On September 8th, Dave Gray gave his first visual thinking workshop at the MaRS Centre in Toronto. Gray is the founder and proprietor of XPLANE, a St. Louis-based consultancy that earns its keep by explaining complicated ideas, gimmicks, and processes using illustrations. XPLANE makes info-graphics, in other words. What makes these info-graphics somewhat unique is the fusion of technical diagram and Hergé-esque cartoon. Indeed, Gray’s book-length brochure, Selling to the VP of NO (2003), looks a bit like a Tin Tin adventure set in Kafka’s castle. The overall effect of this style is more playful and eye-catching than, say, the very literal info-graphics found in science magazines. Gray’s refrain is that visual stories and maps are a more attention-grabbing, memorable, and ultimately persuasive way of communicating. Humans are visual animals; the optic nerve is a direct route to the brain. Many humans are also visual thinkers: a “visio-spatial sketchpad” (i.e., visual sensory register) helps interpret and remember visual information. Doodles, icons, and diagrams are popular forms of expression that can be used to communicate ideas via this mental sketchpad. Entrepreneurial business folk, always on the look-out for new ways to influence, seem to eat this stuff up. That’s why his company’s work adorns the pages of the pop business press (e.g., Business 2.0) and the halls of many corporations (e.g., Microsoft).

I’ve long been a fan of Gray and the information designers who work for him. I’m convinced that expressing complex models, processes, and mechanics using these techniques will do wonders to overcome the Attention Deficit Disorder of time-starved decision-makers. More to the point, info-graphics are a vivid way of explaining highly technical ideas to lay-persons. That is why newspapers and popular magazines often invest in these techniques. So I traveled to Toronto and took part in the workshop. Gray stressed that the workshop was a pilot (a “beta version”), something to keep in mind as you read my comments.

The actual title of the half-day workshop is “The Power of Pictonics: Using visualization to tell your technology story.” Confusingly, the notion of “pictonics” never came up. There is a Pictonics Group web site run by Gray’s company. The site claims that pictonics is a “visual language system” inspired by Otto Neurath, a visionary who invented a set of pictograms called Isotype early in the last century. (Apologies for the unintentional pun.) Neurath’s goal was to create a universal language using iconography. The XPLANE web site claims that pictonics is a “proprietary visual language and consulting methodology,” which suggests something a little less universal in spirit. In any case, the Isotype-like examples found on the Pictonics Group site never made it into the course. Gray himself preferred to use the term “visual thinking” instead, which is also the name given to his on-line course hosted by the e-learning site Squidoo.

From what I can discern, the workshop mostly draws from five sources: (a.) the in-house training of employees at XPLANE; (b.) techniques used to sell info-graphics to XPLANE clients; (c.) ideas from Gray’s on-line course and blog; (d.) ideas developed for a book Gray is planning to write about visual thinking; and (e.) Gray’s personal reflections after working in this field for more than two decades. These insights are wrapped up into a rapid-fire slideshow,1 interrupted periodically by exercises involving audience members. Some photographs of the event have been posted here.

I won’t describe the workshop in its entirety, partly because I couldn’t do it justice and partly because it’s a work in progress. Instead, I’ll highlight a couple of ideas I found particularly interesting.

Early in the workshop it becomes clear that visual thinking and explanation are a central part of Gray’s lifestyle. Gray is an illustrator and painter. He carries a pocket-sized digital camera, Moleskine sketchbook, and index cards with him where ever he goes. He is always looking for sources of inspiration, or sometimes just curios that he finds interesting. His tablet computer allows him to sketch digitally, post photos on the Web, and blog. Part of the workshop revolves around trading tips about how to be a more visually oriented person. All this reminds me of Daniel Pink’s A Whole New Mind (2005), a book that stresses the need to exercise the artistic and empathetic side of our brain. Pink devotes a chapter to design that contains advice, similar to Gray’s, about collecting design ideas and seeking out sources of inspiration. Gray and Pink are exactly right about the need to become a more aesthetically aware person in order to practice this mode of communication.

The core of the workshop is about overcoming obstacles to communication. Gray claimed that we all have a “comfort zone” that determines how receptive we are to new ideas. When we are exposed to new things that are outside of this zone, greater effort and will is required to learn them; that is, “cognitive friction” or “dissonance” occurs. Our comfort zone is defined in part by existing mental models and our biases. Gray briefly lists several commonplace biases. There is the confirmation bias, or the tendency to only believe evidence that supports a previously held view. Not believing evidence that conflicts with that view is the disconfirmation bias. The bias blindspot is a tendency to see oneself as unbiased but see others as biased. The illusion of control is an over-estimation of one’s own power, whereas the control-support bias is the over-confidence in one’s own decisions. People value something more when they have a sense of ownership over it, which is called the endowment effect. When someone values something simply because others do too, that is called the bandwagon effect. Gray argues you shouldn’t challenge a person’s comfort zone head-on if you are trying to communicate. Instead, you begin an explanation within a person’s comfort zone and then move them towards a new way of thinking by selling new way of seeing things. You “start with what they know,” simply put.

The information designer must also think carefully about what the old and new mental models consist of. Gray advocates breaking down ideas into nodes and links. A node is simply a piece of information, such as a concept or a stage in a process. A link is a pattern or flow between nodes; that is, the way pieces of information fit together in space or time. Gray prefers to write down or draw nodes on index cards (or post-it notes) and then explore the linkages between them. This exercise is an important process of discovery as people discuss how the nodes fit together. Ultimately, the nodes and links are turned into a larger picture. If the picture is more spatial, then it will tend to resemble a map. If it is more sequential and episodic, then it will tend to resemble a visual story. Stories are better for leading another person through a chain of logic. Maps are better for allowing another person to peruse a set of interconnected ideas at their own pace. Regardless of what type of picture emerges, it should not have more than twelve nodes according to Gray as a rule of thumb; any more and it becomes overly complex and difficult to remember. Much time is spent simplifying the picture into its essential nodes and links (“boiling it down”).

