Rohan Irvine Transcript

Transcript

1. 1 www.captionslive.com.au | captionslive@outlook.com | 0425 904 255 UX AUSTRALIA Design Research 2020 Day 2 Friday, 20 March 2020 Captioned by: Gail Kearney & Rebekah Goulevitch
2. 2 ROHAN IRVINE: Thanks very much, Steve. Thanks for the really kind intro and thanks for raising the issue of being kind to ourselves and have plans in place because it's things we don't all put in place when we start research but it's definitely important and something you unfortunately learn from experience. If you can short cut that experience and start doing it early or even from today, it makes a huge difference to your practice in the sessions you're in. Thanks, mate. OK. So welcome. My name is Rohan. Today I'm going to talk to you about the research participant survival guide. This is something I've been working on and my partner ren Yea has been working on. I want to start the session by acknowledging the Wurundjeri and Boonwurrung people of the Kulin Nation as the custodians of the land I live and work on. As researchers it's important for us to know the places that we conduct research and to also to work with Indigenous groups and people within our area to help them in their ongoing struggle in this country. I hope you take that into your practice and do an acknowledgement of country whenever you're speaking or running workshops. So the research participant survival guide. This is something I've been kicking around for a couple of years. I think over the amount of sessions that you do as a researcher, often times you are running into what seems like similar people over and over again and just naturally what we tend to do is develop our own strategies and our own practice in dealing with those people. And most of the time we actually just keep that to ourselves and it's through, as one of the speakers said yesterday, through this skill of doing that we kind of learn and we put these things into practice. And then when another person or another researcher or a new person comes into your practice, that's when you begin to share those strategies with them. It usually happens after they have gone into a research environment and they've had a particular situation happen that they struggle with, mostly struggle with that you get to have the conversations about who are the different people we are going to talk to, what are they
3. 3 like and what do we do when we run into those difficult situations as us for facilitators in the room. A little like myself. I'm a UX researcher, I work at Pager's based in Melbourne. Previously I worked at REA Group and run an event company called UX Gatherings with my partner. We are constantly talking to people at various stages of their career and hearing the stories about what they are going through in their practice at a moment in time. As well as that I do a bit of teaching so I work with RMIT online, GA, General Assembly and again just in constant conversation with people about their design practice, their research practice and specifically like the interviewing skills. What I'm going to talk about today is with developing your research practice with developing your interviewing, your interviewing style and facilitation style, the amount of work that goes into before the session and the amount of work that goes into after the session is actually too big for us to talk about in this particular talk. I think that there are definitely strategies and practices that you can put in place to make sure that your interview runs as smoothly as it can. But as we heard from Alexandra and Karina yesterday, if you plan for things to go exactly one way, it will go the absolute opposite way when you're actually in a session. And so what I'm going to be focusing on today and in the research participant survival guide is what to do during a session. And the way that we're going to do that, we're going to look at what are some of the behaviours you can spot from a participant that roughly puts them into an archetype of a participant, how are you likely to experience that. Mostly like how I experience that or how other people I've spoken to have experienced that session. And then what are the strategies that you can put in place in the moment to try and still get the most out of the interview. Because as researchers we are very, very worried that we need to get every drop of insight out of every single conversation that we have to make sure our time is the most valuable that we can facilitate the rest of the design process or the rest of the organisation's learning.
