xyz

early_men.md

We are early men

You can take it as a manifesto if you like

1. Walking in the dark:

1.1. The need to stumble in the dark:

So far our current applied research frameworks (human centric design research to be precise) are geared towards problems those arise from current application frameworks and new similar propositions with present day constraints. Although they take into consideration a person's lifestyle and their different conditions, it falls in short to really address for something's implications that doesn't properly exist yet*.
The danger of such practice is that: Although we are sometimes familiar with the technological advents(technology has very less surprises in it's path and is very predictive), when we go out to find something's future state, we start driving our principles and values with a POV of features.
Doing so we risk ourselves in landing into tough situations for coming up with clear necessities and reasonable ideas that doesn't sound like a gimmick.

1.2. The challenge of stumbling in the dark:

Since not every day other organizations and think tanks face these situations at such granular levels, there is an absence of reasonable frameworks and practices those which can produce relatable outcomes and scenarios that are worth running after. Feature based and thought less collection of ideas do not go very far and we thus have high chances of missing out in creating real value for the future.
Thus in one sentence, one core challenge is to create a reasonable frame work that helps us creating reasonable scenarios that can be communicated in it's true value to the stake-holders.

2. Walking in the dark with supports:

First thing is to realize and accept the fact that we do not know a lot of things and that all of those propositions are our biased assumptions and we can be completely wrong. Hence not to strive prioratizing one or the other but create multiple alternatives. Being said that, tangibility of thsoe directions are also essential to help communicate them to the stake holders in order to make them understand the actuality.

1. Jumping right in with very anthropological discussions with groups of people will help. People are imaginative and we can use role plays, fake theatric scenarios and games to simulate them. These are rather less expensive, can be performed in smaller groups and we do not waste resource or time in polishing or validating things that looks like gimmick to the REAL eyes.
2. Next step is to look beyond what peopele are saying and apply our knowledge(for which we need to self-educate ourselves as well with tough debatable thoughts) to extract, abstract and reframe possibilities. Multiple possibilities, contradicting possibilities.
3. Prioritize those possibilities that are not only just "catchy" but are also challenging to the im-mautre eyes. Our goal and opportunity here would be to educate them with our directions and tangible outcomes in-order to prepare them for the future rather than doing a sales pitch.

3. Discover the caves:

Now that we are in a state where we have decided multiple scenarios and multiple, unfamiliar states of un-imaginative technological implications, we are ready to make tangible things that can help us communicate these scenarios. At this point we invest into supporting materials and building prototypes for conveyence. Just one thing to keep in mind that they are still not full blown service ecosystems.
After this we open them up to people to let them experience, we take their feedbacks, we polish further, we combine ideas and make our assumptions more towards something concrete.

4. Time to make the caves your most likely homes:

WIP and TBD..