The Customer Experience Podcast
The Customer Experience Podcast

Episode 138 · 11 months ago

138. Human Factors & Design Thinking w/ Anand Tharanathan

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

Human factors is a field of science that explores capabilities and limitations of humans as they interact with a product, technology, or service. The goal of human factors is to capitalize on the capabilities and to circumvent the limitations to create an optimal human-machine interaction.

In this episode, I interview Anand Tharanathan, Chief Product Officer at MetaCX, about incorporating human factors into every aspect of design.

Anand talked with me about:

- Tips for building a superior design team

- User centered design: what it is and why it matters

- Starting with empathy

- How to synthesize insights into viable tests

- Becoming a first-time Chief Product Officer

Subscribe, listen, and rate/review the Customer Experience Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Play or Google Podcasts, and find more episodes on our blog.

Listening on a desktop & can’t see the links? Just search for The Customer Experience Podcast in your favorite podcast player.

So the more you are in front of them and observing them and shadowing them, not getting into their job, the more empathy you build. The more empathy you build the next time you go write a lot of code or your design a screen or you start bringing talking about a product, you start bringing that empathy to the forefront. You start thinking about the human, the user more. The single most important thing you can do today is to create and deliver a better experience for your customers. Learn how sales, marketing and customer success experts create internal alignment, achieved desired outcomes and exceed customer expectations in a personal and human way. This is the customer experience podcast. Here's your host, Ethan Butte. User experience, design, thinking human factors. Today's guest brings deep insights, experience and expertise in these areas to help us inform our own experience design process. He's earned a PhD and experimental psychology and human factors from Texas Tech, a master's degree in industrial engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology and an MBA from northwestern universities Kellogg School of Management. So He's blending psychology, engineering and business to humanize customer experience. He's led research and design teams at companies like facebook and Jee's list and honey. Well, today he serves as chief proct officer at metic X, where they're pioneering a new outcomes based approach for managing the customer life cycle by transforming how suppliers and buyers collaborate and win together. On in, Tarathan, and welcome to the customer experience podcast. Thank you that. I'm glad to be here. Yeah, I I really enjoyed getting to know you a little bit recently and I'm glad we're in this conversation. And before we get into customer experience, and I really appreciate your unique perspective on it, and I'd say unique relative to most of the guests that we host. You're on the show. I think your expertise is going to be a specially unique relative to that population. But before we get into it, you've lived in India, you've lived in Minnesota, Texas, New Jersey. You've lived in cities like Indianapolis, Chicago. You're currently in the San Francisco area. When you think back at all of the different places you lived, which is at least twice as many places as I've lived. What are the highlights that come to mind or there is there a park or a store or people, like when you think back at all the places you've lived, like just spur the moment top of mine, like what do you reflect back on? A seksh I missed that person, that place, that thing. You know, it's interesting. I mean, thank you, as is an interesting question. One thing I talked about, which is unique in a way that I was fortunate to be in a way, exposed to, is I lived for about fifteen years in a country called Guitar, which is in the Middle East. I was born in India and I moved there my that was working the for almost thirty years and when I was living there, one of the things I was able to do I used to be a tennis player, not as much now, but I used to, you know, play pretty advanced and I got the opportunity to play with the prints of the country who right now is a King of guitar. So, you know, it's one of those things when people ask me, what is one thing about your experience living in different parts of the world that you always go back to remember? This is something always talk about. I think it's pretty cool yeah, that is really cool. Now, is there any obligation to let a print win a match, or is this like, out of respect, you have to do your best in play your hardest, even if it means defeat for him. I've always played my hardest and you know I did when I did that fall up question a lot and I did when I we've played, I think, three times and I want all the times, but it's it was just a great experience. Cool. Do you still play today? I do play. Yes, Nice. Okay, so where we always start on the show is customer experience, and basically take this however you like, like when I say customer experience to you on and what does that mean? It's such a loader term. There's so many different definitions for customer experience and the way I look at it is how it comes down to the emotional component, the visceral reaction to something and how you stay with a brand over time, time and I strongly believe the more we can invoke and stated that emotion of interacting with the product or a service, that is, for me, the experience being a user, a customer. How we going to put it, what lends you look at but that emotional component and maximizing. That is what I try to optimize for when I think about customer experience. I love it. I love that you went straight to the emotional component because to someone relatively ignorant about the heart ins and outs of the deep research that you're attuned to in the types of teams and processes that you've been responsible for, you know, would be tempting to just assume that it would there be a...

