Links in this episode
This transcript was created using the awesome, Descript. It may contain minor errors.
Note: This is an affiliate link, where This is HCD make a small commission if you sign up a Descript account.
Gerry Scullion 00:24
Hello, and welcome to Bringing Design Closer. My name is Gerry Scullion, and I’m a service designer and trainer based in Dublin City, Ireland. Bringing Design Closer is a podcast dedicated on shining the light on the complexities of embedding design within organizations. Human centered design has been getting quite a lot of bad press over the last number of months, questioning how it’s a fad and how it misses the mark in many, many ways. Now, I tend to agree with many of these points, and today we will speak about the role of human centered design in regards to designing inclusive services. I caught up with Christine Hemphill, MD of Open Inclusion in London. Christine has led an amazing life. And without spoiling too much about this episode upfront, we chat about how a fundraising effort for her nephew changed not only her perspective on life, but her entire career too. We chat about Open Inclusion’s design framework and what we can do as design practitioners to ensure that what we design works towards meeting a broader set of needs. I’ve added a link to that framework in the show notes if you want to follow along. But anyway, let’s get straight into this episode. Christine Hemphill, a very warm welcome to Bringing Design Closer. How are you doing?
Christine Hemphill 01:39
Really well, thanks, Gerry. Lovely talking to you.
Christine, where are we coming from today?
I’m in London today. Not so sunny. But yeah.
So Christine, tell us a little bit about what you do and how you got into it.
I’m an inclusive researcher and designer. I run a company called Open Inclusion based here out of London. I got into it, as many people do in inclusive design or research, in a fairly roundabout way. So I came in with an innovation and change background in large organizations, took a little bit of a segue midlife – had a bit of a midlife crisis and went took a segue into sports on the way. And when I came back into the professional sphere, came into digital design, realized that a lot of digital design was same-same but different, and thought we’d differentiate ourselves more fundamentally on real user value, and used inclusive design as that; so both content and inclusive design, and accessibility of the products were how we differentiated. And then I found that was actually the really fun bit, so rather than do that within a design agency, I created an agency just to do that: supporting other design agencies and organizations, bringing the voice of consumers with any specific needs into the design process right at the beginning and measuring the outcome at the end.
Yeah. You mentioned something there, and you’ve been extremely humble about your midlife crisis and then getting into a bit of sports. You’re actually a world triathlete champion. Tell us a bit about that.
Funnily enough, that was also my route into inclusive design. I have a nephew that, when he was four, was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy. And in the first year after that, I just saw my sister and her family go through a huge wave of – it’s like standing on a beach and watching a tsunami come at you; you know, it hasn’t hit yet, but the knowledge has. And I just wanted to say I cared so I decided to sign up and do a triathlon. And I chose to do one just south of Sydney. It was the nationals. It was a long course. I put myself through more pain, people might give you a bit more money. And I just raised some money for the research foundation. And what I didn’t realize is actually that was a qualification course for the World Championships. And I set some goals in terms of time that people had to pay me more if I went faster. And yeah, I hit those goals, and by accident qualified for the World Championship, which was a little bizarre. And that opened a whole door in a very unusual way that I followed for four years and ended up racing for Australia for three years professionally.
Incredible. It’s an incredible story. But when you look at that, you know, one door closes, another one opens and you entered into the world of sports. Tell us a little bit about how you see in your own mind elite athleticism and how that relates to inclusivity. You must see some parallels between the two worlds?
Absolutely. It’s really interesting. In fact, I was talking to a young athlete just a week ago and saying, ‘You don’t yet realize how many of the skills that you’re building up through your sporting career at the moment you will use in every part of your life as you go forward.’ So, I guess a couple of the key ones. One, just do the work. You don’t get to go faster by thinking about it, just working on technique. You have to do all these things. You need to eat well, you need to sleep well. You need to really work on finessing your technique, but actually, at the end of the day, you also just need to do the work. Whether it’s hard work, do it hard. If it’s going long and slow, do it long and slow. So not just doing the work but doing it really specific to purpose – that is completely parallel with running a business. We need to really focus on you’ve only got X amount of time – it’s like your energy in a day – that you’ve got to really focus on the things that most count. And actually, one thing about Open as a business is I set up Open as an impact-first business; it is actually a for-profit, but we’re an impact-first goal. And we’re a small team, so we really need to focus on making sure every drop of energy we put out there has the greatest impact and influence it can have. You know, if we’re doing something that’s hard and fast and like a sprint training, do it hard and fast; if it’s something that needs to be slow burn and long build, do it in that way. But be very specific and do the work.
