KEY LEARNINGS FROM REFLECTING ON EXPERIENCE-LED DESIGN
I will go into far less depth regarding the insights on the value of feedback with my case study for a number of reasons. The main being that need for a feedback solution turned out to be far less than I had expected. The other is that when I finally located a verifiable weakness impeding IKEA’s collective knowledge, I quickly pivoted away from the possibilities derived from regular feedback, and adopted a new direction where need was expressed. This is not to say that IKEA’s feedback mechanisms are flawless, and based on difficulties expressed about truthful feedback, it would seem that psychological safety to foment trust would have provided a better direction to pursue. Learning about the wide variety of mechanisms already in place, it became apparent that this area had already been adequately addressed through me-talks (individual), we-talks (team), 360 feedback (from stakeholders), annual development talks, and The Voice (an anonymous company wide survey). Asking how IKEA could benefit from additional feedback, the responses: 'Feedback’s huge here, more than I've ever seen' and 'IKEA has three times as much as any other place' and 'I think sometimes it's too much, too much information' made it clear I should pursue another direction.
I considered simply killing the feedback chapter, but then realized that it is part of my phenomenological journey, which includes my own missteps, and illustrates how my own failure is a valid outcome of an experiential design process. I view this as a negative outcome in an experiment, signifying the need to reexamine my assumptions. This means that I am unable to fulfil my initial intention to transplant fail-friendly strategies borrowed from startups, on a structured organization. The solution I ultimately still serves the overarching purpose of facilitating learning from failure. In order to learn from failure and develop resilience towards future episodes, I have analyzed my process to identify key flaws.
a. Designer centric
Design thinking’s user centric principles call for empathy prior to ideation to make sure that the solution is relevant to user needs. Instead of adhering to the order of the double diamond’s 4 stages, I pushed an agenda inconsistent with users. The value of feedback was not my own creation, it was derived from interviews with startups, but running with it as a solution from IKEA prior to stepping into IKEA’s shoes was a mistake. The way I interpreted it, IKEA’s stature scuttled opportunities for the kind of impromptu feedback described by Aleksandra, the cafe owner whose staff reflect daily over lunch. How could I have failed to anticipate the degree to which the company had already emphasized structured feedback? The answer is by negating Savoia’s (2019) essential lesson to establish market fit prior to investing time and resources on a solution nobody wants or needs. By Jumping the gun, I proposed a solution based strategy, instead of a user informed one.
b. Planning over action
Lacking an organizational learning or cognitive psychology background, It seemed imperative to gain a depth of experience on relevant topics before approaching my case study. I familiarized myself with the discourse on failure, experiential learning, psychological safety, reflection and feedback, as well as by testing the waters with entrepreneurs, before approaching IKEA. While I do I regret being prepared, this delayed meeting with my case study until late in the game, leaving limited options when my assumption proved wrong. Too much emphasis on preparation and planning may have subverted my original intention to maintain a bias towards action.
c. Experience-led Ignorance
The phenomenological methodology is one of discovery in action, where past and present experiences influence my choice of what to probe. However, I relied too heavily on my personal experience, which contrasted markedly with my users. The backstory is that my experience working as a contractor for IKEA exemplifies what Pink (n.d.) refers to as a feedback desert, but what I have now learned is that my feedback starved encounter is not what full time IKEA employees experience. Even though this proved to be an unnecessary diversion, the detour contributed to my renewed understanding of IKEA’s actual needs.