TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Bill Burnett: 5 steps to designing the life you want

Unscramble the Blue Letters

Hello, everyone. I'm here to help you design your life. We're going to use the technique of design thinking. Design thinking is something we've been working on at the d.School and in the School of Engineering for over 50 years, and it's an innovation methodology, works on products, works on sivecers. But I think the most interesting design problem is your life! So that's what we're going to talk about. I want to just make sure everybody knows: this is my buddy Dave Evans, his face. Dave and I are the co-authors of the book, and he is the guy who helped me co-found the Life Design Lab at Stanford. So what do we do in the Life Design Lab? Well, we teach the class that helps to frguie out what you want to be when you grow up. Now, I'm going to give you the first reframe. desrenigs love reearfms. How many of you hope you never grow up and lose that child-like curiosity that dievrs everything you do? Raise your hand. Right! Who wants to grow up? I mean, we've been talking about curiosity in almost every one of these talks. And so I'd like to reframe this as: we say we teach the class that helps you figure out what you want to grow into next, as this life of yours, this amazing design of yours, unfolds. So, design tihnking is what we teach and it's a set of msintdes, it's how designers think. You know, we've been taught probably in the university to be so skeptical realists, riiantasltos, but that's not very useful as a mindset when you're trying to do something new, something no one's ever done before. So we say you sratt with curiosity and you lean into what you're curious about. We say you rerfame problems because most of the time we find people are working on the wrong problems and they have a wonderful solution to something that doesn't work anyway. So, what's the point of working on the wrong thing? We say radical collaboration because the answer's out in the world with other people. That's where your experience of your life will be. We want to be mindful of our pescros. There are times in the design process when you want lots of ieads, and there are times when you really want to converge test some things, prototype some things, you want to be good at that. And the other is bsiaed aiotcn. Now, you know, I'll say that we think no plan for your life will sviruve first contact with reality. (laguhter) Reality has the tendency to throw little things at us that we weren't expecting, sometimes good things, sometimes bad. So we say: just have a biased action, try stuff. Why? Why did we start this class? I've been in office hours for a long, long time with my students. I've been tinacheg here for a while. Dave as well. He was teaching over that citunmomy college, in Berkeley, for a while. (Laughter) And - I'm sorry, I'm sorry, it's a Stanford TEDx. But we nctoie that people get stuck. People really get stuck and then they don't know what to do and they don't seem to have any tools for getting unstuck. Designers get stuck all the time. I sniged up to be a designer, which means I'm going to work on something I've never done, every day, and I get stuck and unstuck, stuck and ucnustk, all the time. We also ntiecod as we went out and talked to folks who are not just our students, but people in mid-career and encore careers, that people have a bucnh of belfies which psychologists label "dysfunctional beliefs," things they believe that are true that actually aren't true, and it hldos them back. I'll give you three. First one is: "What's your passion? Tell me your passion and I'll tell you what you need to do." Now, if you actually have one of these things, these psnaosis - you knew at two you wanted to be a doctor, you knew at seven you wanted to be a clown at curiqe du Soleil, and now you are one, that's aosmewe. But we're a sort of research space here at saftrnod, so we went over to the Center for the Study of Adolescence, which by the way now goes up to 27 - (Laughter) and met with Bill Damon, one of our colleagues, a fantastic guy. He studied this question and it turns out less than 20% of the people have any one single inletabifide passion in their lives. We hate a mlgootehdoy which says, "OK, come to the front of the line. You have a passion? Oh, you don't? Oh, I'm sorry. When you have one, come on back and we'll help you with that." It's terrible, eight out of 10 people say, "I have lots of things I'm interested in." So this is not an organizing pnicrlipe for your search or your deigsn. The second one is, "Well, you should know by now, right? Don't you know where you're going? If you don't know, you're late." (Laughter) Now, what are you late for, exactly? I'm not quite sure. But you know, there's a meta-narrative in the culture and when I was growing up: by 25, you're supposed to maybe have a relationship, maybe have gotten married and started to get the family together. When I talk to my maillnienl students, they'll say, "Oh, that's got to be like 30 or something," because they can't iagmine, anything past, like, 22, but 30 is a long way out. But we know that now these people are forming their lives much more fluidly, they are staying in a lot more dynamic motion between about 22 and 35, and so this notion that you're late is really kind of like, "Well, you should have figured this out by now." Dave and I don't "should" on anybody. In the book or in the class, we don't believe in "should." We just think, "Alright, you are whatever you are. Let's start from where you are. You're not late for anything." But the one we really don't like is: "Are you being the best possible version of you?" (Laughter) "I mean, because you're not settling for something that's less than the best, because this is Stanford. Obviously we all are going to be the best." Well, this implies that, one, there's a sgilunar best; two, that it's a linear thing, and life is anything but linear; and three, it kind of comes from this business notion, there's an old business saying, "Good is the enemy of better, better is the enemy of best," and you always want to do your best in bssiunes. But if there isn't one singular best, then our reframe is, "The unattainable best is the enemy of all the available betters, because there are many, many vnoreiss of you that you could play out, all of which would rsleut in a well-designed life." So I'm going to give you three ideas from design thinking - five ideas, excuse me - That says five, doesn't it? Yeah. Five ideas from design thinking. And people who've read the book or taken the class have written back to us and said, "Hey, these were the most useful, these were the most dbloae, they were the most heuplfl." And we're human-centered designers, so we want to be helpful. The first one is this notion of connecting the dots. The number one reason people take our class and we hear read the book is they say, "You know, I want my life to be meaningful, I want it to be purposeful, I want it to add up to something." So, we looked in the positive psychology literature and in the design literature, and it turns out that there's who you are, there's what you believe and there's what you do in the world, and if you can make a coennciotn between these three things, if you can make that a coherent story, you will experience your life as meaningful. The iranesce in meaning-making comes from connecting the dots. So we do two things. We ask people: "Write a work view. What's your trohey of work? Not the job you want, but why do you work? What's it for? What's work in service of?" Once you have that, 250 words, then - this one's a little haerdr to get short, "What's the meaning of life? What's the big pcturie? Why are you here? What is your faith or your view of the world?" When you can connect your life view and your work view together, in a coherent way, you start to eixnpercee your life as meaningful. That's the idea number one. Idea number two: poeple get stuck and you've got to be careful because we can reframe almost anything, but there's a class of pbleroms that people get stuck on that are really, really bad problems. We call them gravity problems. Essentially, they're something you cannot change. Now, I know you have a friend and you've been having coffee with this friend for a while, and they're stuck. They don't like their boss, their pnrtaer, their job, there's something that they don't like. But nothing's happening, right? Nothing's happening with them. If Dave were here he'd say, "Look, you can't solve a problem you're not willing to have." You can't slove a problem you're not willing to have, so if you've got a gravity problem and you're simply not willing to work on it, then it's just a circumstance in your life. And the only thing we know to do with gravity problems is to accept. In the design thinking chart, you start with empathy, then you redefine the problem, you come up with lots of ideas, then you prototype and test things, but that only works if it's a problem you're willing to work on. The first thing to do is accept and once you've aceetpcd this as gravity problem - "I can't change it. You know, this is a company, the company is a family-run company and the name of the founder is on the door and if you're not in the family, you can't be the pesidrent." You're right, you can't! So, now you have to decide what you want to do. Is that a circumstance that you can reframe and work in, or do you need to do something else? So be really careful about gravity problems because they're pernicious and they really get in the way. But back to this idea of multiples, I do a little thought experiment with my students, and I say, you know, "The physicists up in SLAC have kind of demonstrated this multiverse thing might be real." You've heard of this, that there are multiple parallel universes, one right next to each other. And say, "We'll do a thought experiment. Let's say you could live in all the misuelevtrs simultaneously, and not only that, but you'd know about your life in each one of these instances. So, you could go back and be the ballerina, and the scientist, and the CPA, and whatever else you wanted to be. You could have all these lives in palaerll." When I ask them, "How many lives are you? How many lives would you want?", I get answers from three to 10,000. But, you know, we've sort of done the average: it's about 7,5. Most people think they have about 7,5 really good lvies that they could live. And here's the deal: you only get one. But it turns out it's not