It’s really interesting, because I’ve done triathlon before, and if you don’t do the training, you’re exposed on the day of the race and you’re exposed in your lack of training or lack of preparation. And the same is true for design; if you don’t do your work – and we’re going to talk today around inclusion and accessibility – if you don’t include those in your training, so to speak, or in your processes, you’re going to get exposed.
It’s absolutely true. There’s that lovely Gary Player quote, you know: ‘The harder I work, the luckier I get.’ You still need at the end of the day to have everything together on the day. And that’s true whether it’s workplace day when you’re in front of a client or exposing something to your customers for the first time, or whether it’s a triathlon on the day of the race. You can only influence all the things you can bring to it. But the better you do that, and the better you turn up, the luckier you’re going to be and the more influence you’ll have.
Absolutely. So let’s talk about inclusion, and inclusivity. How do you describe it? And bear in mind that not everyone has the same definition, so imagine you’re trying to describe it to a five-year-old child.
Actually, everyone does have a different definition and it’s pretty misunderstood. I try and flip it on its head a little bit and say: understand exclusion. Because everybody understands the feeling of being excluded from something, whether it was that they were too small, too tall, too old, too young, their hands were too big or too small – you know, everyone understands the frustration of something not quite working for them. And actually, inclusion is all about getting rid of those moments where it doesn’t work because of an individual difference. That difference might be the way we sense, the way we move, the way we think, the way we feel or the way we communicate. So, you know, all sorts of differences that we have within any human, and every human is different. So just to define accessibility versus inclusion, because a lot of people, particularly coming from a digital design background, will be very aware of digital accessibility. That means designing in for people who have disabilities and who basically would be defined as disabled under any legislation. So in England, that’s the EA Act, or the ADA in the USA. And so that’s designing in for their requirements, and specifically thinking about people who use assistive technologies or people who adapt the way that they’re interacting with their environment or sensing their environment. But actually, inclusion is much, much broader than that. It includes all of us when we have those moments of exclusion – because we might be operating one handed, or we might be in a country where we don’t speak the language as a first language or when we write. You were talking that you had an early morning this morning because of a young child, because you’re tired and stressed; that’s cognitive diversity, and that’s going to create exclusion to a certain degree. So my view of designing is designing for as many people in as many contexts as possible so that the experience is as effective as possible consistently.
Yeah. So we’re going to build on that later on in the conversation. But the next one: you mentioned accessibility there. And in my experience, people tend to get these mixed up and they use them interchangeably at times. How do you define accessibility? And how’s it interrelated to inclusivity?
The way I define accessibility, which is not necessarily the way everyone does, but I really think about accessibility as ensuring you can at minimum get access to the content that’s being created. And there’s a legal requirement; it’s not just getting access, but being able to interact with it. So in the digital world, the WCAG – the World Content Accessibility Guidelines – defines what accessibility is at the moment. They’ve just released their latest draft of 2.2; 2.1 came out last year. There’s a clear set of guidelines; this is what is required at minimum. For an organization who, say, is creating a customer journey around online shopping, there is this minimum and it’s a bit like if you think about a horse jumping in a paddock and the horse jump with its different bars. That’s the minimum bar you have to hurdle. If you don’t go over that, you’re really putting your organization at risk of legal action. But also that is the minimum requirement that customers these days just expect and these are the customers that are very aware of accessibility guidelines; they’re written down and clear. Above that is the kind of experience side, which is how does your online shopping journey work for people with differences? And that’s that end-to-end piece and it’s a bit like the difference between looking at a customer experience and designing for a piece of the journey, or designing for that end-to-end journey – which, of course, This is HCD, you talk about all the time. It’s taking it to the way the customer interacts with your organization, the job they need to be done, and how smoothly and easily they can do that. Inclusion is about moving that bar up to a point that it is brand accreditive to your organization to have created that experience.
A lot of this is just common knowledge to a lot of our listeners, but we do also have quite a lot of business people listening to the podcast over the last number of years. One of the things that I have noticed is very often businesses believe that they actually are inclusive and designing for accessibility by default. So a good segue into the next question would be: what do you say to businesses when you go in as a practitioner and they say, ‘Oh, yeah, we know, we do include inclusion in our design process’ or ‘We consider accessibility’, but really they don’t? How do you get around that?
