BLUE SKY REDEMPTION
Some time ago, when I was applying for my first job, an interviewer asked me the following question: "Completely blue sky, that is ignoring any monetary or technical constraints, describe for me the perfect shower controls." Up until then, things had been going very well. It took me a long time to realize exactly how badly I screwed up the answer to this question. The only way I could have made more certain that I did not get the job would have been to mention the interviewer's daughter in my answer.
The short version of what I did wrong? I forgot about the "blue sky" part of the question. You're not getting the long version, I don't want to talk about it. As someone who prides himself on creativity and intelligence, I'm still intensely embarrased at my incredible failure to use either of those traits to answer the question.
Since the day I realized what I had done, I have spent some time thinking about how to properly answer such a question. For lack of anything better to do today, I'm going to share some of these thoughts with you.
First, one must consider: what is the ultimate purpose of a shower? If you do not understand what people intend to get out of the experience, you will not be able to give them the means to get it. So, what DO people want from a shower?
Well, to get clean, for one. Well if that's the case (and I'm going to argue in a moment that it's not the only case), and we take "without constraints" to mean "without constraints" why do we even need the shower, let alone the controls? Why not assume a device that is capable of cleaning a person in a much less intrusive and less time intensive manner? Assume, instead, we could build a device into a doorframe that automatically (and unobtrusively) removes dirt and oils from you and your clothes every time you walk through it; or assume a piece of jewelry that acts to prevent you from ever getting dirty in the first place. Think of all the time such a device would save. Think about how inconvenient the shower-as-cleaning-device really is and get rid of it. In other words, if we're assuming our point is cleanliness and we have a blue sky to do it in, we're assuming a world that doesn't bother with showers.
But... if we take a closer look, cleaning ourselves isn't really the only use we have for showers. Humans, as I'm fond of pointing out, have never limited themselves to using a thing solely for its original purpose (some would argue that this tendency is exactly what makes us human). Some people instead use showers to warm up on a cold day, to cool off after a hard workout. Some people use them to wake up (slowly or suddenly). Some people simply enjoy the sensation of standing beneath a stream of water (with or without company). In other words, besides cleanliness, we also simply enjoy the feel of a shower and will use one for that purpose alone.
A tiny device, in a blue sky world, might be capable of providing the same sensations without the extra room or, say, the skin drying effects, but even so, controls would be required.
Now that I've demonstrated that I really can think "blue sky," I'll get around to answering the actual question. Not that the previous discussion was useless, it serves to point us towards the purpose of showers (or the simulation thereof) in a "blue sky" world: sensation.
Actually, I'm not going to get around to that question quite yet. After we figure out WHY we're controlling a thing, we need to understand WHAT we can control about it. What dimensions exist within the context of the shower that we would wish to have under our control?
Your typical shower today gives you control over temperature and flow (although these are not usually independent). Some shower heads then give you further control over the
force of the water, the shape, and the output pattern (massaging or steady) - again, not usually independent. The shower-head-on-a-hose attachment, although not often considered a control does act as onel; it is a means of controlling the direction of water flow. What else is there we could control about the shower? How about the size of the droplets? If we really have complete control, we could provide a full range from atomized mist to a solid stream (my personal favorite).
Here, then, is a quick list of the various factors we might possibly wish to control if it was in our power to do so (and keeping in mind that sensation is our goal): water temperature, water volume, water pressure, pressure pattern over time, droplet size, direction, coverage, air temperature (yes, air temperature - ever stepped from a warm shower into a cold bathroom? Then you know why you might want to integrate air temperature into shower controls). I'm sure there are others.
That's a lot for one person to worry about. In a pure "blue sky" world, however, the user shouldn't have to worry at all. The shower would be able to read the user's neurological activity and manipulate the environment from there. Step into the shower, think to yourself "today I feel like a warm, misty kind of shower" and it will take care of itself. Too warm? The shower will adjust based on your preferred comfort level (keeping in mind that some people prefer showers to be just short of painful). There would need to be some indication for first time users that this is how the shower operates or they will spend a long time looking for a knob before they step in. Although such a notification would become less and less necessary as such a shower gained wider adoptance.
On top of the mind reading, designers would probably also want to install an emergency cutoff just in case something malfunctioned (assuming everything will always work as planned is a quick and easy way to get into serious trouble - even in a blue sky world). Such a cutoff would have to be easy to find with your eyes closed, reachable from a prone position (in case of a fall), and not blocked by the source of water.
Now if mind reading is a little too-blue-bordering-on-the-black-of-space, there are other options. Voice control would be my next choice (assuming, of course, that this blue sky world has technology that can handle conversational style voice commands in such an accoustically hostile environment), namely because it's incredibly versatile, and fits all the requirements listed above for the emergency cut off: accessible with water in your eyes, accessible in case of accident, and not blocked by the source of water (to be safe, you'd probably still want a physical cut off option). The only thing it does not do, that mind reading would not require, is remind the user what adjustments are actually possible. If it never occurs to the user that they can adjust the droplet size, they will never make an attempt to do so. One way to address that concern would be a list of features that displays when you first perpare for the shower (and which can be told not to after you've owned the shower long enough) and could be redisplayed (or spoken out loud) during the shower at the user's request.
There are plenty of other considerations such as individual defaults ("Hey shower, it's Bob, I think I'd like my 'Workout Cooldown' preset this time.") and additional non-shower-specific features ("Turn the radio on to DC 101, and remind me I've been in here too long after about ten minutes."). Physical controls, or even reduced functionality voice controls (that is, predefined instead of conversational), would be a whole new issue but this post is already long enough. I think you get the picture.