...stronger data orientation. Not that there's not a data component to the emotion, but I appreciate the you isolated that right away. I will let that kind of color our conversation a little bit, but for for we proceed too far in your view, in your experience, is customer experience better handled as like a cultural component or an ethos of an entire organization, or is it better handled role team function? Or does that vary based on the organization? I think customer experience is the more use Stilo it into a department or organization or team, I think it is a recipe for failure. Customer experience has to be a part of everybody's ethos in a company and that has to be a priority, and the more you make it that, the more departments and organizations within companies start focusing on that and that shows. Otherwise you're starting to ship org structures and not the experience. And so I in my opinion, I think it has to span across a company, has to start from the top and has to be drawn bottoms up. So that's how, at least from my perspective, I look at it. Yeah, I started asking that as a follow up to the main definition and that seems to be pretty consistent. But it certainly depends who you talk to. You about it and it does like it. So I mean the purpose of the the role the person or the team or the function, I think would probably just be to advance that ethos and that the priority and what it means practically in storytelling internally about doing customer experience well. And Yeah, yeah, and if you think about anything, I mean you have the marketing side of the world, which is kind of staying ahead really understanding users. You obviously have a product and engineering organization that builds products. That has to definitely focus on the experience that we bring from a product standpoint. We do some companies and services. That has to focus on the interaction, the talking, the communication. So there's, if you think about it, sales organization, there's just so many components that a product or a serve as or a company touch us, the customer at and we have to look at it end to end, and so well, organizations within a company have to make that a priority. Only then the successful ones come out. Have you been part of an initiative where perhaps an organization that you were in wasn't especially a tuned this way or oriented this way and went through that transformation or no, one hundred percent one of the companies that work with earlier in my career we had. It was a time where experience led design and experience led products are starting to become an important part in the market. It was with how you know, Apple Bald and that whole design lad thinking and all that started and the company I was at was not really tuned to that in a way, but to their credit, from the executive level there was a huge initiative to kind of think about it that way and we went man that was it was a massive effort that spanned across multiple years and even today they have a really well established practice there. We started with almost like a team of less than twenty people around it around research and design and experience all the and it was, it had be to bebats everything. This company was a big one and today, when we look at how products were being developed in that country, in that and that organization, from the get go, from the beginning, the customers are brought in. It's an iterator product velopment cycle. The customers are always in the loop. We continue to tweak the experience of the product and it's a very different way of functioning today. And there's I think were a thousand people in that involved in that kind of thinking and it's a cross leadership. It's across countries. So yeah, and I was fortunate to be a part of that because there was a lot of scars, a lot of pain initially when we were starting that, like, what does this even mean for a company like ours? How do we put that in perspective? How do we go end to end? What are the different touch points that will kind of agencies do we have to recruite to get a little bit of momentum in it? What kind of communication do we need internally within the organization so that people start getting educated on it? It was a huge initiative and I thought being a part of that early stage really helped not only me learn the craft and do that, but also just how important it is for a company for its market share, you know, cross multiple dimensions. So good. I'm glad to hear that and in reflecting on that, or there may be one, or it could because we're all trying to almost any organization, and certainly people that are listening to shows to get exposure to new ideas and these types of things. Like the type of person that would listen to the show is probably evolving innovating, you know, generically speaking, and obviously, no matter whether the transformation is a small behavioral one and a very small team or whether it's this large organizational like. This is the way we look at, view and think about and talk about things now. You know, we're all undergoing transformations pretty consistently. At least people that are moving forward are just from a practical standpoint. Or there one or two...

