Evolutionary Thinking and IR Design

Just the other day I observed that Google, by thinking only evolutionarily and being unable to make leap-based changes, long ago fell into a local maximum trap.  The following blogpost from a designer who is leaving Google appears to reinforce this conjecture:

When a company is filled with engineers, it turns to engineering to solve problems. Reduce each decision to a simple logic problem. Remove all subjectivity and just look at the data. Data in your favor? Ok, launch it. Data shows negative effects? Back to the drawing board. And that data eventually becomes a crutch for every decision, paralyzing the company and preventing it from making any daring design decisions.  Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. I had a recent debate over whether a border should be 3, 4 or 5 pixels wide, and was asked to prove my case. I can’t operate in an environment like that. I’ve grown tired of debating such miniscule design decisions. There are more exciting design problems in this world to tackle.

The writer goes on to say that evolutionary thinking, by itself (discovering the gradient by measuring user interaction) is not a bad thing.  It is only when an over-reliance of gradient dominates that evolutionary thinking prevents us from making larger leaps:

I can’t fault Google for this reliance on data. And I can’t exactly point to financial failure or a shrinking number of users to prove it has done anything wrong. Billions of shareholder dollars are at stake. The company has millions of users around the world to please. That’s no easy task. Google has momentum, and its leadership found a path that works very well. When I joined, I thought there was potential to help the company change course in its design direction. But I learned that Google had set its course long before I arrived. Google was a massive aircraft carrier, and I was just a small dinghy trying to push it a few degrees North.

Evolutionary thinking, as I argued the other day, conflicts with long term-thinking.

This entry was posted in Information Retrieval Foundations. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *