Chirp: Let's make good choices
Chirp: A newsletter from Catbird Content

This week, I'm mindful of the futures we choose for ourselves and our communities. I'm thinking about the US elections, of course, but also about the choices we make for the people using the experiences we make. Let's get into it.

Finds

I’m so excited by the content design skills assessment provided by Rachel McConnell at The Product Content Design Studio.


It’s different (and complementary to) the skills assessment available through Catbird Content.


Rachel has structured her assessment so each skill is clearly related to categories including user-centricity and facilitation as you take the assessment.

Then, within each question, Rachel provides four different levels of possible response. The first option is of basic, useful competence in that skill. They get progressively more advanced, and an early instruction notes that each option includes the information from the previous options. The final option includes what it looks like to do that skill as a team leader, responsible for the team’s execution of that skill.


At the end, you get to see where your own skills map to the categories she establishes. I’m so pleased that this is available, and I hope you find it (and Rachel’s
book and workshops) useful too!

Flexes and fumbles

This edition’s flex and fumble is to admit that I’m rattled. I’m sending this note out a day earlier than usual so that I can avoid writing/finalizing a newsletter while I watch results start to emerge from the US election. If you’re unrattled, I’d like to hear about what you’re doing to stay centered!

Alt text: Pink letters appear within yellow quotation marks: "Who are we nudging our users to become?" The background is white, and there's a gray catbird perched on a pencil at the top. At the bottom, it says "Torrey Podmajersky" and has the URL “Catbirdcontent.com/chirp”

Philosophy

Most of our products seek to make a profit from the products and features we make. Profiting isn't a bad thing. The problem for UX comes when the business wants to make and increase profits by maximizing or increasing circumstances that are bad for people. And usually, that means we limit the apparent choices available to people.


In UX we often arrange the UX so that the person using it has a single, obvious path to go down. That UX then “feels intuitive” while it reduces cognitive load. When we see the analytics that show thousands of millions of people following these paths we prescribed, we congratulate each other: we've done a great job!


For signing in, sure. Buying something. Making a video call. These seem innocuous enough. There's a point at which it's not innocent, though. A point at which these “nudges” we create can be used to reduce people's choices in ways that are bad for them and their communities. A point at which people don’t know how to behave when faced with choices, because they haven’t practiced.


“We are what we repeatedly do” wrote Will Durant. With the power we wield to reduce choice-making inside everyday user experiences, who are we UXers nudging our users to become?


I want to nudge our users (and humans in general) to become their best selves, whoever they are. That means I give them choices, and make sure they’re aware that they’re making choices. To do it well, I need to build their trust in the experience and the accurate information within it, so they can understand about the effect of those choices.  


As you make choices today, whether or not you’re a voter in the US, I hope you choose accurate information, and consider the effects of your choice. Even when we disagree, we are all better off when people have practice with deliberate decision making.  

I write these newsletters myself, and I stand by what’s in them. If you have kudos, concerns, or questions, please tell me. —Torrey