After being away for 18 months to pursue my MSc in Circular Economy Management, I arrived back at Somia and found colleagues building future scenarios on Financials for Gen Z. In fact, they had held an event and shared about Futures Thinking at Ideafest last year. In some ways, I wish I was there, exploring, learning and applying with them. But nonetheless, I’m happy that they did, and I could not wait to get my feet wet too, in this very near future.

So what is Futures Thinking, you might ask, as I have.

According to Canina, Bruno and Monestier (2022), “Futures Thinking can be defined as a strategic approach to explore and critically consider future scenarios in order to define the most preferable ones for people and society.”

To help me, and you, the reader, make a bit of sense in this, using the case my colleagues crazily put together. You would know why I said crazy because of the amount of data and synthesizing that went into creating these scenarios. I now have a newfound respect for all futurists.

Here are the general steps taken. For a more detailed step-by-step breakdown, here is the link to the abyss.

Step 1: An idea sparked
Drawing data and inspiration from a project Somia did on Youth Financial Literacy…

Step 2: Hunt for Signals
Starting from where we are today, first think about the world (red text) we live in, the infrastructure, policies, culture, technology, that governs the world we live in. Pretty much what and how our laws and regulations shape us, our culture and needs also play a part on the policies that are created, plus new technologies that may emerge and influence the way we perform tasks which again may influence policies. It is a huge systems play at hand here! (Read more about Systems Thinking in our earlier post here). Uncover micro trends, signals of change and cool-hunting for what is surfacing in society that may be relevant to this piece of Futures work. Look out for anything unusual or strange.

Expert Interviews
Drawing key ideas from nine experts, think trends, movements, phenomena that are also occurring as a result of (intended or unintended) what we just talked about above or perhaps from other drivers.

Without complicating things, this reminds me of how the dynamics of transitions (Geels, 2011), and if one takes on a multi-level perspective, we can see how innovations may break through to make adjustments in socio-technical regimes, which can then put pressure on existing regimes to create opportunities for new regulations or plans or deals. And with new policies or regulations, these can then bring about new phenomena. Ok, I’m going down the rabbit hole. Super interesting, and I believe I am now inspired enough to write more about socio-technical change in another article.

So I digressed.

Back to Futures. Considering all that a futurist, or likely futurists, have gathered. I also wondered, how much research is enough? So I had the opportunity to check in with one of my colleagues at the Reach Network, Slava from Summ()n, and he replied that at some point, you will encounter some patterns, some repeated information, what researchers call ‘data saturation’, that will be a good indicator to stop.

Simply put, the next step is to create the branches of possible futures. Well, it is also in this stage when the crazy gets crazier…

Step 3: Driving Factors and Scenarios
Unpacking and synthesising all the data collected to derive multiple possible future scenarios. Two key drivers were identified: 1. Socioeconomic Uncertainty, 2. Personal Agency Capacity

Step 4: Scenarios Creation and Mapping
Based on the two key drivers, four different ideas were drawn, as shown in the image below. These ideas were then translated into future scenarios: tangible, visual representations.

Phew… let’s take a beat. I hope you are still following me, cos I am struggling to follow myself.

So in this case, my colleagues created many visuals representing each of these four ideas; more importantly, painting both utopian and dystopian futures helps organizations and societies prepare for multiple possibilities and make decisions that steer toward preferred futures while avoiding catastrophic ones.

You can find more information on the website here.

And again, I find myself asking, “So what? So what if we have all these scenarios?”. So it seems, with these scenarios, their core purpose is to evoke emotions, thoughts, reactions… for discussion and creation. We may come from different places, different roles to play at work and in our society, but we come together in some cohesive reactions that may overlap and a Futures workshop can then open by inviting the stakeholders with different perspectives to come together, collide and collectively discuss and envision what the future may hold.

Instead of having the audience roam, take in all the possible future scenarios, and keep their thoughts to themselves, a Futures workshop will prepare questions to guide the participants. Questions like, “How do you think Gen Z will own property in this future?” Or, “How will Gen Z commute in this future?” I was informed that it is also best to frame a Futures workshop with a specific context and segmentation, to allow for a more focused discussion.

So first, the target such as Gen Z, Silver Generation, Ultra-Rich, Underserved, etc.

Then contexts such as Transportation, Personal Care, Mental Health, Retirement, Homes, and so on…

To frame this more clearly, an example of a theme for a Futures Workshop could be “Envision the Future of Personal Care for the Silver Generation.”

This is a way to source and collect ideas from the participants, then review and map how the Silver Generation manages their personal care across these four scenarios.

As we come to the end of this article, and if you are still asking… ok, so what? I’d like to land this piece with the following.

Some possible outcomes for a company could be:

1. Test current strategy against multiple possibilities to identify which ones are more robust or resilient across scenarios or are scenario-dependent.
2. Identify early indicators of change in the community, technology, healthcare, and consumer preferences, for example, “anti-aging” or “active-aging” culture, AI-assisted monitoring, regulatory shifts towards preventive care.
3. Uncover specific unmet needs and pain points for a concrete innovation pipeline
4. Prepares the organization for any structural change — future-proofing its direction
5. Prioritized roadmap; to name a few, product development, internal processes or capability development.
6. Future ecosystem mapping: go-to-market strategy or partnership opportunities
7. Informs risk management and strategies

Ok, I can go on and on about the possible outcomes, but I think you get the drift.

The point is, instead of abstract “future thinking,” the outcomes of a Futures Workshop are really directly actionable. It’s about getting together to sift through all the signals you’ve collected, making sense of them (some call it the “mind-melting” process), and then asking yourself what possible business propositions, new products, services, or policies need to be designed or redesigned.

This gives companies a clear strategy for what to develop, which markets to enter, partnerships to pursue, and capabilities to build. These all point to organizational alignment, meaning everyone understands the direction and knows what to contribute.

