In simpler terms, if you don’t take the time to find your product truth and the surrounding environment, then your creative process is failing you.

This line you stated “A solution that doesn’t correctly assess the environment is not creative—it’s naïve.” nails it on the head directly.

Walt Disney used a three room creative process. Each room had a different function:

Room 1.
An “all things are possible” room with no restrictions or limits on creative ideas.

Room 2.
The co-ordination room where ideas were organized and sorted.

Room 3.
The “sweat box”. A critical review room where a project was picked apart and ideas were removed or changed.

A project would cycle in this process until it was refined enough to escape Room 3 in order to get approved for production. Implementing a similar process to this would eliminate the forced brainstorming in the boardroom approach that often ends in failure.

If we could solely focus on the aspect ratio we are designing for instead of a wide range of different monitor resolutions we would be better off. We could even design both standard and widescreen versions of a website, however this of course would require additional time which normally means a higher cost.

The main problem with the shift in monitor sizes and resolutions over the years is that traditionally we have designed for the common resolution in mind. This means the sites that we are designing right now for 1024×768 will need to be redesigned in the next few years for the next common resolution. It’s a problem that could be solved by browser technology but unfortunately we will have to wait and see what happens.

Laurence, I think government will eventually accept it because they’ll be forced to. It’s like Ryan said at the event (I’m paraphrasing), governments have an opportunity to embrace web 2.0 or they’ll be forced to change over time as the younger generations age. Harper doesn’t believe it because he’s publicly denied that social media has power, but I would invite him to consider how his policies are being shaped by online debate. What’s more is if Harper ever wants a majority he should embrace social media. I don’t want to bring up the Obama example again, but social media works for political organizing, fund-raising and messaging. In 2010, if a political party can win the public relations war online they’ll capture a huge chunk of the under 35 group and many more.

I wonder which ones I’d vote for?

I met a man from the county government in Minnesota several years ago and he was working hard to move government services out in the community — get a new driver’s license, and a liquor permit, and pay your water bill all from your branch library. No more trips to City Hall, etc.

Going online makes it even easier (for some) but everything is predicated on putting the citizen at the middle of things. A great many of the issues people have with government are customer service issues.

Did you sessions challenge the assumption of the government as a provider of services? Tim O’Reilly talks a lot about ‘Government 2.0′ and creating platforms so citizens can do more for themselves, rather than government as a vending machine who dispenses services. (here’s a video clip: http://bit.ly/dcsizs ) Not sure how I feel about this, but I’m intrigued by the possibilities.