Karen Holtzblatt claims to know what makes things absurd. She even has a book out begetting the extremely literal championship: What Makes Things Absurd? Just I am suspicious of anyone who claims to understand what makes things cool and sells his or her know-how to gigantic corporations (in Holtzblatt's case: LG, Walmart, Nokia, John Deere, and others). In detail, I disagreed with something Holtzblatt wrote in her book: "We all know cool products when nosotros see them." Absurd, I think, is learned. We are social creatures, after all, and we look to a select few to assistance the states develop our tastes–which is why we call such people tastemakers.

Yet Holtzblatt seems to be maxim that coolness can literally be designed into a product. I run across coolness every bit fleeting, something scarce. She says there is a connection between learning and joy and the perception of cool. I think cool is external. We similar sure things and detect them cool because they tell the world something about us and how we'd like to exist perceived. You could play it cool, in other words, but could you actually exist cool? Maybe, if you were The Fonz. The balance of us are just faking it.

She and I fundamentally disagree about the nature of absurd, and disagreements brand for good chat, so I called her recently to talk about the ideas in her volume.

FAST COMPANY: What is it that you actually practice, and how did you come to do that?

KAREN HOLTZBLATT: I'll give you my usual pitch. When I came into the high-tech industry over 20 years agone, my training was as a psychologist, in cerebral psychology, and this was right when technology started being used by real human beings–people who were not engineers.

How was existence a psychologist useful then?

There was the consequence of nobody really wanting to sympathise how the technology was put together. And back in those days, there were inappreciably whatever usability engineers, let alone UX [user feel] or UI [user interface] designers. I had a much broader sort of practical background and had already basically been doing usability testing in my lab work and out in the field. People were like, "What practise yous mean you'll leave and talk to people almost what they're doing and how they do it?" There'due south some paper someplace where I'm chosen a mystic and heretic.

The typical mode then, and nevertheless, in some ways, was to ask people what they want. But people don't actually know what they desire. People don't know technology or themselves or their lives. And besides, we aren't interested in truth, we're interested in making things people love. Out of this came my first book, which is used by universities and companies all over the world, on user-centered design processes. I'one thousand known, at present, equally this sort of voice of understanding customers in the field. I would consider myself…well, people call me a guru.

Okay. This cool thing: I don't think we see eye to eye here. Your notion is that you can build something absurd.

That's correct. If you think nigh the idea that's–what's front end cease design?

[Long pause]

I don't know.

You lot come up with an thought, iterate, validate, and the user experience part is baked into that procedure. When we talk about the user experience, we're non talking about Lady Gaga cool. The world cool has a variety of meanings and assumptions. And so what I wanted to know when I started researching cool was what was going on such that people were exclaiming, could not finish talking almost their engineering, that it itself had go cool.

How did you inquiry this?

I went out into the field. I asked people, what were the dimensions that defined this experience, that the discussion absurd was a geiger counter for.

That's a complicated way to put it!

Well, we didn't say exactly that. We started with threescore people and asked them to bring together their stuff, what they thought was absurd that had some applied science component. When we talk nearly the results of this study, nosotros go, "Look, it's cool considering people brought this together and they said and then." We went into their homes, each of the things–sometimes it was a radio or a vacuum cleaner; information technology was ever their mobile device, their DVR, their large screen TV; every then often it was their car. The technology devices were always at the top of the list.

But y'all asked them–you said there had to be a engineering science component.

Sure. Simply it also could take been a fridge or a microwave. We then said, "Alright, show me what it does in your life during the structure of your day, and we looked at what was actually going on and looked for themes. When we were done, there were seven cadre concepts that account for the driving issues around the user experience. The overarching experience is i of joy existence ripped out of your guts.

I don't remember I ain any piece of engineering that makes me experience this style.

Well, what's interesting about joy is yous tin't cognitively create joy. You lot tin't think your manner into joy. But effectively your joy is fastened to something that moved you lot. It'southward a little metaphysical–it moved you lot in your soul. Talking about their absurd tools, people were going bananas. They talk virtually their phone the aforementioned mode people talk virtually a puppy.

I find that kind of sad.

