I was reading an interesting blog post on Instructional Design versus Experiential Design: do you have what it takes? by Koreen Olbrish. I have picked out a particularly interesting bit.Experiential learning is a process of learning by doing. According to David Kolb, an individual learns from personal experiences and from the environment.1. Having said this, I think it may be incorrect to deduce that elearning/workshops may not be able to provide experiential learning. In well designed programs, the learner can learn by doing and needless to say, he will learn from his own experiences and from the environment.2. Instructional design is based on the learner's true needs. Therefore, it will be a systematic layout of content if the learner truly needs this. Instructional design is about designing the program such that learning happens. Therefore, the type of instructional strategy suggested above is just one among millions.3. Even VLEs require to have a sound instructional base. Why? Your environment may be extremely real and may wow the learner. But, if you have learning presented in a manner where they are required to read off a book, attend a lecture in a VLE, or have information which is just difficult to find, this will make it less easy to learn. The learner may be better off with an eLearning program.4. Even games have boundaries, rules, logic that can be learnt very quickly. If these are defined well in an eLearning program, I think we can design experiential learning. If the learner gets to do things to learn, I think you have a good program. Again, it has to have a strong instructional base.5. I guess it is great if instructional designers break content into simpler chunks to ensure that they have a greater understanding of the content itself. But how the content should be presented, should be based on the learner's current knowledge and the skills that he wishes to acquire.6. I am a huge fan of VLEs provided the usability issues are removed. But, I think it may not be right to say that great eLearning programs and workshops cannot provide for experiential learning.7. I completely agree with Koreen that it requires a different kind of skill set to actually design experiential learning. It requires a lot of research into the learner's reality, the content itself, iteration in the design process, lots of brainstorming, and competent instructional designers, visual designers, and SMEs.8. Therefore, my point in a nutshell, it is never Instructional design versus Experiential design. If your learners are learning, there is always instructional design in work there. You may not have designed it your self. I remember @Abhinava mentioning the same during his session at the IDCI session. We learn a lot of things unconsciously but this is always backed up by good instructional design.What do you think?1. Can we ensure experiential learning in eLearning/workshops?2. Is experiential design truly possible only in a VLEs?3. Is instructional design always about simplifying content?

I was chatting with my colleague Yatin, when he jokingly told me 'Well, you don't seem to like the challenge then.' I always thought myself as a person who enjoyed challenges. I hate mechanical, dry, boring, work. I have to have to use my head, else my heart is not in it. And, I cannot work if my heart is not in it. So, then why did I not like that particular challenge?I like a challenge, when:1. I can see the light at the end of tunnel. I know that there is a way out. Like in games, when you know that you just have to keep planning your attack and finally you will get past to the next level.2. I am confident that I have what it takes. Let us face it. We are good at certain things and not so good at others. It is ok to accept that there are things that I do bad. What can I do about this? Think about how I can improve. Read more about it. Talk to people who are good at it. If it is not worth investing time in, I check whether someone else can help me do this while I focus on doing what I am really good at.3. I have all the resources that I need. I have everything I need to tackle this challenge. Or I know where I can find these resources. If I don't have the resources, the challenge is impossible to meet. Brings me to the next point...4. The challenge is truly attainable. Don't you just hate challenges that you can do nothing about it. Like a dead end in a game or an impossible opponet who refuses to die. As a gamer, I prefer to give up my life and redo things better. But the challenge has to be attainable, else I give it.5. The possibility of an 'epic win'. I have to know that I am close to an epic win. That I can crack this case. That I am soooo close that it will be stupid to give up. That I am on the verge of something great.6. I have the time and luxury to sort things out. Conquering a challenge requires clarity of thought. Therefore, I need time to figure things out. I need to sort things out in my head before I attempt to try my hand at this challenge.Have you ever given up a game because it was just too frustrating to continue? Have you felt so disappointed with loosing that you never try again? So, I think there are challenges and there are challenges. Some of them excite you and some of them scare you off. Some of them make you want to give it your best, while others make you want to quit. I think these are really useful when we design online training also. We use challenges to engage the learner, but this will fall flat if we don't:1. Make the challenges attainable.2. Show them light at the end of the tunnel.3. Reward them for right choices.4. Create situations where epic wins are possible.5. Provide necessary information to make the right decision.6. Give sufficient time to figure things out.