It’s really just asking them how they do it. That usually exposes what they know and what they don’t know. In fact, we’re talking to a client yesterday and using the analogy of the cockpit in a plane. And essentially, if you don’t have information about customers with specific needs, and how they experience your organization, it’s a bit like trying to fly a plane without any of the dashboard, or with a dashboard where each side of every meter has been hidden so that you can’t see what happens beyond that. So we would just kind of question and expose what do they know, what don’t they know? How do they ask? Are they asking in a way that is actually going to expose their understanding, so that – whether it’s the customer side or workplace inclusion – they really do understand the experience they’re creating for people with every kind of difference?
A good analogy that I’ve been using over the last couple of years is businesses say ‘Well, look, that’s only 1% of our business. We tend to design and put our focus on the other, on the majority.’ And I bring them back to the barebone facts that if you’ve got a customer base or user base of, say, a million people, that’s still 10,000 people that are being excluded in that process. Using the metaphor of a real-world scenario – forgive me, I’m going to use a burger analogy. But let’s say you went somewhere like McDonald’s – they’re everywhere around the world – and the counter was at five foot high and you weren’t able to read the menu, because it was too far away. It just wouldn’t work. It wouldn’t make business sense, because those 10,000 people affect the bottom line. But for whatever reason, in the digital realm, we seem to just accept it that that’s okay.
How can we do better?
Yeah, and actually, your 1% is a little off because what people don’t realize – and obviously that’s a specific need – but what people don’t realize is 20% of customers in the UK or USA or across Europe – it’s about 20% across all of those – or 15% globally are disabled, permanently have a significant access need impacting their day-to-day life. Twenty percent – one in five – of your customers requires you to have considered this deeply because they cannot access your products or services if you haven’t. Now add to that. That’s the people with long-term access needs, long-term health conditions or disabilities. There are then people who have shorter term. In the UK – I know the stats there best – people with an impairment – so they might have broken their arm, they might be going through treatment for a specific health condition at the time – that is over 30% of people. So one in three of your customers has a need today. Now we’re talking about temporary and permanent put together, but we haven’t added situational. And then when you add situational – I might be buying as a parent of someone who’s got an access need, who’s got a disability. I might be buying as someone who is really tired today and really doesn’t want to read the fine print and long language that you’ve used. And that’s that situational need. That’s going to be well over 50% of your customers who will have a challenge with the way you’ve designed a product if you haven’t considered this. So firstly, I suppose, this is much bigger than people realize. And the main reason for that is about 80% to 90% of disability is not visible. So when you think about disability being the person in the wheelchair or the person with a white cane and the guide dog, the service dog–
That’s right. That’s what we see. But actually difference is very profound and most of it is quite hidden within someone. And they’ll work out very, very good adaptive techniques to manage that in a way that you probably won’t notice that and perceive that unless you know them deeply.
So one of the one of the things that most of the listeners will know is that I’ve got a young family and two kids under three. Obviously, we go out and about, and I’ve got the pram, and going into the city with the pram totally opened my eyes to how inaccessible large parts of cities around the world are – steps into shops, buses without ramps and so forth. And it just blows my mind that in 2020 we’re still at this point. So why are these problems that I encounter on a daily basis going around with a pram – which is entry inaccessibility to buildings and stuff – still persisting? What is causing this thing? Is it lack of awareness? Is it lack of knowledge? Is it lack of interest? What do you see is causing these things?
I think there’s a range of factors. At first, it’s messy. People’s differences are many and varied. So we talked about sensing and moving, thinking, feeling and communicating. They all require different responses. You’re talking about moving, obviously step-free access with a pram – whether it’s a pram, whether you’ve got a trolley bag, whether you’re a wheelchair user, you require step-free access. But that’s a design outcome for a specific mobility requirement. So it’s a little bit messy. I think there’s fear. I think fear and complexity are two of the biggest barriers to people stepping into inclusive design.
From the service providers?
