Are problem statements killing creativity and innovation?
The simple answer is ‘no’. The not-so-simple answer is ‘they can’!
I recently read an article on 5 ways to reframe a solution to a problem statement that I mostly agreed with, but some of the points it made got me thinking. I strongly believe in framing user problems (or needs/wants) using the problem-space mentality. It removes solution-space bias and lets you dig further to see whether it’s actually the problem or just a pain point or symptom in a larger problem space. But let’s get back to that article.
The article provides Google Glass as one example and labels it a failure (which it was) due to lack of validation with users and poor problem and value proposition framing. Personally, I have a few issues with that and not because I was a fan of Google Glass or owned a pair, but because, I feel, it promotes this fear we all seem to have of failure. Google Glass was an experimental product that was trying to push wearable tech boundaries and see what it can evolve into. It was trying to be innovative but didn’t quite find its “space”.
Will the new (if they get released that is) Apple Glasses do better? It looks like they’re taking a sightly different approach and potentially addressing the main concern people had… being recorded. But they’re doing so by using the data that Google Glasses has managed to provide with its “failure”. Now, could Google have figured out that non-consumers of its product would have had issues with a camera potentially recording them by the users of Google Glass? Sure, they could have interviewed people that wouldn’t be the main consumer of the product and gotten feedback from them — but hindsight’s a b****.
As designers and problem solvers, we shouldn’t be afraid of experimentation and failure. As the old Chinese proverb goes “Failure is the mother of success”. To be innovative, I believe, we need to sometimes forget about what “makes sense” and what proven solutions exist and push our ‘solutioning’ boundaries and embrace and learn from failure. Architects do it all the time and design amazing and memorable solutions using crazy and creative materials to address different client problems. Do those solutions sometimes fail? From what I’ve seen on the many Architectural shows that I watch, yes. Do they learn and improve on those solutions? They sure do! Look at SpaceX — they also constantly experiment, innovate, and aren’t afraid to fail. Their Starship launch and landing technically ended in “failure”, but they managed to gather a bunch of data to ensure the success of their next launch. They shipped to learn… get it? shipped. to. learn…!? I’ll see myself out :(
Only by learning from our failures, and using that data to improve (very important), can we truly provide the most delightful and memorable experiences to our users. Unfortunately, in Google’s case, it looks like it will be Apple that will be benefiting from the learnings of Google Glass.
