Transforming perspectives: The key to paradigm shifts in Product Design

It often happens in cities, near squares or stations where people are in a hurry, to see flowerbeds crossed by one or more paths formed by the trampling of people who cut across them instead of walking around. Despite the presence of prohibition signs, people somehow establish the shortest route between two points of interest (e.g., station exit – bus stop for the city center) and take it.

The key points, at least if we consider this specific case, are:

• The importance of the points of interest involved
• The number of people, timings, and other factors (e.g., people being in a hurry)
• Why architects and urban planners did not consider these needs or failed to predict this behavior
• The fact that imposing a prohibition afterward does not change the status quo

I want to briefly focus on the last two points. In particular, I believe they are two sides of the same coin. No one took the trouble to understand the users’ needs, although it remains to be seen how, on the one hand. On the other hand, it was mistakenly thought that a minor action would be enough to change a well-established behavior. Of course, one could argue that it is merely incivility. From my point of view, however, it is what happens when interacting with complex systems.

If you want to know more about the difference between complicated, complex, and chaotic systems, the Cynefin framework is for you. (Cynefin Framework)

Returning to game changers and the case above (but you can easily transpose the mechanics to the evolution of any product), it is easy to see how neither a prohibition nor changing the shape of the flowerbed to follow the new path traced by the majority are definitive solutions, but only palliatives.

So, what do we do? How do we change behavior, make people more responsible, and alter certain habits?

We need to change our vision and paradigm.

The Fun Theory Case

In 2010, Volkswagen asked a creative agency to advertise a new technology that would have less environmental impact without compromising performance and driving pleasure. These people managed to go beyond the automobile, and the result became a benchmark:

But how can we go beyond the paradigm if we are part of it, if we are trained in it?

It is not easy, certainly. I want to take another example.

Nikolai Lobachevsky and Non-Euclidean Geometries

Geometry as we know it, Euclidean geometry, is based on five axioms by Euclid. The first four were easily demonstrated by the mathematician. However, the fifth (Parallel postulate) represented a 2000-year-long challenge for mathematicians trying to deduce it from the first four. The postulate in question can be summarized as:

“In a plane, through a point not on a given straight line, at most one line can be drawn that never meets the given line.”

Among the mathematicians who tackled the problem was Lobachevsky, who decided to try to prove the fifth postulate by contradiction. By negating this postulate, he thought, he would obtain inconsistent results that would demonstrate its indispensability. In fact, thanks to this approach, sometimes happens, he contributed to creating non-Euclidean geometries and is now considered one of their founding fathers (Non-Euclidean Geometry)

Conclusion

It might seem trivial, but if we want paradigm shifts (and it is not easy), the only way is to see an opportunity where others see a problem.

First example in my mind is: if I continue to consider returns as an issue for e-commerce after years of feeding my customers with “everything free,” I am not solving the problem. I am sweeping it under the rug.

Be an external eye, find a different point of view.

Say it again: “see opportunities where others see problems”.