Daily Design Inspirations 35: Drones You Can Eat! (#dailydesigninspirations)

Via Wired.com. When drones save lives, not kill!

Every sale of this edible Pouncer drone can save 50 lives

Aquila inventor Nigel Gifford’s Pouncer drone is capable of real humanitarian aid

Nigel Gifford makes drones with a difference. His humanitarian UAV, the Pouncer, is designed to deliver food aid in disaster zones – by being edible itself. That may sound unlikely, but Gifford, 70, has a history of succeeding with unconventional projects. He’s the Somerset-based engineer behind Aquila, the Wi-Fi-beaming drone bought by Facebook in 2014 to connect 1.6 billion humans to the internet.

In 2010, Gifford imagined Aquila (originally named Ascenta) as a high-altitude drone that could be used to beam internet or mobile-phone connectivity to civilians below.

“I absolutely believed in what we were doing; I could see how this could be a major benefit in communications applications,” he says. The UAV was designed with solar panels that would give it enough power to stay airborne for 90 days, with a flexible central section that could adapt to securely carry any cargo.

The call from Facebook dramatically changed Ascenta’s fate. It bought the drone for a reported $20 million (£16 million). Now with an enlarged wingspan the size of a commercial airliner, Aquila made its first successful flight – a 96-minute cruise above Yucca, Arizona – on June 28, 2016. Gifford is delighted: “For what it started out as and has now become, it’s super.”

Post-sale, Gifford’s new company Windhorse Aerospace has focused its energies on the Pouncer, a UAV whose three-metre-wide hull can enclose vacuum-packed foods. Its structure will be made from as yet unspecified baked components that can be consumed. “It will have a 50kg payload that should feed 100 people for one day,” Gifford says. GPS will guide it to within eight metres of its target. Windhorse Aerospace will be testing its capabilities in the spring; by late 2017, it will be in production.

Will Gifford sell this drone, like Ascenta? “We have the vision; we want to take it through to development,” he says. But any partnership allowing the Pouncer to be rapidly deployed would be a priority. “The key is getting the Pouncer used for humanitarian aid,” he says. “If this existed now it would be saving lives in Syria.”

Design Thinking News: How Design Thinking Creates Connected Health Devices That Matter

Design News: The Street – Why the Financial Services Sector Should Embrace Design Thinking

Kunal Vaed, a senior vice president and the head of digital at E*TRADE Financial in New York, shares how the company applied Design Thinking to transform customer experience. Appeared in The Street.

Design Thinking has certainly captured the zeitgeist of our times, moving beyond the realm of digital-product management. Financial services institutions need to evolve to rapidly embrace design thinking or they risk disruption at the hands of nimble start-up companies.

Design often connotes simply a beautiful product, without enough attention focused on its utilitarian aspects. This is ill-fated, as a well-designed product or experience solves a human need and is something with which users want to engage and for which they want to advocate.

Simply said, design thinking places the user at the core of an organization’s agenda. It spans traditional functions within product development such as experience design and visual design, all the way to strategy and innovation.

Through extensive customer research, designers identify not just the functional needs of users but build true empathy. Designers create propositions to best serve these needs and continually test these hypotheses with customers.

The financial services industry is the perfect sandbox for design thinking. The reasons are simple.

 The industry facilitates many of life’s biggest decisions: buying a house, saving for retirement and paying for children’s education. Planning for retirement is an emotional topic, so this makes thoughtfully designed experiences a necessity.

In addition, investors face an array of complex investment choices, which require scrupulous analysis prior to investing. Design can address the complexity of investing and empower users to feel confident in the decisions that they make.

 At E*TRADE, design thinking allows the company to help investors get smarter.

E*TRADE’s approach to design thinking takes its cues from the Double Diamonddesign process, developed by the British Design Council. There are four stages in this design process: discovery, definition, ideation and delivery.

In the discovery phase, designers and product managers conduct research to understand customer pain points. This phase is divergent as we search for new questions and unmet needs.

Techniques such as customer listening are effective enablers.

In phase two, E*TRADE synthesize customer research and converge to the problem statement. This requires ruthless discipline to ensure that the company isn’t boiling the ocean.

Creating customer personas highlights differences in needs and aspirations of various customer groups. Customer journeys illuminate the path of the customer as they complete a task navigating outside and inside E*TRADE.

