UXA2023 George Aye - That Quiet Little Voice: When Design and Ethics Collide
The lack of a moral framework in the design disciple, let alone a set of ethical guidelines, put designers at great risk of doing more harm than good in the world.
event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. www.captionslive.au | [email protected] | 0447 904 255 UX Australia UX Australia 2023 Friday, 25 August 2023 Captioned by: Kasey Allen & Bernadette McGoldrick
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 2 Our first talk today is George Aye who is joining us all the way from Chicago, from Greater Good Studio. Welcome to the stage. (APPLAUSE) GEORGE AYE: Good morning, I can check the mic works, sounds good. I was trying to explain to my family that I was coming out to Sydney because this is my first time in the region. It is very exciting to be here. I was trying to explain to my 4-year-old "I am going to be in Sydney" thinking they might understand and they were like ahh. I was like how do I relate to a 4-year-old why this is significant? I said "I am going to go meet Bluey" and they were like right. I will have to convince them that I did meet Bluey. It is a pleasure to be here. It is an honour to be part of this conference and to kick off the second day. I will be speaking about something called design ethics. I am sure you have all talked about it and
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 3 whispered about it in the corners. I am hoping to make a lively discussion around this topic. I think it is complicated and we don't talk about it enough. Throughout the session and for all time, I guess, I would love to hear feedback you might have for me or the studio about these questions that I will be bringing up. Could I just check to see how is everyone's familiarity with this term Human-Centered Design? I tend to think of it is a large bed rock for UX design. If are you not familiar, you can do a middle number with your hand. Familiar up to here and if you really familiar with it, go up to here. There is a lot of hands. That is great. If you are not familiar with Human-Centered Design, that is totally fine. Human-Centered Design tends to present itself as being a very logical, linear process that has cute-coloured graphics that describe a series of steps that talk about how humans are, about the insights we build about humans and making responses in some type of designed tangible format and these are the cute coloured graphics that our studio has that purports the same thing. I want to tell you about how Human-Centered Design using processes like these, changed the lives of millions of people and it starts with these two designers from Stanford. These are quotes from Stanford's alumni magazine. "Monsees and Bowen approached smokers on campus and asked them what they loved and hated about their habit". "The complaints were consistent: fear of being seen with a cigarette and paranoia about smelling of smoke on a first date". "Their first prototypes were ad hoc assemblies of bespoke components and items found on drugs to shelves". They followed the format that they were taught, understand humans, build insights around the behaviours and try to build responses. This is where the story goes sideways. Rather than being a typical story of how awesome Human-Centered Design is, this is the story of the dual e-cigarette, a public health scourge that didn't exist until two
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 4 students figured out how to weaponise Human-Centered Design against the same people they were trying to serve. Somehow along the way, as they were building the thesis, advisors, the universities, somehow nobody noticed that the risk of harm was so present with making a product that was inherently addictive could get onto the radar of someone who has an addiction portfolio like Philip Morris. Somewhere along the line, upon getting $12 billion offered to them, they went whoopsy, I guess we will do it later. Can you see how that could be a problem? Somehow nobody noticed this could be a source of concern for the smokers you are trying to help. I have heard people that have said this has helped them. Somewhere along the line, upon designing things like this, which is mango flavoured pods using the same technology, questions about what is the purpose of us doing this work and research, had to split a path. Do we stick on the one that we originally started on, or take the one that is going to get us closer to a $12 billion evaluation? Can you see how that might be a problem? I don't blame Stanford. I am sure there are many highly renowned institutions of higher education that are tackling this right now and are also hoping for the best. Doing a fingers crossed approach. It makes me wonder as an industry how did we lose our way? How did we get to a point whereby, upon using the ability to understand humans as they are, we don't notice that the risk of using it against those very same humans is equally present? The design industry has obviously adapted and changed over many years, over decades now, but at its root there are aspects to how design in the commercial setting, which is primarily the source of really conferences like this and many of the careers we have, those lurking aspects tend not to show up in commercial settings but show up as risks when you enter complex social issues, smoking is just one of them. It is
