I had made a comment about how metrics-driven product development ends up subtracting value for users in the absence of foundational principles, using the example of the deterioration of the Fitbit experience.
There's also an argument here for using a product to ensure you're making the best version possible of that product. This can lead to differentiation too.
I'm a big believer in skin-in-the-game. In this case, speaking as a fellow pump-wearing diabetic and son of a physician, the recommendation that FDA administrators or "auditors" wear pumps and glucose monitors to solve the problem is far from feasible. For one thing, there's the problem of Decision By Committee - theres's no one (or small number) of people that make these kinds of FDA policies. The second fact that makes it an infeasible solution is that the FDA has little interest in or motivation for making devices user-friendly. Their mandate is to ensure product _safety_ and efficacy. Yes, one could argue that safety and efficacy can be impacted by usability, but that's not universally true; the rules and guidelines they produce have to account for the effect on _every_ potential patient, not just those of us who are comfortable with technology. Mr. Polyakov's annoyance (or even mine) is someone else's life-saving reminder.
By the way, from his description I'm pretty sure I use the same brand of insulin pump as Mr. Polyakov, and I know that many of the employees of that company are indeed patients themselves. So they do have skin in the game, although exactly how much is impossible to say.
I've got an old family friend that was a helicopter mechanic, and they still take the first flight whenever they do any work or maintenance on a helicopter (the things have a habit of falling out of the sky when things go wrong).
Another friend that also works on helicopters was once told to rewire two entire helicopters in a weekend which would normally take 2 weeks. He finally told the boss who was pressuring him to do this "I will do it if you will take the first flight." The boss declined and let him take the time that it needed to be done right.
I also think of this when I think about whether college/ university should be free. I am torn - education is great, access shouldn't be based on your family's financial status. However, if it is free, you have no skin in the game as you say, and don't try as hard. Doesn't mean the same to you.
This thinkie is great! The story is such a great example. I have use the Dexcom glucose monitor for glucose rather than diabetes management. I had the same experience as Alex and it made me upset. It annoyed me that the alarms would go off at the movie theater, when trying to sleep, etc. The most annoying one was that I needed to replace the sensor, I use it a sensor once every 2 or 3 months, but there was no way to disable the alarm, so I ended up uninstalling it.
If the VP of your smart watch division won’t wear your watch every day… 😬
There's also an argument here for using a product to ensure you're making the best version possible of that product. This can lead to differentiation too.
Also known as Eating Your Own Dogfood.
I'm a big believer in skin-in-the-game. In this case, speaking as a fellow pump-wearing diabetic and son of a physician, the recommendation that FDA administrators or "auditors" wear pumps and glucose monitors to solve the problem is far from feasible. For one thing, there's the problem of Decision By Committee - theres's no one (or small number) of people that make these kinds of FDA policies. The second fact that makes it an infeasible solution is that the FDA has little interest in or motivation for making devices user-friendly. Their mandate is to ensure product _safety_ and efficacy. Yes, one could argue that safety and efficacy can be impacted by usability, but that's not universally true; the rules and guidelines they produce have to account for the effect on _every_ potential patient, not just those of us who are comfortable with technology. Mr. Polyakov's annoyance (or even mine) is someone else's life-saving reminder.
By the way, from his description I'm pretty sure I use the same brand of insulin pump as Mr. Polyakov, and I know that many of the employees of that company are indeed patients themselves. So they do have skin in the game, although exactly how much is impossible to say.
Good example of generate *then* evaluate, the Thinkie Motto.
Indeed.
I've got an old family friend that was a helicopter mechanic, and they still take the first flight whenever they do any work or maintenance on a helicopter (the things have a habit of falling out of the sky when things go wrong).
Another friend that also works on helicopters was once told to rewire two entire helicopters in a weekend which would normally take 2 weeks. He finally told the boss who was pressuring him to do this "I will do it if you will take the first flight." The boss declined and let him take the time that it needed to be done right.
I also think of this when I think about whether college/ university should be free. I am torn - education is great, access shouldn't be based on your family's financial status. However, if it is free, you have no skin in the game as you say, and don't try as hard. Doesn't mean the same to you.
This thinkie is great! The story is such a great example. I have use the Dexcom glucose monitor for glucose rather than diabetes management. I had the same experience as Alex and it made me upset. It annoyed me that the alarms would go off at the movie theater, when trying to sleep, etc. The most annoying one was that I needed to replace the sensor, I use it a sensor once every 2 or 3 months, but there was no way to disable the alarm, so I ended up uninstalling it.
The example + the reflection is valuable.