Yes, I think both from the organizations themselves and also from designers. So the organizations and the design agencies that are really at the leading edge of their craft are seeing: this isn’t just an opportunity to make right – to not create a bad experience – this is a real opportunity to create a good experience. There’s a bulk of design in the middle that’s fairly average, that really looks at the generic experience in the middle and doesn’t stretch themselves out to the edges to get the value of that. And partly they might not, having not gone there, know how much gold dust is out on the edges of that experience curve. And I guess the one thing that I’d really like to remind people of – whether it’s organizations that are providing an experience directly to their customers or whether it’s people designing experiences for clients – is that actually, once you step into this, you don’t need to take on everything all at once. Just start that learning journey. Start by uncovering the experience and working through the experience that you’ve uncovered – where the barriers are, where the friction is – and then work back from there and just prioritize it in so that this is a journey. I was listening to Jenny Lay-Flurrie from Microsoft talk about this the other day. And Microsoft really leaned into inclusive design over a decade ago – since Satya’s been running the company, really heavily leaned into this and really strategically tried to differentiate the organization with this. And she talks about the fact that they’re never going to get there. And this is an organization that’s truly committed to it and really trying to make change. No one gets there. This is a journey. So it doesn’t matter where you step on the journey. I do suggest that there is a better way of how to step on the journey, which is put customer insight at the core of that. But in terms of stepping in and just starting, just get going and that complexity and that fear starts to unravel quite quickly once people are in there.
So a good example, yesterday I had a phone conversation about a client who is kind of the middle person between the real client, if that makes sense. And the real client wanted to get some personas because they’re in the early stages of growth and they figured that they need to get some personas. So I said, ‘Well, look, you know, they’re based globally, and we’d have to do these things remote.’ I was explaining to the middle person – we’ll call him Dave, for argument’s sake. I was explaining to Dave that if I just let them create their personas, and they take them and then they own them, and then they use them, they will tend to use a couple of actors within those personas. And they’re designed for the average. They’ll miss all these opportunities that we’re talking about here. So they’ll just – you know, and that’s fine. In traditional design research, we’ve created our personas, and it could be like single mom or whatever – you’ve seen these personas for years. But then they forget about all these other people and all these other people with really true needs, the 1% – or as you’re saying, the 30 percenters. They never get picked up. So how and what can we do to ensure that they’re getting better represented?
A great question. Personas are something we find challenging. We have been asked to do personas in the past. And I guess the key thing from our perspective is to really create characters, truly multi-dimensional relevant characters – not caricatures, which often get used, as you say, ‘the single mom doing this’. People are messy. Humans are messy. I think we’ve talked about this; human centered design is not very human at the moment. The one thing that is guaranteed to be consistent across any human is we’re different from each other. So that is our point of consistency. And if we take that as the underpinning truth for design – that if you believe you’re a human centered designer, and if you understand that humans are messy and 100% of us are different from everyone else, then we’re designing for difference. We’re not designing for caricatures in the center that don’t really exist. Actually a really good example of this: there’s a great book, Rebel Ideas by Matthew Syed, and he was talking about this example in a US airfield, where they had designed the cockpit for the average male height, and it was an average of 11 different measures. And when they looked across the 3000 airmen on that particular air base, how many people do you think tick the boxes of those 11? Zero, not one man, not a single man was average. And so if we take each dimension – and that’s why I say rather than take average, look at the dimensions. If you say, here is the top of this one dimension – of say, neck length or the way in which people interact, the size of fingers if you’re thinking about touch targets, or people’s dexterity – if you think about the top and the bottom end for each of those single dimensions, then you can design for that. And then if you extend those tops and bottoms, are you going to make sure that that works when it’s someone standing on a train and it’s jiggling about, or whether that day they’re having to wear gloves, they’re skiing, and they’re using their nose or they’re using some other part of their body, like their little finger. So that’s where design becomes much more durable by taking each of those elements and saying, ‘What’s the extended usage of that element?’ And that’s a role for designers, I think, to really lean into – this recognition that human centered design, or design thinking as we think of it at the moment, is really failing a lot of humans.
Absolutely. And just to be clear, I’m using design broadly, so that includes design research.
You know, the whole process. For anyone who’s listening, the interpretation of design is not about designing the interface or any of that kind of stuff, it goes right back to the start: the creation and the capturing of the raw data, and really including those people within that data set. And then one of the bits that is too often overlooked is the prototyping world and taking those prototypes that we create and bringing them out into the real world and testing them in real-world scenarios. That is the one thing that I’m always saying to people: don’t test in an office, test out in the wild. Go out there, that’s where the really, really rich fruit and the low-hanging fruit is persisting.