What are the 5 unlearnable elements that all IDs should steer clear off?1. DefinitionsDefinitions (especially poorly written ones) are not important. Look at a few examples.Negotiable instrument is a written document by which a right is created in favour of some person and this is transferable by delivery. Meaning?Credit is the provision of resources by one party to another party where that second party does not reimburse the first party immediately.Sounds confusing!Direct manipulation is a human-computer interaction style which involved continuous representation of objects of interest and rapid, reversible, incremental actions and feedback. Now in English please...How many of us are comfortable introducing a concept using a definition? Have we ever stopped to wonder how effective these definitions are? Here's what we typically do: Start any module with a definition because it makes the content look authentic. Then, we go on to simplify the definition further. If we stop to think about it, we may just realize how unlearnable these definitions are.Definitions are meant to simplify a concept. Help understand an idea/process better. Why is it important to share a definition when you can jump directly to the explanation? I remember in school how I had all the important definitions by heart. But looking back now, the visual depiction of evaporation or osmosis was far more useful in understanding the concept. Think about it. Is it important for a manager to know the definition of conflict or identify a conflict situation and react appropriately? Don't bother with definitions. They only intimidate or confuse the learner further and serve no learning purpose.2. HistoryWhy does man have the urge to start from the beginning? Why is it so important to know what happened in the past? When I learnt about computers, it started with history of computers. When I learnt about the Internet, it started with history. When I learn about Search Engines, it starts with history. Really, how important is this information to me? What can I do with the knowledge of history? When can you use history?Teach a scientist the history of a particular theory because it may important for him to know: 'This has already been tried and the results were 'this'. When you want to drive home the important of a current process vs a previous process. Common Craft Videos do this beautifully.Don't use it unless it is absolutely critical to learning. If your SME insists, move it to references.3. Information dumpSome eLearning applications look like a dump of information. What we need to understand is that SMEs (at least 99% of them) will give you information. Let me share an instance with you. I was handed responsibility of storyboarding for a technical skill-based course. I had a never ending content dump. Most of the content in this was theoretical and could be classified under information. When I asked the SME for examples to substantiate the theory, the SME told me: 'We have done all the research that need to be done. So you don't need any more information. All you need to do is make it learnable.' Sure. I didn't give up and thankfully I had another very cooperative SME. I would surf the Internet for suitable examples and get it validated. The content dump and the course look completely different.Next time you dump information in your storyboard, dont bother. Just mail the word document to the learners. Your eLearning is as learnable as the content dump. No one is going to give you information in the learnable format. It is our job to make it learnable. Make information learnable. Remove all the necessary content and get the real stuff out.4. VisualsSimply putting an attractive visual on the screen will not help the learner learn. I have seen SBs where the visuals are based on the least important information on the screen. Focus on designing learnable, useful visuals. They must support and reinforce what is being described.5. ExercisesExercises for the sake of it is a pure waste of time. The usefulness of the exercise is in danger if it is:1. Very obviousthe question is poorly designed and gives the answers awaythe question is really not important/too simplisticThe question does not require much thought (while designing or solving)2. Forced (because I have to add an exercise after 10 screens)Exercises also have to be learnable. They have to have a purpose. They must make the learner think.Next time, we start storyboarding let us not start with the definition, move to the history, dump information on screens, provide useless visuals, and add pointless exercises at regular intervals. What are the other common used unlearnable elements that you have witnessed?

Are you a designer? Are you inspired by one? Do you want to know how their mind works? Do you want a sneak peek into the kind of work they do? DezineConnect interviewed Neil Dantas, designer who designs graphical T-shirts with a strong social message. Read more here and be inspired!As an Instructional Designer, I think it is great that these sites bring us closer to the design community. There is so much we can learn from them. A little about DezineConnect:DezineConnect celebrates design from India. It connects creative people to the world. DezineConnect aims to showcase designers, design buyers, and design support people.If you know a great designer, who must be featured here, get in touch with the DezineConnect team. You can follow DezineConnect on Facebook and Twitter. Stay connected to see some interesting stuff!

