Hey, this is Hustle. A podcast about digital product design. I'm Rick Messer, your co host with Anthony Armand Ears. What's up, guys? Ah, Anthony, who we got on the show today. Today we got Victor Yoko Ah, listener that reached out, um, via our website and suggested a really cool topic that I'm excited to talk about today. I'm gonna give Victor a little bit over here. Victor's a user experience researcher with the passion for representing the voice of end user and product design decisions. He writes and speaks on the application of psychology to design and has written quite a bit of things for list part smashing magazine,

you Ex Booth User Experience magazine and several more, um, he currently are recently just published a book called Design for the Mind, which is published by Manning. Um, and it's talking about applying psychological principles to Prague design. And here's a brief description of the book designed for the mine includes seven psychological principles of persuasive design to teach you how to recognize how websites and applications could benefit from awareness of our innate natural responses humans and had apply these principles to our own signs for those that are listening At the end of the show, um will will read a discount code which will get you guys a pretty pretty good discount book from Publisher's website. Victor wanted Thio. Say hello and tell a little bit about yourself.

Hey, guys. Hey, Antony. Hey, Brick. Are you guys today?

Eyes good. I am fine, Thank you.

How wonderful. Well, thanks for having me on and yeah, I reached out because I had the book coming up and psychology. Applying that to design is something that I was hoping you'd find relevant to your listeners. And I'm excited that it's it's finally reached the point where it's been released. But, uh, you gave me a great in true, a little more about Mia's. I'm a researcher in the U ex researcher which sometimes, uh, people are not necessarily familiar with that because a lot of times a CZ you've talked about on your other shoes, we give our designers a lot of duties and research is often something that is not necessarily looked at is separate from the duties of a designer. But where I work intuitive. We have separate separated research from design and we work on teams with our designers. And with that allows,

I think, is that I have a more research, an analytical, focused background and my designer colleagues. They've got the design and problem solving backgrounds that that you would expect. Most designers have and bring to the table, and we learn to work together and speak the same language. So I have a very heavy background in psychology and communication. I got my PhD and it wasn't anything related to design. It was looking at how people receive an interpret communication in settings like zoos and science centers. What that did is it gave me really sound foundation on designing studies and interpreting results so that they can be applied in those settings. And the last three years or so, I've spent transitioning from that background into doing digital design. But the same type of research you know, interviewing people, observing people, usability, testing things like that, that that all take place whether the product is digital or not. So it's been a good transition.

So it's just all about your dribble, right? Yes, just getting absolutely. It is so much untold behind a designer. Yeah. Before you talk about the book I'm bi curious if you're able. Thio showed a little bit light on how that the teams you work on work and how you guys distribute the the responsibilities in collaboration on working all this stuff and what that might feel like on a day to day or week to week basis for you and the other mix of independent contributors.

Yeah, that's a great question. And it's something that, as I've been talking to people in the field, it's something I think I'm going to write a future article on, which is we have a really good team set up where all of our teams so we have. We're, ah, studio that focuses on other people, so we're consultancy effectively. And when we work with clients, we give them a team that includes a researcher, a T least one of each, but a researcher, a designer. We have friend and developers, and then we have a project managers,

or what we sometimes call engagement leads here, and they're very focused on on the relationship and facilitating that and making sure that logistically everything works out. We have a really flat at hierarchy around who can do what and so people are really empowered on our teams. I often I like to be very client facing and client focus, So I'll be scheduling meetings and following up with clients. Just a CZ Muchas say our engagement lead in our designers will do the same. Our designers will be working with the other designers or with a product manager from a client, and they'll be constantly in contact with them. They don't necessarily have to go through anybody to talk to each other, somebody from the other team who they feel like they need to communicate with. But then internally on our side, we're all very close. And so if I'm doing research, I'll probably have a designer in the room with me if I'm doing remote interviews and I'm on the phone with somebody and they'll be taking notes if they want to, or they'll be sketching out what's coming to mind while I conduct the interview and then we'll talk about it afterwards, or if they don't have the availability,