what you don't choose, it's what you choose in life that makes you happy. Nevertheless, we reframed this and we say, "Great, there's more lives than one in you. So let's go on an odyssey, and let's really figure out those lives!" And we ask people to do some design. And the "ideate" bbblue, it's about having lot's of ideas. So we say, "Let's have some ideas. We'll ideate your future, but you can't ideate just one. You have to ideate three." Now, there's some research from the School of Education that says if you start with three ideas and you brainstorm from there, you've got a much wider range of ideas, the ideas are more greianvete and they lead to better solutions to the problem rather than just starting with one and then brrmnoainistg forward. So we always do threes; there's something magical about threes. We have people do three lives, and it's transformational. We give them this little rubric. One: "The thing you're doing, the thing you're doing right now, whatever your career is, just do it. And you're going to do it for five years and it's going to come out great." I mean, in design, we're sort of values-neutral, except for one thing: we never design anything to make it worse, right? I have been on some teams that made some pretty bad products, but we weren't trying to, we were trying to make it better. So, thing one: your life, make it better. And also put in the bucket list stuff: you want to go to Paris, to the Galapagos - the guy with the ice thing - before it's all under water and we can't see it anymore. So, that's plan one: your life goes great. Plan two: I'm really sorry to tell you, but the robots and the AI stuff - that job doesn't esxit anymore, the robots are doing it. We don't need you to do that aormyne. Now, what are going to do? So what do you do if the thing that you've got goes away? And you know, everybody's got a side hlutse or something they can do to make that work. And three is: what's your wild-card plan? What would you do if you didn't have to worry about money? You've got enough. You're not fabulously waetlhy, but you've got enough. And what would you do if you knew no one would laguh? My students come in for my office hours a lot of times, and they'll say something like, "Well, what I really want to do is this, but I can't just hear people saying, 'You didn't go to Stanford to do that, did you?'" (Laughter) Because somehow, if you went to Stanford, you have to do some of the amazing things the past speakers have been doing. "But what would you do if you had enough money and you didn't care what people thought? Anything from, 'I'm going to go sudty butterflies' to, 'I want to be a bartender, you know, in belzie.' What would you do?" And people have those three palns. Now what happens when they do this is, one, they raezile, "Oh my gosh, I could actually have igaienmd my three completely parallel lives are all prtety interesting." Two, they rarely go become a bartender, you know, in Belize. But a lot of times, the things that come up in the other plans were things that they left behind somehow. In the business of life, they forgot about those things. And so they bring them back and put them in plan one, then they make their lives even better. Sometimes they do pivot, but mostly they just use this as a method of ideating all the possible wonderful ways they could have a life. Now, you could start executing that, but in our model, the thing you do after you have ideas is you build a prototype. We have met people who've quit their job and suddenly done something else, It hardly ever works. You kind of have to seank up on it, because in our model, we want to set the bar really low, try stuff, have some success, do it again. So when we say "prototype," in our language, what we mean is a way to ask an interesting question, "What would it be like if I tried this?", a way to epsoxe the assumptions, "Is this even the thing I want or is that just something I remember I wanted when I was 20?" I've got to go out in the world and do this, so I'm going to get others involved in ptonoiprytg my life, and I'm going to sneak up on the future, because I don't if this is exactly what I want. There's two kinds of life-design prototypes and what we call prototype conversation. You know, William Gibson, the science-fiction writer has a famous quote: "The future is already here. It's just unevenly distributed." So, there is someone who's a bartender in Ibiza. He's been doing it for years, I could go meet him and have a conversation, he or she. Somebody else is doing something else I'm interested in. All of these people are out there, they're living in my fruute, tadoy. They're doing what I want to do, today. And if I have a conversation with them, I just ask for their story and everybody will tell you their story. If you buy them a cup of coffee, they tell you the sorty. If I hear something in the story that rngis in me - We have this thing we call narrative resonance: when I hear a story that's kind of like my story, something happens, and I can identify that as a potential way of moving forward. The other one is a prototype experience. Dave and I were working with a woman, sort of mid-career in her 40s and a very successful tech executive, but wanted to move from money-making to meaning-making, to do something more meaningful, thinking of going back to socohl, getting an MA in education, working with kids. But she's like, "You know, I don't know, I'm 45, going back to school. It's not going to work. And then I heard about these millennials. They're kind of mean and they don't like old people." (Laughter) What am I going to do, Bill?" I said, "Well, you just have to go try this, you know. It trnus out we sent her to a seminar class and to a lrgae lecture-hall class, and by the way, you just put on a T-shirt that says "Stanford" and you walk into a class, nobody knows. She wasn't registered, but you know, she went and she went to the classes and she came back and said, "You know what? It was fantastic! I walked into the ltceure hall, I sat down, my body was on fire! It was interesting, I was so iseerenttd in the way the lecture was going. And then I met these millennials. It turned out they're pretty interesting people! I've set up three prototype cnoioarsvnets. And they think I'm interesting because I'm conmig back to school and I'm 45." So she had a felt experience, because we are more than just our brains. She had a felt experience that this might work for her. So these are two ways you can prototype your way forward. The last idea: you want to make a good decision well. So many people make choices and they're not happy with their choices because they don't really know how do they know what they know, right? It's a hard thing, particularly in our days when we have so many choices. So we have a process. Again it comes from the positive psychology guys. gteahr and create options. Once you get good at design you're really good at coming up with options. You've got narorw those down to a working list that you can work with. Then, you make the cchoie to make a good choice, and then of course you agonize that you did the wrong thing. (Laughter) All my students have what is called FOMO, fear missing out, "What if I didn't pick the right thing." Someone came into my office and said, "I'll dclaere three mrjoas and two minors" and I said, "Do you plan on being here for a few years? It's not going to hpapen, right?" So we don't say that; we say you want to let go and move on, and all these have some psychological basis in them. Let me tell you about it. Once you get good at gathering and carnetig ideas, you also want to make sure you leave room for the lucky ideas, the serendipitous ideas. This is a guy named Tony Hsieh. He was the CEO at Zappos, he sold it to Amazon. But before you became an employee at zppoas you had to take a test, and the test was, "Are you lkucy?" One, two or three: "I'm not very lucky, and I'm not sure why." Seven, eight, nine, ten, "I'm very lucky, gaert things happen to me all the time, I'm not sure why." He wouldn't hire anybody who was not lucky. (Laughter) I think it's probably illegal, but it was based on - (Laughter) but it was based on a piece of research where phgiostyoscls did the same thing, "Rate yourself from lucky to ukcnuly." And then they had people read the fornt section of the New York tiems, 30 pages, lots of articles. And the graduate sdtnetus said, "Please count the number of -" either headlines or photographs, depending on the test. "And when you get the whole thing read and you cunot the number of photographs, just tell the person at the end." And if you got the right number, you'd get $100. Of course you all know when a gtarudae student tlles you what the experiment is that's not the experiment. So, inside this thing that looked like the New York Times, 30 pages, front page, inside all the stories were little pieces of text that said, "If you read this, the experiment's over. Collect an extra $ 150." People who rated themselves as unlucky by and large got the right answer, 36 headlines, whatever it was, got the $ 100. People who rated themselves as lucky - seven, eight, nine or ten - 80% of the time noticed the text and got the etrxa $150. It's not about being lucky. It's about paying attention to what you're doing and keeping your peripheral visoin open because it's in your pererihpal vision that those interesting opportunities show up, right, that you were not expecting. So you want to get good at being lucky. Narrowing down. This is quite simple. If you have too many choices, you go into what psychologists call choice oovlread, and then you have esetsnlaliy no choices. Here's the experiment. This was done at Stanford. You walk into a grocery store and there's a nice lady. She's got a table and on the table, she has six jams, and you come over try the jams to have a sample, buy some jam. Six jams; about 30 people who would go by pick a jam, or stop and test something, and about a third of those actually buy a jam. That's the binseale. Next week, you walk in, 24 jams: jalapeño, strawberry, banana, whatever; all sorts of jams. Well, guess what happens? Twice as many people stop, look at all these jams, it's so interesting. Three percent of the people buy them. (Laughter) When you have too many choices, you have no choice. What do you do when you have too many choices? Just cross off a bunch of choices. Psychologists tells us we can't hdnale more than five to seven. I'd say it's five. If you've got a bunch of chioces, cross them all off, just pick