4. 4 I know that puts a lot of pressure on us and I've spoken to a lot of people who have this boulder they carry on their back that means every single interview needs to go 100% perfect and I need to get the exact insight out of it every single time I do it, which is unachievable. And it's also not the nature of people. We are dealing with people. They are very - they are themselves and you don't know that until you sit down. Like Steve said, when you go to a room and have a conversation, you don't know where that conversation is going to go. I find it thrilling as a researcher but it leads us to situations that we may not have encountered before. We are going to focus on during the interview during this talk. It's not just me about my experiences, I had all of my experiences, I had a lot of conversations when I worked with Jess at REA about the type of people that we were running into constantly and that started the foundation of what we're going to talk about today. I also went out and I put a survey out. One of the things I love about our community is that we literally cannot get enough of research. Someone says, "Hey, do you want to do research? " They say, "Yes, I want to do some research". I got 35 responses from the survey detailing the experiences and difficulties people have in sessions and some of the strategies they developed along the way. And I did seven in-depth interviews with some of the people who responded to that survey to flesh out some of the experiences they've had and build out some of the archetypes you can see along the next slides. One of the interesting things I found, win that block of survey people, about half of them were researchers of varying levels up to the team lead of a research team. And the other half were designers. So people who had conducted a lot of interviews but were primarily designers and we had a few consultants and adjacent roles. We also had quite a good range of experience, so probably about a third of the experience sat in the one to four years of practice. Another third was in the like five to ten and then the final third was 10-plus years of practice as a researcher or conducting research.
5. 5 One of the interesting things that I found when I asked how many interviews do you do in the last 12 months, there was again about a third of people who had run like under 50 one-on-one interviews with people over the last 12 months. A third of people who had done 50 to 100 interviews and a third of people who had done 100-plus interviews in the last 12 months. It was interesting to see how many different people you would probably speak to in the space of 12 months. And that's only people that you are literally conducting research with. It doesn't include the stakeholders and other designers. I was like my God, we are going to be running into similar people over and over again as we conduct our research. And there is 100%, like these practices that we put in place to manage different types of people. What I was really thankful of is like all of the contributors to this project. So this is a group of people that the project was based around. These are the experiences we've heard and put into the archetypes that you'll hear today. Just an amazing thank you to every single one of you. Because again like the openness and willingness to share these experiences, I saw immediate value like just in my own practice talking to these people and reading their experiences. But I'm really excited for what other people do with the things that I'm going to share today and if there are interesting things, please post in the chat about it. Have discussions. If you find an archetype that you are like my God, yes, all the time, definitely post how your emotion al response to hearing how that person exists in the chat so everybody can nod in furious agreement with you. I want to thank everybody, there are so many who didn't want to be mentioned as contributors but thank you. All right. So let's meet the archetypes. So here are the archetypes. Today I'm going to be going through seven of the archetypes that I created from the research. I have probably about seven more that I could have gone through but I think I will leave them for another day and we can talk about the ones that I've missed after this session because I would really love to hear your input.
6. 6 So the first one I want to talk about is the waffler. Now, if you've met me, you know that I am 100% the waffler. The way you can spot a waffler when they walk into your interview room is that they are extremely enthusiastic, they fill the room and they are very excited to be there. Sometimes you can spot them with nervous energy in the waiting room as they're coming in. They might be on a tangent or a thread as you are walking into the research room before you have been able to get them to sign any of the consent confidentiality forms and got the camera rolling. Your note taker looks up and starts having to type out of control. There are people who want to talk about the whole service. They are not just interested in answering the question that you have for them. They are interested in telling you about every minute detail that they have gone through in the use of your product or service and it can be extremely difficult to get them to focus in on the question that you actually asked. Whereas they want to talk about all of the granular details and all of the way that they were feeling, which is both a blessing and a curse when you're in the room. Often they will talk in loops. A waffler will get on tangent and loop around. And always trying to find a way to get back to what they were talking about beforehand, even when you've tried to move the conversation on. So you will hear like repeating patterns of content coming from them and they will talk about their most and least favourite parts of the experience. Again, in excruciating detail. So what happens when you have a waffler in a session as a facilitator is that you generally start off super excited because you're like, I finally have a participant that wants to talk to me about everything I want to talk about. And then as you open the question and they start talking, you start getting engaged, you've got your active listening on and there are so many good points, and it will be good point, good point, good point and I will have to remember this for later. What starts to happen, you begin to be overwhelmed with the amount of information they are giving to you and it becomes difficult to