Absolutely. We totally think of it in the same way that, for us, design starts at that asking and learning, setting your context of what you’re trying to solve. And it doesn’t really finish, because even once you’ve built it you’re still reviewing what you can improve of it. But all the way through, in each part of that process, so in that ask and learn – at that point, specifically go out and get some extreme insights, get some perspectives from people who are at those edges of sensory interactions, or mobility and dexterity or the way they think, people who are neurodiverse, people who have different language backgrounds and so on. When you’re designing, get some of those people that you’ve engaged with or engage some people specifically to co-design that with you. And you’ll find, actually, particularly people with permanent disabilities, who have lived with disability for a very long time, are the most natural hackers and creatives out there, because the world as it stands today isn’t designed for them. It’s often they have to design their interactions around that, and they end up – not everyone, but there is a real level of creativity that people are required to kind of step into in order to adapt effectively in the environments they’re in. So co-designing is great.
Yeah. One of the things that I often observe is people listen to the podcast, and they chuckle away at that analogy or that story of the cockpit and the designing process. They’re like, ‘Idiots, how did they get to that? How did they let that happen?’ And sometimes the joke is actually right in front of their own eyes, and they could be part of their own problem and they don’t see it. You know, like, we could have another case in our own business. What I’m trying to understand better is when we first reached out and started speaking, the first thing you said to me was, ‘Human centered design is letting people down.’ And I was like, ‘Yeah, I know,’ and at the moment there’s quite a lot of backlash for human centered design. But to me, what’s the alternative to this, first of all, is the question that I always come back to, and it’s an evolving thing – if it’s not working, let’s improve it.
Absolutely. I think I was a little more blunt than that. I think I said, ‘Human centered design is broken,’ but actually long live human centered design. I don’t think the process is broken. I think the way in which we’re implementing that process is broken.
Right. So let’s talk. I know you’ve got a framework that you sent across and I had a good look at. So let’s talk about this framework and let’s understand how it differentiates between the ‘traditional’ human centered design process.
Absolutely. I guess the main way in which it differentiates – and it kind of goes to what you were asking before – is just how do people know that they don’t have an equivalent failure of that air base in their own world? And actually, the way in which that air base failure, the air force failure was highlighted at the time was people were dying. So they realized that people were dying at a much higher rate than they had been before, and they just didn’t understand why and it took quite a while to unpick that. So it was something very, very extreme before people started to work backwards. What we’re trying to do is work with organizations and share this experience with designers and particularly researchers and customer experience people out there: how do you actually ask the question before you’ve had a major failure? And in fact, the starting point is if you’re understanding your customer experience deeply – so if you’re doing good insight and research into the customer experiences that are being provided from the designs that you’ve created – to start with as an organization, you’ll understand where your fail points are. What you won’t necessarily understand is why you’re failing. So you understand that the airmen are dying, that these crashes were happening, but it takes a while to unpick the why. And actually starting with make sure that you’re listening, the listening posts are in place, and that you do understand customer experience and that you’re listening in a broad enough way to really understand both friction and failure of the customer experience as it stands today. That model you’re talking about, we look at all of the environments, so we’re very much end-to-end journey based. Does it do the job to be done that the person’s come to the organization for? And they might choose to do that in a digital way, through a physical engagement, either product or an environment, they may engage with people for customer service. And actually, they’ll have an expectation of the brand, and the kind of communications that go out about that brand, before they’ve even interacted. So they’re the different environments they can interact with. And then different people will interact in different ways because of themselves, as opposed to which channel they chose. And that can be sensory differences of vision and hearing, physical differences of mobility and dexterity, or the ways people receive information, process that information and communicate – so learning, memories, social and speech differences. So that’s what we start with: understand the customer experience across those four environments that we’ve kind of put things into, and across that range of different needs.
So say people are listening, and they’re like, ‘Yeah, we do that already.’ What exactly can they do more of in that stage of the early stage research? How can they ensure that they’ve covered all the bases?
