The time I announced with a straight face at a DX training session that we should 'implant helmets into our heads'

About two years ago, I was selected as a member of the DX promotion team at my company.

It was an activity where people were gathered from various departments to study IT knowledge and promote the company's DX.

I think it was a pretty serious initiative for the company as well.

At first, I participated quite seriously too.

It was a training program to learn the basics of IT, data utilization, business improvement, design thinking, and so on.

There was a lot of content that was different from my usual production engineering work, and there was a lot to learn.

There were about 12 people from the same company participating.

Our departments, ages, and job types were all different.

At first, everyone was a little distant.

That's only natural.

People from departments that don't usually interact were gathered together,

"Okay, let's learn DX from now on."

That's what we were told.

It would be strange if we suddenly became friends.

At first, everyone was putting on their professional faces.

Listening seriously.
Taking notes seriously.
Doing exercises seriously.
Presenting seriously.

We are adults, after all.

However, the training wasn't just a one-time thing.

We participated in the training many times over the course of about a year.

As we did, the distance between us gradually closed.

People who initially addressed each other by surname and 'san' started talking more casually.

We started chatting about trivial things during breaks.

Light jokes started appearing in group exercises.

Someone would mess around a little.

Someone else would go along with it.

And little by little, everyone started to realize.

This group is surprisingly okay with messing around.

From there, the atmosphere of the group exercises changed a little.

Of course, since it was training, we were still doing it seriously.

However, doing things seriously and messing around with a straight face are not mutually exclusive.

I think we had realized that.

One time, there was a design thinking training session.

Design thinking.

It's a very buzzword-y term.

Find user pain points.
Empathize.
Define the problem.
Expand ideas.
Prototype.
Verify.

Roughly speaking, I think that's what it was.

In that training, we had to think about a certain theme.

The problem of not wanting to wear a helmet.

The helmets used in factories and on-site.

I understand that they are necessary for safety.

However, there are people who don't want to wear them.

It's hot.
It's stuffy.
It ruins my hairstyle.
It's heavy.
It's a hassle.
I forget it.
It doesn't suit me.

There are various reasons.

Normally, I think the solutions to consider here would be these:

Make it lighter.
Improve breathability.
Improve the design.
Make it more comfortable to wear.
Attach sensors.
Manage wearing status.
Come up with better storage locations.

Realistically, this is probably the right direction.

However, our group had already matured a bit.

We had reached an atmosphere where it was acceptable to propose stupid ideas with a straight face.

Then someone said,

"Wouldn't it be better to just implant the helmet into our heads?"

There was a moment of silence.

And then, everyone understood.

Why didn't we think of that?

Don't want to wear a helmet.
Then don't wear one.

But safety is necessary.
Then just keep your head protected at all times.

How do you keep your head protected at all times?

Just implant a helmet into your head.

As a logic, it holds up.

As a human being, it's quite insane.

But as a logic, it holds up.

This is important.

We decided to seriously develop that idea.

The act of wearing a helmet disappears.
No hassle of putting it on or taking it off.
No forgetting it either.
No need to manage who isn't wearing one.
No need to say "Please wear your helmet" at the morning assembly.
Since it's integrated, you're safe from the moment you enter the site.

Amazing.

All problems are solved.

Except for human rights.

Even so, we seriously made presentation materials.

It's training.

It's design thinking.

We must solve the user's problem.

The user doesn't want to wear a helmet.
The company wants to ensure safety.
The site wants to reduce management hassle.

So, we implant it into the head.

Problem solved.

The time for the presentation came.

I made as serious a face as possible.

In times like this, you must not laugh.

The more ridiculous the idea, the better it is to present it seriously.

"This time, we focused on the problem of not wanting to wear a helmet."

A normal opening.

"On-site, helmets are necessary for safety. However, on the other hand, there are issues such as it being hot, stuffy, a hassle, and forgetting it."

Still normal.

"So, we thought, can't we eliminate the act of wearing a helmet itself?"

It started to get a bit suspicious.

"What we are proposing is a head-integrated helmet."

It's already over.

But my face is serious.

I think at that moment, with a very serious face, I said,

"We will implant the helmet into the head."

At that moment, the air in the conference room stopped for just a second.

And the next moment, everyone laughed.

I said it.

At a company DX training session.

At a design thinking presentation.

In front of members gathered from various departments.

I said with a straight face that we should implant helmets into our heads.

As a result, it was quite well-received.

At least, it was highly evaluated by the members.

"That was good."

"It's unfair to say it with a serious face."
"It's annoying that it actually makes sense."
"As an idea, it's not wrong."
I think that's how it was.

Of course, you really shouldn't implant a helmet into your head.

I'll write this just in case.

You really shouldn't do it.

Beyond safety, there are quite a few problems.

However, I don't think that presentation at that time was just a prank.

No, it was quite a prank.

I admit that.

But it wasn't completely meaningless.

In design thinking and brainstorming, if you try to come up with only realistic ideas from the start, you usually end up with similar conclusions.

