We caught up with Despina at her home in New York City as she prepared for her work at NYU.

‍

Loft: Thanks for speaking with us on this sunny Friday! In recent years, our design thought leadership has become deeply intertwined with policy, research, and strategy. As we've delved deeper into these areas, it has become clear that they are interconnected and essential to our holistic approach.

‍
Despina Papadopoulos: There are many articles suggesting that the era of brainstorming with just a few Post-it notes is over. Today, we need a more holistic and systemic approach to address any issue, whether it's designing a pen or implementing organizational change. Honestly, I've always had reservations about the term "design thinking" because, in my view, good thinking is just that—good thinking. I don't see what the specific designation "design thinking" adds; in fact, I believe it might even detract from the broader, more effective concept of systemic thinking, which I would prefer if I had to choose between the two.

‍

Loft: Systemic thinking highlights the fact that no design solution can exist in a vacuum. Technological, societal, and ethical considerations are always intertwined with emerging technologies. To suggest that emerging tech can stand alone is as misguided as claiming that design can function independently. This interconnectedness necessitates a more integrated approach to problem-solving.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: Exactly, and not to mention the ecological and sustainability issues, as well as the cultural considerations.

‍

Loft: How to design and why you should design are deeply intertwined. Focusing solely on one or the other will not lead you to the end goal. To achieve success, you need to consider both aspects.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: It's surprising that despite influential thinkers like Victor Papanek and Russell Ackoff, or Donella Meadows emphasizing the importance of holistic thinking, considering both the how and the why, and the potential for unintended consequences, we continue to repeat the same mistakes. However, there is a growing recognition and pushback from both consumers and leadership for a more thoughtful and integrated approach. Additionally, the previous boom in venture capital investment often overlooked the reasons and methods behind ventures. Fortunately, this trend has abated, which I believe is a positive development.

‍

Loft: Organizations excel at syndicating a business idea and driving operational efficiencies, but they often struggle to embrace new ideas and integrate them effectively. Consider the S&P 500: how many companies present 30 years ago still remain on the list today? Not many. This reflects a self-destructive cycle where companies optimize efficiencies to the point of obsolescence. Very few successfully transition from physical to digital, digital to data, or from data to AI. Currently, AI-focused companies are gaining significant traction, posing a challenge to traditional IT companies. These companies are scrambling to catch up, but it remains to be seen if they will adapt successfully to the new business models emerging in this AI-driven era. Given your experience with large organizations on significant initiatives, I'd love to hear your insights on best practices for fostering innovation and evolving technology within companies that already have established corporate strategies. How do you expand offerings, improve customer experiences, and encourage strategic growth and investment in these environments, especially when there are many entrenched systems already in place?

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: There are a few key components to successful project execution. First, it's crucial to have a champion in a position of power. Without buy-in from the higher-ups, even the best ideas can falter, making it difficult to push initiatives forward. Therefore, having a powerful advocate is essential. Secondly, engaging all stakeholders from the start is vital. In my role, I often act as both a psychoanalyst and a private investigator, holding one-on-one meetings with key figures such as the heads of IT, HR, and marketing. It's common to involve marketing too late in the process, which can be detrimental. Early and inclusive engagement helps foster understanding and sets the stage for successful initiative rollout. I also organize workshops to act as a translator, showing the interdependencies between departments. This is crucial even in technical projects, where misunderstanding each other's roles and the complexity of tasks can lead to inefficiencies. Thirdly, I advocate for rolling out solutions incrementally using a modular approach. Starting with small-scale proofs of concept allows for manageable testing and adjustments, which is far more effective than launching full-scale implementations right away. Lastly, creating micro prototypes is extremely beneficial. This approach not only helps team members understand what they are working on and see incremental changes but also enhances their understanding of how their work interconnects with others, facilitating a smoother final rollout.

‍

First, it's crucial to have a champion in a position of power. Without buy-in from the higher-ups, even the best ideas can falter, making it difficult to push initiatives forward.