The first few minutes of any interaction is crucial because the people involved are all judging what they are experiencing. This is true for face to face interaction, the first few pages of a book or movie, a phone conversation, and so on. First impressions... Have you ever picked up a novel and found it difficult to complete it? Have you sat in class and starting doodling or passing notes because you couldn't care less what the lecturer had to say? Have you formed an opinion to not like a movie just by looking at its trailer?First impressions... In learning also, first impressions are crucial. The first few seconds decide the fate of your course. The learner may just drop out or click Next continuously to 'get it done with'. If first impression is not positive, your great ID strategies within may just fall on deaf ears.Gain attention:1. Sets expectation: What is in it for me? and What is this all about?2. Get them thinking: Really?/ No way!/ So true!!3. Makes an impact: Strike an emotional chord. Touches the learner's heart. I don't mean 'mush' :)4. Makes them give you a chance: They want to hear/see more. You have their undivided attention.Types of gain attentions: Myth breaking: Break an existing Myth. There is nothing like challenging an individuals belief's systems. It triggers an emotion in them. If you prove what you say right, you may have found respect for your course. Fact Sharing: Share facts that will inspire/surprise them. Saying Roses are red isn't going to make them notice. Share information that will really interest them. Challenge/pretests: This is good for learners who believe they know it all and there is nothing more to learn and for demotivated learners. Do not test the learner. The objective is for him to understand where he stands, to judge himself. Don't try to trick him. (When should we use pretests?) Story/Scenarios: Make the learner empathize with a scenario or people in the scenario. Make them want to help the people out. Give them control over the destiny of another individual's lives. Creaet scenarios that will make them feel, 'Hey, this happens with me all the time!' or 'That's a tough one. How will she get out of it?' Make learners love/hate the characters. I think gain attentions should have 'depth'. Visuals is a way to communicate the message. But the visuals never become more important than the message itself. If you really on WOWing the learner based on just the 'look and feel', you may just manage to capture his attention for a few seconds.If you WOW the learner through an effective message, you will grab the learner's attention for way longer. Like Micheal Allen says what use is a fancy graphics and a spinning logo if it does not aid learning.I think we don't fuss about it enough. Gain attention makes your users sit up and notice. It makes them want to see what lies ahead. It makes an impression and they are willing to give you a chance. Grab it while you can!

I thought this video was very funny. I get the joke, seriously, I do! But what really gets to me is that most us may be working this way. I wish the designer had given an opinion, made a case for himself, suggested why certain things work and certain things don't. WAKE UP, man! As a designer, your job is not to create SOMETHING for the client. You job is to understand what your client wants, what is the goal of the project and then give your expert suggestions. They have hired you because you are an expert at what you do.In training, keep the learning goal and the learner as the focus. Back up your suggestions with logic for why it would work and why it wouldn't. Don't just give in because finally the client is bound to be disappointed with your work. Your work is to find out what will truly work and ensure that the client gets that. If they are still insistent, let them know you are not happy about it but will do as is suggested. They will treat you as an expert. They will ask you for your opinion. Why?They trust you are looking out for the good of the company. They realize that you are trying to do your job right. They will support you as your goal is in line with their goal.They realize that you know what you are talking about. You have the expertise in this field and that you rationalize things before you suggest them. You don't say no, I can't do it. You say this may not be good for the design because....You are part of their team and not just any vendor. They respect you and value your presence.So, do you have a spine? Do you blindly do as you have been told? Do you think for yourself before your execute? Do you behave like an expert? It is tough, but the least we can do is try and try really hard.Also read That Dirty Word -Creative and Getting Stuck and Unstuck.

I was reading 'Is it a dead-end for L&D professionals?' thoughts shared by Mathew Kuruvilla. In August, I had blogged on 8 Tips for the Training Department, but after reading this post I got an opportunity to understand things from the other side of the table. Mathew mentions:"Unless L&D professionals evolve to a more strategic role in the organization, it’s going to be dead end for them. L&D will always be treated as a support function to HR."If you are just filling in the training calender with courses no one needs, it is surely a dead end for these L&D professionals. When you read Mathew's thoughts, you will know exactly what the L&D needs to do to ensure that move to a more strategic role. What I am more interested is how can learning consultants help make this transition from L&D to T&D (Talent and Development)? What are the challenges that learning consultants face? How can these be overcome? Let us take this one at a time.How can learning consultants help L&D transition to T&D? For every project, start with a contextual inquiry. I have seen that contextual inquiry gives you a wider access into the organization. It gives a clear picture as to what gaps