Marshmallow pyramids

I recently came across Tom Wujec’s amazing TED presentation where kindergarten kids were excelling in building the highest structures (only beaten by architects and engineers).

While at first glance this appears to be a surprising result, anyone who has been working on larger projects can probably confirm the success of using an iterative process of progressive prototyping rather than a lets-throw-in-as-much-as-we-can-and-see-what-happens approach.

The very first (unpublished) version of PlusPad, our assessment management application for creative universities, featured a rather complex UI, and therefore complex HTML, CSS and JavaScript. Not surprisingly, subsequent development proved to be difficult and so time-consuming, that, after a long debate, we took the difficult decision of scrapping the entire first version, rather than forcing it to work. We lost weeks of work, but also felt immensely liberated. The weight of trying to force too much into a first version was suddenly gone. The new approach, then, was radically different. With a ruthless focus on core functionality, we wireframed the next version in just 30 minutes (using a pencil). The CSS was coded quickly and we breezed through development. It felt good and we had a lot of fun. We learned that if a project feels awkward in your tummy, something is fishy and needs changing. We’re glad that we were honest enough to admit this with one of our own projects. PlusPad has moved on since, but it is still a lightweight, fast and very flexible app, and we are very proud of it.

Using an approach much like that of the kindergarten graduates from the Marshmallow Challenge, we’ve been able to achieve better results. Clients can see their project develop, and we’re able to incorporate their feedback along the way, rather than as a major revision at the end. This way, the project becomes a joint project, rather than a client project.

This approach, however, requires clear, constant communication and a high level of trust between all the partners involved. Everyone who has been working in intercultural environments knows that this at times can be a challenge.

While a member of the Advisory Council on Youth of the Council of Europe, I came across many non-formal education exercises used as session ice-breakers and for team-building. One of these exercises in particular, the bridge game [DOC], was always intriguing to observe. It demonstrated beautifully that things are not always what they seem to be (is the red piece of paper really thicker than the blue piece of paper?).

There are parallels to this situation when communicating with clients. Because of our flexible and light-weight approach, we often have to explain (or even defend) functionality before drawing up definite visuals. While we’re using many words, sketches, arms and legs to get our vision across, this can of course be difficult for some clients. We nevertheless value this method highly, as visuals tend to distract from what’s far more important – what happens where, when and why. Just like in the bridge exercise above, appearance can be deceptive and without clear and precise communication, the bridge won’t be able to carry the scissors.

Through play, continuous testing, and maybe a dose of healthy naiveté, the kindergarten kids built structures that were beautifully strange in appearance, but structurally successful. Now it’s our turn to construct our own marshmallow pyramids.