaders on topics related to the future.

14. The Institute for the Future

https://www.iftf.org/ – A research organization that provides resources and research on the future of technology, work, and society.

15. World Economic Forum

https://www.weforum.org/ – A platform featuring reports and discussions on topics related to the global economy and the future of work.

16. The Long Now Foundation

https://longnow.org/ – A foundation providing resources about long-term thinking and decision making for the future.

17. The Technology Review

https://www.technologyreview.com/ – A website featuring news and opinion pieces about emerging technologies and their implications for the future.

18. The Future of Life Institute

https://futureoflife.org/ – A research institute providing resources and research on the implications of emerging technologies on the future.

19. Futurism.com

https://futurism.com/ – A website dedicated to exploring the world of technological advances and the future of humanity.

20. Futurum Research

https://futurumresearch.com/ – An independent research firm that provides insights, analysis, and forecasts about the future of business and technology.

21. The Futures Agency

https://www.thefuturesagency.com/ – A consultancy dedicated to helping organizations, leaders, and individuals identify and prepare for the future.

22. Future of Life Institute

https://futureoflife.org/ – A research and outreach organization dedicated to exploring the potential of artificial intelligence and its implications for the future of humanity.

23. Long Now Foundation

https://longnow.org/ – A nonprofit organization that works to inspire long-term thinking and foster responsibility in the framework of the next 10,000 years.

24. Center for the Study of the Drone

https://dronecenter.bard.edu/ – A research center that provides analysis, education, and policy advice on the use of unmanned aerial systems (drones).

25. Massive Change Network

https://massivechangenetwork.org/ – An international network of organizations, cities, and individuals working to create a more sustainable and equitable world.

This is of course not an exhaustive list of all the futurology and futures research resources out there, but it is a good start to supplement all of the futurology articles here on this website.

Bottom line: Futurology and prescience are not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Top 5 Innovation Movies According to Artificial Intelligence

Leave a reply

Top 5 Innovation Movies According to Artificial Intelligence

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In recent years, filmmakers have explored the concept of innovation and its impact on the world in a variety of ways. From biopics about trailblazing inventors to stories about the consequences of technological progress, these movies have not only entertained audiences, but also provided thought-provoking insights into the world of innovation. Here are our top 5 innovation movies that will leave you feeling inspired.

1. The Social Network (2010)

This biopic chronicles the rise of Mark Zuckerberg, the co-founder of Facebook and one of the most successful entrepreneurs of our time. The movie paints a vivid picture of the challenges and successes of an ambitious young innovator who changed the way people interact with each other.

2. The Imitation Game (2014)

This biopic focuses on the life of Alan Turing, the British mathematician who was instrumental in cracking the Nazi Enigma code during World War II. The movie explores the power of innovation and its potential to save lives and shape our future.

3. Moneyball (2011)

This movie tells the story of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane, who revolutionized baseball by employing advanced analysis to build a winning team on a tight budget. This movie is a wonderful example of how innovation can be applied to any field to improve performance.

4. Hidden Figures (2016)

This biopic tells the inspiring story of three African-American women mathematicians who played a crucial role in the successful launch of the first US space mission. The movie highlights the importance of diversity and the power of innovation to break down barriers.

5. The Man in the White Suit (1951)

This classic comedy stars Alec Guinness as a young inventor who develops a revolutionary fabric that never gets dirty or wears out. The movie explores the power of innovation and how it can disrupt entire industries.

Conclusion

Each of these movies provides a unique perspective on innovation and its power to change the world. They are sure to leave you feeling inspired to pursue your own innovative ideas.

Personally, I was surprised to see ‘The Man in the White Suit’ on the list, and not my favorite ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’, so I guess I will have to see if Netflix or Prime Video has this movie from the fifties. It sounds intriguing.

Another favorite of mine is ‘Flash of Genius’, a movie about the inventor of intermittent wipers and his painful fight against the patent infringement of the major car companies.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Slowing Down to Speed Up Innovation

Leave a reply

Mindfulness and Velocity

LAST UPDATED: November 28, 2025 at 9:51AM

Slowing Down to Speed Up Innovation

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In the innovation world, we treat Velocity as an unambiguous virtue. Lean, Agile, Design Thinking — all rightly emphasize rapid cycles and fast feedback. Yet, when speed becomes the only metric, a dangerous pathology emerges: the Mindless Rush. Teams accelerate into execution before achieving clarity on the problem, leading to months of wasted effort solving the wrong thing, or building a feature nobody needs.

The human-centered solution is not to abandon speed, but to introduce Mindfulness. Mindfulness, in an innovation context, is the deliberate, conscious act of pausing velocity at critical junctures to focus attention and achieve profound understanding. It is the conscious investment of time upfront to prevent the far greater cost of rework and re-steering later. We are slowing down the clock for a minute so we can save hours down the road.