I guess making sure that within the research cohort, within the participants that they’re engaging with, there are people with really specific access needs. So people with lived experience of disability, people who use assistive technologies – whether that’s something as simple as a cane or a service dog, or whether that’s a digital interface that they use an assistive technology to support their digital interactions, or whether they just adapt in different ways, like pinch zooming things because it’s difficult to see. Or in a shop you know, you see people literally taking a magnifying glass into the shop and trying to read the labels on a particular piece of packaging. So include people in that front-end research that have really quite strong needs. And obviously if you’re including people with strong needs, the research itself needs to be designed inclusively. So you need to be recruiting inclusively so people know to find you, they know that you’re asking for them. You need to provide information to them for the research itself in a way that’s really adaptive to them, and then keep them safe and provide – we were talking about this the other day, they save they glycogen, they save their energy for actually providing you that richness of insight rather than just getting there, getting away and managing the experience itself.
So just to cover that bit off, Christine, it’s including people with different access needs, such as mobility, learning, vision, hearing, memory, dexterity, social and speech. So if we include those needs as part of the research and the raw data set, we’ll have successfully improved the process to include the more diverse needs. Is that correct?
That gives the fuel. That means that you actually understand the experience. So that is the fuel that can fuel a great design process. During the design process, you need to then use that fuel. And actually, you need to reengage that fuel and refuel a few times. So then when we’re thinking about once you’ve got a concept, you think ‘This is what I’d like to do, and I think this is how it could go’, you can either do that alongside in a co-designed way, or you can do a very low fidelity prototype. We’ve done usability testing with anything from paper prototypes upwards. And then test that. You can do focus groups where you go ‘If you had something like this’ where it’s not even a prototype yet, but it’s a concept and get conceptual feedback. And then obviously, as that prototype goes from very low fidelity or very early stage concept through to something that’s much more tangible and testable, testing that even with a small group of 10 to 12 people that have significant access needs in any of these areas. You’re going to get such rich insights that will show you where those friction and break points may be in the future if you weren’t aware of them.
Just for anyone listening, we’re going to put a link to this framework in the show notes. I’m aware that we are speaking about a framework, and sometimes it’s very hard to visualize these things, so there’ll be a link in the show notes if you want to follow along as we’re speaking about these things. Christine, we’re coming towards the end of the episode here. What other things do you think people are missing as regards the whole inclusivity or accessibility? Is there anything else you want to add?
I think that one key thing is what we’ve mainly spoken about is how to understand and improve a current experience. Actually, we just touched on it before – that gold dust that I mentioned at the edge of experience where people have got much stronger experience. That’s where you find the ideas for quite significant improvement of design, and that’s where innovation lies. And it’s really human centered innovation, because it’s not using a piece of emerging tech because there’s this new emerging tech there. ‘Oh, we can do something immersive, let’s use VR, let’s find a way of using it.’ This actually comes from an unmet need and a really significant unmet need, and then saying, ‘How can we solve that using the way solutions are emerging now?’ – whether it’s a new business model, a new technology, or old technology being applied differently, or even things like just a bit of customer service training can sometimes make a really significant difference. Innovation lies at the end of this and for organizations that are wanting to significantly differentiate on the basis of how their customers feel about them, actually inclusive design is a fabulous lever.
We actually co-created a great tagline to that: inclusivity is a path to greater and richer innovation. And it’s so true. Really by including everybody and designing for all, you’re going to get a much better outcome.
If people want to reach out to you, Christine, how might they go about doing it? Twitter?
Yes, I’m fairly easy to find on Twitter. Our handle is @openforaccess.
I’ll throw a link in the show notes.
On LinkedIn, Christine Hemphill – I don’t think there’s too many Christine Hemphills. And Open Inclusion is just openinclusion.com for our website.
Christine, it was great chatting with you today and I’m looking forward to hopefully connecting face-to-face at some point. But thanks very much for your time.
Absolute pleasure, Gerry. You guys have a good day.
I hope you enjoyed this episode. And if you’d like to be part of the conversation or community, hop on over to ThisisHCD.com, where you can join the Slack community and help shape future episodes and connect with other designers around the world, or join the HCD newsletter where you can win books and get updates. Subscribe to our content on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, and listen to any of our other podcasts such as Getting Started in Design, Bringing Design Closer with myself Gerry Scullion; or Power of Ten with Andy Polaine; or Decoding Culture with Dr John Curran; ProdPod with Adrienne Tan; and EthnoPod with Jay Hasbrouck. Thanks for listening and see you next time.
We provide remote, flexible training options to help you grow your design and innovation capabilities. We also offer bespoke training programmes for teams and organisations on any of our courses.View all courses