...or three things that you remember from that massive transformation that might be useful for someone who's trying to do something perhaps more moderate in their own organization today. Like we already mentioned kind of the internal communication piece, but like what are a couple things practically there? Yeah, I'll see three things you think that stood out to me as major learnings from that whole effort and I I take that to any job I go to. A number maybe think about a massive transformation. Beat experienced letter otherwise. One is it has to be a multidimensional team. So it cannot be just an engineering team or just a design team or just a research team or just a sales team. There has to be representation from at least in that case have we had sales, we had marketing at product engineering, we had design. So it has to be a multidimensional team. That's one number, because the voices from each of those have to be a part of the discussion at least early on. Number two is we have to start with a pilot program so when you start thinking about institutionalizing or transforming, it's easier to get caught in the wave and just go blanket and then, you know, sometimes a failure can be really painful. But if you start with a pilot deam and how we did it is we had, you know, I think it was like seven lines of business, and so from each line of business we picked one specific product line instead of going across a whole gamut and we picked a product line. When we picked that specific product we looked at multiple dimensions. One is, is that team ready? Does that have a growth mindset okay for failure? Where is it in the market maturity State? So there are multiple dimensions that we looked at, but we picked one from each line of business rather than going across. Then we test the model across and then once we saw and learned from it, then we slowly expanded at across the different product lines. And number three is we have to be okay with failure, and that was just drilled into our heads from the beginning that this it's okay to fail, we fail fast and it's so easy that people use that term and sentences a lot now nowadays, but it was so true and how we lived it and we did have failures. There's a lot of scars from that that you know, and I look at doing something new in a new company, those learnings just come back to me, you know. So those three things, I believe, really stayed with me as a part of that, at least that initiative that I've taken an applied and started different roles of had after that. I can tell by how well structured and concise. Your response was that it did stick with you and they expend some time thinking about it, perhaps talking about it and sharing it with other people. I guess last question here, and I didn't intend to even go down this road at all with you, but I'm glad we're here. In terms of those failures, how was the split between like they were kind of like mechanical failures or process oversights versus how much of it was kind of the human side of it, either resistance or confusion, misunderstanding, a lack of emotional by cognitive understanding, but lack of emotional by in like, when you think about the failures or like, where they evenly split? Or were they? How did that go? You know, the Big One, and I touched on this earlier. I think the biggest failure that we learned what as around communication and keeping the team in the loop as we go through it, because we're talking about a multidimensional team. To start, some of those members didn't even know what we're after. This is yeah, this experience led design to be okay, great, sounds great, sounds cool. Apples doing it great, but unless we keep that team and powered the team and communicate pretty much every detail when every single single meeting we have and say what are we learning? Why are we not learning? It's easy for that team to drift away and that learning and that was one I would say was consistent across that whenever we saw a communication failure or a communication gap of communication internally, starting with internal teams, that pilot program would just fall apart. So that's one I then obviously there's more, but I think that's one that I always, always in any of the work I do today. Communication, I just I just it's such a such a human component to it. Right when people have to feel like they're involved their power, they're where and the communication is a way to do it. Yeah, I I love that you landed it essentially the intersection of the two things I was trying to peel apart. The like that communication is at the intersection of those two kind of generic categories I drew out. So you're right at the edge of it. So let's get into it. I have almost no understanding at all of human factors, so I love like a pass on that because I think people can find it useful. I have gone in. I've done a kind of a medium shallow dive into human centered design, which I think you would say design thinking in human center design are two phrases for the same thing. So for people who aren't familiar, because I've applied human center designed to communication and in like in a theoretical way, essentially trying to speak to human centered communication. So I...

...think that the principles are applicable, not just so that people could adapt human center design as they're making decisions and developing things. I think you'd be applied very broadly. And so first, I guess take on human factors. It like just the cursory read when I was reading about your background. Is like I need to learn more about human factors before I get on this call, and it's super interesting. But then also human center design, like just give us an introduction to these things for the ignorant. Yeah, fair, human factor. So let me let me try to explain, hopefully in simple terms, what that whole field of science is about. It's really understanding capabilities and limitations of humans ass and when they interact with a product, technology or service and then capitalizing on the capabilities circumventing the limitations so that eventually the overall through put and performance of that man machine interaction is optimal. So there is a psyche ecology component to it, is understanding how humans can thing will kind of attentional resources and working memory capacity and things like that. Decision making skills under pressure, not you know pressure, the psychology component. Then there is the engineering side that. Once you understand that, once you understand not only the human psychology of interacting but then also the technology that we need to build to help the human and the technology, the engineering side comes in. And it's really that both of them in tandem where human factors plays a really crucial role. And you can apply this to any space where there's a human component involved. Any space. It could be a Mug, it could be an APP, it could be in the airports like screeny, could be in military operations, it could be anywhere there's a human and a technology inlaw. So that's human factor. So understanding that side of it. So there's a psychological and even a physical like a bio mechanical yeah, okay, for this we call it in psychology, in the human factor space, we call it about the shoulder and low shoulder. So about the shoulders, really, the mind and those side, and then obviously a chair and you know, you have the Ergonomic side too. So so that's human factors it. Hopefully that gives you a little bit of a yeah, fantastic. And then when you come to design thinking, it's you know, it's been around for a while and the more you really start applying principles in the space of human factors to product and service design or in products and services, is the component or the aspect of design becomes more and more pronounced. And so when you think about use a center design or human center design, it's that that philosophy that you bring to the forefront. And when you think about design thinking, there's different models of explain that. But one that's really struck with me, it's a little, I would say a little a few years old, but still valid, is there are three pillars. When you think about design thinking, it is and when you think about a product or or a service, it is a tech feasibility. How feasible is it to technical layor technology and build it? The business viability. So you think about a product or service, how much is that going to help the business, the business of viability? And the third component is a user desirability. So how much would it resonate with users, your customers, so the more you can bring those three pillars together, that's the center of it. Is really its CD or design thinking. That's what we really and that it's about iterated product development and bringing users in early and continue to iterate with them eventually. That's that. Hopefully that gives you a philosophy of HCD or exigns that like. Yeah, I love the the three pillars of viability, feasibility and desirability. You know, my first pass at it, when I first getting in, I thought there was a bias toward desirability in and to see them balanced out. I think you know, because there's a tendency, like as I was thinking about applying human center designed to human centered communication, there's bias toward maybe altruism or something. I'm going to do a little bit more effort on my side to meet or exceed their needs and to overcome my own limitations simply for their benefit, which you know, in theory, the more we can do for customers these taste, I think, the better they respond. But balancing the viability in the feasibility is is really, really smart. What you offered there made me think about the language of customer experience and user experience is user experience simply the product aspect of a broader customer experience in your view? Yeah, and that's that's kind of why when I when I think about customers, is there every touchpoint? But user experience traditionally has been tied to this specific experience related to products. And when people say I'm a UX designer or UX researcher, it's really the product aspect of design, of the product aspect of research, and customer experience traditionally have spanned across. So it could be anywhere from a called center to when you take a Bab world, you take a product to a customer and then you...