the five and then make your decision there. "Oh my God! What if I pick the wrong ones? What if I cross off the wrong ones?" Right? Well, you won't, because it's the pizza or Chinese food thing. You're at the office and everybody says, "Let's go out to lncuh today." "Sounds great. What do you want to do? Pizza or cishnee food?" "I don't care." In the elevator on their way down, someone says, "Let's get Chinese food." Then you go, "No, I want pizza." (Laughter) You won't decide how you feel about the dieoscin till the decision's made. That's a pceie of research that's been done again and again and again. So just cross them off. If you csors off the wrong one, you'll have a feeling somewhere in your stomach that you did the wrong thing. csniohog - this is about that fnleeig in your smtocah. You cannot choose well if you choose only from your rotainal mind. This is Dan Goleman, who wrote the book on emotional inneitgeclle. He does a lot of reeacsrh on this, a lot of brain science. There's a part of your brain, way down in the base brain, the basal ganglia, that summarizes emotional decisions for you. I did something, got good emotional response from that: good, cchek. I did something and had a little bad emotional resnpose to that. It summarizes all of the emotions that you have felt and how your decisions were valenced positive or negative an emotion. The problem with that part of your brain is that it's so early in the brain it doesn't talk to the part of your brain that talks. There's no connection to the prefrontal cortex or anything else. It's only connected to your GI tract and your limbic system. So, it gives you information through felt sensations, a "gut feeling." Without that, you can't make good decisions. And then the letting go and moving on. This was the headrst part for me, but this is also the work of Dan Gilbert, who is a distinguished scientist at Harvard, despite the fact that he's doing insurance cicorelmmas now. And he's been studying decision-making and how do you make yourself hppay. So, you walk in another polsygochy experiment. The postdoc has got five meont prints, five puetrcis from Monet, and you rank them from best to least, "I like this one the most, I like this one the least," number one and number five. "Thank you very much, the experiment's over. Oh, by the way, as you're wnikalg out, you know, I kind of srceewd up and I boguht too many of number two and three. So if you want to take one home you can just have it. Two conditions: in one case, take it home and have it, but don't bring it back because I'm kind of embarrassed and - Just keep it, you can't exchange it. Second condition: I've got lots of these. If you don't like the one you picked, you can swap it back and pick another one." And of course everybody picks number two. It's a little better than nbmuer three. We bring people back in a week later and say, "Re-rank the stimuli. Which one do you like now?" The people who were allowed to cgahne their mind don't like their painting, they don't like the print, they don't like the other one anymore, they don't like any of them anymore. In fact, they don't like the whole process and they have destroyed their otnpipourty to be happy. (Laughter) The people who were told, "You pick it, it's yours, you can't return it" love their pnrit, they tlacpliyy rank it as number one and think the rest of them suck. (Laughter) If you make decisions reversible, your chance of being happy goes down like 60 or 70 percent. So, let go and move on, make the decision reversible. And by the way, as a designer, that's no problem, because you're really good at generating options, you're great at ideation, you're really good at prototyping to get data in the world to see of that world will be the world you want to live in, so you have no fear of missing out. It's just a process, a mindful process: ccolelt, reduce, decide, move on. That's how you make yourself happy. So, the five ideas: Connecting the dots to find meaning through work and life views. Stay away from gravity problems because I can't fix those and neither can you; reframe those to something that is workable. Do three plans, never one, always do three of everything, three ideations for any of the problems you're wokring on to make sure that you've covered not just the ideas that you had when you settrad, but all the other ideas that are possible. Prototype everything in your life before you jump in and try it. And choose well; there's no point in making a good choice poorly. Choose well and you will find that things in your life are much easier. And you can do this, we know you can, because thousands of students have done it. Two PhD setduis have been done in the casls that dotmaenrtesd hihegr self-efficacy, lower dysfunctional beliefs. It's a fascinating process to watch people who don't think of themselves as creative go through this class and walk out saying, "You know what? I'm a pretty creative person!" what David Kelly cllas "creative confidence." So, we know you can do it, thank you very much. It's simple: get cuorius, talk to people and try stuff, and you will design a well-lived and joyful life. Thank you. (Applause) (Cheers)

Open Cloze

Hello, everyone. I'm here to help you design your life. We're going to use the technique of design thinking. Design thinking is something we've been working on at the d.School and in the School of Engineering for over 50 years, and it's an innovation methodology, works on products, works on ________. But I think the most interesting design problem is your life! So that's what we're going to talk about. I want to just make sure everybody knows: this is my buddy Dave Evans, his face. Dave and I are the co-authors of the book, and he is the guy who helped me co-found the Life Design Lab at Stanford. So what do we do in the Life Design Lab? Well, we teach the class that helps to ______ out what you want to be when you grow up. Now, I'm going to give you the first reframe. _________ love ________. How many of you hope you never grow up and lose that child-like curiosity that ______ everything you do? Raise your hand. Right! Who wants to grow up? I mean, we've been talking about curiosity in almost every one of these talks. And so I'd like to reframe this as: we say we teach the class that helps you figure out what you want to grow into next, as this life of yours, this amazing design of yours, unfolds. So, design ________ is what we teach and it's a set of ________, it's how designers think. You know, we've been taught probably in the university to be so skeptical realists, ____________, but that's not very useful as a mindset when you're trying to do something new, something no one's ever done before. So we say you _____ with curiosity and you lean into what you're curious about. We say you _______ problems because most of the time we find people are working on the wrong problems and they have a wonderful solution to something that doesn't work anyway. So, what's the point of working on the wrong thing? We say radical collaboration because the answer's out in the world with other people. That's where your experience of your life will be. We want to be mindful of our _______. There are times in the design process when you want lots of _____, and there are times when you really want to converge test some things, prototype some things, you want to be good at that. And the other is ______ ______. Now, you know, I'll say that we think no plan for your life will _______ first contact with reality. (________) Reality has the tendency to throw little things at us that we weren't expecting, sometimes good things, sometimes bad. So we say: just have a biased action, try stuff. Why? Why did we start this class? I've been in office hours for a long, long time with my students. I've been ________ here for a while. Dave as well. He was teaching over that _________ college, in Berkeley, for a while. (Laughter) And - I'm sorry, I'm sorry, it's a Stanford TEDx. But we ______ that people get stuck. People really get stuck and then they don't know what to do and they don't seem to have any tools for getting unstuck. Designers get stuck all the time. I ______ up to be a designer, which means I'm going to work on something I've never done, every day, and I get stuck and unstuck, stuck and _______, all the time. We also _______ as we went out and talked to folks who are not just our students, but people in mid-career and encore careers, that people have a _____ of _______ which psychologists label "dysfunctional beliefs," things they believe that are true that actually aren't true, and it _____ them back. I'll give you three. First one is: "What's your passion? Tell me your passion and I'll tell you what you need to do." Now, if you actually have one of these things, these ________ - you knew at two you wanted to be a doctor, you knew at seven you wanted to be a clown at ______ du Soleil, and now you are one, that's _______. But we're a sort of research space here at ________, so we went over to the Center for the Study of Adolescence, which by the way now goes up to 27 - (Laughter) and met with Bill Damon, one of our colleagues, a fantastic guy. He studied this question and it turns out less than 20% of the people have any one single ____________ passion in their lives. We hate a ___________ which says, "OK, come to the front of the line. You have a passion? Oh, you don't? Oh, I'm sorry. When you have one, come on back and we'll help you with that." It's terrible, eight out of 10 people say, "I have lots of things I'm interested in." So this is not an organizing _________ for your search or your ______. The second one is, "Well, you should know by now, right? Don't you know where you're going? If you don't know, you're late." (Laughter) Now, what are you late for, exactly? I'm not quite sure. But you know, there's a meta-narrative in the culture and when I was growing up: by 25, you're supposed to maybe have a relationship, maybe have gotten married and started to get the family together. When I talk to my __________ students, they'll say, "Oh, that's got to be like 30 or something," because they can't _______, anything past, like, 22, but 30 is a long way out. But we know that now these people are forming their lives much more fluidly, they are staying in a lot more dynamic motion between about 22 and 35, and so this notion that you're late is really kind of like, "Well, you should have figured this out by now." Dave and I don't "should" on anybody. In the book or in the class, we don't believe in "should." We