Designing For Play and Friction in a Fast-Paced World

At UDig, play is an integral part of our philosophy. “Having fun” is embedded in our culture, and we always find opportunities to use play to encourage collaboration, ignite creativity, and make room for bold experimentation to build stronger teams and solve problems ranging from the seemingly simple to the most complex. I always have opportunities to approach my work in a playful manner at UDig, and doing so always makes my day-to-day quite engaging and fun. It is also one of the reasons why I had to hear Michelle Lee’s talk at Config 2025 titled Designing for Play and Friction in a Fast-Paced World. And I’m glad I did. It turned out to be one of the most eye-opening and amusing talks I attended at the event. 

After Config, I had the opportunity to interview Michelle, Partner and Managing Director of IDEO’s Play Lab and a champion of the power of play, to discuss the joys of purposeful play and friction and their impact on who we are as people and what we aspire to create.  

Michelle is more than an inspiring person with a bright perspective—her background in aerospace engineering and toy design, paired with entrepreneurial leadership across tech and design, brings a unique blend of creativity and solution-driven thinking that makes her insights both refreshing and entirely engaging. 

Here, I can prove it to you: 

Jordyn Roberts: In your talk Designing for Play and Friction in a Fast-Paced World, you touched on several key topics. You introduced us to the importance of purposeful friction, play as a tool for learning, the downsides of high proficiency, and even mentioned Gen Z’s pushback on technology, which I thought was very interesting

Michelle Lee: Ah, no, of course. It was no mistake that I mentioned the floor of lava in my talk. That was a game I played all the time as a kid.  I played it at home at my grandparents’ house with my brother after school, where we’d jump from one piece of furniture to another.  We played it at recess all the time, jumping from one parking block to another, because our player was also the parking lot, but we didn’t mind because it was some really cool props to play with.  And I think it was just such a fun game because it involved imagination to think you’re in the middle of all this hot gooeyness.  There were lava monsters chasing you. There was challenge, lots of physical skill. And then it was so social because you had all these other people who were in it with you.  And we just fed off each other’s enthusiasm. So that is definitely among one of my top-rated games of all time. 

I couldn’t help but grin hard as Michelle reminisced on her childhood, because The Floor is Lava was also my favorite game as a kid, and I also played it with my brother. We’d climb up the narrow hallways of our childhood home, jump from dresser to door with enough momentum to swing from one slide of the room to the next. Until we outgrew our shenanigans, that is. 

Jordyn: You describe purposeful play as play that ‘intentionally adds challenge or friction to an experience.’  So, instead of focusing on efficiency, we focus on making the experience ‘more exaggerated and engaging, meaningful, and memorable.’  An example that you gave was pretending the floor was lava, like you said.  Also, during your talk, you had us pass an object between one another in one round, and then [pass the same object] with [anything] but our hands in another. The activity hit all these three points – it was engaging, it was meaningful, and it was memorable. 

 I know that config attendees consist of people about like 18 years and older, so we’re all adults, and as many of us get older, we get tied up into other things in life that may make us lose our sense of play.  But why do you think it is so easy for some of us to let go of the play in our lives– like me letting go of playing The Floor is Lava game– and how do you think we can reclaim it? 

Michelle: Yeah, well, one, I think we would have gotten along really well in our younger selves.  I would have loved to be playing Lava with you and new obstacles all over our houses. But I do think that over time, there’s just so much societal pressure to shun play and do something that’s serious.   

I know I felt this a lot as a kid. I personally worked really hard to be a good student, trying to understand what a teacher wanted of me and then trying to parrot that back in order to ace the tests and get into all the best schools.  That just puts on a lot of pressure to be perfect. But we get rewarded for it as we’re growing up, right?  That’s how you do well on a test. And so, I think you do that more and more and it takes some kind of dramatic shift to make you realize that that’s not what you actually want or what’s best for you, the world or people around you.   

I think the pandemic did that for a lot of people, where it suddenly jolted folks, and they’re like, ‘Oh, wait, what? I don’t have to spend 40 plus hours in an office. What else can I do?’ ‘Is this making me actually do better work when I get inspired and go elsewhere and be exposed to new things that I can’t be exposed to just at my desk?’  

I think it’s a real challenge when we’re constantly getting that message of, like, ‘Be busy. Work harder. Play is something you do in your spare time.’ I got that message a lot growing up, that I loved math and science and that was great for engineering, and that’s what would pay. That was a real career.  

I loved art, too, but that was going to be my side gig– it had to be a hobby.  Whereas I think I’ve learned over time that you can bring play more back into the picture, and it helps you do better work.  That’s part of what I do at the Play Lab– blend those two things together, and that play actually helps keep you inspired, helps feed your curiosity, helps you be more creative.   

