...in good weather when we're outside and when 1 goes off, everyone thinks it's their doorbell and that there's just an internet lag (happens1) between hearing that and other notifications.

LET ME PERSONALISE THIS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!

Having a small amount of HTML, CSS, and JS knowledge is definitely a plus and saving me time here.

I'm working in enterprise though and building something quite complex.

I should imagine if I were building more simple web based 'things' it would be a much better experience.

People trying to "fail fast" and just solving the wrong problem.

Yes, you spend 4 weeks coding and testing something, but it failed. Then you iterated, and it failed again. Maybe 4 weeks of research up front and you'd have built the right solution first time. It's actually faster...

The view given by said poster shows a fundamental lack of knowledge, and definitely lack of experience too.

Those of us who have been around for a little longer than we sometimes care to mention (not least because of ageism in our profession) have seen this problem many times...

I'm happy to agree, get some code together, if that's your way of prototyping, and get it tested. But you need to know what you're building first. This is one of the greatest benefits of solid research.

THIS IS WHY IT HAPPENS FIRST.

I think we need to start about "succeeding efficiently", rather than "failing fast".

However, I expect then, we'll have loads of people claiming "efficiently" means "fast".

Maybe that's how the whole thing started. Does anyone here remember?

This quote is also fun, and very true. It's true of most places were "fast" is so important:

"The problem isn’t that decisions aren’t fast enough, that’s actually a symptom. The real problem is that the strategy is garbage."

(original post: www.linkedin.com/posts/ddemar...)

It is ALWAYS UX.

Understand your users problems.
Understand the outcomes they need.
Design for that experience*

It's not Product management. It's not Product design. It's not "fail fast and iterate".

It's the core of UX. Always has been. Always will be.

*not limited to a product and interface

...and guess what? They were wrong.

I find it incredible that so many companies operate in this way and fail time and time again. Even the big ones.

If you don't know what you're users problems are and what they need to solve, how do you know what to build?

This is fundamentally UX.

This is the quote (2 sentences from the same paragraph in his article):

"We were at least 250x bigger, and we tried everything. But ultimately, Goliath lost…
We never validated our core assumptions before investing heavily in solutions."

Basically "we guessed what we thought users wanted"

Going to steal that phrase!

In my case that means, GOOGLE, LOOKING AT YOU, implement AI properly in GBoard so predictive text doesn't come up with the most random nonsense imaginable.

That would be quite life changing.

Look at the simple problems right In front of your users.

2/2