Next, E*TRADE creates early prototypes to visualize potential concepts in the ideation phase. Customers are part and parcel of this process and co-create these concepts.

Last, convergent thinking is employed to deliver a high-fidelity prototype, which is ready for developers to code. In this final phase, customers play a vital role in testing the usability of the new experience.

Consider E*TRADE’s new Adaptive Portfolio offering, which combines automated advice with access to financial consultants. Early on, in the discovery phase, E*TRADE’s research showed that customers were seeking peace of mind and transparency in their search for the right investing solution.

So E*TRADE designed with a simple problem statement: to help users go from idea to investment in five minutes. During the ideation phase, E*TRADE paid special attention to create an uncluttered design for the risk tolerance questionnaire, with intuitive questions, actionable steps and persistent help.

E*TRADE also heard that customers were interested in confirming their tolerance for risk before finally signing up. So E*TRADE designed a series of engaging visualisations to compare and contrast the company’s model portfolios by risk tolerance.

Finally, in the delivery phase, E*TRADE conducted usability interviews with customers to further optimise the work flow. E*TRADE is measuring interaction data across this experience and continue to refine it based on user behaviour.

Employing a user-centric mindset in the brokerage industry comes with its challenges, given the spectrum of users. E*TRADE has sophisticated traders who have honed their craft over the years and instinctively deploy a virtual army of strategies as they move in and out of positions every day.

At the same time, E*TRADE has buy-and-hold investors who take long positions for income and are more interested in long-term performance. Finally, E*TRADE has delegators, who are interested in self-adjusting solutions such as Adaptive Portfolio that are professionally managed.

Making sure that the design is flexible enough to scale becomes paramount.

There are four key considerations that can help strike the right balance.

  1. Share the glory. Customers and stakeholders across the organization need to co-own the outcomes. The financial services industry needs to place particular emphasis on co-creation given the complexity of investment choices and the changing regulatory landscape. Connecting designers, product managers, engineers and compliance experts early and often creates a shared responsibility.
  2. Get commitment from the top. Senior management needs to set the tone for the importance of designing an exceptional customer experience. E*TRADE Chief Executive Paul Idzik listens to several hours of customer calls every week and encourages employees to “put themselves in the customer’s shoes” at all times.
  3. Create an aspirational north star. Every organization needs to find purpose in its customer agenda. This agenda needs to speak to all, from customer service representatives, to engineers to designers to operations staff. In fact, the company has memorialized eight design tenets in posters and digital screens across E*TRADE to remind employees of what it means to deliver exceptional customer experience.
  4. Test, learn, re-test and re-learn. The user-centric mindset means the process is iterative. Design thinking fits perfectly with E*TRADE’s continuing transformation toward an agile software development process. Continuously analyzing data on how customers are using products and services ensures that E*TRADE evolves and learns.

Investors have entrusted the companies in this industry with a major responsibility: to help them manage their money.

Furthermore, their expectations are being set by digital leaders outside the financial services industry, who are constantly upping the ante. As a result, their expectations will only increase.

This industry has a narrow opportunity to embrace design thinking and position the customer at the core of its agenda. This has significant implications on talent mix, product development processes and tools, and project portfolios.

The most profound impact is in transforming the industry’s culture to be design-forward.

 

Design News: Engineering as a Driving Force Behind the Design-Thinking Movement

logo“““““`

It’s wonderful that design thinking is now applied to so many different problems: designing better experiences for hospital patients, designing and implementing better client experiences at social-service agencies, starting new companies, teaching leadership, inventing new radio shows, changing organizational structures, and developing new products and services for people at the bottom of economic pyramid — to name just a few. Design thinking focuses on uncovering human needs, and doing so by not just relying on what people say, but by watching what they do as well. It entails developing a point of view about what needs to address, generating quick and rough solutions, prototyping like crazy and testing ideas with the users, customers, patients, employees or whomever the solutions are intended to help — and doing it all very quickly and not being overly attached to ideas.

There is, however, a part of the story that seems to be slipping away — especially in the business press and in business schools, as well as in areas such as education and healthcare where design thinking is being used. Many executives, students and journalists don’t seem to realize that engineers and engineering schools were among the main driving forces behind the start of this movement. David Kelley, the main founder of the innovation firm IDEO and the Stanford d.school, has been teaching mechanical engineering at the university for over 35 years(he is pictured above, with the Apple mouse that IDEO designed); and Bernie Roth, our academic director at the d.school has been teaching mechanical engineering at Stanford since 1962 (he is a pioneer in the field of robotics).