To take a step back, Futures Thinking aims to provide policy-makers, and more broadly decision-makers in any field, with the capacity to proactively anticipate changes, recognize opportunities, and ease the transition toward desirable futures.

Thank you for sticking with me as I unpack Futures with you, in a small way. Of course, this is just the beginning; there’s much to unpack further.

As of today, the world has become an unstable, erratic place. Well, it’s always been cos nothing is ever constant, but I personally feel that it has gotten shakier. But if we can find common ground to design for society, for humanity, then perhaps Futures can be a useful tool to help us imagine solutions, policies, and strategies that will benefit us, as a society, for the planet Earth and all its inhabitants.

Oh, had to add this: My colleagues made this, IMO, super cool graphic to illustrate their process.

The Somia CX team is continuing our Futures work and putting together an event sometime this Sep as a follow-up to last year. If you are interested in finding out more, drop us a note at info@somiacx.com.

Chin (Me) is a director and principal consultant at Somia CX. I’m passionate about design innovations, and I care about the environment. To read more articles from me, click here. Let’s connect on Linkedin 👋

References:

• Canina, M., Bruno, C., Monestier, E. (2022). Futures Thinking. In: The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98390-5_272-1
• Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002

The Messy, Crazy Process Behind Building a Strategy for the Future was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Do you ever get an itch from experiencing a service so bad that you want to redesign how things work?

That’s how I got to learn about Service Design.

Back then, as an architecture student, I visited a historical museum that was very much ‘naked’ — no guide, labels only mention the object name without any story, and no signs of where to go — a museum that did not serve a non-historian visitors. That was when I thought, ‘I want to learn how to design a museum’.

That dream has not yet became a reality, but the same itch got me into years of working to improve public transport services, then into more varying sectors when I joined Somia CX and, obviously, involved in Service Design Indonesia (SDID) Community.

It’s been 7 years since Somia CX initiated the Service Design Indonesia (SDID) Community in 2019. Today, SDID has grown into a large, volunteer-based committee with the vision of bringing fresh conversations to our local communities and introducing service design practices — particularly to those in positions to drive meaningful change within larger organisations in various sectors.

As the founder of Service Design Indonesia (SDID), and years of client experience, Somia CX has witnessed growing curiosity over the years. We have also seen a shift in conversations and questions around Service Design among the people we have met:

‘What exactly is Service Design?’

has evolved into…

‘How can I explain Service Design to my company leaders and justify the idea of adopting it?’

That made us think: even though more people have been exposed to Service Design, explaining how it works and how it can benefit a business or an organisation is a different challenge. Sure, there are a bunch of easy-read references out there, but we hardly found any in Bahasa Indonesia.

Therefore, as our way of giving back to the community, we decided to create a simple, publicly accessible pocketbook in both Bahasa Indonesia and English to help you learn — and explain — Service Design to anyone.

You can download the English/Indonesian PDF or explore the digital flipbook in Bahasa Indonesia below:

Or flip through the English version below:

Connect with us at info@somiacx.com to create better services together!

Introducing Service Design: A Pocketbook for People Who Care was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

During my Master’s Thesis, I set out with the intention to understand whether nudges could influence more sustainable food choices, and which types of nudges would be more effective. Nudges have been well-studied in the area of behavioural psychology to steer people towards choices that will benefit them, with the choice to opt out at any point in time. And in the area of menu design for more sustainable choices, this has also been well-researched in the area of meat consumption (Brunner et al., 2018; Gravert & Kurz, 2019; Seger et al., 2025).

But when I looked at seafood, especially in a sushi setting, there was surprisingly little to draw from. The gap is real, hence I felt obliged to dive into that and was extremely privileged to be able to partner with a Swiss-based sushi restaurant to explore whether digital nudges could influence more sustainable choices within a menu that is, by default, centred around fish.

Nudging refers to subtle modifications in choice environments that steer behaviour in predictable ways without restricting options or significantly altering economic incentives. They are easy-to-implement interventions to steer and help consumers close the intention-behaviour gap towards more sustainable choices (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008).

I was under the hypothesis that nudges are effective for consumer behaviour change, and awareness will drive consumers to desired actions. In some ways, that was right, but in others, I was proven wrong during my research.

Prototyping

I tested three types of nudges on a digital menu: carbon-style labelling, social cues and positioning (Holenweger et al., 2023; Kim et al., 2025; Franchini et al., 2023). Based on the results of my research, all nudges showed modest effects. Positioning performed slightly better than the others, but overall, none of the nudges significantly changed behaviour.

Other Factors at Play

However, little did I know that habits, taste preferences, time pressure and category norms all proved to dominate decisions and have overwrote the effects of nudges. So, yes, we may want to choose sustainably, but boy, are we up against some stiff competition!

Especially in the context of food decisions, they are rarely made in calm, reflective conditions. They happen quickly; during a rushed lunch break, shaped by what we usually order, and influenced by what we see around us (Wansink & Sobal, 2007; Higgs, 2014). In a sushi context, there are also strong category expectations. Sushi is associated with fish. That expectation alone already frames the decision before it is even made.

System 1 & 2 Thinking

Hence, the tension. Sustainable choices require reflection, System 2 thinking. A more familiar example might be this: How many times have you intended to pick a healthier choice over a happy one, say an apple instead of chocolate? And how many times has chocolate won the battle because of other factors at play? A craving? Emotional state at the moment? A whole apple simply looks too much to eat? Not because you didn’t know better, but because something else took over in that moment.

Final Food-for-Thought

What this left me with is a different way of looking at sustainable choices. It’s not that people don’t care. In fact, many do. But the conditions under which decisions are made rarely support that intention. We must not simply start with “Let’s redesign the menu!”, but rather, look with a systemic lens, to be evaluative and the interventions we design.