7. 7 remember all of the threads you want to follow up. Eventually getting to the point where you start to take yourself out of the conversation because you are trying to remember what it is you actually need to talk about and what tangents are the most relevant for you to flow down. And in the extreme cases, you will get to a point where you have completely lost your train of thought, you don't know where you are in the conversation, you don't know what question comes next and you are wondering, like, how did we get here? Like, why are we talking about this? Is this even to the study. And it's at that point you might become very overwhelmed and just look back and realise that you've spent 25 minutes on the first question. Now, this is a type of person that I really struggle with. I really struggle with it because I myself am an intense waffler and if you get me going on something, I will just talk and talk and talk and talk. When I interact with them, I want to listen to every single thing they are saying, you are so excited, I like this, and then I get overwhelmed and forget where I'm going. I look back and go my God, what is happening here. It wasn't until I started working with one of my old bosses, Peter Grierson, I saw in his practice how well he was able to maintain the facilitation and maintain the conversation to check off the things we were needing to talk about in our research. When I interviewed Peter, I was like I've seen you deal with these people. He's like "it's about the breath". I remember sitting as a note taker, I'm furiously note taking trying to capture every single word and he was able to insert himself in a conversation in a place I didn't realise you could insert yourself in a consideration to take back that control and summarise what was going on. Now, that's the waffler. So I'm certain this was the type of person that every single person I spoke to encountered and I'm certain everyone has had a taste of this. If not in the research session, definitely with your colleagues. And so some of the strategies that can really help you in the
8. 8 moment when you identify that you've lost control of that conversation, that they're going on and on and on, like here are four of the key ones I think are useful. When Pete says you've waited for that intake of breath, that's the audible interruption. You go thank you so much. They are talking, "Oh my God, that was so great!" You've got to be quick and focused and aware the conversation has gone past the point it has become valuable to you and to the session and you need to look at them for that intake of breath. Now, sometimes that doesn't work. Sometimes people like talking and they are not looking at you. Sometimes use a physical interruption and that's where you use a gesture to draw their attention back to you. That can be as simple as moving your hand up and down like this. Or even like shifting in your space, making a sign. I would say that's a physical interruption if you are like signing and showing to them it's time to wrap up that conversation. And physical gestures are really great way of just breaking the conversation flow and bringing the attention back on to you. One of the physical interruptions that I really like is getting your note taker to take over. So if at a point you are like, I have no idea where I am, you can just physically turn to your note taker and say, "Hey, could you let me know where we are at the moment? Or can you answer this question, have we caught this question? " They are a physical or audible interruption to the session so you break the conversation. And when you do do these breaks, it's important to validate the waffler and direct them back to your topic. Because it's not their fault they want to talk about a million things. That's you as a facilitator. All of these things are weighted. You can facilitate better. This is not the participant's their natural state of being. You can thank them for their natural state of being. Let the note taker know they can come into the conversation. That is the waffler. The second type of person that I'm going to talk about today is the silent type of person. Now, you know that you're talking to the silent