And consider two of the most revered design thinkers and teachers I know:Diego Rodriguez at IDEO and Perry Klebahn at the d.school (officially, the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford). When I first met Diego, some 20 years years ago, he had just graduated from Stanford, where he earned a degree in mechanical engineering and was working at IDEO. Diego did get increasingly interested in business, got a Harvard MBA, and now — back at IDEO for years as a partner — has become one of the most imaginative business thinkers I know (check out his blog and tweets). Yet, when I talk to Diego, listen to his ideas, and watch his masterful teaching and coaching, I can always see how the magnificent engineering designer inside him remains the strongest guiding force. His relentless advice to do things like get out and talk to and watch some real human beings, to develop a sharp point of view, to brainstorm, to “prototype until your puke,” and to view ideas as easy to get, important to throw away, and ultimately best to be judged by users and the market (rather than experts) all go back to his product-design roots. This really struck me when, a few years back, Diego was designing a new organizational structure for a client that, many years before, he had designed a product for when working as a young IDEO designer. He remarked to me, “The end product is a lot different, but the process I am using is remarkably similar.”

I see the same thing in how Perry approaches problems. Perry has always been a product guy, as he invented the modern snowshoe as a Stanford product-design student and then went on to grow a company that sold and spread the product called Atlas (the above grainy picture is of Perry on CNN with his invention back in 1997). Then Perry was a senior executive at Patagonia, and most recently was CEO of Timbuk2. Perry has also taught numerous product-design classes at Stanford over the past 25 years, and in the last decade, taught over a dozen classes for students and executives at the Stanford d.school. In fact, Perry has taught more d.school classes than any other faculty member since the d.school was founded in 2004 (even though he was CEO of Timbuk2 for five of those years, he kept teaching).

Over the years, I have watched Perry move beyond and expand his engineering-design skills to an ever broader set of problems, like helping software executives gain empathy for what millennials want and rethinking the strategy of a Fortune 500 company. Lately, Perry’s students in his d.school classes — which he teaches with others including Kathryn Segovia,Jeremy Utley and me — tackle problems ranging from finding ways for the San Francisco Opera to attract younger customers to improving the experience of buying a bra for women who have had mastectomies.

Yet Perry’s engineering roots are always evident. I remember watching Perry use his product-engineering background to guide a class exercise aimed at improving employee selection, recruitment and socialization practices for our d.school fellows program. He pressed the students to look for unmet needs, to identify the problem they were trying to solve, to brainstorm ideas for prototypes quickly, and then to test the emerging ideas with users — even though those ideas were unfinished and crude approximations of organizational practices. This process, although modified by Perry and many others to fit problems of all kinds, is simply a variation of the design process that Perry used as a Stanford engineering school student years ago to invent the modern snowshoe — and then to grow the company and customer base required to make the product succeed.

Yes, I am a tenured professor in the Stanford School of Engineering, but I am not an engineer. The core of what we do at the d.school, and of much of what they do so well at IDEO, is rooted most strongly in product-design engineering — especially the flavor taught at the engineering school. That is why, frankly, I feel better when I work with “real” engineering product designers like Diego and Perry in the d.school classes I help to teach — even though I recognize that there are master design thinkers from all kinds of backgrounds, including lawyers, journalists, computer scientists and psychologists. The aforementioned Kathryn Segovia has a Ph.D. in communication (she did her thesis on the psychology of avatars), and Jeremy Utley is a Stanford MBA and former management consultant). Both have developed into two of the most skilled design-thinking practitioners, teachers and coaches I know.

Like many people at the d.school, I get in regular arguments about what design thinking is, how it ought to be applied, and the times when it isn’t right to use it. It’s healthy for all of us to question what we do and how to do it better. But one thing we all share at Stanford, whether our students and faculty realize it or not (and some don’t, as the history is fading a bit), is that the brand of design thinking that we teach is a mindset and set of methods that was developed and refined at Stanford’s engineering school for decades — especially by product designers — before design thinking was ever a hot topic in business, entrepreneurship, education, healthcare and so many other places.

