The unsexy problem problem

🌈 Abstract

The article discusses the "unsexy problem problem" - the challenge of getting people with different priorities and interests to work together to solve complex, multi-dimensional problems. The author shares their experiences as an anthropologist on a tech design team, where "unsexy" but impactful features were often deprioritized in favor of flashier, automated ones. The article argues that this phenomenon extends beyond tech, manifesting in how we approach solving social and planetary problems, where the "unsexy" work of systemic change is often overlooked in favor of novel technical solutions. The author proposes shifting incentives to focus on outcomes rather than just novel technologies as a way to address this issue.

🙋 Q&A

[01] The "Unsexy Problem Problem"

1. What is the "unsexy problem problem" that the author describes?

• The "unsexy problem problem" is the challenge that people who need to work together often don't agree on what kinds of problems are exciting to solve and what kinds of solutions are worth pursuing, making it difficult to motivate them to collaborate on complex, multi-dimensional problems.

2. How has the author experienced this problem in their work as a UX researcher?

• As a UX researcher, the author found that their recommendations for "unsexy" but impactful features were often deprioritized by engineering partners in favor of flashier, automated features that looked good in demos but didn't solve core user problems.

3. How does the author see the "unsexy problem problem" manifesting on a larger scale?

• When looking at solving social and planetary problems, the "unsexy problem problem" arises again, with the "unsexy" work of designing new social systems and advocating for systemic change often overlooked in favor of novel technical fixes.

[02] Addressing the "Unsexy Problem Problem"

1. What does the author propose as a way to address the "unsexy problem problem"?

• The author proposes shifting incentives to focus on outcomes rather than just novel technologies. This could involve funding calls that treat social, political, and technological solutions as equally valid approaches to solving specific problems.

2. Why does the author say this shift in incentives is necessary?

• The author argues that there is a high level of bias towards technical solutions, and that technical scientists and engineers often have more funding and prestige than their social scientist colleagues. Shifting incentives could help create cross-functional teams that incorporate different tools and practices to develop the most robust solutions.

3. How does the author see this issue playing out in the development of AI and addressing global challenges?

• The author states that the complex problems we face, whether in AI development or addressing global threats like climate change, are inextricably both technical and social. Addressing these challenges requires a "techno-social" lens that does not leave out the "unsexy" problems of systemic change.