How to Design for Behavior Change

The grid is a nice definition, but the triggers are the secret weapon… and it seems like they’re not available. There’s a form where you can request the “premium resource guide” “when it becomes available.”

From the 2009 paper I see only three trigger options: “do X whenever you see a Y”, “do Y for 30 minutes every day at time T,” and “whenever you do X, do Y, where Y may be just “more of X than normal.”

Triggers have worked in my life on two occasions: “Never go to bed without flossing your teeth” and “whenever the drainer is full, empty it; whenever it is empty, do the dishes.” It seems like a sound approach though.

Also look at the books Sway and (especially) Nudge. Nudge has a blog that covers current nudges.

It seems another benefit here is bundling, or teaming up with others that have varied factors. So if the top of my hexagon has “Time”, but the bottom has “Money”, I can then look to partner up with someone who has a lot of money but no time, and come up with a ‘simple’ solution that would benefit both parties more than each party would have benefited individually.

@Noumenon - great point. My understanding is that the triggers are still in development, and BJ does seem willing to talk to anyone who is interested.

@Kare - thanks for the suggestions!

@Brent - interesting. So adding a layer of complexity (the right person) might actually make things simpler.

@Alexandra - Precisely. This description reminds me of Matt Ridley’s TEDtalk “when ideas have sex”: No one person knows how to build the technologies we use, from start to finish. We depend on many other people to produce bits of the technology that many other people know how to put together - making the ultimate task of building technology much simpler.

It seems reasonable to swap ‘build technology’ for ‘change behavior’ and argue you might similarly get further with a social-network.

Interesting stuff guys.

I agree with Dr. Fogg especially about the influence of Context. It would be interesting to learn what the impact of each different factor is on simplicity (for instance time = 15% and money = 5% of influence)…

Keep it up!

BrandNewBart

@Alexandra re: brent’s post. I think you’re right, I think it(adding layer of complexity) is called ‘shooting higher’ or wanting more :)

The more People try to make life efficient outside of the Brain the less effective the Brain is trained to be. Triggers is a BIG BIG WORD.

People who lose the ability… No. People train themselves to have the loss of Internal Triggers. Accomplishing very easy tasks becomes seen as milestones. A Person who writes themselves a note at night to remember some thing seems normal because society has accepted the abnormality.

At an early age >When< Children are taught to follow orders in a simplified way and the expectations are rewarded Children as Clever seek Leverage. Taking out the Trash for instance is easier just done than asking most Children as that is a REALLY TOUGH TASK! >When< the Child never get’s the Idea of the Trash INTO the Mind as expected to be done from within without the exterior reward. Like teaching a Dog to do Tricks.

Through the >When< introduction from induction at a young age the Child must go from led to the >When< the Child self leads to expect him/her self to take out the trash as OWNER of that responsibility.

People become from Children. Trained. Expecting the introduction of reward and induction to continue throughout life. People then substitute Peers in Place of Parents and the Cheering continues. Getting the Brain to follow through induction or outside stimuli is learned eagerly and is not seen as self destructive because the rewards from others seem to justify a job well done. This Blinds a Person from seeing the Cause/Effect.

Imagine a Child who works on a Farm and must Milk the Cow, Feed the Pigs, Pick up the eggs, and so on before getting to eat what was worked for without being told anything. They wake up the Rooster before the crack of Dawn.

The Physical Brain. Separate from the Mind which is either in control of the Brain or the Mind is Off. The Physical Brain processes information beyond Terra-Bytes per second.

If a Person sees out of their eyes and thinks they have one Brain they have Lost the Use of the Mind which is Two Brains. A Right. A Left. and the Projected Image from BOTH as separate. Men have fewer Hard-Wire connections than Women who are born with five times as many. The Brain with the ability to Project into Image goes Three Dimensional. A Right Brain, a Left Brain AND Central Processing for each part of the body with full sub-conscious back-ups.

People have the ability to re-teach the Brain to turn on the Mind. This has nothing to do with stored information or recollection which is seen as intelligence. Reaction is Separate from Thinking. Thinking is Separate from Image. If a Person has a difficult time looking inward into the Mind and thinking while imaging then the Mind is Off. A Shift is needed.

This has nothing to do with being stupid, dumb, less, etc… Stress is self-inflicted. Anxiety is Preplanned and expected. Triggers set off other triggers and what seems difficult to control is a Person who has decided for an easy route with benefits to replace the responsibility of self control.

Cars have four speeds(generally speaking), Bicycle’s ten speeds. The Brain has no finite number to quantitate. SHIFT. Metanoia.

Once the Mind becomes able to Image then the internal 3D becomes Free-Flow. Time-Less. Transcending Dimension. Inward Projection Leads further… trust me I see.

You might also be interested in Dan Lockton’s work on Design with Intent, which is about product and system design to change behaviours. It is worth noting that motivation can be hard to get - for instance, motivating people to use less electricity is hard if cost is not an issue.

http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/

You can buy or download free teh toolkit for design with intent.