just think, "Alright, you are whatever you are. Let's start from where you are. You're not late for anything." But the one we really don't like is: "Are you being the best possible version of you?" (Laughter) "I mean, because you're not settling for something that's less than the best, because this is Stanford. Obviously we all are going to be the best." Well, this implies that, one, there's a ________ best; two, that it's a linear thing, and life is anything but linear; and three, it kind of comes from this business notion, there's an old business saying, "Good is the enemy of better, better is the enemy of best," and you always want to do your best in ________. But if there isn't one singular best, then our reframe is, "The unattainable best is the enemy of all the available betters, because there are many, many ________ of you that you could play out, all of which would ______ in a well-designed life." So I'm going to give you three ideas from design thinking - five ideas, excuse me - That says five, doesn't it? Yeah. Five ideas from design thinking. And people who've read the book or taken the class have written back to us and said, "Hey, these were the most useful, these were the most ______, they were the most _______." And we're human-centered designers, so we want to be helpful. The first one is this notion of connecting the dots. The number one reason people take our class and we hear read the book is they say, "You know, I want my life to be meaningful, I want it to be purposeful, I want it to add up to something." So, we looked in the positive psychology literature and in the design literature, and it turns out that there's who you are, there's what you believe and there's what you do in the world, and if you can make a __________ between these three things, if you can make that a coherent story, you will experience your life as meaningful. The ________ in meaning-making comes from connecting the dots. So we do two things. We ask people: "Write a work view. What's your ______ of work? Not the job you want, but why do you work? What's it for? What's work in service of?" Once you have that, 250 words, then - this one's a little ______ to get short, "What's the meaning of life? What's the big _______? Why are you here? What is your faith or your view of the world?" When you can connect your life view and your work view together, in a coherent way, you start to __________ your life as meaningful. That's the idea number one. Idea number two: ______ get stuck and you've got to be careful because we can reframe almost anything, but there's a class of ________ that people get stuck on that are really, really bad problems. We call them gravity problems. Essentially, they're something you cannot change. Now, I know you have a friend and you've been having coffee with this friend for a while, and they're stuck. They don't like their boss, their _______, their job, there's something that they don't like. But nothing's happening, right? Nothing's happening with them. If Dave were here he'd say, "Look, you can't solve a problem you're not willing to have." You can't _____ a problem you're not willing to have, so if you've got a gravity problem and you're simply not willing to work on it, then it's just a circumstance in your life. And the only thing we know to do with gravity problems is to accept. In the design thinking chart, you start with empathy, then you redefine the problem, you come up with lots of ideas, then you prototype and test things, but that only works if it's a problem you're willing to work on. The first thing to do is accept and once you've ________ this as gravity problem - "I can't change it. You know, this is a company, the company is a family-run company and the name of the founder is on the door and if you're not in the family, you can't be the _________." You're right, you can't! So, now you have to decide what you want to do. Is that a circumstance that you can reframe and work in, or do you need to do something else? So be really careful about gravity problems because they're pernicious and they really get in the way. But back to this idea of multiples, I do a little thought experiment with my students, and I say, you know, "The physicists up in SLAC have kind of demonstrated this multiverse thing might be real." You've heard of this, that there are multiple parallel universes, one right next to each other. And say, "We'll do a thought experiment. Let's say you could live in all the ___________ simultaneously, and not only that, but you'd know about your life in each one of these instances. So, you could go back and be the ballerina, and the scientist, and the CPA, and whatever else you wanted to be. You could have all these lives in ________." When I ask them, "How many lives are you? How many lives would you want?", I get answers from three to 10,000. But, you know, we've sort of done the average: it's about 7,5. Most people think they have about 7,5 really good _____ that they could live. And here's the deal: you only get one. But it turns out it's not what you don't choose, it's what you choose in life that makes you happy. Nevertheless, we reframed this and we say, "Great, there's more lives than one in you. So let's go on an odyssey, and let's really figure out those lives!" And we ask people to do some design. And the "ideate" ______, it's about having lot's of ideas. So we say, "Let's have some ideas. We'll ideate your future, but you can't ideate just one. You have to ideate three." Now, there's some research from the School of Education that says if you start with three ideas and you brainstorm from there, you've got a much wider range of ideas, the ideas are more __________ and they lead to better solutions to the problem rather than just starting with one and then _____________ forward. So we always do threes; there's something magical about threes. We have people do three lives, and it's transformational. We give them this little rubric. One: "The thing you're doing, the thing you're doing right now, whatever your career is, just do it. And you're going to do it for five years and it's going to come out great." I mean, in design, we're sort of values-neutral, except for one thing: we never design anything to make it worse, right? I have been on some teams that made some pretty bad products, but we weren't trying to, we were trying to make it better. So, thing one: your life, make it better. And also put in the bucket list stuff: you want to go to Paris, to the Galapagos - the guy with the ice thing - before it's all under water and we can't see it anymore. So, that's plan one: your life goes great. Plan two: I'm really sorry to tell you, but the robots and the AI stuff - that job doesn't _____ anymore, the robots are doing it. We don't need you to do that _______. Now, what are going to do? So what do you do if the thing that you've got goes away? And you know, everybody's got a side ______ or something they can do to make that work. And three is: what's your wild-card plan? What would you do if you didn't have to worry about money? You've got enough. You're not fabulously _______, but you've got enough. And what would you do if you knew no one would _____? My students come in for my office hours a lot of times, and they'll say something like, "Well, what I really want to do is this, but I can't just hear people saying, 'You didn't go to Stanford to do that, did you?'" (Laughter) Because somehow, if you went to Stanford, you have to do some of the amazing things the past speakers have been doing. "But what would you do if you had enough money and you didn't care what people thought? Anything from, 'I'm going to go _____ butterflies' to, 'I want to be a bartender, you know, in ______.' What would you do?" And people have those three _____. Now what happens when they do this is, one, they _______, "Oh my gosh, I could actually have ________ my three completely parallel lives are all ______ interesting." Two, they rarely go become a bartender, you know, in Belize. But a lot of times, the things that come up in the other plans were things that they left behind somehow. In the business of life, they forgot about those things. And so they bring them back and put them in plan one, then they make their lives even better. Sometimes they do pivot, but mostly they just use this as a method of ideating all the possible wonderful ways they could have a life. Now, you could start executing that, but in our model, the thing you do after you have ideas is you build a prototype. We have met people who've quit their job and suddenly done something else, It hardly ever works. You kind of have to _____ up on it, because in our model, we want to set the bar really low, try stuff, have some success, do it again. So when we say "prototype," in our language, what we mean is a way to ask an interesting question, "What would it be like if I tried this?", a way to ______ the assumptions, "Is this even the thing I want or is that just something I remember I wanted when I was 20?" I've got to go out in the world and do this, so I'm going to get others involved in ___________ my life, and I'm going to sneak up on the future, because I don't if this is exactly what I want. There's two kinds of life-design prototypes and what we call prototype conversation. You know, William Gibson, the science-fiction writer has a famous quote: "The future is already here. It's just unevenly distributed." So, there is someone who's a bartender in Ibiza. He's been doing it for years, I could go meet him and have a conversation, he or she. Somebody else is doing something else I'm interested in. All of these people are out there, they're living in my ______, _____. They're doing what I want to do, today. And if I have a conversation with them, I just ask for their story and everybody will tell you their story. If you buy them a cup of coffee, they tell you the _____. If I hear something in the story that _____ in me - We have this thing we call narrative resonance: when I hear a story that's kind of like my story, something happens, and I can identify that as a potential way of moving forward. The other one is a prototype experience. Dave and I were working with a woman, sort of mid-career in her 40s and a very successful tech executive, but wanted to move from money-making to meaning-making, to do something more meaningful, thinking of going back to ______, getting an MA in education, working with kids. But she's like, "You know, I don't know, I'm 45, going back to school. It's not going to work. And then I