Reflection: Learning Launch

Challenge: As part of my work I run an annual recruiting campaign to  identify twenty top leaders in the energy and climate space under the age of  thirty five to join a prestigious program at my institution. The selection  process depends on an open application and a merit-based review process.  Naturally, the more high-quality applications I receive, the more competitive  the process is, and ultimately, my annual cohort of twenty is higher caliber.  Therefore, each year I strive to increase the total reach of the campaign as  well as the average quality of the candidates. These two constraints are the  primary design criteria of this challenge.    Traditionally, our recruitment campaign centers on distributing a document  we refer to as our ‘call-for-applications’ through direct email, personal  networks, and social media. While this document is full of useful  information, the document medium itself isn’t very dynamic or interesting.  Based on data from previous campaigns, I knew that while we were reaching  many millions of potential applicants through our existing distribution  channels, a very small percentage were actually clicking any of the links in  the document, or even spending more than a few seconds reading it. The low  conversation rate had been a source of frustration for a number of  recruitment cycles. My operating hypothesis was that the format of the  application call was partially responsible for this low conversion percentage  – more dynamic content that communicated the idea in a shorter time span  and generated greater curiosity and interest, potentially at the expense of  detailed information, would, I surmised, likely lead to a better click-through  rate. So, the challenge: redesign our recruitment materials in a format other  than our traditional ‘call-for-applications’ document.    Selection and the Tool: This redesign involved the use of a number of  different tools to better understand the user-experience involved in applying  for our program, including journey mapping and interviews of previous  applicants. However, for the purposes of this reflection, I will focus on the  learning launch tool, which was used to pilot the different new formats and  content pieces we developed for our campaign this year. The learning launch  tool is employed near the end of the design thinking process, after designers  have already explored and answered the questions what is and what if, and  are searching for answers to the questions what works and what wows? This  tool is deployed when designers have possible solution sets prepared and  ready to test in the market. Its hallmark, and where it differs from traditional

innovation processes, is its focus on placing small bets on a low-fidelity  prototypes with the potential to show success, but, perhaps most importantly,  the ability to fail at a very low cost. Through low-cost failures in the learning  launch stage, the designer can test his assumptions quickly iterate and  experiment with multiple solutions, gathering key insights about the  feasibility of all his or her ideas in the real market while honing the solution.    Application of the Tool: This was the strategy employed for our  recruitment campaign. I piloted three low-cost advertising campaigns with  three new types of content, produced in-house at no cost, but also at a  relatively low production value. These included graphically designed “image  tiles” featuring images of past participants, activities, and other interesting  aspects of the program with short superimposed text emphasizing a unique,  but limited-time only, opportunity; short videos of former participants  discussing the program and offering testimonials, and finally, short video  clips of myself and my team discussing the program and its vision (this  suggestion was actually generated by a colleague outside our team who was  invited to our brainstorming sessions specifically to offer an outside  perspective, thereby helping us account for our own “blind spots” and group  think). The learning launch included rolling out a small number of varieties  of each of these pieces of content towards targeted audiences via Facebook  and Twitter ad campaigns. We also published a traditional application call to  the same demographic groups as a control in our market experiment.     Insights: After a week of running the ads, our video testimonials and tiles  outperformed the application call, but our staff videos faired poorly. We  ultimately invested greater resources in the testimonial and graphic design  tiles to enhance and professionalize the production quality, and also  combined the two during later experiments, to roll out to our entire  distribution network. The final numbers not only exceeded our previous  recruitment campaign metrics, but they also delivered some unexpected  results – we captured more and better applicants, including a large number  from sub-categories in the broadly defined energy and climate space who we  had previously not considered or targeted: people working on software and  digital services for the energy industry.     I believe this type of unexpected discovery is one of the great benefits of the  learning launch tool and design thinking more generally. Once you  acknowledge and accept that you cannot fully predict how a given solution  will play out in the market, you become more aware of possibilities and

insights that you might otherwise have missed because they were not part of  your initial criteria. In this case, we were not aiming to capture new types of  professional demographics, only enhance our engagement with or pre- defined target group. However, the discovery of an entirely new professional  demographic interested in our work that represents a complimentary sector  and perspective has been a revelation and offered a tremendous amount of  dynamism to our program. The connections between the two may not have  ever been exposed, let alone acted upon, had we not embarked on the  process of design thinking in pursuit of our original goal – to exceed annual  recruiting metrics.    Approach - What I Might Do Differently Next Time: Next time I will  devote more time and resources to socializing the concept of a learning  launch internally with my supervisors, especially those responsible for  managing our budget. The notion of a multi-pronged market experiment in  which a large percentage of my ideas will likely fail (while these tests are  cheap, they are not free, and the gut reaction to the principle of “wasting”  money, no matter how little, is difficult to manage) was received with  significant skepticism. The greatest asset I had to actually advance this  strategy was speed – I was able to move through the development and  testing of prototypes more quickly than supervisors could determine what  decision to make in response to my ideas. By the time this skepticism was  fully processed and I was told to take my ideas “back to the drawing board”  before publishing, I had already run multiple tests and had the data required  to make my case. I was fortunate to be in an environment in which I have  this latitude for independent action while also conducting a learning launch  uniquely well suited for speed. However, learning from this experience, in  the future I will take steps before launching to ensure I am prepared to move  faster than my bureaucracy and to ensure I have the appropriate “overhead”  cover because this tool does involve failures, which are always difficult to  justify.      Additionally, In the future I will make better use of the story telling tool in  developing this type of content. One of the reasons our staff videos  performed poorly is because they didn’t do a good job telling a story, but  were based to closely off the original application call. In future iterations of  this recruitment campaign, I believe there is a way to leverage staff videos  and story telling to enhance the overall efficacy of the program.