‍

Loft:  It makes total sense. You mentioned the importance of having a champion in power, which is crucial. From my experience, there are two approaches, each with its own drawbacks. In the top-down approach, you might be brought in by a CEO with a clear mandate, gathering the necessary team to execute that mandate. However, the challenge arises if you don't invest enough in socializing the initiative within the organization. You can easily be sidelined, and the initiative can falter if the CEO, the project's champion, loses influence or leaves. This creates a risky situation because the project's momentum can quickly shift elsewhere, leaving you in a precarious position. Therefore, it's critical to focus on effectively socializing the initiative across all levels of the organization. At the same time, I've found that a bottom-up approach can also be highly effective. While there are challenges with a product manager initiating a project, creating a galvanized, enthusiastic environment like a town hall that presents ideas to upper management can be very powerful. This approach ensures you already have buy-in at various levels, and you simply need the green light, along with the necessary resources and funding from leadership, to execute the vision.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: Absolutely, creating a shared understanding and getting people to buy into the vision early on is crucial, as it helps carry the project forward even during challenging times. That's precisely why I always conduct one-on-one meetings. Sometimes, however, this approach can backfire. People may feel resentful, thinking that the leadership, though they have set directions, doesn't understand the day-to-day realities or the specific challenges faced by different departments. It's not just about big visions; understanding the intricacies of each domain is essential. Ensuring that everyone not only feels heard but is genuinely understood is a significant component of any project's success. That’s why in-depth behavioral and “cultural” background research is so important.

‍

Loft:  I'm intrigued by your unique blend of practical applications with a future-focused vision. You've transitioned from working with sensory and physical realms into digital data and data ethics, and now you're teaching and consulting for large companies. Given your background, I'd love to hear how you envision the evolution of immersive sensory experiences over the next five to ten years, especially with advancements in AI and other technologies. Additionally, how do you see these experiences becoming scalable businesses? While sensory, wearable, and immersive technologies have been around for some time, they haven't gained significant traction yet. I'd appreciate your insights on this.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: It's fascinating because I recently had a long discussion about the potential in this space. Currently, there's an increasing comfort with digital realms and AI agents, like large language models, but there's also a noted crisis of disembodiment. People are seeking ways to shift from a dopamine-driven engagement and towards more embodied and mindful experiences.  Of course there is also the potential to abuse this desire for “connection” and replace the dopamine effect with the oxytocin effect which can also be problematic. But finding ways to get people to be more connected to themeselvesis more ethically aligned and sustainable. One promising area where wearables might see a revival is in conjunction with AI. Prominent figures like Yann LeCun, a professor  at NYU’s Courant Institute and Chief AI Scientist at Meta advocate for spatial AI, emphasizing that understanding physical spaces could enhance AI's capabilities. Similarly, Fei Fei Li's startup, Word Labs, focuses on spatial understanding through 3D imaging, indicating a trend towards more sophisticated, multi-dimensional AI models. The integration of physical sensors in devices like wearables can collect real-world data, enriching AI models beyond the current capabilities of smartphones and smartwatches. These devices could become probes in the real world, gathering complex data that feed into more advanced AI systems. For example, Nivea's project to develop a T-shirt that accurately measures sweat output in various conditions illustrates the practical value of such technology. This wearable not only gathers data for material scientists to improve antiperspirant formulas but also involves multiple departments like marketing, providing a competitive edge with tangible data to support product claims. This approach to wearables, not just as consumer products but as data collection tools, could revolutionize how we interact with and leverage technology in everyday life. However, the scalability of such technology is currently hindered by high production costs and the distinct manufacturing processes required for electronics and apparel. More widespread adoption of this technology could lead to invaluable insights across various industries.

‍

People are seeking ways to shift from a dopamine-driven engagement and towards more embodied and mindful experiences!

‍

Loft:  Especially regarding the challenge of scalability. Wearable sensory solutions have indeed found success in highly specialized, vertical applications. These devices transform what was previously only possible in controlled lab environments into something practical for everyday human use, making a significant impact in areas like first responder management where the stakes are high. In terms of broader, scalable solutions, the concept of "physical agents" you mentioned is compelling. As we discuss the emergence of digital agents and the evolution of smaller, more independent language models, the integration of these technologies into physical devices opens up new possibilities. These physical agents could redefine our interaction with technology by bringing sophisticated, context-aware capabilities to everyday environments, extending beyond traditional digital platforms.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: Absolutely, I was involved in a very successful project that was initially conceived as a research endeavor, not as a product. We developed a vibration device worn around the neck, beautifully integrated with woven fabric. The aesthetics of wearables are crucial to me because they contribute significantly to the emotional connection we establish with items we wear. Clunky, unattractive devices can detract from our psychological and emotional experiences. In this project, we explored various vibrational patterns, allowing users to design their own. The findings were astounding, leaving the collaborating psychologists and neuroscientists stunned—results that you couldn't simply explain or imagine beforehand. As research tools, wearables have immense potential. However, many university-created probes are often unappealing and cumbersome, making the wearer feel like a cyborg, which can significantly alter their emotional response. Understanding the emotional component is increasingly recognized as vital in how we interact with everyday objects and how these interactions, in turn, affect our experiences.