heard about these millennials. They're kind of mean and they don't like old people." (Laughter) What am I going to do, Bill?" I said, "Well, you just have to go try this, you know. It _____ out we sent her to a seminar class and to a _____ lecture-hall class, and by the way, you just put on a T-shirt that says "Stanford" and you walk into a class, nobody knows. She wasn't registered, but you know, she went and she went to the classes and she came back and said, "You know what? It was fantastic! I walked into the _______ hall, I sat down, my body was on fire! It was interesting, I was so __________ in the way the lecture was going. And then I met these millennials. It turned out they're pretty interesting people! I've set up three prototype _____________. And they think I'm interesting because I'm ______ back to school and I'm 45." So she had a felt experience, because we are more than just our brains. She had a felt experience that this might work for her. So these are two ways you can prototype your way forward. The last idea: you want to make a good decision well. So many people make choices and they're not happy with their choices because they don't really know how do they know what they know, right? It's a hard thing, particularly in our days when we have so many choices. So we have a process. Again it comes from the positive psychology guys. ______ and create options. Once you get good at design you're really good at coming up with options. You've got ______ those down to a working list that you can work with. Then, you make the ______ to make a good choice, and then of course you agonize that you did the wrong thing. (Laughter) All my students have what is called FOMO, fear missing out, "What if I didn't pick the right thing." Someone came into my office and said, "I'll _______ three ______ and two minors" and I said, "Do you plan on being here for a few years? It's not going to ______, right?" So we don't say that; we say you want to let go and move on, and all these have some psychological basis in them. Let me tell you about it. Once you get good at gathering and ________ ideas, you also want to make sure you leave room for the lucky ideas, the serendipitous ideas. This is a guy named Tony Hsieh. He was the CEO at Zappos, he sold it to Amazon. But before you became an employee at ______ you had to take a test, and the test was, "Are you _____?" One, two or three: "I'm not very lucky, and I'm not sure why." Seven, eight, nine, ten, "I'm very lucky, _____ things happen to me all the time, I'm not sure why." He wouldn't hire anybody who was not lucky. (Laughter) I think it's probably illegal, but it was based on - (Laughter) but it was based on a piece of research where _____________ did the same thing, "Rate yourself from lucky to _______." And then they had people read the _____ section of the New York _____, 30 pages, lots of articles. And the graduate ________ said, "Please count the number of -" either headlines or photographs, depending on the test. "And when you get the whole thing read and you _____ the number of photographs, just tell the person at the end." And if you got the right number, you'd get $100. Of course you all know when a ________ student _____ you what the experiment is that's not the experiment. So, inside this thing that looked like the New York Times, 30 pages, front page, inside all the stories were little pieces of text that said, "If you read this, the experiment's over. Collect an extra $ 150." People who rated themselves as unlucky by and large got the right answer, 36 headlines, whatever it was, got the $ 100. People who rated themselves as lucky - seven, eight, nine or ten - 80% of the time noticed the text and got the _____ $150. It's not about being lucky. It's about paying attention to what you're doing and keeping your peripheral ______ open because it's in your __________ vision that those interesting opportunities show up, right, that you were not expecting. So you want to get good at being lucky. Narrowing down. This is quite simple. If you have too many choices, you go into what psychologists call choice ________, and then you have ___________ no choices. Here's the experiment. This was done at Stanford. You walk into a grocery store and there's a nice lady. She's got a table and on the table, she has six jams, and you come over try the jams to have a sample, buy some jam. Six jams; about 30 people who would go by pick a jam, or stop and test something, and about a third of those actually buy a jam. That's the ________. Next week, you walk in, 24 jams: jalapeño, strawberry, banana, whatever; all sorts of jams. Well, guess what happens? Twice as many people stop, look at all these jams, it's so interesting. Three percent of the people buy them. (Laughter) When you have too many choices, you have no choice. What do you do when you have too many choices? Just cross off a bunch of choices. Psychologists tells us we can't ______ more than five to seven. I'd say it's five. If you've got a bunch of _______, cross them all off, just pick the five and then make your decision there. "Oh my God! What if I pick the wrong ones? What if I cross off the wrong ones?" Right? Well, you won't, because it's the pizza or Chinese food thing. You're at the office and everybody says, "Let's go out to _____ today." "Sounds great. What do you want to do? Pizza or _______ food?" "I don't care." In the elevator on their way down, someone says, "Let's get Chinese food." Then you go, "No, I want pizza." (Laughter) You won't decide how you feel about the ________ till the decision's made. That's a _____ of research that's been done again and again and again. So just cross them off. If you _____ off the wrong one, you'll have a feeling somewhere in your stomach that you did the wrong thing. ________ - this is about that _______ in your _______. You cannot choose well if you choose only from your ________ mind. This is Dan Goleman, who wrote the book on emotional ____________. He does a lot of ________ on this, a lot of brain science. There's a part of your brain, way down in the base brain, the basal ganglia, that summarizes emotional decisions for you. I did something, got good emotional response from that: good, _____. I did something and had a little bad emotional ________ to that. It summarizes all of the emotions that you have felt and how your decisions were valenced positive or negative an emotion. The problem with that part of your brain is that it's so early in the brain it doesn't talk to the part of your brain that talks. There's no connection to the prefrontal cortex or anything else. It's only connected to your GI tract and your limbic system. So, it gives you information through felt sensations, a "gut feeling." Without that, you can't make good decisions. And then the letting go and moving on. This was the _______ part for me, but this is also the work of Dan Gilbert, who is a distinguished scientist at Harvard, despite the fact that he's doing insurance ___________ now. And he's been studying decision-making and how do you make yourself _____. So, you walk in another __________ experiment. The postdoc has got five _____ prints, five ________ from Monet, and you rank them from best to least, "I like this one the most, I like this one the least," number one and number five. "Thank you very much, the experiment's over. Oh, by the way, as you're _______ out, you know, I kind of _______ up and I ______ too many of number two and three. So if you want to take one home you can just have it. Two conditions: in one case, take it home and have it, but don't bring it back because I'm kind of embarrassed and - Just keep it, you can't exchange it. Second condition: I've got lots of these. If you don't like the one you picked, you can swap it back and pick another one." And of course everybody picks number two. It's a little better than ______ three. We bring people back in a week later and say, "Re-rank the stimuli. Which one do you like now?" The people who were allowed to ______ their mind don't like their painting, they don't like the print, they don't like the other one anymore, they don't like any of them anymore. In fact, they don't like the whole process and they have destroyed their ___________ to be happy. (Laughter) The people who were told, "You pick it, it's yours, you can't return it" love their _____, they _________ rank it as number one and think the rest of them suck. (Laughter) If you make decisions reversible, your chance of being happy goes down like 60 or 70 percent. So, let go and move on, make the decision reversible. And by the way, as a designer, that's no problem, because you're really good at generating options, you're great at ideation, you're really good at prototyping to get data in the world to see of that world will be the world you want to live in, so you have no fear of missing out. It's just a process, a mindful process: _______, reduce, decide, move on. That's how you make yourself happy. So, the five ideas: Connecting the dots to find meaning through work and life views. Stay away from gravity problems because I can't fix those and neither can you; reframe those to something that is workable. Do three plans, never one, always do three of everything, three ideations for any of the problems you're _______ on to make sure that you've covered not just the ideas that you had when you _______, but all the other ideas that are possible. Prototype everything in your life before you jump in and try it. And choose well; there's no point in making a good choice poorly. Choose well and you will find that things in your life are much easier. And you can do this, we know you can, because thousands of students have done it. Two PhD _______ have been done in the _____ that ____________ ______ self-efficacy, lower dysfunctional beliefs. It's a fascinating process to watch people who don't think of themselves as creative go through this class and walk out saying, "You know what? I'm a pretty creative person!" what David Kelly _____ "creative confidence." So, we know you can do it, thank you very much. It's simple: get _______, talk to people and try stuff, and you will design a well-lived and joyful life. Thank you. (Applause) (Cheers)

Solution

essentially
parallel
reframes
extra
noticed
rings
tells
commercials
higher
front
creating
multiverses
narrow
cross
rationalists
psychology
generative
check
action
doable
brainstorming
picture
large
today
design
feeling
beliefs
partner
survive
unstuck
belize
stomach
happy
reframe
thinking
drives
teaching
millennial
