Skip to main content
Aim For BehaviorContact
Menu

Why don’t we ideate on what we can

Why don’t we ideate on what we can take away instead of what we can add?

Why don’t we ideate on what we can take away instead of what we can add?

I’ve been thinking about this recently. Every time we want to diagnose a problem teams and stakeholders default trying to add more things. (Agencies as well)

If only we had X feature or service then things would really change.

Teams go in and workshop idea after idea to see which one will be the one that is implemented.

Sadly sometimes no results come, or worse things regress, and so the cycle repeats itself.

I would want to flip this and have sessions where teams sit to ideate what they can remove and see how that would work.

With our limited time and attention, we can only chose to do so many things per day. The more complex, the more we put things off.

Perhaps by taking things away from your product or service, you will have a better chance of making it up the customer or users choice priority ladder.

Do any of you run sessions like these? What have your results been like?

#productinnovation #servicedesign #digitaltransformation #uxdesign #behavioralscience

Teams go in and workshop idea after idea to see which one will be the one that is implemented.

Sources named in this post

  • SHIFT Barrier Codes..Aim For Behavior
  • Jill Cane and colleagues, Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) (2012)
  • Deci, SDT at Work (Self-Determination Theory) (2000)
Browse the Library