As a conclusion, low-touch nudges alone are simply insufficient as behavioural interventions when up against strong category norms like sushi, where fish is highly associated and used culturally. This is further evidenced by the consequences of the intention-behaviour gap and how food choices are made using System 1 thinking, which is fast and more intuitive (Sheeran & Webb, 2016; Kahneman, 2011).

However, hope is still in the air. With the use of nudge+ multi-layered strategies, they have been proven in other empirical studies in the context of meat consumption to have increased their effectiveness (Mertens et al., 2021).

But more importantly, the finding shifts the question: If decisions are shaped by context, not just intention, then what should we be designing for instead?

To design for humanity, or in this case, sustainability, we must address issues by looking at systems we operate in. From business owners to product owners to designers to consumers to the fishes! (just to name a few), we must be more responsible for each other and the systems we live in.

Chin (Me) is a director and principal consultant, with a focus on Circular Economy and Sustainability, at Somia CX. To read more articles from me, click here. Let’s connect on Linkedin 👋

If you like to read the full thesis report, feel free to reach out to me via chin@somiacx.com. We can chat more!

Read Systems Thinking Articles from the Somia Team here

• Systems Thinking in Design: What is it? — Part 1
• Systems Thinking in Design: Why is it important? — Part 2
• A Framework to Embed Systems Thinking into Design Thinking Process — Part 3
• Systems Mapping Tools & Design Levers — Part 4
• Systems Thinking in Design: Shifting Our Mindset — Part 5
• Systems Thinking in Design: Systems Innovation — Part 6

References:

• Brunner, F. et al. (2018). Carbon labels in restaurant settings and their impact on food choices.
• Franchini, C. et al. (2023). Menu positioning and its influence on sustainable food selection.
• Gravert, C. & Kurz, V. (2019). Nudging consumers toward climate-friendly food choices.
• Higgs, S. (2014). The role of social norms in eating behaviour.
• Holenweger, G. et al. (2023). Carbon labelling and its effect on sustainable decisions.
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow.
• Kim, A. et al. (2025). Social and expert cues in influencing menu choices.
• Mertens, S. et al. (2021). The effectiveness of nudging across behavioural domains.
• Seger, B. T. et al. (2025). Carbon labels and environmentally responsible dining.
• Sheeran, P. & Webb, T. (2016). The intention–behaviour gap.
• Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge.
• Wansink, B. & Sobal, J. (2007). Mindless eating and everyday food decisions.

What Designing for a Sushi Menu Taught Me About Sustainable Choices was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

“Fail fast, fail often” mindset of tech startups has disrupt so many industries by quickly surfacing the working solution`s to the user’s problems. This mantra has championed low-fidelity testing for many years — wireframes and simple lab setup allow quick experimentation without eating much resources. But relying to low-fidelity testing alone is a luxury that only new startups with little to no reputation can afford.

For complex, high-stakes projects, where agility is no longer the only concern, relying solely on low-fidelity methods is like approving a skyscraper’s construction based on a napkin sketch. The risk is no longer one dimensional but spans across the business. On those cases, you might need to start considering adding a new tool on your shed: high-fidelity testing.

Defining testing fidelity level

First, let’s define what I meant by [low/high]-fidelity testing so that we both have the same idea on what I meant by it.

I use the term [low/high]-fidelity testing to refer to both the fidelity level of the prototype and how we conduct the test. This means, a high fidelity testing should be conducted in a relatively highly contextual situation with a relatively high-fidelity prototype.

To make it clearer, here’s what I meant by different prototype fidelity level:

• High: a working software
• Mid: a wireframe mockup
• Low: a concept

and here’s an illustration of what a different conduct fidelity level looks like:

• High: in a contextualized setup (experiential)
• Mid: using a prototype in a lab setup
• Low: show and tell

Justifying the cost of high-fidelity

High-fidelity testing allows you to discover the nuanced, human-centric insights that low-fidelity tests miss — like how the physical layout of a self-checkout counter causes user anxiety, or how a banking app’s branding feels untrustworthy.

Not convinced? Take a look at the three images below and observe what you think and feel when looking at each of them:

• What did you think and feel when you see each images?
• Which one resonates more with you?
• Which one is easier for you to accept?
• Which image evoke the most emotional reaction to you?
• Which image is easier for you to comment on?

As you can see, the three images above are essentially representing the same thing: an image of cat in front of a wheat field. But they evoke different responses from you.

So yes, high-fidelity testing provide you with high-fidelity insights. But it is expensive. It requires more time and effort.

An ideal balance between test fidelity and the risk of implementing a design can be seen by plotting the risk of implementing the design and the level of the test fidelity. Let me introduce you to “the sweet corridor”:

Justifying this investment to stakeholders requires reframing the conversation: by position high-fidelity testing as a strategic tool for de-risking. Ask the tough question:

“What is the cost of getting back the user’s confidence, re-engineering the product, retraining our staff, launching a recovery marketing campaign, and covering the damage cost if we get this wrong?”

The cost of doing a high-fidelity test must be pale in comparison.

Unpacking the Risk: Your Compass for Fidelity Levels

To make sure that we’re in the sweet corridor, we need to measure this “risk of implementing”. Here are several critical dimensions that we need to consider:

1. Contextual & Error Potential Risk
   Will the user’s context strongly influence the way they behave when using the design? How much damage will occur if an error or mistakes happen?
   A touch screen entertainment system dashboard in a car is better tested in the context where the user is actively driving their vehicle as the user is multitasking and may lead to traffic accidents.
2. Business Operational Risk
   How much will the new design disrupt internal operations, workflows, and existing systems?
   A new cashier system might require retraining thousands of employees and changing internal support processes.
3. User Adoption Risk
   Is the proposed change so drastic that we risk alienating your current user base? Will new users understand it? How many users will drop off?
   A complete redesign of a beloved interface is high-risk because users might reject it.
4. Brand Perception Risk
   Will it change the users’ perception towards your brand?
   A radical redesign of a popular app that users are accustomed to may causes critical implications to the perception towards the brand.