experience
research
print
vision
happen
baseline
result
peripheral
response
hardest
problems
gather
increase
declare
handle
unlucky
bought
collect
realize
singular
stanford
count
change
methodology
monet
decision
class
started
expose
chinese
cirque
people
piece
anymore
designers
exist
walking
number
imagined
solve
notice
connection
sneak
studies
principle
graduate
choice
plans
mindsets
interested
holds
awesome
president
calls
identifiable
lecture
theory
intelligence
helpful
story
accepted
start
screwed
passions
hustle
biased
turns
imagine
business
overload
typically
prototyping
working
process
pretty
harder
zappos
bunch
wealthy
demonstrated
lives
majors
opportunity
future
ideas
study
students
psychologists
pictures
versions
services
bubble
choosing
figure
signed
coming
curious
rational
great
school
community
lucky
lunch
laugh
times
laughter
choices
conversations

Original Text

Hello, everyone. I'm here to help you design your life. We're going to use the technique of design thinking. Design thinking is something we've been working on at the d.School and in the School of Engineering for over 50 years, and it's an innovation methodology, works on products, works on services. But I think the most interesting design problem is your life! So that's what we're going to talk about. I want to just make sure everybody knows: this is my buddy Dave Evans, his face. Dave and I are the co-authors of the book, and he is the guy who helped me co-found the Life Design Lab at Stanford. So what do we do in the Life Design Lab? Well, we teach the class that helps to figure out what you want to be when you grow up. Now, I'm going to give you the first reframe. Designers love reframes. How many of you hope you never grow up and lose that child-like curiosity that drives everything you do? Raise your hand. Right! Who wants to grow up? I mean, we've been talking about curiosity in almost every one of these talks. And so I'd like to reframe this as: we say we teach the class that helps you figure out what you want to grow into next, as this life of yours, this amazing design of yours, unfolds. So, design thinking is what we teach and it's a set of mindsets, it's how designers think. You know, we've been taught probably in the university to be so skeptical realists, rationalists, but that's not very useful as a mindset when you're trying to do something new, something no one's ever done before. So we say you start with curiosity and you lean into what you're curious about. We say you reframe problems because most of the time we find people are working on the wrong problems and they have a wonderful solution to something that doesn't work anyway. So, what's the point of working on the wrong thing? We say radical collaboration because the answer's out in the world with other people. That's where your experience of your life will be. We want to be mindful of our process. There are times in the design process when you want lots of ideas, and there are times when you really want to converge test some things, prototype some things, you want to be good at that. And the other is biased action. Now, you know, I'll say that we think no plan for your life will survive first contact with reality. (Laughter) Reality has the tendency to throw little things at us that we weren't expecting, sometimes good things, sometimes bad. So we say: just have a biased action, try stuff. Why? Why did we start this class? I've been in office hours for a long, long time with my students. I've been teaching here for a while. Dave as well. He was teaching over that community college, in Berkeley, for a while. (Laughter) And - I'm sorry, I'm sorry, it's a Stanford TEDx. But we notice that people get stuck. People really get stuck and then they don't know what to do and they don't seem to have any tools for getting unstuck. Designers get stuck all the time. I signed up to be a designer, which means I'm going to work on something I've never done, every day, and I get stuck and unstuck, stuck and unstuck, all the time. We also noticed as we went out and talked to folks who are not just our students, but people in mid-career and encore careers, that people have a bunch of beliefs which psychologists label "dysfunctional beliefs," things they believe that are true that actually aren't true, and it holds them back. I'll give you three. First one is: "What's your passion? Tell me your passion and I'll tell you what you need to do." Now, if you actually have one of these things, these passions - you knew at two you wanted to be a doctor, you knew at seven you wanted to be a clown at Cirque du Soleil, and now you are one, that's awesome. But we're a sort of research space here at Stanford, so we went over to the Center for the Study of Adolescence, which by the way now goes up to 27 - (Laughter) and met with Bill Damon, one of our colleagues, a fantastic guy. He studied this question and it turns out less than 20% of the people have any one single identifiable passion in their lives. We hate a methodology which says, "OK, come to the front of the line. You have a passion? Oh, you don't? Oh, I'm sorry. When you have one, come on back and we'll help you with that." It's terrible, eight out of 10 people say, "I have lots of things I'm interested in." So this is not an organizing principle for your search or your design. The second one is, "Well, you should know by now, right? Don't you know where you're going? If you don't know, you're late." (Laughter) Now, what are you late for, exactly? I'm not quite sure. But you know, there's a meta-narrative in the culture and when I was growing up: by 25, you're supposed to maybe have a relationship, maybe have gotten married and started to get the family together. When I talk to my millennial students, they'll say, "Oh, that's got to be like 30 or something," because they can't imagine, anything past, like, 22, but 30 is a long way out. But we know that now these people are forming their lives much more fluidly, they are staying in a lot more dynamic motion between about 22 and 35, and so this notion that you're late is really kind of like, "Well, you should have figured this out by now." Dave and I don't "should" on anybody. In the book or in the class, we don't believe in "should." We just think, "Alright, you are whatever you are. Let's start from where you are. You're not late for anything." But the one we really don't like is: "Are you being the best possible version of you?" (Laughter) "I mean, because you're not settling for something that's less than the best, because this is Stanford. Obviously we all are going to be the best." Well, this implies that, one, there's a singular best; two, that it's a linear thing, and life is anything but linear; and three, it kind of comes from this business notion, there's an old business saying, "Good is the enemy of better, better is the enemy of best," and you always want to do your best in business. But if there isn't one singular best, then our reframe is, "The unattainable best is the enemy of all the available betters, because there are many, many versions of you that you could play out, all of which would result in a well-designed life." So I'm going to give you three ideas from design thinking - five ideas, excuse me - That says five, doesn't it? Yeah. Five ideas from design thinking. And people who've read the book or taken the class have written back to us and said, "Hey, these were the most useful, these were the most doable, they were the most helpful." And we're human-centered designers, so we want to be helpful. The first one is this notion of connecting the dots. The number one reason people take our class and we hear read the book is they say, "You know, I want my life to be meaningful, I want it to be purposeful, I want it to add up to something." So, we looked in the positive psychology literature and in the design literature, and it turns out that there's who you are, there's what you believe and there's what you do in the world, and if you can make a connection between these three things, if you can make that a coherent story, you will experience your life as meaningful. The increase in meaning-making comes from connecting the dots. So we do two things. We ask people: "Write a work view. What's your theory of work? Not the job you want, but why do you work? What's it for? What's work in service of?" Once you have that, 250 words, then - this one's a little harder to get short, "What's the meaning of life? What's the big picture? Why are you here? What is your faith or your view of the world?" When you can connect your life view and your work view together, in a coherent way, you start to experience your life as meaningful. That's the idea number one. Idea number two: people get stuck and you've got to be careful because we can reframe almost anything, but there's a class of problems that people get stuck on that are really, really bad problems. We call them gravity problems. Essentially, they're something you cannot change. Now, I know you have a friend and you've been having coffee with this friend for a while, and they're stuck. They don't like their boss, their partner, their job, there's something that they don't like. But nothing's happening, right? Nothing's happening with them. If Dave were here he'd say, "Look, you can't solve a problem you're not willing to have." You can't solve a problem you're not willing to have, so if you've got a gravity problem and you're simply not willing to work on it, then it's just a circumstance in your life. And the only thing we know to do with gravity problems is to accept. In the design thinking chart, you start with empathy, then you redefine the problem, you come up with lots of ideas, then you prototype and test things, but that only works if it's a problem you're willing to work on. The first thing to do is accept and once you've accepted this as gravity problem - "I can't change it. You know, this is a company, the company is a family-run company and the name of the founder is on the door and if you're not in the family, you can't be the president." You're right, you can't! So, now you have to decide what you want to do. Is that a circumstance that you can reframe and work in, or do you need to do something else? So be really careful about gravity problems because they're pernicious and they really get in the way. But back to this idea of multiples, I do a little thought experiment with my students, and I say, you know, "The physicists up in SLAC have kind of demonstrated this multiverse thing might be real." You've