,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
X : The real leap with your maps is that movement axis of evolution.
Me : It's the combination of a chain of needs with movement that makes it different to the point that once seen, it can't be unseen. It messes with your mental models.
Me : It's the combination of a chain of needs with movement that makes it different to the point that once seen, it can't be unseen. It messes with your mental models.
X : I can't believe people weren't doing this before.
Me : Before my maps i.e. pre 2005. Alas, not that I'm aware of. That evolution axis took some work - 6 months and 9k data points. But yes, it has that "OMG, this is so obvious" once you start using it.
Me : Before my maps i.e. pre 2005. Alas, not that I'm aware of. That evolution axis took some work - 6 months and 9k data points. But yes, it has that "OMG, this is so obvious" once you start using it.
... i.e. it's difficult to unsee. I tend to find mapping takes over and just becomes internalised practice. It's hard for me to even listen to a problem without building a map in my mind.
X : Aren't you concerned that your evolution axis might be wrong?
Me : No. I assume it's wrong, it's a model after all. Same with maps, they are all imperfect. The only question is whether it's useful. I find it useful, that's enough for me.
Me : No. I assume it's wrong, it's a model after all. Same with maps, they are all imperfect. The only question is whether it's useful. I find it useful, that's enough for me.