Getting a proper measurement of your risk will help you understand the ballpark area of your test fidelity level. Understanding each component will also allow you to get a gist on whether to increase the fidelity of your prototype of your testing context.

While leaning towards a higher-fidelity will more likely provide you with better output, if you’re not sure, it is still better to lean towards the lower-fidelity to make sure that you don’t over spend on your research.

So, have you ever done a high-fidelity testing? Do you have any thoughts or opinion on this? Let me know below. I’ll be happy to discuss and learn from you all.

Why test in high-fidelity? was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Waterless
The most obvious difference is that it is waterless. So we are paying for the active ingredients and less of the water being shipped around the world, which means its carbon footprint is drastically reduced since liquid shampoo typically contains 80–90% water.

Also, the active ingredients are more concentrated, hence a smaller quantity is needed per wash. This, I can attest to! In the past, I have had to wash and rinse my hair at least three times to get the lather going and feel my hair clean. I used to think it’s because the water is hard but with the solid shampoo, just one wash does the job! I use less water. Score!

Less need for preservatives
Since it contains minimal water, the microbial growth risk is low and hence preservatives can be reduced or omitted (C&EN, 2018). Some brands claim that this leads to cleaner formulations.

Packaging
Many solid shampoo bars come in simple paper or cardboard packaging (some are recycled) and are also of a much smaller size, hence this cuts down on single-use plastic packaging (C&EN, 2018).

Lower Carbon Footprint
Since they are smaller and lighter, this translates quickly to less packaging material and reduced CO2 emissions during transport. But this is sometimes often used in brand marketing (Jarsking, 2025).

Product Life
I know some websites claim one shampoo bar soap may replace 2–3 standard 250ml bottles of liquid shampoo. But my personal experience hasn’t been so: my shampoo bar lasted a month. Maybe I was being over enthusiastic and lathering too generously, resulting in excessive use. It is something I’m experimenting with on my second bar.

Travel-Friendly
It was so easy to travel with my bar soaps on recent trips! No spillage, easy to store and no need for checked luggage. It really just is a bar of convenience.

So… it must be better for the planet… RIGHT?!

But I can’t help but start thinking beyond the above advantages and diving deeper into the system where this bar of soap lives. Well, the truth may be a little more tangled, and the devil often lies in the details. Beneath that minimalistic aesthetics lies a complex balance between chemistry, life cycle impact and user behaviour.

Research on shampoo bars is still nascent. I couldn’t find many papers that discuss shampoo bars exclusively.

Use Phase
According to Kröhnert and Stucki (2021), most of a shampoo’s environmental impact occurs during the consumer use phase, particularly from water heating. The study finds that one hair wash emits about 161 g CO₂ eq when factoring in cradle-to-grave impacts (raw materials, manufacturing, transport, use, disposal). In that analysis, the use phase (especially heating water in showers) is the dominant contributor to climate impact.

I applauded a friend who visited recently for using bar soaps. But at the end of his visit, he asked me to throw away the soap, which was, at best, only half used. I was shocked and asked him why. He said this is already his third bar during his visit, and he did not want to deal with carrying them around. This made me think about our relationship to convenience and waste. The impact of cutting the soap’s lifespan short certainly needs consideration during the use phase (Giacomello & Gasser, 2009).

Raw materials
Solid shampoos still require surfactants, oils, fragrances, conditioning agents, amongst other ingredients, like liquid shampoo. All of these have ecological baggage from land use to fertilizers to transportation to processing, and a shampoo bar does not eliminate this footprint.

Among the ingredients, one name pops up often: Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS). Environmentally, it’s derived from petroleum or palm oil, both of which carry sustainability baggage: carbon emissions from fossil fuel extraction, or deforestation from palm cultivation.

Scale, Infrastructure and Energy Mix
Another thought, a bar made in a small artisal workshop powered by fossil energy may have a higher per-unit footprint compared to a large factory setup that uses renewable energy. Plus, shipping solid shampoo across the globe will still carry transport emissions. So the food for thought here is where and how the product is made matter.

I recall years ago, I was given a bar of soap as a corporate gift and I swiftly handed it to my colleague and said almost proudly, “I can’t use a bar soap. It’s just so hard to use.”. And yet, umpteen years later… a humble pebble of bar shampoo has quietly rewritten the story of how I wash myself, and it struck me how sustainability could lie in these mundane, intimate moments. A shampoo bar alone won’t save the world, but it invites me to participate in a different story about consumption and sustainability.

And I truly love how this humble object has become a conduit of aligning my daily ritual with the new values I’m cultivating with my pursuit to live more consciously, and one that hopefully does not antagonise the planet.

FYI #1

This is the shampoo bar that was gifted to me, which I absolutely love! But after looking into the ingredients list (because of this little piece of research)… I found that the active ingredient used is Sodium Coco-Sulfate (SCS). SCS is much closer to Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) in structure, performance, and irritation potential.

FYI #2

So another good friend who has been using bar soaps for the last 20–30 years recommended this one from J. R. Ligette’s, and I am relieved to at least find that the ingredients are naturally derived, but a note that natural does not always translate to sustainable. But I will leave it here for now, otherwise, it will be another article within this article. Sweat

What can I say? Finding the product that sits with yourself takes time and work, and not everyone has that time. Well, I’ve never been the most conscious consumer, but I hope to take a small step, whenever I can, to be at least more aware. I hope you have found this read interesting. And if you have your own experience with solid shampoo, do share in comments! I’d really love to hear about your experiences and thoughts.