heard of this, that there are multiple parallel universes, one right next to each other. And say, "We'll do a thought experiment. Let's say you could live in all the multiverses simultaneously, and not only that, but you'd know about your life in each one of these instances. So, you could go back and be the ballerina, and the scientist, and the CPA, and whatever else you wanted to be. You could have all these lives in parallel." When I ask them, "How many lives are you? How many lives would you want?", I get answers from three to 10,000. But, you know, we've sort of done the average: it's about 7,5. Most people think they have about 7,5 really good lives that they could live. And here's the deal: you only get one. But it turns out it's not what you don't choose, it's what you choose in life that makes you happy. Nevertheless, we reframed this and we say, "Great, there's more lives than one in you. So let's go on an odyssey, and let's really figure out those lives!" And we ask people to do some design. And the "ideate" bubble, it's about having lot's of ideas. So we say, "Let's have some ideas. We'll ideate your future, but you can't ideate just one. You have to ideate three." Now, there's some research from the School of Education that says if you start with three ideas and you brainstorm from there, you've got a much wider range of ideas, the ideas are more generative and they lead to better solutions to the problem rather than just starting with one and then brainstorming forward. So we always do threes; there's something magical about threes. We have people do three lives, and it's transformational. We give them this little rubric. One: "The thing you're doing, the thing you're doing right now, whatever your career is, just do it. And you're going to do it for five years and it's going to come out great." I mean, in design, we're sort of values-neutral, except for one thing: we never design anything to make it worse, right? I have been on some teams that made some pretty bad products, but we weren't trying to, we were trying to make it better. So, thing one: your life, make it better. And also put in the bucket list stuff: you want to go to Paris, to the Galapagos - the guy with the ice thing - before it's all under water and we can't see it anymore. So, that's plan one: your life goes great. Plan two: I'm really sorry to tell you, but the robots and the AI stuff - that job doesn't exist anymore, the robots are doing it. We don't need you to do that anymore. Now, what are going to do? So what do you do if the thing that you've got goes away? And you know, everybody's got a side hustle or something they can do to make that work. And three is: what's your wild-card plan? What would you do if you didn't have to worry about money? You've got enough. You're not fabulously wealthy, but you've got enough. And what would you do if you knew no one would laugh? My students come in for my office hours a lot of times, and they'll say something like, "Well, what I really want to do is this, but I can't just hear people saying, 'You didn't go to Stanford to do that, did you?'" (Laughter) Because somehow, if you went to Stanford, you have to do some of the amazing things the past speakers have been doing. "But what would you do if you had enough money and you didn't care what people thought? Anything from, 'I'm going to go study butterflies' to, 'I want to be a bartender, you know, in Belize.' What would you do?" And people have those three plans. Now what happens when they do this is, one, they realize, "Oh my gosh, I could actually have imagined my three completely parallel lives are all pretty interesting." Two, they rarely go become a bartender, you know, in Belize. But a lot of times, the things that come up in the other plans were things that they left behind somehow. In the business of life, they forgot about those things. And so they bring them back and put them in plan one, then they make their lives even better. Sometimes they do pivot, but mostly they just use this as a method of ideating all the possible wonderful ways they could have a life. Now, you could start executing that, but in our model, the thing you do after you have ideas is you build a prototype. We have met people who've quit their job and suddenly done something else, It hardly ever works. You kind of have to sneak up on it, because in our model, we want to set the bar really low, try stuff, have some success, do it again. So when we say "prototype," in our language, what we mean is a way to ask an interesting question, "What would it be like if I tried this?", a way to expose the assumptions, "Is this even the thing I want or is that just something I remember I wanted when I was 20?" I've got to go out in the world and do this, so I'm going to get others involved in prototyping my life, and I'm going to sneak up on the future, because I don't if this is exactly what I want. There's two kinds of life-design prototypes and what we call prototype conversation. You know, William Gibson, the science-fiction writer has a famous quote: "The future is already here. It's just unevenly distributed." So, there is someone who's a bartender in Ibiza. He's been doing it for years, I could go meet him and have a conversation, he or she. Somebody else is doing something else I'm interested in. All of these people are out there, they're living in my future, today. They're doing what I want to do, today. And if I have a conversation with them, I just ask for their story and everybody will tell you their story. If you buy them a cup of coffee, they tell you the story. If I hear something in the story that rings in me - We have this thing we call narrative resonance: when I hear a story that's kind of like my story, something happens, and I can identify that as a potential way of moving forward. The other one is a prototype experience. Dave and I were working with a woman, sort of mid-career in her 40s and a very successful tech executive, but wanted to move from money-making to meaning-making, to do something more meaningful, thinking of going back to school, getting an MA in education, working with kids. But she's like, "You know, I don't know, I'm 45, going back to school. It's not going to work. And then I heard about these millennials. They're kind of mean and they don't like old people." (Laughter) What am I going to do, Bill?" I said, "Well, you just have to go try this, you know. It turns out we sent her to a seminar class and to a large lecture-hall class, and by the way, you just put on a T-shirt that says "Stanford" and you walk into a class, nobody knows. She wasn't registered, but you know, she went and she went to the classes and she came back and said, "You know what? It was fantastic! I walked into the lecture hall, I sat down, my body was on fire! It was interesting, I was so interested in the way the lecture was going. And then I met these millennials. It turned out they're pretty interesting people! I've set up three prototype conversations. And they think I'm interesting because I'm coming back to school and I'm 45." So she had a felt experience, because we are more than just our brains. She had a felt experience that this might work for her. So these are two ways you can prototype your way forward. The last idea: you want to make a good decision well. So many people make choices and they're not happy with their choices because they don't really know how do they know what they know, right? It's a hard thing, particularly in our days when we have so many choices. So we have a process. Again it comes from the positive psychology guys. Gather and create options. Once you get good at design you're really good at coming up with options. You've got narrow those down to a working list that you can work with. Then, you make the choice to make a good choice, and then of course you agonize that you did the wrong thing. (Laughter) All my students have what is called FOMO, fear missing out, "What if I didn't pick the right thing." Someone came into my office and said, "I'll declare three majors and two minors" and I said, "Do you plan on being here for a few years? It's not going to happen, right?" So we don't say that; we say you want to let go and move on, and all these have some psychological basis in them. Let me tell you about it. Once you get good at gathering and creating ideas, you also want to make sure you leave room for the lucky ideas, the serendipitous ideas. This is a guy named Tony Hsieh. He was the CEO at Zappos, he sold it to Amazon. But before you became an employee at Zappos you had to take a test, and the test was, "Are you lucky?" One, two or three: "I'm not very lucky, and I'm not sure why." Seven, eight, nine, ten, "I'm very lucky, great things happen to me all the time, I'm not sure why." He wouldn't hire anybody who was not lucky. (Laughter) I think it's probably illegal, but it was based on - (Laughter) but it was based on a piece of research where psychologists did the same thing, "Rate yourself from lucky to unlucky." And then they had people read the front section of the New York Times, 30 pages, lots of articles. And the graduate students said, "Please count the number of -" either headlines or photographs, depending on the test. "And when you get the whole thing read and you count the number of photographs, just tell the person at the end." And if you got the right number, you'd get $100. Of course you all know when a graduate student tells you what the experiment is that's not the experiment. So, inside this thing that looked like the New York Times, 30 pages, front page, inside all the stories were little pieces of text that said, "If you read this, the experiment's over. Collect an extra $ 150." People who rated themselves as unlucky by and large got the right answer, 36 headlines, whatever it was, got the $ 100. People who rated themselves as lucky - seven, eight, nine or ten - 80% of the time noticed the text and got the extra $150. It's not about being lucky. It's about paying attention to what you're doing and keeping your peripheral vision open because it's in your peripheral vision that those interesting opportunities show up, right, that you were not expecting. So you want to get good at being lucky. Narrowing down. This is quite simple. If you have too many choices, you go into what psychologists call choice overload, and then you have essentially no choices. Here's the experiment. This was done at Stanford. You walk into a grocery store and there's a nice lady. She's got a table and on the table, she