...help them set it up and how the different touchpoints they're evolved, and so it's a whole whole nine there. So it could be seen as a small set of the larger customer experience field is Ux has, but to me it's all. It's all the experience. Two more questions in this kind of Zone a little bit. One is why isn't human centered design the standard? Like when I think about again, viability, feasibility, desirability, like why do I interact with people? And you know, as as again going down this road of human centered design, human centered communication as talking to different people about it. A lot of people don't know anything about it and it's not like it seems like such a practical framework. So that's one question. Let's just go there. Why do you think this isn't more common or familiar or like? Why isn't this in popular language, at least in a business context? I know that's just I've been amazed by that. I'm in the same same boat as you and I think has to be. It just has to be. I mean that's just if you look at the biggest brands and how they operate, it's a part of their ethos and that should tell us not only from a market cap and the profitability of companies in general, but that just has to be the kind of products they bring it, regardless of the space your in, be to be or be Toc. The more companies think about human center design and that trickles down to the way they operate, like how they're engineering and product teams and marketing teams, you know, collaborate, to all the way to how the CEOS communicate out to the street. I mean there's just it sets across. It has to be man it's always felt it and I do see that gap. You know. It's one more fascinating thing, if I can share it, since lease, when you think about some of the be tobe products, I don't want to say it name, just just taking generally and see some of the B Toc products that you and I just you know, interact with daily, and it's top of mine for a lot of people, be scheduling a ride, just checking into a hotel or one of those social media APPS. The same people who use the BAC products or the high and APPS when they go to work in a BB setting, the expectations are so different of how the experience of the product, of the service could be and when they go home after work and interact with a technology and experience they are in patient. Things need to work fast and needs to be right there when they need it. So that that distortion, I called the expectation distortion, between be TOB and BBC. It's the same people in different, you know, roles. So there's just so much there to uncover. Is Really what I'm saying and and to your point earlier, that just needs to be front and Center for people, for companies, for organization and how you bring human center, design, design thinking into your product and service development process go one more step deeper. They're like at what I my gut would be that that expectation around be tob has to be accelerating because of how the be Toc is is now resetting my expectations one experience at a time. It's like, why am I tolerating this over here? Because it falls under a different practical category or something like. This is a well, this is be to be software. So my expectations aren't as high as BETC software. Like. Obviously people don't are certainly aren't conscious of it, but I maybe we've been trained to have some kind of a bias. Maybe that way. But what do you think about the idea of that gap being forced to close? Yeah, I could buy I or man, I could talk about this for for an hour and I think I'll touch on two things here. So there's something when I think when I was at fewer, part of it centure. It's a it's a huge design agency. Don't quote me on this, but I think it's a couple of the design leaders of fured came up with this concept of what we call fluid expectations. Fluid expectations really mean people have expectations that are agnostic of the space or the product per se. So even if you're interacting with a terminal and an airport or in a control you know a pour plant, your expectation is that it should work as smoothly as one of the APPS you use to listen to music, because the expectations are fluid, it has no boundaries and because of which, to your point, especially in the be tob world, there has to be an accelerated effort to bring and match experiences that we are seeing in the B Toc World. And the reason that gap exists is, I think, multier, multidimensional, mutipfold. One is a lot of times to point of sale, the person who paints for our product and be to be is not, is not necessarily the same person who used as a product. So that just leads to several you know, it's like who you know, snowball effector what are we going to call it? But that's one big I would say if you do a route cause analysis, that's one part of it. It really is. I got yeah. So, I mean there's more, but I think that's but yes, one hundred percent. The B Tob World has to catch up. The experience has to be and I think the potential to bring experiences of forefront is significantly hiring be to be and I think we should, you know, neget that...