‍

Loft:  It's great to hear your interest in how ethics intersect with emerging technology. Given the significant influence of tech leaders like Zuckerberg and Musk, there's a crucial conversation to be had about where the ethical breakdowns occur and what can be done better. Given your background in philosophy and a focus on ethical use of technology, I'm curious to know what you think tech leaders are missing today. In your experience, what approaches to integrating ethics, design, and technology have been successful? Also, how can we develop methodologies that not only address these issues but are also viable for businesses? I'd really appreciate your insights on these topics.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: It's truly a billion-dollar question: how do we embed ethics deeply into the development of technologies rather than considering it as an afterthought? Historically, the tech industry's ethos of "move fast and break things" no longer suffices due to the direct impact these technologies have on people's lives and the environment, which are now well-documented. Microsoft stands out for its thoughtful research into the ethical implications of AI, including the effects of large language models on critical thinking. However, much of the industry is still guilty of "ethic washing," where superficial measures are promoted as ethical commitments. There is a growing recognition that ethical frameworks need to be an integral part of technological architecture. Initiatives like Anthropic’s “mapping the mind of large language models” are leading discussions on interpretability, focusing on understanding AI models' actions. But I believe we need to go even further. Imagine a scenario where a tech team consists not just of engineers and a token ethicist but includes a significant number of philosophers. These professionals would examine the epistemological and ontological foundations of AI development. What if our approach to building machine learning models was as rigorous as constructing a philosophical argument?

We need to revisit the interdisciplinary spirit of cybernetics, involving anthropologists, ethnographers, psychologists, and neuroscientists to build a comprehensive understanding from a philosophical perspective. This could lead to a deeper interpretation and consideration of the implications, akin to analyzing the works of Hegel or Kant. My colleagues and I are advocating for this more profound integration. We urge companies developing AI technologies to include thinkers who can deeply analyze and interpret the broader consequences of their work, ensuring that ethics are not an add-on but a core component of technology development.

‍

Loft:  This totally makes sense! While AI offers clear benefits, it often feels like we're using a hammer in search of a nail. The truly transformative applications will be those that integrate ethics directly into their business models, making it a core component of their offerings. Until then, many solutions will remain superficial and not fully relevant to our needs. The old adage of technology primarily offering efficiency is somewhat misleading—we're essentially doing the same things faster, but not necessarily better. Historically, while technology has advanced, it hasn't always aligned with the deepest human values. I believe that truly great societies are defined more by their philosophies than by their technologies.

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: I couldn't agree more,    Philip Agre, originally a computer scientist, transitioned into a media theorist after earning his PhD from MIT. In the 1990s, he famously stated, "Technology at present is covert philosophy. The point is to make it overtly philosophical." This powerful quote raises questions about the philosophical implications of our technology use. For example, while AI simplifies daily choices like what to eat for lunch, its pervasive application risks oversimplifying human experience, which can be both diminishing and empowering.

Currently, I'm involved in a project aimed at helping global artisans bring their products to market—a challenging area where many have failed despite significant funding. This project includes a mix of profit-driven and non-profit elements, supported by grants. A key challenge is enabling artisans, such as a woman in Kenya, to upload and describe their products compellingly. We've addressed this by creating a simple, culturally sensitive conversational AI using off-the-shelf tools. This AI assists artisans in generating appealing product descriptions that resonate with Western consumers, greatly enhancing their market presence. This success demonstrates the potential of technology to empower individuals by aligning with their needs and cultural contexts. How can we continue to develop such inclusive technologies that are truly beneficial?

‍

The potential of technology to empower individuals by aligning with their needs and cultural contexts. How can we continue to develop such inclusive technologies that are truly beneficial?

‍

Loft:  I truly believe that storytelling is the ultimate superpower in technology. I'm eager to hear your perspective on this, because stories, like that of the lady in Kenya, often resonate much deeper than any tech presentation. Do we need more storytellers as leaders in technology? And how can we move away from a purely tech-driven, and often toxic, worldview?

‍

Despina Papadopoulos: That's a wonderful question. Indeed, we need more storytellers and innovators who can identify real problems where technology can add value and delight to people's lives. How do we achieve this? It's unclear, but undoubtedly, the need for storytellers is critical, lest we lose our essence as narrative-driven beings. I often say that the existential threat of AI isn't that it will surpass our intelligence, but rather that we might become as shallow as it currently is. The real challenge is how to foster a collaborative and meaningful relationship with these systems while setting safeguards that align with ethical standards rather than just revenue goals. This is essential, even if it means challenging the status quo where engagement metrics override ethical considerations.

‍

Loft: Thank you for this fascinating conversation. Really important and necessary insights. We hope to continue this at some point in the future!