because I also do my best to respect everyone's schedule. Then, once I'm completed an interview, I'll go download with the team or I'll post a brief summary over slack. And then, after I've had a few interviews that I've done, I'll schedule a meeting with the designers that I'm working with and the rest of the team and we'll come together and we'll talk about what's bubbling up from the research. So I like to think that it's an effective approach. Our company has recently been acquired by a multibillion dollar company, and so I think that that was one of the telltale signs of being successful. And I know that that the studios being gobbled up by larger brands is something that you guys have also discussed, but something that I've felt firsthand now, Um, but I think that one of the things that made us attractive was that we've been able to put together this teamwork from our end, that it's really effective at delivering a high quality product

of our clients. Well, that description you gave sounds very similar to the way that we're kind of set up in structured and the kind of empowerment we hoped for and also maybe even a little bit of how we work with clients. One last question for you said you mentioned product managers on a client's team That would be a safe assumption that you're kind of the user experience researcher role is almost a liaison partner to the client, product manager and the design team to sort of make the things happen. Or it seems like you might even be highly collaborative with the at a much higher level with the client partner.

Yeah, and so that realizes itself through things such as If we're putting together unturned view script or if we're gonna be asking questions and doing tasks through usability testing, I'll have them giving me. I'll have the product manager from from the client giving me direct feedback. Oh, you know, I want to know what their thoughts are on what we're doing, and I want to make sure that it's going to meet their needs. And then I'll often rely on them, though if we're doing that, say, usability, testing and its financial client, who has a lot of non disclosures in place or has a lot of their customers who I can't simply reach out and say, Hey, I'm Victor from intuitive. Come,

come participate in this study. I'll rely on them to make the contact and facilitate setting up a time that we can do the testing. And so, yeah, it's it's got to be highly collaborative to be successful. And and I'm always very up front when we kick off a project that our success is especially around meeting the timeline is going to depend on those how well we collaborated them, understanding that things around research like recruitment are gonna be really critical if I need their health.

D pretty much deal pretty much run all of your projects with the same, like team structure, you said, like, Ah, yourself a researcher designer, Um And then is that same sort of, uh, is it like a repeatable team structure for each each project? Or do you staff differently based on just different details

of Yeah, I think that to some extent, I think the desire is that you always have somebody representing from each. But the reality is that's not either always needed or always funded, and an example would be. We have retainer clients that maybe we've had worked with four years years, and we do a whole bunch of upfront research, and then what they want to do is build out whatever it is that we've been designing or concept ing around. And so a lot of the hours, then are a lot of the project. Time will turn into development work, and maybe they'll bring back in the researcher if they want to do some usability testing on a quarterly basis, or if they've got some new features or an update that they want to make sure everything is working well on. But that team might really be dead heavy in two years down the line because that's that's the point that it's reached, but in that reflects a different project type or a different maturity for a client. But ideally, you know,

we want to have the voice of research, and we want to be ableto still say, Oh, hey, don't forget about research even if you're two years down the road because the landscape changes, your product is evolving at all times, and you want to make sure you still have a pulse on these things. Usability testing is great, but it's also not the solution to everything. And so you know, it's How do you balance this, justifying the fact that researchers should still be around design designers? You know you do want them around at all times when you're working with a design firm. So we don't necessarily find ourselves justifying that As much as the researchers

interested it off, I am gonna keep in touch with you about this, Victor.

All right? I appreciate it. It's something that I really enjoy talking about it to me. So I was telling you a little bit about my background and really, you know, me being what you would call in U X or digital design came about in such a roundabout way. I wasn't the person who went to art school and thought, Oh, my gosh, I wantto make make things Or, you know, a lot of my colleagues have just been they've had careers where they knew this was gonna be what they ended up doing. And so for me, I was hired directly from my previous job, which was doing research in settings like zoos and science centers into intuitive and the whole, uh, sort of set up that they have has always been what I've witnessed.

And so, as I've talked, spoken to people and I realized Oh, hey, like this setup of having a team that collaborates is is rather unusual in some places, or the fact that we don't ask our designers to do their own usability testing is unusual. And so it's something that yeah, I've developed opinions on. But I've also not necessarily realized Oh, there's other ways that people do it. So it's been a great conversation. Tohave

Yeah, that's nice. Um, so can you talk a little bit about, uh, the book? Is that it? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Can you tell us just like Anthony Red the overview and it's ah, sounds like there's there's like these these principles that kind of make up the bones of the book that are things were kind of built around.

Yeah, well, when I started doing you ex research, I realized how applicable my past was not only from the standpoint of creating studies, designing studies, carrying them out, but also I had a lot of background in psychology around persuasion. Believe it or not, zoos and science centers want to convince people to do certain things after they visit. So if it's a zoo, they might want you to think about why you should purchase things that are more environmentally friendly or why you should recycle instead of throwing away things that could be recycled. And they do that by presenting you with messages throughout the experience. And I realized when I was in user experience research then that we also do the same thing. We want people to engage in certain behaviors. We want them to use our product. We want them to use in a certain way and that all these psychological principles that that air about persuading and influencing people are equally applicable in when the product is digital and on a screen as if it's something tangible or sign in a zoo. So I started writing about that,

and it was really part of it was me trying to contribute something that I felt like I brought to the table. And it was something that I enjoyed doing, which is how do I take these somewhat stuffy or maybe really stuffy psychological theories and models about why people do the things they dio and how people make decisions and present him in a way that designer colleague of mine is gonna be like. That's useful. I can apply that to my job, and I started doing that, and it's something that was relatively well received and like you mentioned in my injury, then I was able to write a bunch of articles about it, and I had always wanted to write a book. I told people I have always wanted to write a book, but I never wanted to write a book about applying psychology to design. But then, but that happened Thio, then be the book, that opportunity that presented itself to me. And so these principles are very much they're from across different fields.

In psychology, they're not a set that I would say you need to apply all seven of these principles at all times or that that would even make sense. It's something that I wanted to present a breath of options to people, and I wanted to be that they would each make sense if you use them alone, but that you could also borrow or pick pieces that made made the most sense for your product. And so some of it focuses on creating new behaviors. And how do we do that? And others focus on How do we get people when they're making a decision? That's sort of spontaneous. How do you make sure that your product is what they think of when they're making that decision. And then the last thickest part of the book is on persuasion and influence. And that's where people commonly think of this dirty Salesman tactic type of thing when you think of the word persuasion or influence. And my point is, well, that that might be what we think of. But truly when you coerce somebody or you trick somebody or you're designing with dark patterns that that is not true to the definition of persuasion,

that persuasion or influences when you communicate or design something in a way that guides somebody too, believing or buying into your point of view. And there is no there's no force behind that. It's, you know, might be saying something in a way that sounds like it activates certain value sets for people. So, for example, if your product, uh, could be something that somebody could use to make their Children happier, you might speak that way to somebody whose apparent or design it in a way that really appeals to their Children versus somebody who you think is completely self centered. You might speak to them in a way that says why they would want to use your product and design it in a way that's going to be very much an experience, that they're able to focus on why the product is valuable to them. And so that's really why people use persuasion is to try to get broader buy in from a greater cross section of potential users.

Sure, so is that one of the sort of seven principles that the book is guided around is this is the notion of, uh, I guess, would that be like knowing who your audience is or,

well, so around communicating? Yeah, yeah, that's yeah, that's around. Ah, I believe it is Chapter seven and it's what the technical term is called framing and how you frame communication on and that communication isn't just the words we use, but it's also the visual images, and it's also the experience itself. So you're communicating to somebody that you want them to use your product and be satisfied by creating something that's usable that's persuasive. It's more persuasive than presenting somebody with a narc AIC interface that they don't understand what the next step is without reading the manual, which is also persuasive in a different way. First ways did something completely different. But when you frame communication, it's presenting something that is supposed to activate, why your product is relevant to people.

And that's one of the first when we talk about actual persuasion. From a psychological perspective, there's this model called the Elaboration Likelihood model. You don't need to know that, um, but Theo model suggests people really only pay attention when they know why something is relevant to them. And if they don't know why it's relevant, they're gonna rely on 100 other things besides what you're actually presenting. So if you don't show people immediately why your product is relevant, they might decide whether or not to use your product based on whether you're your main branding color is pink or blue, or whether your spokesperson is attractive to them or whether they think your logo is cool. Versace. If you activate this relevancy piece and you immediately show somebody, so my one example, I use his turbo tax like people understand why paying their taxes is relevant. And then immediately.