...gap as as soon as possible. Awesome. Now let's go. Let's go kind of double back a little bit into what I would regard probably as one of your specialties, is certainly where you spend a lot of your career, and it's anchor, it's the foundation, I think, for human center design, which is immersion with the stakeholders in the design itself, like the people affected by by the process or the product or the system or whatever you're designing. And so this intimate familiarity, this true understanding, probably alignment with so a maybe speak to the importance of that at the beginning of any kind of design process and then maybe give again for the ignorant. How do you get to be that intimate with those people? And it's not just picking up the phone and talking with six customers in this particular segment to understand that segment, like how do you collect the user's voice? How do you organize it, how do you use it? Like how do you truly immerse yourself at the beginning of a process yeah, and there's two things there. It's great question and the analysis in there too as a really big question. But yeah, you know, just my goal here, by the way, for you and for people listening, is that maybe a leader and a customer success team or someone running a a Dr Team can think about their own systems and processes, maybe a new thing that they're implementing, and start to think about it this way and think about maybe the resources that might be available to them and, you know, in a simple way, without a team of researchers to go kind of collect and gather and analyze and theorize and prove out. How do we approach this? How do we approach this and or how do we collaborate across teams to get to some of this intimacy? Yeah, the great question. Great question, an important one, and I'm going to try and be as succinct as possible to hit of the main points. Is, again, a sure please manage that career span across you know, this month right. Well, that could you boil that last eighteen years left words. It's a trend that everything I said in this in this discussion here than is. It's very multidimensional and let me let me kind of. You know, break that into a couple points. One, when we start off, especially when a company starting to think about how do we do this right, research is one of those groups, or teams or organizations, however you want to put it, is not always the first top of mind thought that comes to an organization to kick off. If they don't have one already, it could seem as expensive, it could seem as all were. How are you going to put it? Just depends on the mindset. If you do have a research team, I'll get to that in a bit, things are it means you're a little bit more advanced. So you know, it's a different way to address a problem. Let's say you don't have one and you're going to start are how do I bring this customer centricity and humanizing our product to services to the forefront? I think we start with the people who are building something. have to have access to the people who are using your system. That's like a principle or a philosophy that you have to have and you know, in most cases when a company starting that or if an engineer or a product manager who's or, you know, a designer, they have to just go and observe how a user currently uses their system. And the more you're trained in research, like myself, you obviously bring a set of tools to the you know, to the forefront, to kind of gather probe, elicit, consolidate, does different methodologies. I won't go there yet, but just generally observing how, let's say, in a process plan, let's because I spend a lot of having my career earlier, how a plan operator actually goes in the clicks on different things and how many clicks do they have to make before they get to a particular outcome and how many pieces of visualization do they have to look at to make a decision? A lot of times people who build products have no understanding about the level of effort, both cognitive and physical effort, they users have to put in. So the more you are in front of them and observing them and shadowing them, not getting into their job, the more empathy you built. The more empathy you build the next time you go right a line of code or your design a screen or you start bringing talking about a product, you start bringing that empathy to the forefront. You started thinking about the human the user more. So that's like step one for a company to start getting to that mindset of Gett in front of the users. Now, how do we do that? Is it for people? Is it ten? Is it thousand? Is it? And I worked at companies where our customers span from tens or hundreds to billions in my career. Like you can you know the brands that I've worked with. And when you think about research in general, there is several methodologies and how you would account for the right sample size. How many people, what types of background? That's where a...