Original Post here

 Go to the profile of Bob Sutton
Bob Sutton
Stanford Professor who studies organizations. Books include bestsellers Good Boss Bad Boss, The No Asshole Rule, The Knowing-Doing Gap and Scaling Up Excellence. He first wrote this post about five years ago and update it every now then. The iteration before this one appeared a couple weeks back at the Stanford Technology Ventures Program eCorner site.

Design Thinking News: Infosys Continues to Drive Design Thinking. Even Upwards.

The Economic Times, May 25, 2016

Infosys on ‘design thinking’ treadmill to get its top gear acclimatised with latest technology

It’s not just the 194,000-odd employees at India’s second largest software exporter who are being put through the paces.

In what would mark the first such instance in India’s $160-billion IT industry, board members at Infosys are now being trained and brought up to speed with “design thinking” -an industry parlance that refers to the practice of solving traditional tech problems using newer, different and innovative methods.

Board members at top companies across the world, especially in the technology industry, routinely go through training sessions to help them keep pace with the rapid changes across the technology landscape.

However, this would mark the first known instance in India’s tech industry where a company is proactively aligning the board with the vision of the company’s top management, as part of a broader strategy to bring about a cultural shift at a traditional outsourcing company where coders and engineers have been content with following orders of customers, without asking questions. The design thinking exercise is one of the cornerstones of CEO Vishal Sikka’s broader strategy for the company and he has actively pushed executives and employees at the company to embrace the exercise. To execute this strategy, Sikka has even sought help from external mentors such as computer science pioneer and legend Alan Kay, who over the past two years has held sessions with company executives and employees.

Infosys chairman R Seshasayee said the decision to train the board on design thinking was taken recently during the last financial year.

“The adoption of Design Thinking at Infosys has been very encouraging, and we can see the enthusiasm and energy with which employees are adopting this philosophy. The Infosys board was keen to embrace this approach that is getting deeply ingrained into the company’s DNA. We introduced the entire board to these concepts during the year and I have found the application of its principles in our course of business very refreshing and impactful,” said Infosys chairman R Seshasayee in an email to ET.

According to Infosys’ latest annual report, at least six board members including chairman R Seshasayee, board veteran and former Cornell University professor Jeffrey S Lehman, Biocon chief Kiran Mazumdar Shaw and Bank of Baroda chairman Ravi Venkatesan have all gone through what the company calls “immersion sessions” where they have been trained on design thinking. Each of these board members have gone through ex tensive sessions on design thinking that lasted for at least 3.5 hours, according to the annual report.

A person directly familiar with Sikka’s thinking said that the board has also been put through immersive sessions on areas such as Artificial Intelligence and that Sikka is actively trying to “acquaint the board with concepts around design thinking as he looks to unleash newer, more executable ideas at the board level.”

Infosys has already trained over 80,000 employees on design thinking and hopes to cover the entire company in the near term, according to its latest annual report.

The design thinking exercise comes at a time when Infosys is starting to show signs of a major turnaround in its fortunes and increasingly resembling its former bellwether self, having trumped top-tier rivals such as Tata Consultancy Services and Wipro for four consecutive quarters.

“Putting the board through design thinking is a must. Design thinking is the equivalent of Six Sigma for this generation. Until the boards understand what’s required to build for empathy and to understand the innovation process, they can not relate to the work required to deliver on innovation,” said Ray Wang, founder of enterprise research firm Constellation Research.

“Training the entire company including the leadership team on design thinking represents more than anything else a change in mindset for Infosys.However, Infosys needs to push change management in equal measure as training alone only gets you so far,” said Tom Reuner, managing director at HfS Research.

HBR: How IDEO Designers Persuade Companies to Accept Change

May 17, 2016may16-17-hbr-012-culture-1200x675

Every design project extends beyond the brief. No matter how straightforward and discrete a project seems at first, it will unfold in the context of a complicated, networked, and messily human organization. That means that part of a designer’s job must be to design tools, conversations, experiences, and environments that help the organization embrace innovation and change. At IDEO, we think of this as designing interventions.

We approach intervention design in a variety of ways, depending on the shape and scale of the organization and the innovation we are working to enable. But every intervention involves designing experiences for a project’s stakeholders that go beyond logic and engage the emotions inherent in the question “Why should we change?”

Here are the three main tools we use:

Transformative empathy

When stakeholders are having trouble imagining things being different than they are, or when they are extremely removed from (and even judgmental of) their customers, the experience of being wholly immersed in somebody else’s perspective can free up their thinking. The desired outcome is that stakeholders come away from the experience in agreement about the challenge we are solving and with a felt understanding of why things need to change.