TurboTax also brings in this decent experience that they've designed, so that backs it up with this whole okay, I can use this product. And now I can become a customer because I see why it's relevant. And I'm persuaded because the experience itself is usable and they use certain trigger words like, you know, your maximum refund guarantee and that they have these processes that show you visually that they're double checking and you get big green check marks. When your completed a section and you're not, you know, you're under the assumption that you're not gonna get audited after that. Those airways that we really show how our products in is not only relevant, but then we bring Indies what's called secondary processes or secondary ways of information processing. And that's where somebody is looking for those cues that they're persuasive. Like, Am I attracted to this person who's presenting me this? Do I trust this information is being presented in a way that I understand. So, uh, that's that's all key things that get at persuading people and making sure that they're gonna want to use your product over a competitors or even looking for a competitors,

right? So there's lots of different ways that I guess you can even kind of, uh pitch something with, like all of this, all of this psychology that's sort of going on in your mind. But unless you sort of, like, identify, ah, like, sort of your audience and are trying to phrase it in a way that is a little bit more geared towards that audience, you know, you're ultimately your reception is gonna be a lot, a lot, a lot better. I, uh,

saw a tweet yesterday That was retweeted from someone else that I don't know where it came from originally, but yeah, you know, I like to get back. I think I retweeted it too, so we could probably find, but anyway, it was really interesting is basically put pretty simply very, very relevant. I think to what you're saying is that users generally don't care about your product. They care about themselves. So if you can relate your product to what the user needs, you know that that's that's how it's going to go over a lot better.

Yeah, I know that that is a is a nice, concise way of summarizing it and what it would it from a psychological perspective and from a body of research on persuasion that the term is involvement people. If somebody is involved, and it's one of the number one reasons, they'll find relevancy to a product. And so you need to. Sometimes it's not immediately obvious to you how involvement might exist, but in some way, if you can tie how your product, how someone's life experiences, make them involved in the purpose of your product that opens the door, and then your job is to make sure you're presenting them with the best experience or the most reliable information. If you don't open that door, that's when you look at these other potential design elements. Are you making it so that it's attractive? Or maybe you're offering your product at a price point That's lower than others. Or maybe you're saying that you are Product comes with X y Z benefits that others don't. And so those are other accused that people will look at when they're making decisions if they're not immediately aware of why something is

relevant to them. Sure, so I don't know if you're familiar with that. There's a There's another book out there to, um I think it's the the co principal or whatever of mule design who wrote it. But that's not research. Yeah, just enough. Yeah. Okay. Cool. Yeah, I like that. That's something. I'm pretty interesting, too, because it feels like there is a point where you know,

the there's more than enough. Right? So I guess that I would pose that question to you if you have an opinion on it, right? Like we all need research to a certain point. And then as you as you said yourself, there's there's points in the structure of your team in the life cycle of product that you'll maybe developing for a client where research needs to, you know, maybe focus on another project or something when things are being implemented and iterating on, um, can you speak to the question of what is enough research and and maybe more specifically, what is more than enough research?

Um, I will do my best to do that. So without sin, you know, with saying upfront, I'm biased towards plenty of research. Sure. I think we have a pretty good a pretty good handle on that. In terms of what you know, you have to think consider a few things. What can your client stomach from a budget in time perspective is always gonna be something that, whether you like it or not, is part of the reality. So when we say we want people to engage in six months of research, that will never really be, and that's not what we say, but that will never really be the truth of it.

And so I think that enough research or too much research would be anything that prevents you from moving forward and then going through with design work and hopefully moving into development where I've worked on projects where and it's not because we're suggesting more and more research. But when you're thinking about of redesign of a product where jobs are on the line, people get into this overly analytical state and they want to make sure everything is perfect. And one of the interesting things about researches, the more research you do, The more question do you tend to have because you'll find something and you'll say, OK, well, why is this happening? And it's not like you can leave it alone and say, Well, we found this and we know that people are using our product a certain way and we're just gonna design for that because all of a sudden you want to know why. Why are they using it this way? And is there a way that we can increase the way they're using it? And so then these new questions could generate new studies each time. But you do need to have a handle on what is a realistic budget.

What is a realistic timeline you're willing to dedicate to research and something that I think we do well here. Where I work it intuitive is that we don't have research as a separate project. We do have projects that we call research and strategy. But even in those projects, the output the client will get is our design concepts that are based on the research. So we won't give them a research report and then say, You know, if you want the rest of it, we need toa have another project or if you want to see what some designs would look like based on what we found, we need to work another six months. And so I think that what we've learned to do his work pretty hand in hand where research is maybe a little bit in front of design because you have to use what you're finding to inform the design. It's not slowing it down to the point where the client feels frustrated or like they have paid for something and they're not getting anything, which sometimes when we first sit down with a client is a concern of theirs, where they'll say, I don't want research to slow down the process. And so if there's going to be any research,

my philosophy is we have to make sure then that it's nimble and that it's something that were immediately showing the value to it. Otherwise, this client is going to lose interest and they'll say, Hey, I have a bunch of great ideas and I want you to do it and that's all. That's what I'm paying you to. Dio and I don't want any research. I don't want you

ask any questions. How do you do that? How do you get something in like a quick win in the door with research, you know, because research is just, you know, in my mind is something that is like, Okay, this is gonna be a longer process. So

right. And I think that's where having your researcher be separate from your designer is really something that can be a benefit because you can work as a team. And while I'm if I can line up something, let's say it's a few quick interviews. Or let's say I'll do a U X assessment or whatever people call it different things like heuristic analysis and a competitive comparative of what some of the other products that are out there doing. I I can put together the whole presentation. But if the designer is going through with me and were interpreting what we see together, the designer can also run off and start to conceptualized solutions or mock up something that might be a completely different experience than what others are doing. And we can run that by the client, and they can see OK, this is stemming from research that we're doing. We're not sitting around waiting for a 90 page report for for months. Wow! All right, Wow! And so I often say that when we do usability testing, we also have our designers right in the room or dialing in if it's something where they can screen share and see what's going on and they don't want to be on site that we'll have.

We'll have debriefs after each day and my designers will have solutions. We'll do usability testing Monday and Tuesday. The designer will present some solutions Wednesday and Thursday, and by the time I'm giving my report on Friday, everyone's moved on

about their life, and it's like, Well, don't forget like, and

I still want to talk about what we did. But it's so my world. I understand why that's important, right? I have to say, if you were coming from academia and you have a lot of, uh, attachment to to rigor and to wanting things to always be done in a way that would get you published in an academic journal, you're gonna be really disappointed the way the industry treats you because the timelines air just absolutely not. Not in line. And I don't think that means throwing all standards out the door. I do think it means understanding when you're presenting your findings, people need to get the bullet points of Here's what we did here is why. Here's what we found and they if you want to include this 2000 page appendix that really shows how you did everything and every response you got. That's something you do. But when you're trying to keep a client excited and engaged, you need to say what you did.

Why, what you found and then move out of the way and let the cool stuff, which is the design, take, take form and and let people see it so that they say what you're doing is valuable. And then if there's somebody who wants toe beam or engaged around what was done for the research and how it was done, you're ready Thio to speak with that person or with that group outside of the context of like a final presentation where you're really wanting to keep people excited.

There's a couple things that I've been thinking about lately, you know, even though we're growing, you know, we tried really hard to make sure that our client mixes a good mix of validated products that are in the marketplace that already have, you know, thousands or hundreds thousands or millions of users. And we're also really excited about, you know, bringing new businesses and new service is and new products to market to and as everyone might imagine a lot of these newer businesses and service's and products are a lot of time spearheaded by, like an owner operator that believes that they know exactly what they need to create, and they just need you to execute their vision. Maybe they are the industry expert, but I think there's a sometimes a big disconnect from what they think people want and how they think people use it and what the truth really is. And they can also get really excited about their new venture, that they want to go out and build every feature under the sun before any, you know,

without really doing the right due diligence and figuring out what people really want. And what the right with you in the right way to build and manage the money is because a lot of these people, unlike a Fortune 500 company that might have one go at this and then and even even then, even if you you know you have good data to back it up and you get a product, you still have to do research on the conversion and optimization and, you know, continuous learning and and you know and So that's the area where I think we we've made a, um we've turned a corner on because I think we've almost got to a certain point where when we're advising, those kinds of people were like, Look, you know, we are going to do we are going to do this because it's it's our It's our job to make sure we're making the right thing, the area where I'm not really sure what to do. Maybe you can offer some advice on this is how some of these bigger companies have validated product the marketplace, for example. And they have a lot of times were paired up with product managers and also their design research team.