...different day. But the idea is you have to have a pretty good representation from the different parts. It could be geographies, it could be different types of users within a company, whatever that is, but the idea is to start small. You don't have to start boiling the ocean. Get into that mindset. Get in front of the users, observe how they work, ask questions without disrupting their work, do sessions after their shift or their particular job, understanding what happened, why it happened, what do you think it is? So that's that's a big part of it. The other side, which which I think is really important to know, is, you know, it's important to just not take what the users saying in face value. So if I say I want that, that doesn't mean you just go billed it. That just means that's friend center a lot of times, and this is why you need to know psychology. You know, there's different types of different ways to look at it. People, people who have procedure life knowledge, which means like if you're driving a car, if you drive stickshift, or for your summer, if I ask you to explain in detail the steps you take to shift a gear from one to two, to three to four and how much of the clutch and accelerate the gas to go, you can't describe it in words. It's caught. It's because it's procedure lies like how do you swim? When do you take your you can because it's procedure life. So there's aspects to it, which is more in the field of research. But don't take everything for face value. You got to look at it from multiple perspectives, go back to the drawing board, synthesize it and then bring bring that back to the to the design. So what I'm really saying is start with empathy, start with going to the user, start with observing, start with asking questions and from there things we can only progress. In my opinion, really good. I only have one specific follow up there, although there are many, many interesting things that you offered their. So for folks who are listening, there's a sixty two back button for a reason. That'd be a good time to hit it twice, maybe three times. And what I really loved about the way you introduced empathy in the way that you close there. Is that my understanding? So if you spend time on Linkedin, like I do, you see people saying empathy, you need to be empathy and need to be more empathetic, and it reminds me of something that I've been teaching, which is you know a lot of people. You know, whether you're doing video, which is something we support here at bombomb, or trying to become a you know, right linkedin posts or give presentations or whatever. People say, you need to find your voice. Find Your Voice, and I think to say that, why I was echoing here with me here was this like find empathy, right, but you don't, you develop it. You take actions that develop your voice. Right, like I'm going to get comfortable speaking extemporaneously in a recorded video message by recording some video messages and the same thing here is I'm going to develop empathy by seeing, observing, engaging with understanding. I'm not going to, and I think you know, shallow pass it topics like these two that I'm trying to make parallel. I don't know if it's working. I feel like it is at the shallow pass as it at. It is, you know, turn it on, don't leave it turned off, but it's just not the you have to develop it by doing the work one hundred percent. And that's that's what I said. As some minds and structs with mindset. It starts with wind set and then going in and to my earlier point about the company that we know, we started with a pilot and putting our team on tidimensional team. We've made it a point that we have to be on the ground of the users so that actually the salesperson or the marketing person or the engineering participant, they actually see it and once, once they see it, they realize it. So it's not like, for the flip of a switch we say it and this is happens. You have to build it. It's it happens over time. There's going to be scarce, it is going to be a lot of learning. It's going to be back and forth worth but it starts with the mindset to put the customer, the user, in the front and build that empathy over time. The follow up question I have is just a more of a personal curiosity. I think it is practical for every listener is you know, as you're organizing, what p different people are learning. Obviously communication is going to be key, but in particular, what I'm interested in when the average person looks at what they have available and they start going down this road and they start doing some observations and conversations and fouled questions and stuff here, to have this blend, generally speaking, of quantitative and qualitative feedback. How do we blend these things together? How do we communicate, like I did eight interviews and observations and she did for how do we bring our learnings together and make sense of them so that we can like, start making practical decisions, so we can start acting on what we're learning? Like how do we blend disparate source, seemingly or practically disparate sources of data together into something meaningful and useful and a cohesive story or something? Yeah, that's a great question. I think a lot of companies sometimes struggle with that, which eventually leads to not the right insights. That eventually needs to not the right products and services, etc. So it's a very fundamental part of how you do it, which I think if the more advanced an organization is on the research side of it or...

...the analytic side of it, different companies are organized differently, the better. It is their experts who do this. So when you think about you know, in my last when as a facebook, because we have very, really mature research organization. And when we think about research, it's like there's quantitative informations, massive surveys we do, there's actual product usage data, and any company that I worked as this is this is true. Then there's like conversations and interviews and things we do. How we bring all of that and and really the best insights. That's all data. This is all data, these different sources of data. Insights are when you convert data into information, and when you convert data into information you have to put the person or the user in context and then you drive insights. And so insights are it's actually a good combination of these different sources of information coming in, which could be surveys. It could be conversations, it could be quantitative product usage data, alogics data, whatever that might be. It could be coming in from marketing sale. Anyway, it is important for these teams to be talking and communicating and exchanging context of these different channels of it, of data, so that the insights that are generated. There's different methodologies for it. I mean there's just that's why people go to school for this and a lot of instances you are really deriving insights that are more meaningful, more credible, more repeatable. And then you start testing it and then you start yeah and make sense. You start putting personas and profiles into this and that it gains more context. So it's what I really say. It is a multidimension, afforditional like here. You do three steps in the work. It is a very collaborative process, but important for that collaboration to happen in those different sources of data to come in to convert to insights and information and, like so many things, I assume that's a balance of art and science. It is one hundred percent, one hundred percent and you could be wrong. A lot of times. You can be and it obviously statistics is involved a lot of these things and this confidence in our reals involved in it, and and there's quality of that. He talked to six people or seven people, so much variants. It cover a lot of different topics. How do you like go to the nuggets of the conversation and really drill deep? Validated that with some of the quality to data you're seeing. So there's just a process involved on that and how we really drive the key insights from an exercise like that very close to my heart, as you can imagine, something I really enjoy. I haven't done quite a bit, but it is a mix of art and science. Super Let's turn this to medicx. So I've already hosted on this show Scott mccorkle, founder and CEO, and I really appreciate what you all are up to the problem that you're solving. But for folks who are listening, I typically to this earlier in the conversation, but here we are. Share whose metics like, what problems are you solving for your customers and who are those customers? So I'm sure Scott touched on this, to Scot's amazing I'll give you my perspective, which Scott and I are lined on Meta sex is really a platform where you can think of a buyer and a supplier and suppliers or vendors or customers are you going to call it? You have a buyer and supplier in the Bab world coming onto a platform like medic x where they share and collaborate and come up with the success plan that works for both of them. That's why we call it both. When right, you win it when together. So buyers have certain needs find buying a product. I have certain needs. The vendor of the supplier has certain capabilities that eventually matches with the needs of the buyer has a lot of times that's in powerpoint slides or excel sheets or conversations or texts. MEDICEX makes it a platform where buyers and suppliers, both parties, can come in and create a shared success plan. We call it a shared success plan, and those could be defined around specific outcomes that are going to come out of that relationship and that agreement. And then how do you drive the value and how do you really monitor how those outcomes are being met through life performance, that data that we can plug into our platform that over time, both parties are driving value, not only internally to their organizations, but also to the larger ecosystem. So that's what really met Cx does is bring a buyer and supplier onto the platform, create a shared success plan, bringing life performance data, and then both parties win together. I appreciate the transparency that that brings to the relationship. You know this. You know that it's a little Shay or or generalized, but you know so often you say what needs to be said, you you do what needs to be done in order to get the deal closed and then you know, nine months later, you start begging for the renewal. And this just like like I assume that that that your customers are bringing bringing their their potential customers in or the buyers as early as possible. That's rights environment and into this conversation and into...