Chin (Me) is a director and principal consultant at Somia CX. I’m currently pursuing a Master Degree in Circular Economy Management in ZHAW. To read more articles from me, click here. Let’s connect on Linkedin 👋

References

• American Chemical Society. (2018, May 20). Solid body wash comes without the waste. Chemical & Engineering News, 96(20). https://cen.acs.org/environment/sustainability/Solid-body-wash-comes-without/96/i20
• Giacomello, C., & Gasser, M. (2009). Life cycle assessment of soap and liquid detergents. Environmental Science & Technology, 43(12), 4606–4613. https://doi.org/10.1021/es900045h
• Jarsking. (2025, June 20). How solid cosmetics outperform liquid products in sustainability. Jarsking. https://www.jarsking.com/how-solid-cosmetics-outperform-liquid-products-in-sustainability
• Kröhnert, H., & Stucki, M. (2021). Life Cycle Assessment of a Plant-Based, Regionally Marketed Shampoo and Analysis of Refill Options. Sustainability, 13(15), 8478. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158478

Solid Shampoo: Sustainability in a Bar? was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

I remember thinking to myself, “Yes, finally!”.

In recent years, I’ve mostly worked on projects related to the discovery and exploratory phases of needs assessment, but never one that involved evaluation. It’s been a while since I worked on something that involved evaluating impact, which I had done in my previous workplace. For me, evaluating impact is deeply satisfying, especially in this case when my team and I had done our part in the intervention.

OK now, how do we evaluate impact? Well, we collect data from people and then we’re done. Does the process sound straightforward? Yes. But does it? Not quite. I will share my experience from our latest project doing impact evaluation and how we conducted it.

Most Significant Change (MSC) approach in a nutshell

One of the approaches for conducting impact evaluation is the Most Significant Change (MSC). And what is this MSC approach exactly?

The Most Significant Change (MSC) approach, developed by Rick Davies, is a qualitative monitoring and evaluation method used to assess a project’s or intervention’s impact. The process involves collecting stories of change (SC), which are then analyzed to determine their significance, providing valuable insights into the success of the intervention.

So, how did we use the Most Significant Change (MSC) approach to see and evaluate the changes that happen from an intervention? Let me share some key learnings from my experience.

1. Understand the intervention provided, when it took place, who the target audience is, and the objectives of the intervention.

This is important for you to gain contextual knowledge to start things off. By understanding this, we can form a clear picture of what was done and what the ideal expected condition looks like. Furthermore, this then serves as a thinking framework that guides our evaluation process.

2. Learn more about the details of the impact evaluation you want to conduct with stakeholders to determine the initial domains of change to focus on.

As a first step, we need an understanding of the evaluation to be conducted. In this case, it’s important to identify which aspects of change we want to explore. This will serve as our direction for the evaluation. For example, if the intervention is training village health cadres for better quality of care, the domains of change could be related to a change in communication skills with patients.

Note, these domains of change are typically defined at the outset, but they are not rigid. There is a possibility that new insights may emerge as the field evolves. For instance, if you were to conduct enhancement training for health cadres, training them in skills related to Posyandu or Integrated Health Post activities (hard skills) as well as building relationships and communication, you might also discover unexpected changes in the field. For example, the training could lead to an increased sense of empathy in patient care, as the cadres realize that communication is a two-way street. Even though the increase in empathy was not a direct objective of the intervention and wasn’t initially included in the domains of change, it could still be recognized as an important outcome during the evaluation process hence may result in a new domain of change.

3. Create and develop a discussion guide based on the initial domains of change, but this goes beyond just designing a set of questions!

When creating the guidelines, pay attention to the flow of how you ask the questions. From my perspective, the Most Significant Change (MSC) approach is quite vulnerable to steering the discussion and can become overly focused on change, which may encourage participants to “look for” change. As researchers, we need to be especially alert to this and avoid asking leading questions right away, as well as assuring them that it’s okay if they don’t feel any change or even perceive negative changes.

Additionally, before diving into a particular topic, it’s good practice to first clarify which interventions they have received and when. This helps ensure that they recall the relevant experiences and use them as an anchor for the discussion.

4. Asking whether the respondents have noticed any changes may not be as straightforward as you might think; always be ready to “assist”.

From my experience, some people may not be able to recall and mention any of the changes right away, if there are any. In this case, there are a few things that we can do:

Give them some time to recall and reflect on their experiences. Let them know that they don’t need to answer right away. Embrace the silence!

Provide a specific timeline for them. For example, ask them to reflect on the past six months or a year. This will help them determine how far back they should recall and compare the situation back then with the present (pre and post-intervention). Doing so should assist them in identifying any differences or changes.

If they are still struggling, ask them prompt questions. We may ask directly whether they have noticed a change in a specific activity or aspect related to the domains of change. We could use some visual cues as prompt too.

These are things we can do to help clarify the meaning of our questions and assist respondents in recalling if they feel there has been a change. However, it is important to note that we also need to be mindful of how far we ask and prompt if the respondent cannot identify any changes, as it’s possible they may not feel any change has occurred. Avoid giving them pressure by focusing too long if they are unable to answer whether a change has occurred, so they do not end up fabricating changes that don’t actually exist.

5. Ensure to gather detailed information on the stories, placing them in context.

Paying close attention to what happened, when, how, where, and who was involved in the change stories is crucial for providing a clear picture of the situation. When evaluating changes across multiple locations, it’s important to explore the local contexts in greater detail to gain a more comprehensive understanding. This should help us grasp the dynamics at play, the cause-and-effect relationships of the changes, and uncover opportunities for future recommendations.

6. The method is also participatory, which in this case requires active participation to determine the significance of the stories mentioned, identifying which ones are chosen as the most significant.

According to Davies & Dart (2005), determining the significance of the stories can be done by involving higher stakeholders. While there is no wrong way, due to certain constraints, we did a bit of a workaround by asking respondents (working-level stakeholders) which were the intervention target to do a self-assessment instead, where they were asked to vote on which of all the change stories they had mentioned and prioritize were the most significant to them.

One thing that needs to be paid attention to is exploring their reasons when selecting the change stories they consider significant — finding out why, so we can understand their context and thought process. From my experience, respondents usually attribute those significant stories based on how much impact the change had on them.

To top it off with a personal reflection, this experience of conducting an impact evaluation has been very fulfilling for me and the team. Being involved in designing one of the interventions (a digital tool), it’s rewarding to see it being used and its benefits felt by health cadres. While there were challenges still to its usage, they motivate us to create even more impact in the future. Fingers crossed!

And yeah, that’s a wrap. A few key learnings on preparing and conducting an impact evaluation. I sure hope this can be useful for those of you about to do the same and considering the Most Significant Change approach.

Has anyone here used it before, or did you use another approach?

I’d love to hear your experience!

Bhagas works as an Experience Design Consultant at Somia CX. He has a Master’s Degree in Clinical Psychology. On the side, he is also practicing as a Clinical Psychologist. Find his LinkedIn and connect!

Evaluating Impact: Most Significant Change was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

We just had Eid Al-Fitri break in Indonesia and got back to work. Not sure whether it’s due to meeting a lot of families, Eid breaks is also the time for people to be in reflective mode, including me. Thankfully I found my reflection in a more hopeful way and helped me move forward. I’m writing more as a reminder for myself and if this can help any of you navigate this uncertain times, I am grateful.

Let’s face it, this Eid break was a bit bleak. There is a lot of negative news surrounding an event that’s supposed to be a celebration time. Whether it is an international one (never-ending-war in multiple areas in the world, global trade wars) to our own country that makes us anxious (RUU TNI, budget efficiency, concerning foreign sovereign fund).

In this troubled times, I am really thankful that I have a design background. Not because of its’ drawing skill (to be honest, I am really sucked at drawing), not because of the problem solving mindset (though it somewhat helps). One crucial aspect of design background that really helps me going through this uncertain time is: the sense of agency.

If you are a designer, either by education or by profession, your work always start with a brief and you’re supposed to do something about it. You need to come up with something by your own hand. The brief would not magically turn into a design work (at least not until recently, now with the time AI I know it is possible). I’ve been exposed to this dynamic over my professional career and I now just realized I can apply this as well in navigating this uncertainty. Design process teaches me there is always something I can do within my own power to respond to life, the brief.

I’m no saint. People close enough to me know that within me there is always a little version of myself that is in panic mode. Sometimes this little me got a little too big and fill out my entire self. At the end of last year it got a little out of control, it consumed me completely. In this moment again I found design offers me a tool for me to have some sense of agency. I encountered a book titled Drawing on Courage. (Thanks for Jakarta Book Party and Periplus for the free book!) The book told us how we can leverage the design process to untangle our own worry and fear. Here is one quote from the book:

The feelings we don’t express leak out. If you don’t express it, you lose the ability to control how you express it”

It suggests to make our feeling visible: by sketching it out, by making it into a paragraph, by turning it into this world’s artifacts; just like when we are designing something. It makes our worry tangible so we can address it more objectively. This helped me regain the sense of agency.

I know in life there will always be thing beyond our control and power. For that I just have to enjoy the ride and hope that it will turn out okay. But now I believe, even in those moments, there are things that I can do to respond to what life throws at me. Even if life puts us down and make us fail, just like in our design, we can learn from it, iterate, and try again.

I’m really thankful for my Eid Al-Fitri break and the reflection time it gave me. I am writing this as a reminder for myself, that in our limited self, there is always something we can do. I hope this can help you as well navigating this uncertain time.

Uka is a Lead Design Consultant at Somia CX. In his spare time, he can be found trying out new coffee beans he ordered from his favorite roastery or trying to establish two-way communication with the neighborhood felines.

You can find out more about his writing here or visit his LinkedIn page to learn more and connect with him.

Eid Reflection: The Sense of Agency, Designers’ Hidden Gift was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

In the sea of endless in-depth interviews and usability tests, here came the most anticipated research method in my career as a researcher — Diary Study.

Diary study was a big deal to me, given the logistics and the people management to make it happen. It was a mix of excitement and a tiny spike of anxiety, alas I have a dream team in Somia CX who always made things happen.

The scale of the project was quite big (at least to me). In this study, our team had to manage 30 respondents for a 5-day diary study. A task will be assigned to the participants every single day for 5 days in a row. Given the assignment, it was a little bit worrisome as the participants might bail out at times.

What is a diary study?

A diary study is a series of research that spans for couple of days, weeks, or even longer. In the user research context, usually during a diary study, a participant will be required to do certain tasks and record them daily. The task can be recording a video, answering survey questions, or keeping track of certain behaviors.

In our case, the participants were asked to fill in a survey and upload screenshots of a social media app. The diary study submissions were used as probing materials during the IDI sessions. We collected the data one by one and created a stimuli deck personalized for each participant. It was handy because the visual aid helped them share the contexts and personal stories.

Things to watch out for: duration vs dropouts

Given the duration of the study and the task given, it was a bit daunting. A longer study equals extra backup participants as the dropout rate might be high. That’s why, if you need to collect 20 data, you might need to recruit 10 more participants as backups.

The longer the duration, the trickier it becomes. In user interviews or usability testing, if the participant bails out, you can easily find a new replacement and schedule a new session. However, for a diary study, it means you are back to square zero. The research duration will last longer as you need to onboard the participants and they have to start again from Day 1 while the rest of the participants are already further in the diary.

How did we manage a diary study in Somia CX?

Our diary study was conducted in December 2023. The dream team that made this project happen consisted of Kara, me, Daniel — our Research Ops, and our former intern, Aaya.

The project had two groups of participants, 1 group of parents and 1 group of teens. For each group, we had 15 participants. Each researcher was in charge of managing comms with 10 participants, mixed of the parents and the teens.

The diary study was 5 days long and all participants must submit their tasks every day. The task itself took 15–20 mins to complete. They were asked to browse their social media as usual, take screenshots of the posts they saw, and share with us why they picked the post.

Since we had to ensure that all 30 of them could finish the complete round of the diary study, our team came up with these strategies.

1. Facilitate a briefing before the study starts

The project timeline was tight. It was December. In the school calendar, early December is an exam week for the students. We were racing with the timeline and the participants’ as well.

That’s why, ensuring participants’ understanding of the study and their task was important. We hosted a briefing session with a Q&A. We showed them how to upload and submit the task.

We couldn’t afford to make an assumption that every participant was able to understand the tasks and navigate around the diary platform on their own. We were glad that we hosted the session, turned out a few participants were still unclear about the study and a bit confused. The briefing helped us ensure that we as researchers and all of our participants were on the same page.

2. Create a personalized WhatsApp group with each participant

For 5 days, all three of us were glued to our WhatsApp apps to run and monitor the study. To keep track of the study and to keep in touch with the participants during the diary, we created a WhatsApp chat group for each participant. If we were to pool all 15 parents and 15 students in one group, we might not be able to keep track of the amount of chats sent in. There would be too much “noise”.

In each group, one participant will be accompanied by one researcher. Creating a personalized WhatsApp chat group with each participant indeed was a lot of work to handle but pooling 30 participants into 2 groups would be quite tricky. With a personalized chat group, we were able to monitor the submissions and ask follow-up questions if needed.

Although we started the project with a deep sigh as all three of us each will manage 10 chat groups, the personalized group system was a lifesaver. Some of our participants’ submissions didn’t meet the criteria of the instructions hence they had to resubmit. In some cases, the participants didn’t write a description and we had to ask them follow-up questions to clarify.

3. Set up daily deadlines, but be reasonable

Another way to keep the diary manageable was setting up ground rules for the participants. We would share the daily tasks at the same time of the day throughout the diary study. As for them, the deadline was also set.

Besides keeping track of the submissions, and checking the contents submitted, we also had to manage the Indonesian to English translation of the submissions. Hence, setting up the same deadline was helpful since we could manage our time better.

Although we have set a daily submission deadline, we were open to negotiation. Our diary study timeline coincided with the students’ exam week. We understood that free time in an exam week was indeed a luxury. Some of them reached out to us asking for more time nearing the deadline.

Things I’d do differently for diary study

After wrapping up the project in early 2024, I was assigned to another project that involved homework submission as a pre-interview round at the end of 2024. Similar to the previous diary study, the participants were also tasked to fill in a survey and submit screenshots of certain apps.

So, after doing one round of diary study and now jumping to another similar one, here are things I’ve done differently.

1. Going back to good ol’ Google Form

Instead of using a fancy platform for data submission, I utilized Google Forms to collect pre-interview data. With participants in mind, I tried to create a concise list of questions. It was a quick 5-minute form where they just filled in the most necessary things that we then would probe more during the interview sessions.

2. Sending photos via WhatsApp for participants’ convenience

Learning from the previous diary study, some older participants had difficulties attaching the files to the online form. In this study, we decided to simplify the process by asking them to upload any screenshots they had taken and send them to us via WhatsApp. This simplified method apparently solved an overlooked issue of uploading files through Google Forms.

We just learned that to upload some files to Google Forms, the participants need to have some free space in their Google Account storage. They wouldn’t be able to upload anything if they had full storage. We were lucky! We discovered this thing in the middle of the interview session. One participant told us,

“It’s a good thing to submit the screenshots via WhatsApp. I have no space left so I won’t be able to finish the task you gave me.”

The Perfect Diary Study Setup

These two projects taught me there was no perfect diary study setup. It all depends on you and your team as the researchers. When creating a diary study setup, we need to consider 2 main stakeholders: the researchers who will collect and work on the data and the participants side.

For the researchers

• Map out all the processes from the preparation to the end of the study to plan an effective workflow. Remember the nitty gritty that is possibly time-consuming.
• Do you need to filter out the data? Do you need to translate the data? Try to design the process so it can ease you up, especially if time constraint is also an issue you need to tackle.

For the participants.

• With the participants in mind, pick the most familiar tool as the study platform. A familiar tool eliminated the possibility of a dropout because of a hard-to-navigate platform.
• Ensure understanding of the instructions and facilitate them with a channel to ask questions during the study.

With these lessons learned, you are set to embark on a diary study prep! It might be daunting but if you prep the logistics well, you can nail it.

Have you done any diary studies? Anything you’ve done differently?

I’d love to hear your thoughts!

Chelsea is a design researcher at Somia CX. She has a degree in Psychology. Reach out to her via Linkedin.

Read my previous articles:

• Behind the Scenes of Pediatric Dental Study.
• Lessons Learned from Interviewing Vulnerable Participants

Lessons from Running A Diary Study was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

As a part of the Global Service Jam, Service Design Indonesia (SDID) hosted the Jakarta Service Jam 2025 on February 22–23, along with 42 other jams in various countries. Service Jam brings out the spirit of experimentation and focuses on ‘doing’ instead of talking, aiming to develop new ideas and prototype services, products, or initiatives inspired by a secret theme in just 48 hours. At the end of the jam, the ideas and insight collection will be published to other jammers globally.

It should have the same spirit as musicians’ jam — someone starts humming, then others fill in the rhythm, chord streaks, and harmony. In the Service Jam context, one may throw an idea through sketches, models, or even act it out, while other jammers can chime in and build prototypes together.

During the jam, participants will be working as a team. This year, we let participants form groups based on a topic they have common interests in. The topics range quite broadly, from healthcare, education, public transport, and lifestyle. As they had two days to develop their ideas, they got an opportunity testing their prototypes to actual users around Pasar Santa and Jl. Cikajang, where they got meaningful insights from them.

My previous experience hosting a jam was more structured, and participants were more guided by dedicated facilitators. This year, the SDID team decided to bring back the essence of jamming: experimental, explorative, and unguided!