To reinforce the point, workshop participants were asked to draw an info-graphic to explain how a toaster works. The exercise is revealing because it encourages a person to think about a common object and break it down into its main elements (e.g., bread, heat, time for cooking, et cetera). A collection of toaster info-graphics can be found here. My info-graphic is here and here. On the trip back from Toronto, I decided to take another crack at this exercise on my laptop using a couple of vector drawing programmes (SketchUp and Illustrator). Here is the result.

Notice that this info-graphic is basically a story in form because it describes a sequence of steps. It is interesting that my first attempt failed to include nodes as elementary as heat and bread slicing. I took important nodes for granted that others might not have. (I chose to omit instructions for plugging the toaster into an electrical socket. I also removed the time for cooking icon as I tried to express only the elementary parts of the story.)

Interestingly, some workshop participants chose to explain how a toaster works using a cut-away diagram showing the inner mechanics of the toaster. That is a common info-graphic format within fields such as engineering and product design. Yet, XPLANE doesn’t tend to create info-graphics of that format and, thus, it was left undiscussed in the workshop.

For an example that is more akin to a map, I draw your attention to an info-graphic that I composed a years ago (using Illustrator and an isometric plug-in). It shows the official accountability duties of senior officials within the Westminster model of democratic government, specifically the variant found in Canada. It’s a work in progress that would undoubtedly benefit from some refinement. Creating it was not easy because of the conceptual ambiguity associated with accountability and related duties, plus the vagueness of the actual procedural rules and constitutional conventions. Here is the result.

In this case, connections across space are used to depict relationships between the various players in the system. For example, differences in elevation (indicated by the stairs) signify differences in rank. Differences in path colour (the traffic signal green, yellow, and red) signify differences in risk. Specific risk statements are denoted with the same colours, along with iconographic shapes. Unlike the toaster info-graphic, this one is designed for perusal and has many more nodes. A legend provides some guidance, much like you would expect from an actual map.

Some of the map-based info-graphics created by XPLANE can get very complicated, sometimes with different levels of detail to allow a person to “drill down” for more information. Examples of some of XPLANE’s info-graphics can be found here (plus here and here). In the foyer outside of the classroom, Gray put on an exhibit of other examples from his shop that are far better (stylistically and in terms of explanatory power).

This type of info-graphic has always left me wondering about how broad the intended audience can be. Many information design gurus—I’m thinking Robert Harris, Edward Tufte and, indeed, Otto Neurath—aspire to create pictorial explanations that are universally understandable. A good example is Edward Tufte’s instructions for using a stereo (shown here), which he designed for a company called Bose. This info-graphic contains no words and has been used throughout the world without modification. It is very literal. Many of the XPLANE info-graphics fall short of this ideal, partly because they are tailored to particular audiences and partly because they often address fuzzier subjects (such as business models). XPLANE info-graphics tend to include more words and comic-book techniques (such as character poses, facial expressions, and hypothetical encounters). A few things that Gray has said lead me to believe that he is a bit sceptical of those who hold universality as the ultimate goal of information design. Communicating with a particular audience seems to be his overriding concern. And Gray readily admits that a certain percentage of the population just doesn’t like receiving information in this way.

How can communication be made more interesting and memorable? According to Gray, tugging on emotional strings helps. Adding humour works too. Providing the necessary context makes it easier for people to recognize familiar items. Tension and carefully inserted interruptions (such as cliffhangers) can create a sense of drama. Periodic repetition can reinforce key points. All of this makes sense. Gray uses many of these ingredients to make his workshop engaging. However, it is not made entirely clear how all of these ingredients relate to info-graphics. Some ingredients seem a natural fit (humour); others quite irrelevant (interruptions); and yet others contradict the need for visual clarity and the avoidance of clutter (repetition). Gray’s main point is that pictures often have a built-in advantage over words in many of these areas. However, he has more work to do to explain how those elements improve info-graphics so that they better grab attention and remain memorable. I suspect that Gray didn’t go into depth on this topic because he didn’t want to get too bogged down in the technicalities of illustration.

It is on that note that I should mention the intended audience. The audience of the actual workshop was quite diverse, ranging from besuited venture capitalists to software developers to graphic artists. To some extent this reflects the client base of MaRS, a non-profit institute that uses networks to bring high tech innovations to market for the benefit of the provincial economy. Gray’s workshop was pitched at a level that suits this diversity: describing the visual thinking ideas behind the design of info-graphics without getting into too many technicalities. Shortly after the workshop, Gray found himself teaching a class in a graphic design course (at Bradley University in Peoria, USA). From what I can gather from Gray’s blog, this was a far more technical look at the artistic design of info-graphics. It will be interesting to see if, at some time in the future, the two workshops are combined to create a more fully fledged course about info-graphics.

So, in conclusion, I highly recommend Gray’s workshop. Even if you are already familiar with visual thinking, Gray offers a number of practical lessons that makes the workshop well worth the time. And if you don’t know much about the topic, I strongly encourage you to check out Gray’s on-line course and attend his workshop if he holds another one in a city near you.

Review by Peter Stoyko

NOTES

1. The rapid-fire slideshow had over a thousand slides, many of which contained only a word or two. This “corporate hip-hop” method of presentation is credited to Laurence Lessig, the law professor from Stanford University. Gray was experimenting with it for the first time. Overall, I think the method was a success as a way of captivating an audience. It is certainly an improvement over the vapid bullet-point slideshows that have become the bane of the modern workplace.

REFERENCES