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 5 not as though design hasn't actually had frameworks for what good design is. Is anyone familiar with Dieter Rams, he is a German designer. I was into him for a long time. He was a predecessor to a lot of the work that Apple has done in the design work. These are the 10 principles that I have referenced myself a lot of times and if you look across all 10 and think back to the dual e-cigarette, it would have passed this test. Funny that, right? Even number 6 "Good design is honest". That product will honestly kill you. (LAUGHTER) how does the dual e-cigarette pass the best design framework I know of and it can still get through? I don't think the framework is wrong, I just think we may be missing something. What we primarily have as an industry is a craft-based system for evaluating good design. I would say most of your careers have been evaluated on how good your craft is. I don't think that is going to be enough. I think what we might be lacking in addition is an ethical-based framework to perhaps augment or build on top of or simply to exist at all to the one that we primarily use as currency in our careers and in our industry. Lacking an ethical framework, this is what we have. A BYOE situation. Each of us bring our own ethical plan to projects, to teams and have this blended mix of ethics that you might have which might be different than you might have and on the next project a different mix again. It is made up as we go. Has anyone else noticed that? Anyone think that is a problem maybe? Are we setting ourselves up for another whoopsy moment again. Whoops we just made $12 billion, whoops we just made 100 million new addicts to a product that we perhaps weren't sure about. Let me back up a little. My name is George Aye, I am a co-founder and director of innovation at Greater Good Studio. We have been in business for 12 years, based in Chicago, working exclusively in the social
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 6 sector for non-profits, foundation for government and working on complex social issues with the inherent concern, perhaps a paranoid fear, of using design in ways that will end up causing more problems than the ones they were the meant to serve. It is a deep-seated fear that I have that keeps me up at night. Some of the founding principles we have when we started the studio, remain as important today as they were when we started back in 2011. We believe the status quo is unacceptable and that might be one of the largest things we are working against at all times. We believe lived experience is expertise and we don't appreciate how often it gets discounted against the credentialed lettered version that most people think is the only form that matters. And that design is transformative, not only for people that we work with but that for you as a designer, you can allow yourself to be transformed through this work as well. We work on problems like these that are evergreen, they have taken decades to build up to the level of mastery that some of the racist, indebted and structural marginalisation has taken and it will be naive to imagine that we can somehow fix these through a design project, to solve it. Can you imagine trying to fit racism into a Gantt chart? What are you talking about, please? Imagine tackling like a regular project is grossly naive. We need to have dedication and patience in the same scale commensurate with how long it took to get here. The challenge of doing this work as a designer who came up in the I got my education in England in the 90s like a lot of people around my age, I noticed that I don't know if we are ready or prepared for this. I feel lucky to do this work but I am worried about the stuff that is in me in our practice and in our industry, because I think what we have been shown, almost like out of habit without questioning, is we are trained almost pavlovianly to respond to projects and RFPs with always a "Yes". We rarely have any training or practice with "No". Your portfolio is made up of multiple yeses, you have