Reflection : Learning Launch Challenge : As part of my work I run an annual recruiting campaign to identify twenty top leaders in the energy and climate space under the age of thirty five to join a prestigious program at my institution . The selection process depends on an open application and a merit - based review process . Naturally , the more high - quality applications I receive , the more competitive the process is , and ultimately , my annual cohort of twenty is higher caliber . Therefore , each year I strive to increase the total reach of the campaign as well as the average quality of the candidates . These two constraints are the primary design criteria of this challenge . Traditionally , our recruitment campaign centers on distributing a document we refer to as our ‘ call - for - applications ’ through direct email , personal networks , and social media . While this document is full of useful information , the document medium itself is n’t very dynamic or interesting . Based on data from previous campaigns , I knew that while we were reaching many millions of potential applicants through our existing distribution channels , a very small percentage were actually clicking any of the links in the document , or even spending more than a few seconds reading it . The low conversation rate had been a source of frustration for a number of recruitment cycles . My operating hypothesis was that the format of the application call was partially responsible for this low conversion percentage – more dynamic content that communicated the idea in a shorter time span and generated greater curiosity and interest , potentially at the expense of detailed information , would , I surmised , likely lead to a better click - through rate . So , the challenge : redesign our recruitment materials in a format other than our traditional ‘ call - for - applications ’ document . Selection and the Tool : This redesign involved the use of a number of different tools to better understand the user - experience involved in applying for our program , including journey mapping and interviews of previous applicants . However , for the purposes of this reflection , I will focus on the learning launch tool , which was used to pilot the different new formats and content pieces we developed for our campaign this year . The learning launch tool is employed near the end of the design thinking process , after designers have already explored and answered the questions what is and what if , and are searching for answers to the questions what works and what wows ? This tool is deployed when designers have possible solution sets prepared and ready to test in the market . Its hallmark , and where it differs from traditional innovation processes , is its focus on placing small bets on a low - fidelity prototypes with the potential to show success , but , perhaps most importantly , the ability to fail at a very low cost . Through low - cost failures in the learning launch stage , the designer can test his assumptions quickly iterate and experiment with multiple solutions , gathering key insights about the feasibility of all his or her ideas in the real market while honing the solution . Application of the Tool : This was the strategy employed for our recruitment campaign . I piloted three low - cost advertising campaigns with three new types of content , produced in - house at no cost , but also at a relatively low production value . These included graphically designed “ image tiles ” featuring images of past participants , activities , and other interesting aspects of the program with short superimposed text emphasizing a unique , but limited - time only , opportunity ; short videos of former participants discussing the program and offering testimonials , and finally , short video clips of myself and my team discussing the program and its vision ( this suggestion was actually generated by a colleague outside our team who was invited to our brainstorming sessions specifically to offer an outside perspective , thereby helping us account for our own “ blind spots ” and group think ) . The learning launch included rolling out a small number of varieties of each of these pieces of content towards targeted audiences via Facebook and Twitter ad campaigns . We also published a traditional application call to the same demographic groups as a control in our market experiment . Insights : After a week of running the ads , our video testimonials and tiles outperformed the application call , but our staff videos faired poorly . We ultimately invested greater resources in the testimonial and graphic design tiles to enhance and professionalize the production quality , and also combined the two during later experiments , to roll out to our entire distribution network . The final numbers not only exceeded our previous recruitment campaign metrics , but they also delivered some unexpected results – we captured more and better applicants , including a large number from sub - categories in the broadly defined energy and climate space who we had previously not considered or targeted : people working on software and digital services for the energy industry . I believe this type of unexpected discovery is one of the great benefits of the learning launch tool and design thinking more generally . Once you acknowledge and accept that you can not fully predict how a given solution will play out in the market , you become more aware of possibilities and insights that you might otherwise have missed because they were not part of your initial criteria . In this case , we were not aiming to capture new types of professional demographics , only enhance our engagement with or pre- defined target group . However , the discovery of an entirely new professional demographic interested in our work that represents a complimentary sector and perspective has been a revelation and offered a tremendous amount of dynamism to our program . The connections between the two may not have ever been exposed , let alone acted upon , had we not embarked on the process of design thinking in pursuit of our original goal – to exceed annual recruiting metrics . Approach - What I Might Do Differently Next Time : Next time I will devote more time and resources to socializing the concept of a learning launch internally with my supervisors , especially those responsible for managing our budget . The notion of a multi - pronged market experiment in which a large percentage of my ideas will likely fail ( while these tests are cheap , they are not free , and the gut reaction to the principle of “ wasting ” money , no matter how little , is difficult to manage ) was received with significant skepticism . The greatest asset I had to actually advance this strategy was speed – I was able to move through the development and testing of prototypes more quickly than supervisors could determine what decision to make in response to my ideas . By the time this skepticism was fully processed and I was told to take my ideas “ back to the drawing board ” before publishing , I had already run multiple tests and had the data required to make my case . I was fortunate to be in an environment in which I have this latitude for independent action while also conducting a learning launch uniquely well suited for speed . However , learning from this experience , in the future I will take steps before launching to ensure I am prepared to move faster than my bureaucracy and to ensure I have the appropriate “ overhead ” cover because this tool does involve failures , which are always difficult to justify . Additionally , In the future I will make better use of the story telling tool in developing this type of content . One of the reasons our staff videos performed poorly is because they did n’t do a good job telling a story , but were based to closely off the original application call . In future iterations of this recruitment campaign , I believe there is a way to leverage staff videos and story telling to enhance the overall efficacy of the program .