...this type of engagement. That's right. And I'll give you a very specific example that we really as a research and experience and design later the past. We've seen, you know, I used to. I used to manage a lot of vendors, my organization, my team's. We have research design tools that they you know, that we hire, we use for our methodologies. A lot of times we don't really have an understanding of the value that we're getting from them. We signed a deal and then goes off for a year and we do something, you know. And so how do we bring that into a platform where both parties can see it and the value that we creating, not only as a design or research organization within a company, but then also how that's aligned with our core objectives, how to sup high is aligned. Would like, for example, diversity and you know. So some of those core objectives. MEDICEX is provides a platform to make that transparent and we're seeing some amazing traction in the industry for that. And it's just sounds very simple, but it is one of those things which is sounds very simple but it just adds so much valuable internally and also externals and organization. Cool. One observation, one question. First, I know that you all are going to be successful a because you've attracted a whole bunch of like to really sharp people into the organization and then be this is we're not. People are the most important, but anyway the be, it's the it's like this, this Duh thing, like this didn't exist, like this seems like it should definitely exist. And this definitely seems like a better way to do all of this stuff that we're doing, those of us that sell in a be to be environment. So I think that combination of things, it's absolutely going to be something successful and I'm certain you'll have to the degree that you may or may not have competition now, like we have a lot. We have at bomb on that a lot more competition now than we did seven or eight years ago, which is at some level is like oh my gosh competition. At the other level it's like, Oh, this completely validates that this is a thing that should be happening. So I know you're going to be successful. Last question here on on Medicx really is I think this is your first go as a chief product officer. Couple take this, however, anywhere you want, but you know, some of my interest here is how do you function within the organization, like what is your relationship perhaps with other kind of functional or department leaders? And then to like what is maybe different about this role then perhaps you expected based on your previous experience, like what's unique about this role for you personally in the experience that you bring to it, because it's a it's a role you've not played directly before. Yeah, it's very interesting question anything and something that I probed and reflective at a bid as I was thinking about career moods. Want to answer to two questions right and the first part. One of the things that I'm really at meticx we do really well is orchestrating and court across apartments because that, as I said, it's we're small. I mean we're not, you know, a hundred thousand people. We're small, but I think it starts when we're small. That culture has to build that there's a really good orchestration happening across sales. Any of our GTM team's customer success, proct engineering and I run product engineering. So that's one. We're just so much coherence and understanding and transparence across very important part of our culture. So that's one. Number two, from a chief product offer roll, what is it different? How is it different? is a different? Here's why I think Scott I have a lot of respect for him and I think that's which is why he's so successful, is has been a BUBB for him thirty years, several years now. One of the things he's he's starting to hopefully started to see, which I resonated with is people don't pay for products, they pay for the experience. And when you bring that experience led thinking and a person who's done experience led design, experience of innovation, experienced a product development to and eth those of a company on how products are being built and make experience of forefront, then it's just a matter of a title change or role change. But what I did throughout my career in mostly the BDC space, with somebody to be is what we're doing in Messx. We're putting experience in the forefront of our product. How it looks, how it works, how it interacts, how would change his transitions penetrates across different touchpoints, for in a Bob Space. And so if you ask me, am I doing something really different? Probably not. In fact, I think Scott has been really he's probably going to revolutionize how products are being thought about here in the space. Were bringing experience to the forefront of how we think at it, you know, a to z period, and so it's been a really cool what I've been here now seven months, eight months now. It's been really, really exciting and to work with somebody like Scott and the team that we're building. It's just and the space that we're after to eventually build a business value network where bias and suppliers a collaborating on the medic x platform and we have all that information that we could use to provide value back to the network and coming round a network company. And I think putting all those things in perspective and really using that to drive medici x, it's just an amazing right for me, awesome. I'm excited for you, I'm excited for the team, I'm excited for your customers and, above all, I'm...