This approach moves us from the flawed metric of Output Velocity (how fast we shipped code) to the powerful metric of Impact Velocity (how quickly we delivered value). Impact Velocity is the true measure of innovation success.

The Three Phases Where Mindfulness Trumps Speed

Mindfulness must be strategically injected at three key organizational stages:

1. The Discovery Pause (Defining the Problem)

The greatest inhibitor to innovation is defining the problem too quickly. Teams, eager to show progress, leap from a vague symptom (“Sales are down”) to a solution (“We need a new pricing model”). The Discovery Pause mandates slowing down the initial empathy and definition phases. This involves spending intentional, deep time on ethnographic research, asking the Five Whys of the problem, and achieving a true understanding of the unarticulated human need. This pause ensures you are aiming the cannon at the right target.

2. The Decision Deliberation (Mitigating Bias)

High-velocity environments amplify cognitive biases, especially Affinity Bias (favoring ideas from people we like) and Confirmation Bias (favoring data that supports our existing belief). The Decision Deliberation forces a slow, structured review of key decisions (e.g., pivot vs. persevere, kill vs. scale). This involves bringing in an external devil’s advocate, mandating silent data review before discussion, and forcing teams to argue against their preferred hypothesis. This deliberate friction prevents the team from rushing toward a suboptimal local consensus.

3. The Learning Reflection (Codifying Insight)

Teams rush from one sprint to the next, treating success or failure as a binary outcome. The value of an experiment is not just the result, but the codified learning. The Learning Reflection mandates a formal, mindful pause after every major experiment or delivery cycle (e.g., a “Learning Day” or “Innovation Retrospective”). This time is used to document assumptions that were proven wrong, package the insights into reusable organizational assets, and adjust the thesis. If you don’t slow down to capture the learning, you’ll be condemned to repeat the costly mistake at full speed later.

Case Study 1: The Government Agency’s Procurement Paradox

Challenge: Rushing Requirements Leading to Massive Rework

A large government agency needed to modernize its aging IT infrastructure. Under political pressure to show speed, they rushed the requirements-gathering phase, delivering a massive, siloed document in six weeks. The result was a $50 million contract signed for a system that met all documented requirements but failed entirely to meet the actual, complex human needs of the end-users (the field agents). The system was unusable and required a complete re-scoping.

The Mindfulness Intervention: The Mandatory Pause

In the subsequent attempt, the new change leader mandated a Discovery Pause. The team was given an additional four weeks with a single goal: Understand the Job-to-Be-Done. They spent this time on ethnographic studies, observing field agents in their daily context, mapping their workarounds, and defining the emotional friction points. This small, intentional delay:

Identified that the true need wasn’t a new database, but mobile, offline data access (a requirement missed in the rush).
Reduced the scope of the resulting RFP by 30%, focusing only on high-value needs.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

The initial rush wasted 18 months and tens of millions of dollars. The four-week Mindfulness Pause cut the ultimate delivery timeline by over a year because the agency finally built the right thing. The total Impact Velocity was dramatically increased by accepting the initial, intentional delay.

Case Study 2: The SaaS Company and the Pivot Pause

Challenge: Rapid Iteration Without Deep Learning

A fast-growing SaaS startup embraced the “Fail Fast” mantra, running weekly A/B tests and feature deployments. They were achieving high Output Velocity, but their feature adoption rate was stagnant. They were pivoting constantly, but only in minor, incremental ways, never achieving a breakthrough.

The Mindfulness Intervention: The Learning Reflection Day

The leadership instituted a mandatory Learning Reflection Day every four weeks. All new feature development ceased for 24 hours. Teams were required to:

Present their failed and successful hypotheses, not just the test results.
Conduct a Pre-Mortem on their most successful test, deliberately trying to find flaws in the underlying assumptions.
Codify three key, transferable behavioral insights learned about the customer into a central knowledge base.

The Human-Centered Lesson:

This intentional slowing (the Pivot Pause) broke the cycle of shallow iteration. By reflecting mindfully, one team discovered that while a specific feature was used, the context of its use revealed a much larger, unmet need for asynchronous collaboration. This led to a large, successful product pivot they would have otherwise rushed past. The pause shifted the focus from merely reporting what happened to understanding what was learned.

The Human-Centered Call to Action: Mastering the Pause

The greatest asset of the modern innovator is not speed; it is clarity. And clarity requires attention — it requires mindfulness.

To master the pause, leaders must embed checkpoints in their innovation process where the primary metric is not execution, but Understanding. Critically, leaders must create the psychological safety for teams to propose a pause without fearing they will be labeled as blockers or slow. These pauses are not delays; they are strategic investments that prevent the costly failures of Mindless Rush.