Next time I get a blue sky question, I'll do better (it would be hard not to).
8 comments:
Someone actually asked you that in an interview? What kind of job was that for? I always hated interview questions like that because the ability to answer some snap question without context is not likely to be correlated with job performance. Unless you were experienced at designing shower controls, it is not really a relevant question.
I love these types of interview questions, myself.
It allows the interviewer to reach beyond the boring constraints of the typical resume regurgitating inquires and painfully common where-do-you-see-yourself-in-5-years genre of responses. It also gives the interviewee the chance to really stand out from an otherwise uniform sea of applicants.
Mike, the point of this question is not to measure the interviewee’s knowledge of plumbing, home appliances, or sensors & controls, but instead to allow the applicant to demonstrate some insight as to the type of person they are and the potential they represent. It’s the characteristic intangibles of people that this type of question strives to answer…the sort of stuff that separates two otherwise identical applicants from one another.
Personally, I would have had trouble getting beyond the term ‘shower controls’.
I would have started with putting the controls on the outside of the shower. There is no reason to have to stick any part of your body inside a shower and risk premature hydration.
Next, I would have the temperature control start on the hot side and go to cold, rather than the opposite standardization we have today. How often do you really take a cold shower or bath? Answer: very rarely. Thus, why force your user to manually and repeatedly skip through those undesired settings?
Next, I would make sure to have a physical temperature gauge measuring the actual water temperature so as to inform the user when the shower was ready to enter. No more of that archaic ‘stick your hand into the stream’ test. That, much like ‘The Dipstick Method’ used to determine the status of a newborn’s diaper, is something best left in our past. (Dave Barry forever!)
Finally, once the user had entered the shower, I would have a readily visible gauge representing a water consumption meter, featuring the amount of hot water accessible in both a gallons-available and time-remaining format.
I would probably have never gone into the level of detail that Rob has represented, though, since, as mentioned previously, the term ‘shower controls’ would have fundamentally limited my response. Thus, Rob has retained the title of 'Best Answer to A Completely Out-Dated and Statistically Insignificant Question’.
Congrats, Rob. It was a hard fought battle, but your victory was clearly earned.
-J
Staring for a long time at the shower controls, paralyzed about what to do? Sounds like the old Dwelling shower to me...
(By the way, I now feel really cool whenever I encounter a shower like that one, as I do not have to run out in various states of undress to my hosts and ask how to turn it on. Thank you 1940's plumbing and Wesley Mem.)
Actually, Mike, it was an interview for "Blue Sky Shower Controls, Inc." so I probably should have seen that question coming...
On a more honest note, it was one of those questions where they want you to demonstrate your thought process as you go . . . explain what you're thinking each step of the way - kind of like doing a Fermi problem out loud.
---------
Jamie, thank you for letting me keep my title. For purposes of stroking my own ego, I have shortened it to "Best Answer" (I thought about just going with "Best" but decided against it so I can retain earlier "Humble" awards).
------
For those of you unaware of what Meredith is talking about, the Dwelling shower appeared designed to deliberately confuse the first time user. To switch water from the tub faucet to the shower head, one had to pull down on the lip of the tub faucet. Nor was it obvious that this was even possible, let alone a required act. Most bizarre. Fortunately, as an official Dweller, my initial frustration was well repaid in a) not having to ask for instructions when I have encountered such faucets since and b) guests at the Dwelling. I would generally warn them ahead of time but sometimes I forgot, sometimes I just felt mischievous, and sometimes . . . well I'll just reference the phrase "various states of undress" and let you draw your own conclusions about my motives.
Well I tried to defend you, but you had to go and ruin it, Rob! I guess the fact that it was a shower control control company does make it particularly relevant.
As to Jamie's comment. I hate all of those standard interview questions including, "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" I prefer interviews that involve discussions of professionally relevant topics, like projects you have worked on, past challenges etc. Those tend reveal whether or not you know what you are talking about really quickly. They are also reveal your ability to communicate your ideas to others.
My first thought was pretty much the same as Mike's -- what they hell kind of interview question was that. After pondering for a bit and reading the other comments I can see how questions like that could be useful, but you'd think having a question more relevant to the actual company/job would be better (I'm assuming that you weren't actually interviewing for Blue Sky Shower Controls - they went under after their infamous tub faucet lip pull-down design). I don't know how would you compare answers for something that doesn't have much to do with the job- Joe brought up the mind-reading capabiltiy but Bill did mention droplet size?? For example, if you're interviewing for a programming job you could spin that question very easily to something more relevant and specific that you could judge people's answers...design a software architecture to simulate futuristic shower controls.
Having had some limited experience giving interviews, I have to give some credit for creativity...coming up with good interview questions is a pain.
Personally, I prefer questions such as "can you give some first-hand observations as to the differences between the Maine and Vermont mountains" or "hey, do you want to just skip this interview and go for a hike?" Sadly, these have never come up.
My first thought was about manipulating the details of the shower. For instance, touch controls with big LCD displays at eye level instead of shin level and things like that. But I like where you've taking the whole blue sky shower debate now, that being, into the level of adding features to maximize relaxation. I would just like to add a few features to those controls. First, ambient lighting. Not just in amounts but also in colors and directions. Replicate a sunrise or moonlit night. Secondly, sound. Music volume or sound effects to give it that true waterfall in the jungle sort of feeling. And finally and most importantly, companionship.
-Bruce
Post a Comment