9. 9 type when they walk into the room, they've got very closed off body language. They might sit down and shrink themselves, cross their arms and legs. I'm not saying that's a definitive way to notice people but it is a behaviour you can take note of and put back into your mind and say this is the way that they've entered the room, let's take a mental note of that right now. They might look nervous. They might be shifting around, not really looking at you in the eye, not looking at your note taker. Didn't really say hi on the way in. Those things are like they look nervous, we know that's a behavioural sign that maybe you might need to adjust your style of facilitation. The biggest way to know you've got the silent type is that they will give you either instantaneous "yes" and "no" responses to all your questions or they will pause, say "hmm" and then you give you a "yes" or "no" question. Tell me a story about yourself? "No". And then what you do is you sit in silence and it's really uncomfortable. Another way is you will see if you are doing usability testing, not interviews, they will complete the task and give you no feedback about how they were feeling, why they did certain actions, why they didn't do certain actions, what they did notice, what they didn't notice. OK, cool. This type of person is really, really energy-consuming is what I would say. This is the kind of interview where you as a facilitator will start to second guess whether or not you should be interviewing people at all. You will sit down, you will ask them your pre-prepared questions, are the open questions, are the right type of questions and you will just give them to them, get their response and go OK. And this will happen so many times that you will see start to like have this self doubt wash over you of whether or not the questions you are asking are the right questions. Whether or not it's you as a facilitator or this person isn't willing to share with you. It can get really uncomfortable. You are going to sit there in this discomfort while you show this person while you are not
10. 10 uncomfortable with the closed off responses and one-word answers. That is draining. If you have got people that don't answer questions, multiple interviews, you are like sapped of energy when you come out of the sessions. Feeling uncomfortable sucks. It's OK. You are going to feel uncomfortable and it's OK. So one of the suggestions that Jess says is just to let there be more awkward silence to see if they say something. I think that's a really good point. Because they're quiet. So one of the ways you can interact with them is be more comfortable with silence. This is something that in the session, when it's quiet, just try and remain silent. So that's don't necessarily interact with them any more. Just sit and stare at them and smile. Just sit there and go... maybe just a little bit longer than you would with other participants to see if that encourages them to start sharing more information with you. So other ways you can deal with the silent type is going off script is probably - it's a great general strategy but it's really good for people who aren't responding well to your questions or the situation or the room that you're in. So drop the sheet of paper that you've got, your run sheet and start trying to connect them and ask them questions that may or may not be related to the product or service that you're interviewing them about. It might be something that is a bit more about them, maybe what they did. If someone hasn't really talked, it's a really good idea to they will them a story about how they got to the session. Like, personally, I found that as a great way when someone hasn't wanted to share any information with me, I start to get them to go into a bit more detail about something really innocuous about how they got to the session today to start prompting them that this is the kind of conversation we're going to have in the session today. Now, another way is change the dynamic of the interview to go from a questions interview to like encouraging them to do a different medium or a different type of method. So one of the things that I
11. 11 actually saw Jackie Chang from REA do was create a journey map with a start and an end and then got the participant to just label where they were within that paper. Because they weren't getting the information that they expected from the questions about where are you in your property journey? That's a really weird question just in general. But when it's written down, like here is a physical journey, just indicate where you are and tell me what it's like at that stage, was enough to prompt people to take themselves out of the interview and to somewhere else. I encourage going off script and trying something you may not necessarily have tried previously. One of the things that I do, and it's never encouraged, which is they always say never ask closed questions. In my experience with specific people who want to respond "yes" and "no", I will then take those closed questions to try and establish like a box around the conversation so that I can get "yes" this, "no" that and use that to say you said that, you didn't do this, can you tell me more about it and generally with a bit more structure around the questions and I guess the narrative of the story in a way they're comfortable sharing, encourages them to share a bit more information. Still at points you can feel like you are dragging it from them as they kick and scream saying, "No, I don't want to participate". But I think that's all part of it. It's fine to feel like that but it's not necessarily their fault. You as a facilitator should be able to adapt in that situation. Again, building rapport if you feel like they don't trust you, proceeding with more questions at that point is going to make them trust you lessor make it more uncomfortable. Go back to sharing stories about themselves and filling in a bit more about them before you go back into the topic. A really good one, I think it's from - I can't remember this guy's name from negotiate like your life depended on it, Chris volunteers says there is a mirror which is you use the last three words or most important last three words in a sentence. Sometimes that's what you are going to get from these people. Just repeating what they said and tell me