During the event preparation, our discussion with Adam from GlobalJams HQ reminded us of something fundamental we had overlooked. Jams are supposed to go wrong — not only for the jammers but also for the hosts. As a host, we usually remind our jammers things like, ‘don’t worry, just iterate if it does not work!’. This mindset should be embodied not only by our jammers, but also the host.

Here are some personal learnings I got from hosting Jakarta Service Jam 2025:

1. Hosts Should Have an Iterative Mindset Too

Hosts are often seen as facilitators who set the stage and run by the plan. However, in the Service Jam context, hosts are encouraged to be iterative. Be open to jammers about iterating the event along the way. If something isn’t working, discuss and quickly ideate with your team, then try it out!

2. Listen to Participants and Tweak Accordingly

Feedback is collected not only at the end of the event but at several points during the event. By actively seeking feedback from jammers and adapting the process based on their needs, we can create a more collaborative and engaging environment.

3. Setting Clear Expectations for Jammers

Not everyone is familiar with what a jam is, so setting clear expectations of what a jam is — and how the jam itself is iterative — is important. Providing references to the prototyping process and guerilla testing is also helpful, especially for new jammers. Through this, participants can better understand the purpose and process of the jam.

4. Get Everyone Move Their Body!

Aligned with this year’s secret theme, ‘Physical Activity,’ we also created our rules according to the theme. Instead of grabbing attention through the usual clapping cue, we introduced a theme song where everyone had to stop whatever they were doing and start moving their body or dance to the music! It was not only attention grabbing, but also doubled up the fun and helps engage everyone in a collective activity.

Having the opportunity to host such a fun, activity-focused event with a #DoingNotTalking spirit, I really encourage more people to try hosting a Jam in their own city! Learn more about how to host a jam here.

Jakarta Service Jam 2025: Just Like Jammers, Hosts May Iterate Too! was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

I’ve been wondering about our profession as UX practitioners for quite a while, why in general it seems we are losing our charm. Throw back a couple of years ago, the profession is really hot. Every company needs help in building their next big digital platform, or how the more mature one started to build the team to tie together all their offerings to make it a cohesive experience for their customers. Everyone suddenly wants to become UX Designers or UX Researchers.

Recently, all we heard is about downsizing and how business switches back to their old setup, and usually the UX team is the one that let go. From ones that still have the team, we heard “My team couldn’t produce an outcome that is valued by the stakeholders.” What’s happening? Aren’t User Experience supposed to be grounded on evidence and that what helps us to have a seat at the table? Why are we suddenly considered not contributing anymore? Four experiences makes me think about our own mindset as an industry in doing our profession.

A. Jumping the bandwagon without understanding the process

During my experience interviewing candidates, I noticed a lot of people are switching careers to this industry due to the popularity and the enticing salary that it can offer. Many of them were enrolled in a bootcamp that helped them familiarize with the Human Centered Design process, a backbone approach for UX. But for some reason, many of the candidates are doing the approach for the sake of ticking the checkbox without actually understanding what they would get by doing it. It makes the work feel ‘broken’, there is no continuity between the problems we are trying to solve, their approach, data gathered, the analysis and the actual solutions produced.

B. An Approach becomes just a template

In the corporate world, I noticed that Human Centered Design (HCD) or Design Thinking (DT) sometimes are learned by using a series of templates (e.g empathy canvas, persona, pain and gain creators) but again losing why do we need to use it in the first place. HCD is reduced to templates to be filled without knowing the value we can get out of the approach. Worse, I encountered where HCD is reduced to be perceived as team bonding activity due to the ‘fun’ in interviewing respondents, role playing in prototyping and final presentation.

C. No room to actually practice and get grounded feedback

In talking to more senior practitioners I also noticed that how many years of experience they have doesn’t directly contribute to a better practitioners. If they are not within environments where there is room for them to actually apply and learn from the process all those years of experience becomes rather pointless. I personally encountered practitioners that have less experience can be sharper and produce greater output if they are in an environment where they constantly can practice and get grounded feedback from their stakeholders. Grounded as in understanding why certain actions could or couldn’t be done considering the company capabilities and limitations and the impact of it. Compared to more seasoned practitioners that has no space to apply the process and can only follow direct orders, they don’t have the space to learn to differentiate from good or bad actions. They don’t know which approach would be suitable within certain conditions. Or simply, they couldn’t back their decision properly. This is every practitioners’ job to make sure the environment they can control can be set up to facilitate constant learning.

D. We forget why we are here

One last thing that I observed, although I think is the most crucial, we sometimes forget that businesses create UX teams or employ UX services not out of charity. They hire us to serve their business goals. Everything we do is to serve those goals: by understanding what the business are trying to accomplish, by selecting appropriate approach that would get us closer to achieve the goals, by understanding our customers, internal flows and staff, the limitations and constraints, by analyzing the data and coming up with relevant solutions for those goals. Every opportunity that we encounter to achieve the business goals, regardless in which process, we should grab it whenever we have the chance.

• Noticed a different stakeholders that might contribute deeper understanding of the problem we are tackling but it’s not directly related? Talk to them!
• Found a new way to get data that help you understand the problems better? Try it!
• Found an interesting story within our participant session that you think is related with our business goals but outside of our predetermined questions? Ask it!
• Found a new idea in the middle of the session that we think it’d solve the business goals? Explore it!
• You feel that the initial approach you set up is no longer relevant and you think it’d be more beneficial to pivot? Do it!

What we are doing is not simply following UX processes. We do what we do to achieve the shared goal within the business. We need to make sure at the end of our project or milestone, we are answering or at least getting closer to that business goal.

We are not simply UX practitioners.
We are A Man & Woman on A Mission.

Uka is a Lead Design Consultant at Somia CX. In his spare time, he can be found trying out new coffee beans he ordered from his favorite roastery or trying to establish two-way communication with the neighborhood felines.

You can find out more about his writing here or visit his LinkedIn page to learn more and connect with him.

We Are A Man & Woman on A Mission was originally published in Somia CX Thoughts on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.