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 7 to have said yes in order to get a project. You don't have a portfolio full of noes, that would be the absence of a portfolio. I get how we wouldn't have got there but if we never talk about how would no ever happen, when is it ever going to happen, right? What could be the practice? I found that sense of maybe saying no, which seems extreme, but like resisting, tends to come from a place that is like a middle more inward. I found for myself at least, I have had this thing which I am calling that quiet letter voice which many of you have probably heard in your careers, might be the best substitute we have, that quiet little voice that I know is inside me, every time it spoke up, do you know what I did? I went "Shoosh, not now bro. You have a good thing, don't blow it." Do you know what I mean? That sense of maybe we should change that - no, shoosh, not now, now is not a good time. Again and again and again, through my whole career I kept doing it. I was starting to notice the commercial career that I had, I was worried I was going to start becoming numb to that feeling. I want to give examples of how that quiet little voice has shown up in my career, and I am ashamed to have to explain that I went shoosh to everyone of these examples. I don't think they are profound but I am hoping that you might recognise some of them because you may have heard them in your career. What is design's relationship to power and privilege? There is 10. Which humans are we centring when we say Human-Centered Design? Who gets to be called a designer? How do we wean design's addiction from whiteness? How can designers say no to work when we have to pay off our - blank, mortgage, medical debt? Design is often sink or swim but why is drowning so common? This industry is brutal. How do designers decide which people in need to serve? What is the framework there? Why does philanthropy, not community, set the agenda for social change? What's the cost of speaking up? But what's the cost if we don't? I think
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 8 we deeply discount the corrosive aspects of staying quiet. And last one is a doozy. What right do I have to do this work? I don't think these 10 are that magical. I just think these are examples of the times when I have had to shoosh myself because I didn't want to deal with it but it didn't make them go away. I am allowing myself and our team at the office to have to confront these questions, not with the idea that we can have an answer but unless we tackle them face on, we will get steamrolled by the thing on the other side of these questions. I suspect there are many of you in this room who are familiar with questions just like this and I don't blame you for shooshing your quiet little voice when you have done so too. It is these kinds of observations around the design industry, because I feel like I am still an outsider, has helped me build a little bit of a practice at trying to write about my feelings and observations around design and I still don't identify as a writer at all. I feel writing is incredibly tiring but I find that there has been an enormous reception to some of the bits I have written about design education, around what defining good means or describing work place trauma at a premier design agency and those writings I found to be surprisingly welcomed and I would encourage all of you that if you also have thoughts that you want to express, I would read it, so make sure you try to get some of it out, please. Along that path, I got to discover this observation around a basic phenomenon in the social sector that I think gets underdescribed in design that I felt unprepared for, it is the notion of what power is. Power has lots of definitions. Best one I have heard is from a co-founder, Sarah, where she describes power as "The ability to change another person's reality". The most succinct version of how I have heard power described. If you think about how your reality at times may have been completely changed for six months at a time over a slack message? You woke up and
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 9 went, oh my God, now everything is different again? That might be a sign of how much power they have over you. Alongside this observation of power is the idea of power asymmetry which is helpful to know. I found that that has shown up every time I have seen power. Is anyone familiar with the term there was a weird power dynamics in that meeting? The word power dynamics is descriptive but I have had a hard time knowing what that meant. When I replaced dynamics with asymmetry, I get it. There was concentrated power on some and lots of very little area of power in the others. This lop-sidedness was the phenomenon I noticed. To make it clearer, I visualised it using a simple tool, a triangle and I want to highlight how this works. For designers, you might still think about this in an intellectual sense. I am curious if you can raise your hand, when was the last time you heard about a project and from the first second of reading it, you were like "Oh shit I am never getting out alive? I don't know the team and how do they expect me to be successful?" Has anyone had a project like that? If you have, to make that visceral, that is you on the sharp pointy end of that triangle. Does