Challenge your teams: Before you start the next sprint, schedule an extra hour for silence and contemplation on the problem statement. Find one reason why your current assumption is guaranteed to fail. This mindful friction creates the space for the breakthrough insight to emerge.

“Speed without direction is simply chaos. Mindfulness provides the direction, ensuring that when you do move fast, you are moving toward undeniable value.”

Frequently Asked Questions About Mindfulness and Velocity

1. What is the difference between “Output Velocity” and “Impact Velocity”?

Output Velocity is a measure of how quickly tasks are completed or features are shipped (e.g., lines of code, number of sprints). Impact Velocity is the true human-centered metric, measuring how quickly the organization delivers genuine, high-value outcomes to the customer or market. Mindfulness ensures high Impact Velocity.

2. How does the “Discovery Pause” prevent wasted time later?

The Discovery Pause mandates slowing down the initial problem definition phase using tools like ethnographic research and “Five Whys.” This intentional delay prevents teams from rushing into execution with a vague or incorrect problem statement, thereby avoiding the massive time and cost associated with building the wrong solution.

3. What is the purpose of the “Learning Reflection” phase?

The Learning Reflection phase is a mandatory pause after an experiment or delivery cycle to codify insight. Its purpose is not to celebrate success but to deliberately capture the assumptions that were proven right or wrong, package that learning for organizational reuse, and prevent the team from repeating costly mistakes in the next high-velocity sprint.

Your first step toward Mindful Velocity: For your next major project, introduce a mandatory 48-hour “Silent Observation Period” immediately after the project charter is approved. During this time, the team can only observe, interview, and document the current state of the problem — no ideation or solution brainstorming allowed. This enforced stillness shifts the focus from solution execution to problem empathy.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Ethnography for Innovators

1 Reply

Uncovering the Unmet Needs People Cannot Articulate

LAST UPDATED: November 25, 2025 at 6:43PM

Ethnography for Innovators

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In our data-driven world, companies invest millions in surveys, focus groups, and A/B testing. Yet, these methods often only illuminate articulated needs—the problems people know they have and can describe. If you rely solely on these methods, you will, by definition, only produce incremental improvements on existing products.

The true gold standard of innovation—the breakthrough idea—lies in the unmet needs: the pervasive frictions, latent desires, or emotional compromises that people have simply grown used to and can no longer identify as problems. They are the invisible pain points that exist outside the structured environment of a corporate interview. The human-centered discipline that unlocks this insight is Ethnography.

Ethnography, borrowed from anthropology, is the practice of immersing oneself in the user’s natural environment to observe behavior, context, and culture. It is the shift from asking “What do you want?” to observing “What do you actually do, and why do you do it that way?” For the innovator, this shift transforms research from a validation exercise into an Exploration Engine.

The Three Fallacies Ethnography Corrects

Ethnography is essential because it bypasses three inherent flaws in traditional market research:

The Articulation Fallacy: People are experts at solving their own problems locally, often through complex workarounds they don’t even recognize as inefficient. They cannot articulate a solution they haven’t seen.
The Context Fallacy: Behavior changes when people know they are being observed in an artificial setting (the focus group room). Ethnography ensures observations happen in the flow of life, where real compromise and decision-making occur.
The Rationalization Fallacy: People often explain why they do something based on rational logic, while the true driver is deep-seated emotion, habit, or social pressure. Ethnography observes the action and then asks “Show me the workaround,” exposing the gap between what they say and what they do.

The Four Pillars of Ethnographic Innovation

To successfully leverage ethnographic insight, innovators must focus on four key areas:

1. The Focus: Extremity Over Average

Do not study the average user; study the extreme user. The people who are bending, breaking, or hacking your product or process reveal the highest friction points and the most intense needs. Observing a power-user or an anti-user provides disproportionate insights compared to surveying the typical majority. The solution that works for the edge case often provides a superior experience for everyone.

2. The Method: Deep Hanging Out

This is the core of the practice. Instead of brief, formal interviews, innovators must practice Deep Hanging Out—spending hours or even days immersed in the user’s native context (their home, office, factory floor). The goal is not merely data collection; it is insight generation by understanding the culture, the tools, the interruptions, and the social contracts that surround the task.

3. The Lens: Observation over Interview

Prioritize observation. Use the interview to fill in the why, not to collect the initial what. For instance, instead of asking, “How do you manage your medication?” observe the user’s routine, the pile of bottles, the post-it notes, the compromises, and the moments of confusion. Then, ask: “Tell me about this sticker you put on the bottle.” That sticker often holds the key to the unmet need.