exist and these gaps may not necessarily be training related. We have suggested process changes, structural changes, training, and so on to address these gaps. Assessment centers also help the L&D departments understand the existing competencies and the areas of focus (if any). This will help identify the key needs to help the employees grow.What I truly appreciate in Mathew's interview was his 3-E mechanism: Education, Exposure, and Experience. This truly helps the employee grow in a more holistic fashion. Most times, we end up giving extra attention to just one of these aspects. These make the person who they are and therefore, it is important to understand this. Most L&D professionals consider their employees as a 'clean slate'. I have often heard my cousin from the IT industry grumble that he needs to take a compliance course every year because of a US law. He mentioned that the scenarios are tweaked but the same thing is presented year after year. Imagine the effect of this on motivation! Why not have a a simple check to ensure that the person still remembers what was taught. It is less painful for the employee and we have done our job of keeping the US government happy.The crux of the matter is that training decisions have to be strategic decisions. How will the employees benefit from this? Do they really need it? What am I hoping to achieve? If only more L&D professionals think like Mathew does.What are the challenges that learning consultants face? How can these be overcome?The article touches on the challenges that L&D professionals face. But what challenges do learning consultants face?1. We are treated more like vendors who execute training rather than consultants who provide suggestions. We know our work best and that's why we do it. Make your opinions count. Make them trust you to make the right suggestions. Be extremely transparent. Don't think about your pocket, think about success. Work as an extended team.2. We do not have access to the real learners. If your clients trust you, they will open the doors and give you all the access you need. If they know why you are suggesting a particular task, they will understand that you have only their interests at heart.3. Clients underestimate the importance of training. Give them holistic learning, not just training. Support them while they implement the training. Give them ideas and solutions to make learning a habit, to encourage transfer of knowledge. Your task does not end with implementation. You are an extended team that supports them when they need it. You do your work right and your clients will see the difference for themselves.Can we really help L&D professionals make this transition to T&D role? Are you going to stand by and watch them make this transition or are you going to make your presence and importance felt by helping them? I am quite sure there is a lot more to this. Please add to this or share your thoughts or critique mine.

I was reading Donald Clark's latest post on Funny Exam Answers. I found the Neils Bohr's incident particularly interesting. Read the post to understand what I am referring to. This had me thinking.Do we always assume that there is only one way to do something or one right answer?When we design assessments, do we fail to take into consideration that there may be more than one right answer?Do we ever consider that the subject we are dealing with may have gray areas and is not necessarily black and white?Do we take into account the fact that there are several variables in a real situation? Are we making it too simplistic and therefore, unusable because we fail to include the various permutations and combination that exist in real life?Do we restrict our learner's imagination and insult their experience by giving them multiple choice questions that keep in mind only one aspect of real life?Do we given them type in answers and then reprimand them for getting a spelling wrong or for not writing things the way we taught them?I remember an incident from my college days. My English teacher would recite a poetry and would ask us to interpret the meaning of a verse. I would always wonder that there are several interpretations that can be drawn out from poetry. It all depends on the way you look at it. Most of the times, we are going to have different people interpreting different things and very seldom there is one right answer. Also, I think we want our learner to think of several situations. They should be able to apply what they have learnt in different contexts using their discretion, knowledge, and experience. We do not want to make all learners similar by expecting them to behave in the exact same fashion. We want to encourage them to think and make the right choices. Read another post that I had written some time back on Exercises that help reflect on gray areas.Recently, we developed a small learning nugget on understanding your consumers and positioning a product. This nugget was meant as a refresher for an ILT program. The objective was very clear. The learner should be able to apply what he learnt during the ILT. He should be able to observe the farmer and his realities, identify what type of consumer this is and position a product accordingly. This was the learner's first experience to eLearning. During Learner testing, we realized that they wanted much more. They wanted more cases, they wanted to compare farmers, they wanted more variable factors and increase in complexity. Simplicity is fine, but pointless when it fails to capture the real influencing factors. The common misconception may as well be that simplicity means fewer variables. What I now understand is that multiple variable factors is far more realistic. So is it about simplicity vs. reality? Are we trying to equip the learners to deal with what is real or are we massaging their egos that giving them easy stuff? That's the question that needs to be answered.