More than any organization I’ve worked with, Weight Watchers employees are in tune with their customers’ needs and feelings. That’s because so many of them are members. But even for them, over time, it’s easy to lose touch with the intimidation and anxiety new members feel the first time they cross the threshold of a Weight Watchers meeting.

A few years ago, Weight Watchers engaged IDEO to create a vision for the future, ­which often implies a digital future. However, our early research pointed to some real value in taking a hard look at the meeting, the central feature of the Weight Watchers experience. With that in mind, we designed an intervention for our client team: a visit to a mega­church in Dallas, TX. A mega­church shares qualities with a meeting – convening people with a shared goal, while also triggering similar insecurities: “Do I belong? How should I behave?” We hoped it would remind our team of New Yorkers what it feels like to arrive at a Weight Watchers meeting for the first time.

Our hypothesis proved correct. The IDEO and client teams looked for every excuse possible to get out of attending the service at the mega­church. “There’s so much traffic, is it really worth it?” “We can just stream it on our phones!” We all but turned around on our way there. But we made it, and were surprised by how embraced we felt as we crossed the threshold. Even though we were late, parishioners greeted us at the door, provided us programs for the service, and guided us to an available pew – with no questioning looks, which was our unspoken fear. We all left with a new perspective, and without saying anything to each other, we knew we had to redesign the experience of showing up at a Weight Watchers meeting.

The transformative empathy intervention shifted the focus of the design challenge to not only include Weight Watchers’ digital future, but also the meeting room.

Co-­design

When stakeholders don’t feel capable of changing the way things work today, and when there are naysayers among them, we involve them throughout the design process — in questions, prototypes, and iterations along the way. The process of co-design should make everyone responsible for approving and implementing the new vision feel invested and confident in the design.

Interbank, a Peruvian retail bank, engaged IDEO to design a more accessible banking experience for the emerging middle class in Peru. One pivotal moment of co­design occurred during a day of live prototyping in a retail branch.

Our prototype was based on a question: Will customers trust a line­free experience of waiting? In other words: if I’m not physically in line, do I trust the line? To answer this question, we worked closely with Interbank staff, including senior leaders and tellers, to transform the bank from a room full of stanchions and queues to a lounge area with soft seating and a digital queuing system. We then watched the day unfold together, testing our hypothesis that people would welcome a break from standing in line.

Customers not only appreciated the new experience, but also used the time to talk to each other and to look at the educational materials on the coffee tables. They were less agitated and even friendly to tellers once it was their turn. At the end of the day, Interbank leaders, our core team, and the bank staff debriefed about the day.

Shared vision

When we need the support of a large and disparate group of stakeholders – perhaps more than we can involve in a transformative empathy experience or in co-design – we create a vision of the future that brings stakeholders together around where they are going and helps them imagine what it might look like. A compelling shared vision fosters a sense of belonging and inspires a group of people to create change together.

Connecticut Public Broadcasting Network (CPBN) came to IDEO in early 2014 to create a future vision for their organization. As they approached their 50-year anniversary, they looked out at the next 50 years and knew they needed to make some big changes – but what, and how?

While CPBN is a relatively small organization, they sit within the national web of public media, and have multiple businesses from radio to education, each with a complex funding model. This makes it easy to get lost in the logic of what it will take for CPBN to embrace a future vision ­ but also all the more important. A shared vision is key to building a more resilient organization, one that’s primed to keep pace with an increasing rate of change.

During our project, we turned an open space at CPBN headquarters into a gallery that displayed work-in-progress components of the vision, including quotes from Connecticut residents, a draft purpose statement, and an audience promise. We invited everyone in the organization as well as board members and outside partners to walk through the gallery and participate in creating the vision. This led to a healthy dose of debate and discussion, enabling the organization to arrive at a strong and shared stance for its future: to be the bravest public media organization, exploring topics in ways no private organization can, and empowering its audience to make the world a more extraordinary place.

As you try out these approaches, remember that no single intervention is likely to change a system. You’ll need to employ different approaches at different stages of any project, depending on the stakeholders and the challenges involved. And don’t forget that intervention design is about emotion as much as logic; when we are creating something new to the world, by definition there isn’t enough evidence to get us where we want to go. Successful interventions are felt experiences, above all, so identify the emotional outcomes you hope to achieve, and then design a way to reach them.

