The impoverished language of business | Clearleft

A good post by Andy on “the language of business,” which is most cases turns out to be numbers, numbers, numbers.

While it seems reasonable and fair to expect a modicum of self-awareness of why you’re employed and what business value you drive in the the context of the work you do, sometimes the incessant self-flagellation required to justify and explain this to those who hired you may be a clue to a much deeper and more troubling question at the heart of the organisation you work for.

This pairs nicely with the Clearleft podcast episode on measuring design.

The impoverished language of business | Clearleft

Tagged with

Related links

Another uncalled-for blog post about the ethics of using AI | Clagnut by Richard Rutter

This is a really thoughtful piece by Rich, who’s got conflicted feelings about large language models in the design process. I suspect a lot of people can relate to this.

What I do know is that I find LLMs useful on occasion, but every time I use one I die a little inside.

Tagged with

Can you count on what you measure? | Clearleft

One of my favourite episodes of the Clearleft podcast is on measuring design. This post from Chris is a complements that episode in a sensible and practical style.

What gets measured gets done. You are what you measure. Measurement eliminates argument. If you work in an environment that puts store in these oft-quoted business adages then I urge you to take a moment to challenge your calculations. Let’s review our metrics to ensure they can stand up and be counted.

Tagged with

Podcast Notes: “Measuring Design” by Clearleft - Jim Nielsen’s Blog

Well, this is just wonderful! Jim has written copious notes after listening to my favourite episode of season three of the Clearleft podcast, measuring design:

I’m going to have to try really, really hard to not just copy/paste the entire transcript of this podcast. It‘s that good. Don’t miss it.

Tagged with

Related posts

Measuring design on the Clearleft podcast

A deep dive into the McNamara fallacy.