...excited for the potential cultural shift that this will I mean this goes back to where we were a while ago and I by the way, I had so many questions we'd even get to but I feel like like we need to call it soon. This idea of like expectation management. I think once once your customers, customers, have this experience, they're going to want it for themselves in their own customers and they're going to want it from their other fenders. It's like there. I'm really excited about that, the cultural shift that your philosophy could could guide, and so if I can be of help in any way, let me know. But for folks who are listening. We mentioned Scott and on and mentioned Scott specifically. That's Scott mccorkle, founder and CEO at metic X. I hosted him here on this podcast on episode one hundred and twenty three. We called that one transforming customer relationships with transparency and collaboration, and certainly the way we talked about the work that you're doing, I think transparency and collaboration fit. Will call this one something different, but that was episode one hundred and twenty three. You was Scott mccorkle. Another one you might enjoy, if you enjoyed this conversation, is episode ninety seven with Bob Barry. He's the principle U X researcher at answer lab and he's the founder of the Human Computer Mastermind Academy. We called that one, and I used his language on it, how U X drive CX in parentheses in the entire world economy. He made a basic argument that the logic pretty well help for me that U X drive C X and in fact drives the kind of s. That was episode ninety seven with Bob Barry. Before I let you go on, and can you give me two pieces of information and any context you want to add around them. The first is thinking or mentioning someone who's had a positive impact on your life or your career, and the second is a company, your brand, that you appreciate for the experience that they deliver for you as a customer. So this is goes back to the thread that I've, I guess, said throughout this discussion. Anything is I don't think there's one. If I could just say two or three for each of those questions and I'll say why. It's just the way I've I've got engineering, you know, psychology and business, just the way I've built my career. So product, I think there are aspects of Apple, I love the brand, just again, a CD and how they put design and forefront. There's aspects of a product like lift, where the APP is extremely, in my opinion, very extremely easy to use, visual keeps a user in the loop. A product like turb attacks, which makes extremely complex tax laws, gives a confidence to user in a simple, systematic way to fill out your tax forms. So there's aspects of those three that have all these excited means. Some we were form and so I would say those three in a way that that that have resonated quite while across because of different reasons, and with people who've or a person who's had an impact. I mean, this is so difficult for me to say. I'll say again three people. One my pag adviser, who's had an instrumental impact on me on on work ethics and commitment to it, to making things right and being okay to feel, my dad, who've had a lot of. Person I've had a lot of has had a lot of personal impact on me across several dimensions. And the third person from a leadership I'd say, is will CAATH Gart, who I've worked at facebook. I started as a part of his leadership team. Now he runs all the WHATSAPP. Will would be embarrassed I'm even saying this, but he is. His approach to leadership, especially charismatic leadership, is something that has stayed with me. How do you peep put you a people in front as a leader and let them drive a new early channelizing and how do you approach things with empathy in mind? So will my Ph advisor, pad Delucia, who's a professor at Rice University. Now in my dad, who passed away in December. Those three people, I think, are people who've had impact on me and for a different reasons. Awesome, well done. Thank you for sharing that. And if folks have enjoyed this conversation, which I don't think you'd be listening at this point if you didn't, how can someone learn more about you or medic x or even human factors or human center design? If we want to send people on an exploratory journey, we are some places you'd send people who enjoyed this conversation. Oh Man, there's a lot of resource. Obviously you can connect with me on Linkedin. I'm very I really act on Linkedin. Medicexcom reach out to us. If you have any questions, happy to chat. We have a wonderful team that will reach out to your needs. And then with respect to human factors, I think there's so many resource. You could do Google search you get a lot, but I think it'shfs Dot Org. HFEES DOT ORG is the society that is kind of the body for human factors in your economics that has academics, practitioners, students. It's really a good place to start when you think about human factors in general. I'd say it's probably a really credible or authoritative source to start. Super I will round those up for folks who are listening. I put up blog posts with the help of Vivian on our team and some other folks. We put up blog post bombbcom slash podcast. We drop in a handful of video clips with kind of key moments in these conversations. I'll round up all of the links that on and mentioned and in some other stuff too, so...

...you can always visit bombombcom slash podcast if you're on the move and you didn't write any of the stuff down and it got by you. No problem, we've got it all linked up and rounded up and we've got some videos too. So thank you for listening and thank you so much for your time and insights on and I really enjoyed it and again, probably could have done this one is a two hour episode. Thank you for thank you for Hammy. I really enjoyed it. Clear Communication, human connection, higher conversion. These are just some of the benefits of adding video to the messages you're sending every day. It's easy to do with just a little guidance, so pick up the official book. Rehumanize Your Business. How personal videos accelerate sales and improve customer experience. Learn more in order today at Bombombcom Book. That's bomb bombcom book. Thanks for listening to the customer experience podcast. Remember the single most important thing you can do today is to create and deliver a better experience for your customers. Continue Learning the latest strategies and tactics by subscribing right now in your favorite podcast player, or visit Bombombcom podcast.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (201)