4. The Synthesis: Insight Teams

Ethnographic data must be synthesized by a diverse, cross-functional team. Insights are most powerful when a Marketing leader, a Data Scientist, and an Engineer all observe the same human behavior. The Engineer sees the technical gap, the Data Scientist sees the behavioral anomaly, and the Marketing leader sees the emotional driver. This co-synthesis prevents organizational bias from distorting the human reality observed.

Case Study 1: The Kitchen Appliance Manufacturer and the Latent Mess

Challenge: Stagnant Blender Market and Incremental Features

A major appliance manufacturer was struggling to innovate beyond faster motors and bigger jugs. Traditional research asked consumers, who invariably replied: “Make it more powerful.”

Ethnographic Intervention: Observing the Aftermath

The innovation team employed ethnography by installing cameras and observing users making smoothies in their homes, focusing not on the blending itself, but on the post-use clean-up routine (the latent pain). They observed:

Users immediately rushing to rinse the blender to prevent food from sticking.
The awkward balancing act of cleaning around the sharp blades.
The subsequent mess in the sink and the counter area.

The Innovation Insight:

The team realized the true, unarticulated pain wasn’t a lack of power, but the messy, time-consuming chore of cleaning. The resulting innovation was a product designed with self-cleaning capabilities and blade structures optimized for rinsing, effectively changing the job-to-be-done from “make a smooth drink” to “make a smooth drink with zero clean-up friction.” This insight could never have been generated by a focus group asking, “What new features do you want?”

Case Study 2: The Financial Services Firm and the Unspoken Anxiety

Challenge: Low Adoption of Retirement Planning Tools by Younger Clients

A financial firm offered robust digital retirement planning tools, but young clients ignored them. Traditional research revealed only surface-level reasons: “It’s too complicated” or “I don’t have enough money yet.”

Ethnographic Intervention: Contextual Mapping of Financial Stress

Innovators spent time with young professionals, observing how they managed money in context (paying bills, checking bank apps, discussing finances with partners). The team wasn’t just observing transactions; they were looking for emotional cues and physical workarounds.

They observed clients constantly checking their immediate bank balance (fear of overdraft) but never checking their long-term retirement accounts.
They noted that talking about retirement planning was socially taboo or anxiety-inducing, leading to procrastination.
The friction point was not complexity, but the psychological distance between the present need (pay rent) and the future goal (retirement).

The Innovation Insight:

The firm realized that the tool had to address the anxiety, not just the calculation. The innovation was a shift to automatic, small-scale savings triggered by behavioral cues (e.g., automatically save $5 every time you use a ride-share app). The tool made the savings process invisible and non-anxiety-inducing, successfully linking the immediate, observed behavior with the long-term, unarticulated goal. The breakthrough was finding the latent emotional trigger, not fixing the interface.

The Human-Centered Call to Action

Quantitative data tells you what is happening; Ethnography tells you why it’s happening. If your innovation effort is stalled, it’s not because you lack data—it’s because you lack deep, human insight.

To move beyond incremental improvement, you must mandate that innovation teams leave the building. They must become anthropologists of the modern world, actively seeking the compromises and workarounds that signal an unmet need. This is how you transform a good idea into a market-defining breakthrough.

“If your customers could tell you what they wanted, you wouldn’t need an innovation strategy; you would need a fulfillment strategy. Breakthroughs hide in the unarticulated.”

Frequently Asked Questions About Ethnography for Innovation

1. What is the main goal of using ethnography in innovation?

The main goal is to uncover “unmet needs”—the latent pains, desires, and emotional compromises that users have grown accustomed to and cannot articulate in a traditional interview. This deeper, contextual insight is necessary for disruptive, non-incremental innovation.

2. Why is studying the “extreme user” more valuable than studying the average user?

Extreme users (power-users, frequent hackers, or even non-users) experience the friction points and limitations of a product or process most intensely. Their extreme workarounds and frustrations often reveal critical system flaws and latent needs that apply to the average user, but are simply less visible.

3. What is the “Articulation Fallacy” and how does ethnography overcome it?

The Articulation Fallacy is the idea that people can accurately describe the best solution to their own problem. Ethnography overcomes this by focusing on observation (What they *do*) over interview (What they *say*), allowing innovators to design solutions for compromises and workarounds that the user is no longer conscious of.

Your first step toward Ethnographic Innovation: Do not commission a survey. Instead, mandate that every member of your next innovation team (including the finance analyst and the engineer) spends three hours observing a customer, not in a conference room, but in their natural environment (their desk, their home, or their point of interaction with your product). Instruct them to document five non-obvious workarounds they observe. Use those workarounds, not stated desires, as the starting point for your next design sprint.

Image credit: 1 of 1,000+ FREE quote slides for your meetings and presentations at http://misterinnovation.com

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.