And they are presenting to us like a road map of things they have to build. And and they always say, Oh, yeah, don't worry. You know what we're doing? Research. We're doing testing. But ah, lot of times we don't get access to that at all. How How can we like? How can we? How can companies or individuals designers get more involved in that and be a part of it instead of it looking like a line item that you know the customer wants to avoid.

So from the research perspective, I think that when the examples that you're giving things make me think of some of the larger banks that I've worked with in the past where they're set on what they want to do and they've been funded to do a certain thing. And even if it sounds like you're gonna go out and maybe find something contrary to what they think they need, uh, they don't necessarily want to hear that. Um, yeah, I think that's a tough position to be in because you're you've taken on the task of serving this. Clients need, um, one of the best ways that I've found is if you can. So let's I would say, First of all, you have to be able to do some research on your own or justify that you need to do research. A lot of times I've I've had clients say it Exactly. You said is we've We've already done the research. What would you do that's any different?

How would what you find to be different and what I found, particularly with the clients who are more legacy or have been around a long time is that they have, ah, misconception about what U Ex research is in A lot of times, they're focuses on market research or marketing research, and their findings are looking at What are the personas of people that we sell to or that might, um, I have an interest of our product and that we describe some of that We have similar methods, but that we use the findings in a very different way. And it's all around making sure that the product that we're putting out is the most usable and also meets the real needs of the users. And so giving us an opportunity to see what are the current problems and how are people out in the field solving them? So does your product currently have a version out there that everybody has found a workaround because it doesn't do exactly what they were thinking, that it would do as easy as you think it does? We need to go see that so that we can actually design a solution that includes what it is that is lacking in the current products. And so I think that making an argument for why you should be able to do some research is a tough thing. Toe navigate because it costs money and it costs time.

But talking about how it it might be valuable from a different standpoint and then also really involving a client in research I've found to be valuable toe have them like you mentioned the Maybe it's a startup founder who thinks they're an expert. They know everything, and they know exactly what people need. That that really eye opening moment can happen when they are watching a video of you interviewing somebody who completely contradicts what they think the experience that their current users have or that people are looking for and that that can start a conversation. Because then, yeah, they offered it from somebody who's not you saying, OK, here's where there might be opportunity.

I think guys actually like, really key is the concept of getting founders involved in it because, you know, just plopping, you know, a report on their desk or walking them through a deck is never going to be as compelling as as uh, yeah, having having some form of participation, was recently talking with somebody about the concept of, you know, Google design sprints and whatnot and how they don't really work if founders aren't involved, The reason that they'll buy into it is because there's sort of a part of the journey, and I think that's actually something to take Ah, principal to take from the overall, you know, just like just like nature. The way product should be built today is with with P people being involved in different portions of the process because you're always going to get better buy in and better views from from somebody who's been involved.

Yeah, I absolutely agree. I don't think I've seen any area that suffers from having people come out and watch how their users are currently using their product or how they're currently solving problems using another product and not walk away feeling like they've been, you know, educated in a way that they couldn't have found if they simply went about their business or read the final report. And so I agree with you completely.

There's a project that I'm on right now that I have to admit In the beginning, I was a little bit nervous about how much time we're recommending going through our discovery and research phase. But we did what we did it exactly what we thought we needed to do. And the result was like two or three e mails and a bunch of slack messages from the client just in all caps thinking us for doing that. And, uh, that was really, I think very reassuring to me and also to the team that you know, that these are things we should do on and just need to learn to get better. It's a little bit harder for us because we don't need it necessarily have that role on and we all have. You know, some of these skill sets and we're trying to navigate the space right now. How can we level up a bit or potential, even create our own role for that? And those are things that if you're open, talk about in the future, I'd love to pick your brain about Yeah.

And yes, some something Victor had mentioned earlier to that point. Anthony, about the fact that if you have somebody dedicated to that role, they're sort of doing the heavy lifting on, like digging deep while a designer can contribute something directly. Uh, that is a little bit. It's just a little bit more tangible, right, because you can see it and you can see it and quickly make a, you know, a judgment on it. But I like that idea. I think like that whole concept of getting getting quick went in the door right away. But it sounds like it would only work, really technically, you know, to have sort of a dedicated person so that they can sort of collaborate with with a designer and sort of like have that pushing pole to turn something around quickly.