Ashlea Powell is a Senior Director at IDEO New York with a background in writing and design research.

Daily Design Inspirations 25: Design Thinking in Prisons. (#DailyDesignInspirations)

ZuFzG-w6FastCoDesign

The Latest In Prison Education? Design Thinking

The MakeRight initiative teaches incarcerated people empathetic design with the aim of reducing recidivism.

 

From packaging that prevents shoplifting to furniture that guards against thieves, projects originating from the Design Against Crime Research Center (DACRC)—a program at Central Saint Martins in London—offer clever design ideas to protect against crime. Its latest project has grander ambitions: change the way offenders think, and perhaps curb law breaking as a byproduct.

The DACRC’s MakeRight initiative teaches prisoners design thinking. While many prison programs teach technical skills—and, historically, have exploited incarcerated individuals for labor—MakeRight is meant to yield empathy through design.

Design thinking is a process that involves defining a problem, researching and observing behavior, coming up with multiple solutions, refining the solutions, choosing a winner, prototyping the idea, and implementing it. While critical thinking breaks down ideas, design thinking builds them up and benefits from having as many diverse solutions as possible.

In one of its first projects—run in collaboration with the National Institute of Design, a school in India—25 prisoners designed theft-proof bags, wallets, briefcases, and purses. They shared some of the (terrifying) tricks of their trade, like slashing back pockets so wallets slide right out, to inform the design of better products—in that case, a wallet with a thicker side so it catches on the pocket and doesn’t fall out.

More…

 

Daily Design Inspirations 25. ‘CONCURRENCE’ Interview with Sudhindra V. Chief Design Officer, IBM (#dailydesigninspirations)

#Designthinking #Design #Innovation

“Design is not a job skill, it is a life skill, one that touches every aspect of your life. I believe that design is an attitude. When you’re a designer, you’re a leader; you’re creating a world, one that doesn’t exist yet. But design has also become a much-abused term. I believe designers should take the responsibility to make sure the essence of design is retained.”

Sudhindra V.’s brilliant interview in the latest Concurrence. Get your copy today! 

 

Scientific American: Can You Trust a Eureka Moment?

Scientific American recently published an interesting article that sudden insights are usually correct.

 

By Roni Jacobson on May 1, 2016

Aha! moments are satisfying in part because they feel so right; all the pieces of a puzzle appear to fall into place with little conscious effort. But can you trust such sudden solutions? Yes, according to new research published in Thinking & Reasoning. The results support the conventional wisdom that this type of insight can provide correct answers to challenging problems.

In four experiments, Carola Salvi, a postdoctoral researcher at Northwestern University, John Kounios, a psychologist at Drexel University, and their colleagues presented college students with mind teasers, such as anagrams and rebus puzzles. At the completion of a timed trial, subjects were asked to report if they had arrived at their answer by thinking the problem through step by step (analytical problem solving) or if the solution had sprung to mind (insight).

In all four experiments, aha! solutions were more often correct than those achieved deliberately. For instance, in one experiment, in which 38 participants had to think of a single word that could form a compound phrase with three previously presented words (such as “apple” for the trio “crab,” “pine” and “sauce”), aha! solutions were correct 94 percent of the time compared with 78 percent accuracy for analytical solutions.

This outcome may result from the way the brain generates insights. Because such processing occurs largely outside a person’s awareness, it is all or nothing—a fully formed answer either comes to mind or it doesn’t. This hypothesis is supported by EEG and functional MRI scans, which revealed in previous studies that just before insight takes place, the occipital cortex, which is responsible for visual processing, momentarily shuts down, or “blinks,” so that ideas can “bubble into consciousness,” Kounios says. As a result, insights are less likely to be incorrect. Analytical thinking, in contrast, happens consciously and is therefore more subject to rushing and lapses in reasoning.

That is not to say that insight is always the best strategy. The Salvi and Kounios experiments involved puzzles with clear right and wrong answers. So the results may not apply to real-world situations, where problems are typically highly complex and may require days—if not months or years—to solve.

In fact, difficult questions often necessitate several different strategies to arrive at a solution, says Janet Metcalfe, head of the Metacognition and Memory laboratory at Columbia University, who was not involved in the study. She adds: “There may not be a perfect solution to a problem.”

 

This article was originally published with the title “Is Eureka Right?”