
Moving Design Decisions From Ego-Centered to User-Centered - kvrichard
https://www.kevinrichard.ch/moving-design-decisions-from-ego-centered-to-user-centered/
======
azhu
Yes. Cultures are systemic, and they are much more than just how your company
has a pingpong table and happy hour every day. Culture is the template for
behavior. It is what dictates what the standard response to difficulty is.
Just as children learn from their parents, followers learn from their leaders.
It is imperative to install leaders who understand this.

> Remember: this is not about you, nor it is about your career. There are real
> people lives and well-being at play. You’re not playing god here and you’re
> not free from mistakes, erroneous judgment, or faulty reasoning. You're
> human as much as everyone in your team/organization, with all the bias and
> limitations. Be humble.

~~~
kvrichard
Thanks for your comment and sharing thoughts!

------
X6S1x6Okd1st
This felt very pusedoscience-y to me.

~~~
kvrichard
Thanks for your comment. This article is based on the actual state of
knowledge in social sciences, and you can find all the references (as links)
all over the article.

If you have doubts or questions on a specific subject discussed in the
article, I would be glad to provide sources.

By the way, I will add a "Sources & references" section that is missing.

Thanks again.

~~~
X6S1x6Okd1st
To be fair it looks like there are a number of valid thing sources here, but
at least to me it didn't feel very cohesive and there are a lot of terms that
have been coopted by self help books and other sources that I don't find trust
worthy.

For instance as soon as I see "tipping point" I think of malcom gladwells book
which falls into puesdoscience a number of times. [1]

It's entirely possible with some different framing and dealing with one
sections that are supported by different research in different articles I
wouldn't have had that reaction.

1:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point#Scientific](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point#Scientific)

~~~
kvrichard
Thanks for your feedback. I better understand your point.

Specifically about the term "tipping point" I used it in its general meaning.
Beyond the legitimate criticisms on Gladwell's use of the concept in his book,
it is known in behavioral science and more specifically in when we talk about
behavioral contagion
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_contagion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_contagion))
as the "inflection point"
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflection_point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflection_point))
which is what I'm referring to as a "tipping point"
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_point_(sociology)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_point_\(sociology\))).
But I agree that this could be confusing. I'll add this precision to my
article.

For the rest of your remark: the point of this article is to make readers
realize the importance of context on people's decision-making process. This is
no pseudo-science as it is standard knowledge in social sciences, backed up
with years of scientific studies and publications.

For sure, many scientific concepts have been reused (and altered) by personal
development and pseudo-science movements. But this doesn't cancel the
scientific validity of such concepts. How many times can we read about
“quantum physic” in pseudo-science articles (i.e.
[https://elemental.medium.com/the-human-body-can-heal-in-
asto...](https://elemental.medium.com/the-human-body-can-heal-in-astonishing-
ways-cc0dc32d862b)). Does it make quantum physic a pseudo-science?
Fortunately, no. The difference here is that not only the concept is well-
supported but also the method and technic used for its application.

Perhaps, my article is not well written, which I can concede (always learning
and improving). Anyway, thanks for helping me improve it.