Yeah, I think it's definitely involves setting up your I don't know the best words. I'll just say culture, but setting it up to where? That's the expectation. You know, designers are gonna then feel comfortable not having the answer to everything because they're going to need to ask the research or something. And the researcher has to feel comfortable that they're gonna let the designers teach them what but design or what a research finding then looks like when it's designed for a digital solution. Our digital product and you know that involves some level of being vulnerable and just really saying, I don't necessarily know all the answers. But I'm gonna develop a relationship with my counterpart, who is the researcher, my counterpart, who is the designer. And I've had the opportunity, really nice opportunity of working with some of the same designers over the years, and that's led.

I feel like really deeper ability to function quickly, and it wasn't necessarily done on purpose. But even we have some standing desks that our work, my standing desk, is directly adjacent to a designer who I've been on. Five out of the last six projects that I've been on have been with him. And so it's almost through body language and everything that we're communicating with each other throughout the day. I will hear him grunt like, Ah, crap! And I'm like, What is it? And you know, then we'll have a conversation. And so it can be something that probably at the snap of a finger you can't go from not doing too doing but with some thought that really, I think, can lead to some great experiences and improve the overall feeling both internally and then also what you're what you're giving these to the client

is well, fair enough. What's really awesome? Um, so The design for the mind is the book by Victor Yoko, and he's Got a Credit. A Short Girl for the listeners Bit Lee b i t dot l Y ford slash Janko one y o c c 01 um, Victor, what's that discount? 39% or something? That

Yes. So there is no psychology behind. I think that Okay, maybe there's like a finest but did not come from me. Manning Publications offers me a 39% discount code if you use if your listener to the hustle and you can use the code. Why O C c o p p c So it's my last name. Y, o, C, c O and PPC if you check out through their website, which is the bit Lee Link that Anthony just mentioned. But I can't explain why is 39%? You know, my joke to myself is because forties too much and 30 eights too little. But if that's a sweet spot where people mentally really feel like they're getting the deals that they want or if that's the cut off point where they feel like they're not making enough profit, I don't know. But it's 39%. Well, and

it sounds like it's, you know, a great investment. Whether it's 100% full price or just got or not. I'm definitely going to get myself a copy of this and and recommend this to a few people on the team. And I hope we can keep in touch.

Awesome. Definitely. I'm I'm always somewhere here. Virtually. You can always shoot me an email. Um, yeah. You anybody who's listening? My email is my name Victor Yako at gmail dot com. And I'm I try to respond anything. Anytime I get a personal message from somebody taking the time

to do that, I'm gonna I'm gonna set you up to some, uh, signing up for some newsletters.

Yeah, thanks. Also, heavily Spam. Four did, too. Victory, ayako gmail dot com. And then also make sure your bots follow at Victory Aku on Twitter. Perfect, but yeah. No, really. I had a great time talking with you guys today, and I love to talk about this stuff and see how it plays out in

the real world. Well, for going out there, listening will post the all the links that you need, especially to buy the book and follow Victor. Victor. Let us know when you you know, you have more stuff out that to read and we'll be in touch. Cool. Thank you, guys. I appreciate it. Thanks for making time. Thanks. No problem. Hey, thanks so much for listening today.

This is Rick. I'm sure you've all heard of envisioned. The product is practically synonymous with screen design. We're stuck that in vision is now a sponsor of hustle. Something we love about envision is that they are so highly involved in the community. These guys really care about where design is going and the support created with loads of design. Resource is you like kids designed process and interview articles on their block, which is great for just general inspiration when building products. Aside from being a great prototyping tool, they also have features for a project management creating mood boards and presentations, live collaborative screen share ings and, like a 1,000,000 other useful things. I literally do not have enough time t even list all their features. But they pretty much got what you need. Bottom line, they don't just want you to be a user.

They want to empower you with their tools so that you can do your best work. And I think that's pretty cool. Overall takeaway. If you haven't heard about envision or haven't checked them out in a while, just play around with their latest features. They have a free trial and a really impressive lineup of industry leading design and project management tools. Their home pages. Just envision app dot com. Check Mouth Hustle is brought to you by Fun Size. A digital product design agency in Austin, Texas, secretes delightful, innovative products for mobile Web and beyond. Visit us on Twitter at fun size or visit our website of fun sized taco.