I had this great opportunity of being at the right place, at the right time. What am I referring to? I got an opportunity to attend Geetha Krishnan's session at Kern during my one week long visit to Hyderabad. Geetha conducted a dynamite session where he introduced teasers that made us to think about several aspects of learning and technology. You can read (must read, actually) what was discussed during the session here. Now, given below are the truths and my response to these.  1. Learner's real world is full of distractions.Do we really assume that the we have the learner's undivided attention? We sure do. We think we have designed an absolutely compelling, thought provoking, visually appealing training program that will glue the learners to their seats. Keeping our massive egos aside, let us accept the truth. For the learner, this is 'just another training program.' There I have said it! They will do any or all of the following as they take your training program - take calls, chat, check their mails, scratch their head, think about what they are going to eat for dinner, talk to a colleague, wonder how long your training program is going to last, and so on. Think about it. We have done all these and more when we were in school/college. Why should our learners be any different? So, what can we do? Take your content dump and attack it with a butcher's knife. Chop out all the unnecessary things, slice out extra information, keep information that is directly linked to the learning objectives. Ensure that you keep your course as close to the learner's reality as possible. Why? Because this increases their chances of remembering it. During the session, Geetha mentioned that it is important that the content is 'familiar to the learner' but not 'obvious to the learner.' Don't teach him things he already knows. But, ensure that what you teach him is very close to his world. Design the course keeping in mind the learner's work and work environment. For example, we had to design training on grooming and personality development for sales executives of a retail store. They had to stop everything they did to attend to a customer. Therefore, we designed really short learning nuggets for them. On the other hand, in a very recent project, we were told that the learner will take this training program in the first three months of joining. First three months are totally dedicated to training, therefore, we know for sure that they will not be interrupted by customers.The advantage of eLearning is that they can revisit it whenever they want to. Therefore, do not expect them to remember everything. Ensure that the most important information registers. Strike an emotional chord. The higher the impact of training, the more interested they are going to be. Understand them before you design for them. Find out what makes them tick, what inspires them. During the session, Geetha Krishnan mentioned that he was not a big fan of usability testing as people tell you what you want to hear. I think any form of testing is an attempt in the right direction. Whether controlled or not, you are making an attempt to design for your learner. And if the interviews are conducted right, people are going to give you valuable information. 2. Learners in eLearning are quasi-customersFirst and foremost, I think it is great if teams truly design eLearning based on mental models of the learners. In most cases, it is typically the mental models of clients and IDs (or their bosses) that the team keeps in mind. Learner diversities can be kept in mind by doing extensive research during learner analysis. At Kern, we do contextual inquiry, mystery shopping (for sales related roles), interviews, observations, and secondary research to understand who our learners truly are. Based on the learner profiles, we also create learner personae if we see contradictory or a variety of prominent traits and characteristics. While I agree, that a trainer in a classroom has 30 participants in front of him and he needs to cater to different mindsets. I don't think this is any less true in online training. Having said that, I must accept that I have had a chance to meet and talk to learners in 90% of my projects. Some others are just not as lucky.  Also, I have attended training programs where the trainers have a very sketchy idea of who their participants are. They gauge the learner's reaction for half the day and then change their training style to meet the learner's needs. While it is great that these trainers think on their feet and quickly undo any damage done, I think half a day is crucial and if you don't make the right impression immediately, you have already been judged. Also, in most classroom sessions, you have only two days and therefore, half a day is a long time. Understanding who the learners are and how they will react to your program has to happen much earlier.3. Faculty considers technology to be their enemy.Why? Because they are worried that technology will make them redundant? They think that they may not be able to provide ALL the information a learner may need? They are scared of parting with 'their' content? Your guess is as good as mine. Another interesting thought that jumped to my mind is... why do ID's love technology? Because it gives them more control? It gives an opportunity to try fancy things or do things differently?4. If technology helps people learn, what do ID's do?As Geetha mentions, technology is only the 'way' a training module is delivered and ID the 'how'. Technology plays a crucial role in the learning experiences and therefore, must be selected carefully. Instead of the client telling you that they need an eLearning course, it should be derived from the learner's needs. It is not about using the latest technology to awe the learner. It is about using the most effective technology to deliver your training. Remember the technology that inspires you, may just scare your learner off. For a project, we wanted to introduce web 2.0 tools to encourage discussion and informal learning. But, during concept testing, we realized that our learners were not comfortable sharing their opinions out in the open. Therefore, technology must be decided based on the learner's needs/attitudes.This doesn't mean that we continue doing things the way we have been doing for ages. If we do not explore newer technology, how will we know the learner's reaction to it? Ensure that you do your research well, involve your learners, seek their feedback/opinion regularly. Geetha mentions that faculty love their content most. Do IDs love their technology and tools most? What do you think?5. Why are marketing and learning the first two industries to explore technologies?I do not think these industries are insecure. I believe they are early