John Thackara

This book confronts a key question of these new times: How might we design a world in which we rely less on “tech” - and more on people?

“In the bubble” is a phrase used by air traffic controllers to describe their state of mind, among their glowing screens and flows of information, when they are in the flow and in control.

Lucky them. Most of us feel far from in control. We’re filling up the world with amazing devices and systems—on top of the natural and human ones that were already here—only to discover that these complex systems seem to be out of control: too complex to understand, let alone to shape, or redirect

On the contrary: the central idea of the book is that people are better at most things than technology is.

But all this tech is not about to go away. Our economy is hooked on tech and complex systems.

It’s as if we had an addiction problem, only we’re addicted to tech rather than booze or skag.

But we’ve lost sight of an important question: what is this stuff for? What value does it add to our lives? But the time to ask what it’s for is before we deploy it - not after.

I do not suggest that we have fallen out of love with technology, more that we are regaining appreciation and respect for what people can do that tech can’t. We cannot stop tech, and there’s no reason why we should. It’s useful. But we can change the innovation agenda and insist that people come before tech.

My premise is simply stated: If we can design our way into difficulty, we can design our way out. The book is full of service ideas in which people carry out daily activities in new ways.

One is called “Fluid Time”. It’s a system, which alerts you when someone like a doctor is ready to see you – so you don’t have to hang around a waiting room for hours.

Another story is about the “Slow Food Movement” in Europe. They’re using mobile phones to connect consumers to small-scale producers.

I also mention several health-related self-help websites, which reduce the demand patients make on over-loaded health systems.

The most revolutionary idea is probably to do with “complementary currencies”, barter, and something I call “Open Money”. Millions of people are migrating to a parallel economy where jobs and credit cards are rare.

In The Bubble is pro-tech - but anti tech-push. Many of the services it describes involve technology - ranging from body implants, to wide-bodied jets. But gadgets play a supporting role in the people-centered world the book describes.

The most important potential impact of wireless communications, for example, will be on the resource ecologies of cities. Connecting people, resources, and places to each other in new combinations, on a real-time basis, delivers demand-responsive services that, when combined with location awareness and dynamic resource allocation, have the potential to reduce drastically the amount of hardware—from gadgets to buildings—that we need to function effectively.

It’s for people who are concerned about the excessive influence of technology on our daily lives – and who want to do something about it.

My key point is that ethics and responsibility can inform design decisions without impeding social and technical innovation.

Q: I just glanced at the Index, John. I see that “National Association of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners” follow “National Aeronautics and Space Administration”.

Most things around us are connected in some way, even if those connections are not at first apparent.

What made me most proud about the Index is that “Context” has 29 entries whereas “Control” has just 4.

Q: Some of the assertions you make in the book don’t seem to be backed up by scientific evidence – or any evidence at all.

Are you by any chance referring to “Thackara's Law”? It’s true, I just made it up. My law states: "If you put smart technology into a pointless product, the result will be a stupid product".

So I did no research or experiments. But tell me, do you think my law is untrue?

The same goes for Thackara's Second Law, which I also made up. (It’s also called the "Law Of Diminishing Amazement”.) It says: “the more gadgets you cram into a simple product, the harder it will be to impress people, let alone to get them to pay a heap of money for it”.

Q: You criticise American consumers for their wasteful ways. Is Europe so much better?

Actually I don’t criticise people, and I try never to call human beings ‘consumers’. What I do criticise are systems we rely on in our daily lives.

As for Europe, I think we probably do try harder not to be wasteful, but we’re not as good at as we think we are. Our high-speed train, the TGV, is supposed to be the epitome of a light, modern, ecologically positive way to move. But it’s not. A total of 48 kilogrammes (about 100 pounds) of solid primary resources are needed for one passenger to travel 100 km by Germany's high-speed train, ICE.

Q: I’m surprised to see so much of your book is about health and care. Are these really design issues?

The biggest users of today’s health systems are people with chronic conditions – those that are long-term, but not in need of instant attention. And yet health systems in developed countries are configured to focus on acute illnesses – those with a rapid onset that follow a short but severe course. That’s a design problem.

Also, ‘health’ is something dealt with mainly outside these vast medical systems. Between eighty and ninety percent of health incidents are dealt with at home – from giving aspirin to a child, to the long-term care of an elderly or sick relative.

