[robflaherty]

I know the intent is good (it is!) but this common notion that good design is a toolbox of fun little games really prevents the design function from getting taken more seriously. In the business world at least it ensures our seat at the kid’s table.

[cheschire]

In my opinion this is impacted heavily by the average career length in the room. This isn't an age thing, but more of an expertise thing.

Once a person approaches and crosses that 10,000 hour mark, they no longer struggle to articulate their motivations and needs the way that a person at the 2,000 hour mark would.

I find this type of design playbook to be very useful when the average experience in the room is on the lower end. On the upper end of the experience spectrum (30,000+ hours), I've found it tends to turn more into facilitating a group therapy session. There's still room for activities and exercises but I use them sparingly.

I should also mention that I prefer to approach the extreme ends of the experience spectrum in separate engagements.

[tjpnz]

In the companies I've worked where it was taken seriously it had more of a Human Factors/HCI bent. You would come to them for accessibility and user studies, and stay for the pretty UI and design system.

[_proofs]

while i appreciate the comment about games, i think it is worth considering the relationship between creativity and ego, and what happens when you take yourself, and your ideas, too seriously.

john gleese has a great take on creativity which i believe to be a fair criticism of what happens when you take yourself too seriously in business.

[noduerme]

What about when you infantilize your employees and implicitly insult their intelligence by having them do exercises designed for 3rd graders? Is that the time to top it off with criticism for them taking themselves too seriously?

[gochi]

The dramatic reaction to doing group activities like stretching being viewed as an "insult" indicates that person has a very low emotional IQ. So yes, that's a great time to get them to stop taking themselves too seriously!

[noduerme]

Also, look at you, Jesus, being the arbiter of who's got emotional IQ - the people who follow your exercise routines? People you like? I'm not speaking to you, but to anyone reading this: Anyone like the person I'm responding to, who jumps to assign judgment of some failing on those that don't go along with their program (or implies someone who doesn't go along with the group must be flawed or weak) is a narcissist and a sick control artist, and a bully who's just learned to use fancy language to make you feel bad about your absolutely 100% natural inclination to reject and call HORSESHIT on the metaphysical group crap they're selling. You, pal, just revealed yourself as one such peddler.

[noduerme]

Actually, quite the opposite. People with high "EQ" are particularly sensitive to the discomfort invoked in individuals by hamfisted attempts at generating group conformity. But it's wonderful to have your emotional intelligence insulted while your intellect is under assault.

One way you know you're in a cult and being manipulated is that you or someone else is being singled out as an example of someone who's unwilling to adhere to whatever ridiculous stunt they're being asked to perform. The person asking them to do it is usually a psychopath using the oldest trick in the book: The ability to manipulate people by leveraging the innate human need for approval from the group.

And it's always those with emotional intelligence who are singled out for abuse. Of course, the psychopaths running the experiment also have "high EQ" - of a very particular and malevolent sort.

Rating: Cheap trick, poorly executed. 2/5. And not nice.

[tomjakubowski]

None of these exercises were designed for third graders

[noduerme]

What on earth do they have to do with "design"? All I see is a handbook for middle managers to force employees to submit to debasing rituals.