that make sense? That means there is someone on the wide end pushing down on you. To make this clearer, there are many, many relationships in the world that are asymmetric from the start. I don't think it has to be fixed but the asymmetry is almost feels as though both parties are playing typecast roles like you have been given a script. "I am now stuck and I don't know how to get out of it". That should on one side and someone else, who may not realise, but they often do, that they are exerting their power over you. Law enforcement, detainees, doctors and patients, funders and grantees, leadership with front line staff, there is asymmetry between me and all of you right now. I am the only one with the clicker, right. Asymmetry is common amongst relationships and to not really pay attention to it means you have become susceptible to moments when you
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 10 are on the sharp end and wondering what happened? Many of the past relationships and moments I have had that were defining in career and personal life I found when I looked through the lens of power and it is like that is what was happening. I can still blame myself, that is a full-time recreational sport in my mind, blaming mill self but to untangle it from the asymmetry, helps me do some accounting. Here is the tricky bit. Greater Good Studio, the company I cofounded, we are all about helping those on the right-hand side, on the pointy end. Do you think we show up between the pointy to the wide end as a design studio, where do you think? I was a little embarrassed to have to admit how far over we have to be. Does that make sense? As a design studio, that has contracts, that has to pay salaries, we aren't getting projects from renters, I love renters but they aren't going "We have to figure out how to post a right RFP". They have their own lives to deal with. Who calls us for projects are the people who have actually, in some cases, made those renters in a precarious position. Can you see how potentially compromising that is? We have to be incredibly chummy with those with great power in order to get projects. Ignoring that fact is very problematic. Design with all of the cheerleading and the ra, ra that happens about how awesome it is all the time, can fool itself and the practitioners within it that thinking you can only do good through design, when actually, because of how you get paid, through the most powerful people, you are always at risk of making things worse. Design works in the shadow of powerful people and powerful asymmetry. We have to accept that which means if we do design work and say yes to projects, we actually run the risk of making it worse, which is why trying to build a practice of saying no actually becomes quite important. I love this quote from Alice Walker "Most common way for people to give up their power is by thinking they don't have any". The most
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 11 powerful are incentivised to make you feel powerless. It is one of their super powers. For us to shed it, only works in their favour. Whether that is a junior intern, through to a CEO, I have been surprised having met so many powerful people in my career now, how common they often say "I'm powerless in this". "It is not up to me". I am like "What do you mean it is not up to you, you are the legendary white guy I have been told to look up to, if you can't change things who could?". You know the hands up emoji like this "I can't do anything". It is seriously. I realised everybody feels a sense of powerlessness. It is universal. As you get more experienced that you won't have that, apparently it still shows up all the time. For us to maybe challenge and disrupt some of this asymmetry, we try to do a gut check every Monday with our studio and the whole team to evaluate what is the nature of this project? What are they asking us? Is it appropriate for us to continue, understanding that the asymmetry is baked into the entire process? What we found, particularly in the social sector is not every question warrants an answer, not every RFP that has been written actually needs proposals. You know what I am talking about? Has anyone seed a completely ludicrous RFP? (LAUGHTER) don't laugh yet, you have gone and written bloody proposals on it, right? We are stuck in an abusive relationship. They write terrible RFPs and we write terrible proposals and then we complain about it later. We don't have to comply. When we assume we don't have power to change things, we get steam rolled. I am thrilled because we are still alive doing this for 12 years, surprisingly, despite having said no a bunch of times, as proud as we are of the projects we have said yes to, we have a good record now of saying no. We have done about 50 break-up with the single largest being with the US government's international agency for international development for $2 million and a terrifying moment.