12. 12 more about that, this is a good way to say I'm interested in this, tell me more about it. As Jess pointed out, just sit in comfortable silence more. It doesn't always work because you are kind of playing chicken with them. Like I hope you are more uncomfortable in this silence and you will share information with me than I am as a facilitator not having a conversation with you. That is particularly hard if you have got a note taker who does not like silence. If you are working with your PMs who are like, their personality is I need things, I need it now, sitting in silence they can do audible-size and physical behaviour that indicates the person that they're wasting their time. Sometimes it doesn't always work but it is something that can encourage them to speak. Again, invite your note taker to ask questions. They are a real safe out. They are there. Use them as a prop in the facilitation or whatever means. Sometimes it's when you need a break and I literally cannot think of anything to say and you pass it over there and go, "There you go". And that's the silent type. So the next archetype we are going to talk about is the misunderstander. Now, you will spot the misunderstander in a session when they don't actually answer the question that you have asked. They are still answering a question but it is definitely not the one that you had asked them. And it seems like that they may not grasp the context so they may be using words that fit within the question that you've asked but the context of how they are telling you this story is far outside of the question that you have actually asked them. And this is something that becomes apparent probably a few questions in. So you may not be able to pick that someone is misunderstanding the questions that you're asking until you've asked a few questions and where you are in the conversation is very different from where they are. I think Ben had that great example about the Xerox and AI, the user and the machine were having two different conversations, that's a great analogy for how it feels in an interview when
13. 13 you're going one way, they're going one way and it's only after a few questions you realise that they are not anywhere, where you are or need them to be. Sometimes this happens a lot if you are talking to people who have, like, English is another language. It's not their first language. Specifically in Australia because that's the only context in which I've interviewed people. But the difference in how they're interpreting your questions and your language is coming back a bit disjointed or left of where you wanted it to be. And you will find this repeating like not being able to focus on the actual question that you've asked them. And going off on a tangent that is unrelated or not even addressing the question that you've asked. One of the things that you also might note is that they agree with everything that you say. So you will pose a question and they will say "yes" because their natural instinct is I'm here, I want to make sure your session goes well because you are paying me to be here so when I say something I'm going to agree with you. If you are not aware of what they are doing, you have a distance between what you are saying and what you are asking and it conflicts with another question you have asked. The way to go about that is go over the screening questions again. This is a yes, this is a no, this is a yes, this is a no. Then expanding on it. Like rather than wait until you get three quarters of the way through the session and you've just realised that oh my God, they don't have - anything I've asked is not correct. Sometimes people are more obvious in the way that they show you they've misunderstood the question like presenting a blank expression or a scrunched up face, like this is a really confusing question and I don't know why you've asked this of me. Which is easier to understand. Like some people have a resting judgment face so like they might just - their thinking face might be this expression that's coming at you. So it can be easy to misinterpret. What I would suggest is when you are spotting these people, it's about collectively looking at all of the signs and judging
14. 14 whether or not you think you've got someone who fits into this category. Lastly, they misinterpret the words that you use. And so you get to this point in the interview like where you will realise that you're not talking about the same thing and a couple of things, you yourself might be confused about how did I get it here? And whether or not the questions you are asking are the right questions, whether they were really confusing, whether or not they were tailored to the audience you wanted to hear from. You might get defensive. You might start getting frustrated because you are seeing like this distance between the answers and I can't believe these two things are different. So you might be defensive, you might be angry, you might be frustrated. You might, if it's really bad, you might get defeated and let a sigh out and go this has been a complete waste of time. There are a lot of ways you might react in this situation. Like with everything, I think you've probably been in this situation with a lot of people in your life and it's about like pausing and readjusting and again knowing that this person hasn't come in here to trick you. They are a human being, you are a human being trying to communicate and there is some broken part of the communication process where you're not getting each other. That's why it's really important for you to choose kindness in that situation to always think like with this person, unless it's very - choose kindness in your approach to re-evaluating your questions. And as Amir says, to put your research goals on hold, try to readjust the mental model of the participant and start again. This is a practice of being mindful in your facilitation so when you identify that you've got someone who has misinterpreted things and they don't share the same model as the previous people that you have interviewed, you need to take a pause. You need to take a pause, you need to reassess and you need to go back and go how can I interact with this person in a way that is far more helpful to them and far more helpful to me. So some of the techniques that I've spoken to people that they do is that you slow down your speech. So I am very guilty of this. I speak