adopters and constant learners. From the learning industry's perspective, it is necessary to explore technology to know whether this will excite the learners, reduce drop out rates, engage them further, make learning more entwined with their work. I think it is important to add newer ways of delivering content to the already existing basket. You can pick from wider range of choices based on your learner's needs and your client's budget. I don't believe that a technology will replace another. I am reminded of this point that Geetha Krishnan brought up - Informal learning and networking will kill eLearning. While I agree that we can not design/control/measure informal learning, I don't believe that eLearning is going to die. Yes, eLearning as we have seen it or understand it, may cease to exist. But, it is not going to die. Secondly, Kern does not believe that eLearning is the only solution. While eLearning is our forte, we do understand that other forms of delivery may just be the answer to our learner's needs. This, I think, is the mark of a learning solutions company.  Informal learning is important. It has always existed. In online training, informal learning can ensure that the learner get an opportunity to share their thoughts and reach out to a wider audience. Having said that, informal learning will continue to take place even if you do not design avenues for it.6. Adult learners hate eLearning, why? I think adult learners hate training, period. It doesn't matter if it is eLearning or classroom training. When delivered at the wrong time to the wrong people, this is the response we are going to get. Discourage clients from implementing 'one size fits all' training programs. Encourage them to understand importance of customization and relevance to learners. Geetha opened my eyes to a very valid point. We teach within a very specific context and this context is typically true for that organization only. But when we design training for our clients, we try and ensure that it meets their organization objectives also. Training vs education is an interesting discussion. I think training meets an immediate need and education a larger need (which may not be obvious to the learner).7. Training happens at transition points.Training happens on a verge of a role change. This is why training is necessarily specific to the organization and this immediate need to ensure that they adjust well and quickly.  Geetha Krishnan also asked why people give so much importance to networking. I think it is the basic social need to be known and to connect. People want to share common experiences and find out what others are up to.Finally, is learning open-source? This is question Geetha left us to chew on as he ended his session. It left several more queries in my head and I am not sure if I am closer to an answer. Help me out, guys. Learning is open source. Everything is available on the Internet, on the job, and in the social interactions. Learning is also very personal to the learner. He draws his own inferences from the training based on his experiences, attitudes and his motivations or immediate need. Learning is open source today when you involve the learner in design, development, and implementation process. They have a say in what they are going to learn. They share their opinions and feedback. They have an opportunity to approve/disapprove. They have an opportunity to be more in control of what they learn.    

What is the point of choices if they do not work for you?This is the new tagline for the latest commercial of Monster India, a online job search site. The ads are funny and the message is really strong. Whenever I view this ad, I am reminded of how true this is in the learning arena also. Do we give our learner too much of content and expect them to choose what will suit them? I remember Geeta telling me that a client wanted a compliance training program that can cater to everyone in the organization. During my early years, Geeta drilled it into my head (and I am so glad for that) that we cannot have a single solution for EVERYONE. Compliance (for example) means different things for different people. For some, say the security staff, it may mean application-based knowledge while it may mean good to know information for certain roles.  Learning paths can also be confused as categorization of content. Content chunking as individual/independent topics is very different from learning paths. Learning paths are customized based on rationale such as age, role, gender, need, and so on. But giving learners access to different topics and expecting them to pick out what ever they want may become a case of giving them too many choices. How about features on the interface of an eLearning application? Do we add unnecessary features for the learners to use? Do we even stop to think whether it adds real value to the course and whether people truly use these features? We automatically include features that we think must be included such as audio, mute, transcripts, glossary, references, etc. The bottom line is the more unnecessary choices you give to the learner, the more confused he is going to be. He will not be able to figure out to do with them. Will leave you to think about this with this piece from The Paradox of Choice - Why More is Less by Barry SchwartzAbout six years ago, I went to the GAP to buy a pair of jeans. I tend to wear my jeans until they're falling apart, so it had been quite a while since my last purchase. A nice young salesperson walked up to me and asked if she could help. "I want a pair of jeans - 32-28," I said"Do you want them slim fit, easy fit, relaxed fit, baggy, or extra baggy?" she replied."Do you want them stone washed, acid-washed, or distressed? Do you want them button-fly or zipper-fly? Do you want them faded or regular?"I was stunned. A moment or two later I spluttered out something like, "I just want regular jeans. You know, the kind that used to be the only kind." I turned out she didn't know, but after consulting one of her older colleagues, she was able to figure out what "regular" jeans used to be, and she pointed me in the right direction. The jeans I chose turned out fine, but it occurred to me that day that buying a pair of pants should not be a daylong project. By creating all these options, the store undoubtedly had done a favor for customers with varied tastes and body types. However, by vastly expanding the range of choices, they had also created a new problem that needed to be solved. Before these options were available,, a buyer like myself had to settle for an imperfect fit, but at least purchasing jeans was a five-minute affair. Now it was a complex decision in which I was forced to invest time, energy, and no small amount of self-doubt, anxiety, and dread.