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 12 To give you a sense of how this works. This is the very first break-up email I ever wrote. I spent eight hours over this. I was so terrified of having to write something like this to a powerful senior program officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. I have written this 50 times now using an underlying structure. I would love it if you can take a picture and maybe you could write your break-up email for when you are ready. It starts with "Thank you very much" because it is nice to be asked and then you explain "It is you, it is not me, I just can't do this". Then you give your actual justification with real bullet points. Don't use opaque language like "We don't have capacity" or "It is not a good cultural fit". You are wasting your time, please be specific. It proves to you and everyone else you have boundaries, that is a thing. Then you say "Let's be friends" because they will never forget you. It happens so rarely getting broken up with, you will be seared into their memory forever. (LAUGHTER) I will try and wrap this up. I would argue that without deliberate intervention, design rarely serves society. It could. It perhaps should but because of how it has been structured for so long, it has to be interrupted. For so long now, in conferences just like this, we have seen people arguing and demanding "I want a seat at the table", where design leaders have been trying to get to - by toddlers "I want more say" and we have been so busy to get to design at scale, we are good now. We perhaps never stopped to pause and wonder if perhaps we are now causing harm at scale. Design is an accelerant. It will magnify whatever it has been put to task with. Who gets to judge when and how that gets applied? I don't know if I would necessarily trust the chief design officer to make that call. When you look back at that family tree of what design is at its root, I would argue that design does two things particularly well. It is really good at building capital and that is the one that most people
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 13 know it for. I have been surprised at how much conference seeking measures are baked into our practice, both by what we do as a practitioner but how desirable comfort is for people. Do you know who loves this most, who loves building capital and feeling comfortable? The most powerful. That makes designers prime targets for their attention. That makes us very susceptible to feeling like Jeff Bezos says "If we can do this one thing, maybe we can offset the carbon if we do it this way which distracts us from the other thing going on" the idea of being used as cover to provide help that is a distraction. What if saying no wasn't just like this personal preference and you coming up with your BYOE that I don't know if I wanted to do this? What I would love to see is a system of accountability that included the aspects that most professions actually have. A code of ethics, some standards for practice, licensing and accreditation, continued education and more. I don't think it is my job to tell you what all the things should be, I think absent of these things, we are incredibly vulnerable, both for exploitation and through self-deception. The dual e-cigarette is one of these things where we are one semester away from it happening again. There are many of you in this room who would be troubled by the idea of licensing accreditation because the amount of gatekeeping that happens in design already is rife. I have felt that very much. I am not asking for more gatekeeping, we don't need that. I am asking for accountability. That is a little different. I would argue that perhaps one day we might try and see a bifurcation in our industry for those who are seeking to be more accountable, serving clients who are willing to willing to pay for that accountability and everybody else remaining unaccountable as things are. I would love to offer a peak into what that could look like because this has been a depressing talk so far. Maybe some hope is to look into the future about what could that look like if we
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 14 were to do design differently? Our studio has been making, through the help of a number of volunteers, a social change by design database. We have almost 300 organisations around the globe at this point, all who have decided to do design differently because they know when they came up, they noticed the issues that were baked into their practice. This database at this point now has a lot of industries - there is a lot of representation of consultancies in North America with leadership under 10 people. It is remarkable because that is different than the kind of model I have seen for how design leadership looked like when I came up. That is very encouraging. This is the link to the database. I would love if you can take a picture in case you missed it earlier. What you may notice, not only is there hope in looking through it, but my dream is if you noticed any gaps in that database, add new ones that you know about that are not there and if I could be even cheekier, my dream, dream for be for you to say "Screw it, I will start my own company and add myself to it". That would be great. If we really think through and actually talk about the rhetoric that design does so well and challenge how it is currently seen, we might get closer to what I think we have potential for, rather than just building capital, I think we have the ability to be building power and rather than just seeking comfort, I think we have the ability to be seeking truth. Design can do this but we have to be willing to question the very fundamental practices we have been taught in order to do so. There is something so tempting by what this could mean if we will allow ourselves to do so and I think we actually have everything we need. We have a room filled with people who are curious, who can build insights based on human behaviour, are great at making prototypes for the future. We are trained in this already and I think we can get there if we would simply slow down and listen to the quiet little voice that is inside all of us. Thank