15. 15 extremely fast and anyone with any extra cognitive load in their life, be it from trying to interpret English, from not having a crap morning on the bus ride in can struggle with the speed at which you are posing the questions. So just take a pause, take a breath and slow down your speech. One of the things I do is smooth out my Australian accent. Sometimes I can get really ocker and I'm from Queensland so sometimes I can sound like I'm from Queensland, which being in Melbourne apparently is the thing. So, like, taking pause to go how am I enunciating the words, how am I phrasing the words? Am I using idioms in colloquial terms that only I will know which is something I do and have to be mindful in my own practice but it's something we all have to be mindful around the context of the conversations that we're having. Like idioms that we think are really normal are culturally normal, socially normal to us within our group and generally the people we are interviewing are not in our group. Generally the people we are interview have their own session terms and idioms. It's important we drop those from our language to much more reflect Lou our participant wants to engage us best in the conversation. You have to be prepared to rephrase your questions again and again and again. Something that can happen, the more times you rephrase a question, the more frustrated you can get as a researcher. And that frustration comes from a number of places, one of them being the frustration that you yourself cannot communicate with another person. And I think if you are in the moment where you are like a bit \frustrated or angry that someone doesn't understand you. You need to take a breath, try again and pivot or move on from that question but you are going to have to rephrase things and rephrase it multiple times. As a practice, like go to people and just get them to explain the same concepts to you in three different ways and then you swap with each other and you have to explain a concept to them in three different ways and three different levels to get used to constantly rephrasing how you are asking these questions. Amir said draw up your research goals,
16. 16 where you are at a point where you are not getting what you want, drop them. Get them to talk about their experience, get them to talk about their life, something that may be unrelated to the topic but maybe a great avenue to get them sharing their world view or world experience. And focus in on what is the smallest amount of context that I can establish with this person in this moment and then how can I build on that context. So how can I go from here to here to here to here all the way to forever. Be prepared for a second interview. This is something that I don't think many of us really take into consideration that if this is a person that you want to speak to and they fit your demographics and you don't know their mental model, it's different to when they walked into the room, have a second interview with them. It's as easy as that. Once again you can go over your script with any questions as well. On to four, the mis-recruit. Their answers are different from the screening questions that you actually asked. They struggle to understand your questions, differently from the misunderstander, they struggle to understand the questions because they don't seem to know what you are talking about, but not just in context. They may not know the service you are actually using. They may appear to be evasive. When you are asking them questions, they are like dodging and weaving away. They use industry jargon. Like people who use usability studies or the language that we use when we're testing people is pretty good identifying that they've been through something similar previously and they may have a high level of knowledge about what we're doing as a practice than using the actual service. They change the topic. The miss recruit might challenge the topic. Like I recruited a 37-year-old working parent who uses our service once a week. You got a market researcher who got past the screening. This is super common. It happens every where. Now, there are a couple of that you can go about this. Ana says you can pit off your focus. If you think he are a regular user, but they're not, you can adapt the situation to the person that's in front of you. So one of the strategies I would suggest
17. 17 using is going through the screening questions again and discover whether they fit those boundaries and get them to expand on the questions so you get an idea about each response. You know, you have to do an assessment of is this person, if they are not quite what I wanted, still going to give me relevant information? Now, where researchers have a lot of access to different parts of the business and so we generally know - in my experience we generally know that there are other studies going on or there are other pieces of work coming up that someone might be relevant for. So just assessing whether this person doesn't fit this study but they definitely fit one I'm going to need to do in a month's time, I would change the interview to be an open interview about that topic that's coming up. It can be really handy. I do that quite a lot because we get mis-recruits about our software so we interview them about the other part of the software they use. Just interview about something else. If