Well, if I had told designers to design for joy, it would be just as hopeless as saying "design for cool." But the fact of the matter is that human beings–never forget I'thou a developmental psychologist–are born with core concepts. Small children tin experience joy. And information technology happens considering of sure lived experiences. Touching, for example, is one of our most central human motives, which we are supporting so much more than. We are touching things that were never touched before with applied science. The way that these cadre concepts piece of work, the cool concepts, the more of them you touch on, the libation your thing is.

What are the absurd concepts?

The cool concepts are proprietary. Each concept has a gear up of 10 phrases. I don't want you to write the phrase, but you can write the concept.

Tin we perhaps use an example? What's a slice of actually cool technology today?

Await, for all really transformative technology that will rock the base of operations, something has to exist so transformative that it punches a hole in human feel, and it goes "whoa," yous know? The first product that probably did this for a lot of people was the spreadsheet.

(Literal sound of me doing a spit-have, simply with air, so it's just pffffffffffffffffff)

No really! It allows you to do "what ifs," on a big scale for the first time. It fabricated the commencement Apple computer. If at that place wasn't a spreadsheet, that is the application that made the box. In point of fact, it in one step was a sweeping change.


So where does Google Glass fall?

Pretend it's a paradigm and this is a corporate experiment. Effectively, we don't know yet whether people want something in their eyeball.

I don't think Google Glass is very absurd.

Permit's use Google Drinking glass as an example, and I'll tell you lot the 7 absurd concepts. My daughter works for Google, past the way. And so the first and the most important is the experience of accomplishments in life, the difference between doing a task efficiently and, you know–if you watch a little babe nil their zipper for the first time, and they intermission out into a joyous smile; when you try doing something and you exercise information technology and yous become, "yes!" And people hate being bored: at the bus terminate, in the doctors office, paying their bills. You could read your book in the line now. We are now designing for time–tiny bits of time at piece of work or at home.

My trouble is: I don't see the problem with beingness bored. Also, by the way, I remember a lot of us are not paying bills or reading, but playing Candy Crush.

Well, the joy, the cool, is getting your overwhelming life done. And the requirement for Google Glass is, does it assist me get my life washed?

I thought, at this point, the requirement is more like: We need people to exist Okay with this weird Net confront-camera so that they don't punch other people wearing information technology in the face.

That's role of the trouble, certainly, merely if Drinking glass was more useful, it would exist more accepted. Also, the e'er-on attribute is a problem. People break upward the 24-hour interval and self-interrupt. In the former days, they'd go up, go to the bathroom, talk to someone. People don't want to be doing chores during their core time, they want to be doing it in dead time. Nosotros've e'er had these responsibilities, we've merely never been able to handle them on the go. What I basically think is that dads have been sticking their olfactory organ in the paper and hiding out in the bathroom for a very long time. At present information technology's not really different.

So applied science is escapist, and that'south always been the attraction.

Engineering science is revealing what is cadre almost humans. Escapism, accomplishment. But connexion besides: Absurd tools are allowing distributed families and friendship groups to stay connected. 3 of the core principles have to do with how often yous touch, the conversational content, the collaboration and planning. What is Google Glass doing for connectedness? Is it really in the way of interacting with someone? The fashion laptops got in the mode of relationships, with Google Glass you also don't take the ability to share what you're looking at.

Also, there actually is no fashion to await absurd wearing it, let's be honest.

That's it as well. If a product helps you do the things that brand you a professional, information technology doesn't just cool points for accomplishment, only for identity. So we gather data for relationships, your life, the nature of yourself. What makes you feel whole, complete, and joyous. Google Glass, really? Is that me? Is that who I want to exist? Look at the first Sony Walkman: Black was for professionals, yellow was for working-grade. The only manner glasses are going to work…is if information technology helps you and says something nigh you in your profession.

I purchase that, because it seems similar now the just people who are routinely using drinking glass are surgeons or technicians in the workplace. Certainly not so much at confined while socializing. So what's the final of these cool concepts.

The last one is sensation. Nosotros're born information technology. Kids are but sensual. We snuggle, we express joy in the wind. In that location's joy just in sense that we love the beauty of the aesthetics of things. People at present expect a mod, industrial design. If they don't accept information technology, they don't like you. But this is the least important attribute, because if it doesn't actually do anything, it doesn't matter.