Let's make it lighter.

Let's improve breathability.
Let's improve the design.
Let's change the management method.
Of course, those are important.

Those are the realistic ideas that can actually be used at work.

But if that's all there is, it becomes a foregone conclusion.

It just becomes renaming ideas that someone else has probably already thought of.

Once, you swing to an impossible extreme.

Then, the premises become visible.

It's not that wearing a helmet is a hassle.

Perhaps the process of "wearing" itself is the burden.
It's not that forgetting it is the problem.

Perhaps "managing it as a personal item" is the burden.
It's not that safety gear is disliked.

Perhaps the "feeling of being forced to wear it" is what's disliked.
Stupid ideas aren't there to be adopted as is.

They are there to break the premises.

The idea of implanting a helmet into the head cannot be adopted, as expected.

It probably wouldn't pass the approval process either.

If it did, it would be scary.

However, by putting that idea out there once,

"Why do people dislike helmets in the first place?"

"What part of the act of wearing them is a burden?"
"How can we balance safety and comfort?"
"How can we reduce the feeling of being managed?"
You can move on to these questions.

Thinking about it that way, that prank wasn't completely wrong as design thinking.

Rather, I feel like we were standing right at the entrance.

Even if the exit was body modification.

At work, the more serious the setting, the more you have to keep a serious face.

Meetings.

Training.
Reports.
Improvement proposals.
Projects.
Everything is serious.

Of course, you shouldn't mess around too much.

You shouldn't ruin the atmosphere.

You shouldn't waste others' time.

However, if you are too serious, your thinking can become narrow.

"Is it okay to say this?"

"Won't they think it's a weird idea?"
"It's not realistic, so let's stop."
"It's impossible anyway, so let's not bring it up."
If you keep cutting things down like that, what remains at the end are only safe, boring ideas.

Safe ideas are hard to get scolded for.

But they are hard to expand upon.

On the other hand, stupid ideas are dangerous.

If you misread the room, you just become a person who messes around.

If your boss has a straight face, it's over.

If the training instructor has a straight face, it's even more over.

But if a relationship has been built and the purpose of the setting is to "expand ideas," there are times when it's better to bring up a stupid idea at least once.

Of course, you need to return to reality at the end.

You shouldn't put the idea of implanting a helmet into the head into the capital investment plan as is.

You shouldn't apply for a budget for "body modification costs."

The purchasing department will be troubled.

The accounting department will be troubled.

You yourself will be troubled.

However, if you return after going that far once, the way you see realistic ideas changes a little.

Is just making the helmet lighter enough?

Can't we change the timing of wearing it?
Can't we change where it's stored?
Can't we make it feel like a hat?
Can't we make wearing it a system rather than a warning?
Can't we create a reason to want to wear it?
That way, the breadth of your thinking expands just a little.

I think this kind of time is necessary for serious work as well.

Before coming up with the correct answer, step away from the correct answer just once.

Before returning to realistic ideas, break reality just once.

Try implanting a helmet into your head only inside the conference room.

Of course, it's a metaphor.

You really shouldn't implant it.

I have always had a habit of telling jokes with a straight face.

Moreover, I think I like not just saying weird things, but saying things that are so impossible as if they make perfect sense.

From the other person's perspective, it might be a bit annoying.

Sometimes they wonder, "Are you serious?"

But I find even that momentary hesitation interesting.

I probably have a bad personality.

However, that bad personality sometimes loosens up the atmosphere.

It sometimes creates a little bit of margin in a serious setting.

When everyone is looking in the same direction, it sometimes shines a light from a slightly different angle.

It doesn't work every time.

Sometimes I miss the mark.

Sometimes I read the room and stop.

After saying it, I sometimes think,

"Ah, that wasn't the right thing to say."

But at that DX training session, I think it went well.

I said with a straight face that we should implant helmets into our heads.

Everyone laughed.

And the premises of our thinking were slightly removed.

I think that was a pretty good time.

When people say DX, it always sounds difficult.

IT.

Data.

Systems.
Automation.
Efficiency.
Business reform.
Of course, those are important.
But I think that before that, there is a sense of,

"Let's doubt the current common sense once."

Helmets are things you wear.

That is common sense.

But doubt that common sense just once.

If you don't want to wear one, is there a way to get by without wearing one?

The answer that came out there was,

Implant it into the head.

It's quite wrong.

But I don't dislike the way it's wrong.

At work, if you try to come up with only correct answers, your thinking sometimes freezes.

So, maybe it's okay to run with all your might in the wrong direction sometimes.

Of course, within a range where you can return.

And if possible, during training.

It's dangerous to really run like that on-site.

Before coming up with the correct answer, try breaking the correct answer once.

I think that margin is the entrance to DX.

Safety first.

You should wear your helmet properly.

Without implanting it.

※ This article is an essay based on a scene from the training at that time. It is not intended to identify any company or individual. If there is anyone who recognizes this, it would be helpful if you could just quietly think to yourself, "That's the helmet person."