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 15 you, very much. (APPLAUSE) STEVE BATY: Thank you for that, George. I think we should take time for at least one or two questions, if people have questions? Would anyone like - yes, that is what I thought would happen. There is a microphone coming around. GEORGE AYE: Was I too ranty? STEVE BATY: You didn't swear, so that was very calm. GEORGE AYE: What is your name? >> Meg. Thanks for that talk. I as wondering how you navigate your inner quiet voice when you are saying no to big unethical projects? I guess when you know that is going to go to someone else and you won't have a seat at the table. GEORGE AYE: This is a really good question because I feel like there is a lot of narratives and consultancies that have comfort-seeking aspects to it. One of them is if we don't do the project, someone else will get paid to do it anyway. Surely we should do it, or the other one is if we do it at least we will know we will do a good job. I find that while that might be true, I have to question is that serving the ultimate goal, or is that serving to make sure this project goes as is? Sometimes the lack of participation can be the most resistant, most radical thing you can do. It may not be an option for everyone but I would be keeping track of every time you notice that coming up, or every time you say that as a sound track, if we don't do it, someone else will and keep note of how many
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 16 times a year that comes up. We should talk about it afterwards. Thank you. STEVE BATY: One more question from Kevin. >> Thanks, George. I feel like you have given us a bit of a statement here and the bit that I am struggling with is tactics. My take on it at the moment is that should we be striving to be basing our design ambitions to be closer to the middle of the power asymmetry? Would you say that is a good tactic? GEORGE AYE: I would be curious about how one wants to assess where asymmetry is and a version of that question is to say who are we centring in our project? Who are we going to in this project? That is a legitimate question. A lot of the times the answer is ourselves, our client, the source of that client's income and then maybe the people we do research with. >> I can definitely see myself trying to move towards that but bringing the client along on that ride, that is the hard part, right? GEORGE AYE: Yes, and this is an analogy, in America, which I have been an adoptee to, there is something called Thanksgiving, a big family dinner, it is usually awkward. Has anyone had a problematic racist uncle and you have to decide do I want to convince them over this one millimetre change in their thinking or spend time with people who I can work with and have a good time? >> Yes.
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 17 GEORGE AYE: Which clients do you want to do all that effort for and do you really think they are going to move? Sometimes clients will tell you "We are ready" and they are absolutely not. We end up becoming complicit in the cover that we provide in saying "We are ready". I would be cautious of trying to get through every client and start to work out where is the signal of this noise in these clients? We do a lot of vetting of clients around "Are you actually ready?" We can do the work all day and we do our best. When it comes to realising that in some cases you the client will get implicated by this research, the question then is how do you plan on handling that news? That usually splits people right down the middle. STEVE BATY: Thank you, George. We will take one more if we have one? Over here in red. >> Hi there. Natasha. Currently working for PwC, so ethics by design, (LAUGHS) Really interesting topic and I do a lot of stuff on inclusion. I have been having my own internal reflections over the past few months. I had a question which was more once you actually get on a project and you start looking at teams' performance and also looking at recruitment and things like that, how do you put some of these principles into your individual teams so it is not just bring your own ethics but you can evaluate people, individually, based on their ethics? GEORGE AYE: Evaluate is almost like a job performance? >> Yes, do you integrate it beyond just what projects you work on but looking at people individually as well?
transcript of a live event and therefore may contain errors. This transcript is the joint property of CaptionsLIVE and the authorised party responsible for payment and may not be copied or used by any other party without authorisation. Page 18 GEORGE AYE: I don't know why I have a funny feeling about that. I would be nervous about evaluating someone's own ethical frameworks. It feels like an abdication of duty. The studio ought to provide that ethical framework and people should try and adhere to it as best they can. It doesn't seem appropriate. >> To have a studio framework? GEORGE AYE: Only in last few years have we finally developed one and a lot of that is geared towards protecting our research participants, including guidelines for protecting our team. That is a working document that we now have. What is cool, if I can brag a little, is we include it in our proposals and say check this out. What I am saying is you are paying for us to be ethical. Does that make sense? I have included it. I don't know if a client has ever said "We went with the team that had the ethical plan" but by inserting it, we are making it explicit that we have a plan. That is best I have. >> Appreciate that, that really helps. STEVE BATY: Thank you, George. (APPLAUSE)
uxaustralia
sms_tech
ashapiro
inesmontani
elrns88
yuichi_hara7
kubosho
junkifurukawa
kiyoshifuwa
root_recruit
securecat
cyberagentdevelopers
colly
addyosmani
lauravandoore
holman
garrettdimon
3n
csswizardry
rasmusluckow
productmarketing
honnibal
reverentgeek
bkeepers