has six jams, and you come over try the jams to have a sample, buy some jam. Six jams; about 30 people who would go by pick a jam, or stop and test something, and about a third of those actually buy a jam. That's the baseline. Next week, you walk in, 24 jams: jalapeño, strawberry, banana, whatever; all sorts of jams. Well, guess what happens? Twice as many people stop, look at all these jams, it's so interesting. Three percent of the people buy them. (Laughter) When you have too many choices, you have no choice. What do you do when you have too many choices? Just cross off a bunch of choices. Psychologists tells us we can't handle more than five to seven. I'd say it's five. If you've got a bunch of choices, cross them all off, just pick the five and then make your decision there. "Oh my God! What if I pick the wrong ones? What if I cross off the wrong ones?" Right? Well, you won't, because it's the pizza or Chinese food thing. You're at the office and everybody says, "Let's go out to lunch today." "Sounds great. What do you want to do? Pizza or Chinese food?" "I don't care." In the elevator on their way down, someone says, "Let's get Chinese food." Then you go, "No, I want pizza." (Laughter) You won't decide how you feel about the decision till the decision's made. That's a piece of research that's been done again and again and again. So just cross them off. If you cross off the wrong one, you'll have a feeling somewhere in your stomach that you did the wrong thing. Choosing - this is about that feeling in your stomach. You cannot choose well if you choose only from your rational mind. This is Dan Goleman, who wrote the book on emotional intelligence. He does a lot of research on this, a lot of brain science. There's a part of your brain, way down in the base brain, the basal ganglia, that summarizes emotional decisions for you. I did something, got good emotional response from that: good, check. I did something and had a little bad emotional response to that. It summarizes all of the emotions that you have felt and how your decisions were valenced positive or negative an emotion. The problem with that part of your brain is that it's so early in the brain it doesn't talk to the part of your brain that talks. There's no connection to the prefrontal cortex or anything else. It's only connected to your GI tract and your limbic system. So, it gives you information through felt sensations, a "gut feeling." Without that, you can't make good decisions. And then the letting go and moving on. This was the hardest part for me, but this is also the work of Dan Gilbert, who is a distinguished scientist at Harvard, despite the fact that he's doing insurance commercials now. And he's been studying decision-making and how do you make yourself happy. So, you walk in another psychology experiment. The postdoc has got five Monet prints, five pictures from Monet, and you rank them from best to least, "I like this one the most, I like this one the least," number one and number five. "Thank you very much, the experiment's over. Oh, by the way, as you're walking out, you know, I kind of screwed up and I bought too many of number two and three. So if you want to take one home you can just have it. Two conditions: in one case, take it home and have it, but don't bring it back because I'm kind of embarrassed and - Just keep it, you can't exchange it. Second condition: I've got lots of these. If you don't like the one you picked, you can swap it back and pick another one." And of course everybody picks number two. It's a little better than number three. We bring people back in a week later and say, "Re-rank the stimuli. Which one do you like now?" The people who were allowed to change their mind don't like their painting, they don't like the print, they don't like the other one anymore, they don't like any of them anymore. In fact, they don't like the whole process and they have destroyed their opportunity to be happy. (Laughter) The people who were told, "You pick it, it's yours, you can't return it" love their print, they typically rank it as number one and think the rest of them suck. (Laughter) If you make decisions reversible, your chance of being happy goes down like 60 or 70 percent. So, let go and move on, make the decision reversible. And by the way, as a designer, that's no problem, because you're really good at generating options, you're great at ideation, you're really good at prototyping to get data in the world to see of that world will be the world you want to live in, so you have no fear of missing out. It's just a process, a mindful process: collect, reduce, decide, move on. That's how you make yourself happy. So, the five ideas: Connecting the dots to find meaning through work and life views. Stay away from gravity problems because I can't fix those and neither can you; reframe those to something that is workable. Do three plans, never one, always do three of everything, three ideations for any of the problems you're working on to make sure that you've covered not just the ideas that you had when you started, but all the other ideas that are possible. Prototype everything in your life before you jump in and try it. And choose well; there's no point in making a good choice poorly. Choose well and you will find that things in your life are much easier. And you can do this, we know you can, because thousands of students have done it. Two PhD studies have been done in the class that demonstrated higher self-efficacy, lower dysfunctional beliefs. It's a fascinating process to watch people who don't think of themselves as creative go through this class and walk out saying, "You know what? I'm a pretty creative person!" what David Kelly calls "creative confidence." So, we know you can do it, thank you very much. It's simple: get curious, talk to people and try stuff, and you will design a well-lived and joyful life. Thank you. (Applause) (Cheers)

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

ngrams of length 2

collocation	frequency
design thinking	6
gravity problems	4
life design	2
office hours	2
positive psychology	2
work view	2
idea number	2
gravity problem	2
thought experiment	2
peripheral vision	2
emotional response	2

Important Words

accept
accepted
action
add
adolescence
agonize
ai
allowed
amazing
amazon
answer
answers
anymore
applause
articles
assumptions
attention
awesome
bad
ballerina
banana
bar
bartender
basal
base
based
baseline
basis
beliefs
belize
berkeley
betters
biased
big
bill
body
book
boss
bought
brain
brains
brainstorm
brainstorming
bring
bubble
bucket
buddy
build
bunch
business
buy
call
called
calls
care
career
careers
careful
case
center
ceo
chance
change
chart
check
cheers
chinese
choice
choices
choose
choosing
circumstance
cirque
class
classes
clown
coffee
coherent
collaboration
colleagues
collect
college
coming
commercials
community
company
completely
confidence
connect
connected
connecting
connection
contact
converge
conversation
conversations
cortex
count
covered
cpa
create
creating
creative
cross
culture
cup
curiosity
curious
damon
dan
data
dave
david
day
days
decide
decision
decisions
declare
demonstrated
depending
design
designer
designers
destroyed
distinguished
distributed
doable
doctor
door
dots
drives
du
dynamic
dysfunctional
early
easier
education
elevator
embarrassed
emotion
emotional
emotions
empathy
employee
encore
enemy
engineering
essentially
evans
exchange
excuse
executing
executive
exist
expecting
experience
experiment
expose
extra
fabulously
face
fact
faith
family
famous
fantastic
fascinating
fear
feel
feeling
felt
figure
figured
find
fix
fluidly
folks
fomo
food
forgot
forming
founder
friend
front
future
galapagos
ganglia
gather
gathering
generating
generative
gi
gibson
gilbert
give
goleman
good
gosh
graduate
gravity
great
grocery
grow
growing
guess
guy
guys
hall
hand
handle
happen
happening
happy
hard
harder
hardest
harvard
hate
headlines
hear
heard
helped
helpful
helps
higher
hire
holds
home
hope
hours
hsieh
hustle
ibiza
ice
idea
ideas
ideate
ideating
ideation
ideations
identifiable
identify
illegal
imagine
imagined
implies
increase
information
innovation
instances
insurance
intelligence
interested
interesting
involved
jalapeño
jam
jams
job
joyful
jump
keeping
kelly
kids
kind
kinds
knew
lab
label
lady
language
large
late
laugh
laughter
lead
lean
leave
lecture
left
letting
life
limbic
line
linear
list
literature
live
lives
living
long
looked
lose
lot
lots
love
lucky
lunch
ma
magical
majors
making
married
meaning
meaningful
means
meet
met
method
methodology
millennial
millennials
mind
mindful
mindset
mindsets
missing
model
monet
money
motion
move
moving
multiple
multiples
multiverse
multiverses
named
narrative
narrow
narrowing
negative
nice
notice
noticed
notion
number
odyssey
office
open
opportunities
opportunity
options
organizing
overload
page
pages
painting
parallel
paris
part
partner
passion
passions
paying
people
percent
peripheral
pernicious
person
phd
photographs
physicists
pick
picked
picks
picture
pictures
piece
pieces
pivot
pizza
plan
plans
play
point
poorly
positive
postdoc
potential
prefrontal
president
pretty
principle
print
prints
problem
problems
process
products
prototype
prototypes
prototyping
psychological
psychologists
psychology
purposeful
put
question
quit
radical
raise
range
rank
rarely
rated
rational
rationalists
read
real
realists
reality
realize
reason
redefine
reduce
reframe
reframed
reframes
registered
relationship
remember
research
response
rest
result
return
reversible
rings
robots
room
rubric
sample
sat
school
science
scientist
screwed
search
section
seminar
sensations
serendipitous
service
services
set
settling
short
show
side
signed
simple
simply
simultaneously
single
singular
skeptical
slac
sneak
sold
soleil
solution
solutions
solve
sort
sorts
space
speakers
stanford
start
started
starting
stay
staying
stimuli
stomach
stop
store
stories
story
strawberry
stuck
student
students
studied
studies
study
studying
stuff
success
successful
suck
suddenly
summarizes
supposed
survive
swap
system
table
talk
talked
talking
talks
taught
teach
teaching
teams
tech
technique
tedx
tells
ten
tendency
terrible
test
text
theory
thinking
thought
thousands
threes
throw
time
times
today
told
tony
tools
tract
transformational
true
turned
turns
typically
unattainable
unevenly
unfolds
universes
university
unlucky
unstuck
valenced
version
versions
view
views
vision
walk
walked
walking
wanted
watch
water
ways
wealthy
week
wider
william
woman
wonderful
words
work
workable
working
works
world
worry
worse
writer
written
wrong
wrote
yeah
years
york
zappos