they are really egregious, end the interview. In my one of my interviews about this topic, someone told me that they had just finished an interview, they walked the participant out into the reception area, said goodbye, came back 10 minutes later and saw the same person walk in to another user testing session. What they did is they were like, that's super weird, maybe they've forgot even how to leave the building. We checked the log and this person had signed in under two separate names with two separate mobile phone numbers. He was like not on my watch and walked into the room and said cool we are ending this session, walked the American out and then contacted the research place and said this person is not a screener. It doesn't have to be as bad as kicking the door down and saying you've ruined half an hour of my work. This isn't working out, really appreciate it, off you go. That's enough of what we don't do, we don't just end sessions, this isn't fine. The next person is the not OK person. I'm going to mention inappropriate behaviour that happens in sessions. And you can spot
18. 18 some of the ways you can spot the not OK person, you may have a sense that they are affected by drugs or alcohol so sometimes they smell, sometimes they are acting really strange. They can use inappropriate language. I'm talking about like people who are being racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, things that are denigrating other people. That language isn't OK and in that situation you will probably get hit with a lot of shock that this is happening in a session, which is completely normal. Because you as a researcher aren't always anticipating there is going to be dickheads in your session. You think they are going to be a lovely person and they start making sexual innuendos or being super racist and you might be taken aback. They can be as extreme as to display inappropriate behaviour. One of the stories I heard was that a participant got extremely angry and punched a table in front of a researcher. And what I say is in a research session, prioritise the safety of yourself, prioritise the safety of your team and then prioritise the safety of your participant in that order. You as a researcher do not have to put up with that bullshit and I really encourage you to know that it is OK that you can end the session whenever you want, that you don't have to listen to like behaviour or language from people that is just completely inappropriate and you can end that session and walk out and prioritise yourself. As Steve was saying before, it can be difficult to know we can prioritise ourselves but I highly recommend that. Close the session, it's not worth it. If you continue the session, you tell them it's not OK, that behaviour is not OK. I'm happy to continue the session but we can't have any of that happening. And the only thing I will say to employers and team leaders is tell your team that they must prioritise their safety and mean it. So back them up. If someone was like someone was really shit, fuck, that is awesome, there will be zero repercussions and we will get that person banned forever from market research, which I have done. Do that.
19. 19 I've run out of time. Archetype six is the people pleaser. They will put themselves down, give answers they think you want to hear. Change their answers based on how you react to them and they are probably sitting in that phase where they are not trying to say how they feel, they are trying to figure out if they are giving you the right answer. Sarah says you have to tell them you have the perspective no-one else has and get particular about what that perspective is and why you are interested in it. So it helps validate them and reconfirm there are no wrong answers and you can be light-hearted and casual and you can make it so it's not a research setting, it's a much more conversational setting. When you're changing topics on a people pleaser, you have to be gentle, you have to tell them the information you are getting is excellent and you want to move on to another topic. The last arc time is the know it all. These are people in the session that may feel like they are coming across defensive or giving you abrupt answers, they speak as if everything is a fact. They don't want to speak about their journey. They don't know why you would be asking about their experience and they constantly suggest features. They want to give you the features they want. The key thing is that like there are two types of know it alls. There are the know it alls that think they are better than you and the know it all that wants to be helpful and knowing which one you are coming up against is important because there are different strategies for them. Jo has a great way of dealing with people who has opinions. Give them the physical question sheet and say of these questions which one is the most important. And what you do in that situation, you stop trying to control them and you give the control of the conversation back over to them and they get to tell you what the most important thing is. Generally that changes the dynamic enough that they will want to continue participating in the conversation with you. Also, just agree with what they say. Don't try and say, like, you're not smart. Sometimes you want to go, that's not right. But really just go
20. 20 oh my God, I didn't know that, I'm such a novice, I don't understand these concepts, you're so smart of the giving that feedback can go I am smart, let me tell you more things. I love the idea of giving them a question sheet and getting them to answer. All right. So they are the archetypes. I know that was a wild ride at the end there but I can go into more detail a bit later on. Thanks, Steve. I really appreciate it.