The average person with diabetes spends about three hours a year with doctors, checking prescriptions and general health. That same person spends thousands of hours a year self-managing their condition. (Say Hilary Cottam and Charles Leadbeater in their book Health: Co-creating Services).

Most of us pass many hours a week waiting for things to happen: waiting to see the doctor, waiting for a bus to arrive, or waiting for a package to be delivered. Waiting occurs when our personal time schedules do not coincide with the schedules of the people and services with whom and with which we interact.

In 1997, doctors in the US spent an average of eight minutes talking to patients - less than half the time they spent a decade earlier. But the most important factor for citizens is time given to discuss health/medical problems face-to-face with health care professionals.

Because both people and services are in constant flux, precise appointment times are not the most useful means of coordination. The unpredictable nature of events requires a more flexible system of time than the published schedule.

Fluid Time, invented by Michael Kieslinger, investigates a new way of interacting with time. Instead of arranging appointments in reference to the clock, Fluid Time users flexibly arrange and adjust their appointments by coordinating their own schedules with the availability of the services they are seeking.

By connecting people to critical time-based information, the service supports flexible time planning according to personal needs. By accessing data in real time, the system delivers accurate information about when and where a desired service might be available.

The design challenge is not to slow everything down, but to enable situations that support an infinite variety of fast and slow moves—at a rhythm dictated by us, not by the system.

Slowness does not have to be a drag on innovation. Products and services that incorporate selective slowness, and that are consistent with economic growth and continued technical innovation are already being developed.

Mobility is the classic “it’s out of control. We can’t do anything about it” story of our times.

Our core dilemma is that although mobility will not stop growing of its own accord, the perpetual expansion of mobility is unsustainable.

This is not just the opinion of green activists. A recent report by twelve global automotive and energy companies concluded that if today’s mobility trends continue, the social, economic, and environmental costs worldwide will be unacceptably high.[i]

The Internet has increased transport intensity in the economy as a whole more than it has displaced individual acts of movement. It continues to stimulate more mobility than it replaces in much the same way that roads built to relieve congestion often end up increasing traffic.

Rhetorics of a “weightless” economy, the “death of distance,” and the “displacement of matter by mind” sound ridiculous, in retrospect.

The good news is that people and information want to be closer. When planning where to put capacity, the law of locality states that network traffic is at least 80 percent local, 95 percent continental, and only 5 percent intercontinental guide network designers.

This is not the “death of distance” that the companies who laid the fiber had in mind.

For me, the most important potential impact of wireless communication networks—or “mediascapes” as Hewlett-Packard dubs them—will be on the resource ecologies of cities.

Combinations of demand-responsive services, location awareness, and what network designers call “dynamic resource allocation”, have the potential to reduce drastically the amount of hardware—from gadgets to buildings—that we need to function effectively in a city.

Most of us are potentially both users and suppliers of resources. With networked communications we can access and use everything from a car, to a portable drill, only when we need it. (The average power drill is used for ten minutes in its entire life).

Put it in new non-fiction. It’s for people who bought:

Q: I’ve read most of those books already. Why do I need to read your book?

In The Bubble uses the concept of an innovation dilemma to explain why technology-centred innovation is failing. Also, my book is inspired by real-world projects and experiences – in Europe, the US, India, and other cultures.

My book explains what “the shift from products, to services” means in practice – and how people can influence that shift.

[i]. The report was produced by twelve global automotive and energy companies that worked together under the sponsorship of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. They set out to assess the sustainability of their products and to envision the future of mobility, with special focus on road transport. The report defines sustainable mobility as “the ability to meet the needs of society to move freely, gain access, communicate, trade and establish relationships without sacrificing other essential human or ecological values today or in the future.” World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), ed., Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability (Geneva: WBCSD, 2004), XXX.<<AU: Provide title of chapter and author, as well as page number for quote>>

In The Bubble:
Designing In A Complex World

Interview with John Thackara by

Put it in new non-fiction. It’s for people who bought:

In The Bubble: Designing In A Complex World

Interview with John Thackara by

Put it in new non-fiction. It’s for people who bought:

In The Bubble:
Designing In A Complex World