That’s, frankly, something we need more than ever right now, because some of the toughest challenges aren’t ones that have been solved before. There’s no answer in the back of the book. We can’t figure out what the teacher wants and parrot that back to them.  We’ve got to figure it out for ourselves.  

Play and the way that helps you think outside of the box is critical to that.  And just love every chance I can to shine a spotlight on the importance of play. 

Jordyn: That’s very true. And it’s funny because I know that when I was younger, the focus was on school.  And then once I graduated from school, the focus then became work. And that was it. That made up the majority of my time.  And I [eventually] found that just having the opportunity to be around people who are themselves and just enjoy having fun… [Your true self] comes out of you naturally when you’re surrounded with those type of people that try to implement some form of, like, play or fun into the work life, because we’re all here together. We’re spending much of our time at work, so why not make it fun? We can be efficient, but we’re not robots. We’re human beings. 

Michelle: I think one of the big parts about play is how do you surround yourself with other people who share a play mindset? I try to surround myself with people all the time. I think part of a play mindset is also really seeking out people with different perspectives. Who can introduce you to new ways of looking at the world? Because that does feed your curiosity when you realize, ‘oh, my gosh, there’s no one right way to look at this.’  Like, how can I look to everyone else and see that people of different age to see things differently.  They’ve experienced things in different ways.  

You mentioned how I referenced Gen Z a lot in my work. It is because I’m fascinated about how a generation that grew up with technology, how they see it differently from me.  It comes with this openness to explore something that’s new, but also really being aware of the watchouts that they’ve identified, maybe even before some of the rest of us, because they’ve been so immersed in some of the dangers of tech, as well as the benefits. 

Jordyn: When you mentioned that during the talk, it was great to hear that’s kind of like the mindset for Gen-Z – and they’re digital natives, too. It’s like they’re completely going –I don’t want to say against how they were raised, being digital natives.  

I’m from the 90s so I remember what life was like before the tablets and all of that. It’s almost as if they’re kind of going against what they were raised on in some respects, because I know not every family is that way. 

Michelle: Yeah, yeah. It’s a very wise approach to it, because, I mean, they don’t shun tech and social media altogether, and there are a lot of benefits to it as well. I know social media also helps people mobilize. Gives you a voice. If you live in an area where you don’t have a lot of people like you, it gives you a chance to connect to other folks as well.  But I think they realize where it’s helpful and where it’s dangerous. So, I think they understand that nuance better than some others.   

One of the analogies that I’ve been going to recently is that if you think of technology like food, there’s definitely junk food that you don’t want to have too much of and you want to be careful with.  But there’s also vegetables and nutrition. I think too often when we talk about tech, we lump it all together in one bucket.  And I think Gen Z does have the nuance of being like, we can identify what’s great and helpful to utilize, but also what to be careful with because we understand where it can be manipulative and get us into habits that we’re not particularly proud of. 

Jordyn: So, I want to go back to designing for deliberate friction and how it’s been applied and worked on an IDEO.  For example, the Modern View Master from Mattel for which a head strap [did not exist], to ensure kids could only use it for short periods of time.  And the Elmo Calls app for Sesame Workshop, where a child can call Elmo and, after a short call, Elmo would immediately hang up!  So, my question for you is, how do you know when friction adds value and when it gets in the way? What’s the line between the two? 

Michelle: It really comes back to human-centered design. IDEO has been in the business of human-centered design for over 40 years at this point, and it really is about going deep and doing your homework. So as a designer, how do we not shortcut design?   

I think the thought of the lone designer sitting at their desk and being struck with a flash of genius has gone away.  More and more designers realize we need to go out and see what the people we are trying to serve are doing.  How do we understand what they truly care about, their natural behaviors? I think in doing that, we can understand where the right places are for friction and where we don’t want to have friction–  and where people want to move quickly, get things done, hit their outcomes versus where they are looking for that deeper engagement– and then, how do we design accordingly?  

It’s something designers has been doing for a long time. I think it’s a big topic right now because we’re seeing what’s happening with AI.  We’re seeing a quick move to efficiency where we’re, I think, lamenting the loss that is coming along with that, where we’re like, wait, the connections feel more shallow.  The meaning doesn’t seem as deep. Things don’t seem as fun. Things are just being done for us. Our sense of ownership has gone away.  But really, designers have kind of known this for a long time. 

I go back to the Betty Crocker cake mix example that gets pulled up every now and then.  It’s not AI, but it’s a very similar mentality of this thought of, at some point, Betty Crocker realized that people make a cake because they’re doing it out of love for other people.  It’s something to give to the people they care about. And I still remember those commercials. You mentioned the 90s, so you might remember these with me, where the lady would make the box cake, but then throw flour on their face to make it look like they put a lot of effort into it.  But they do want to put effort into it. And that’s why Betty Crocker, at some point added that step about having to crack an egg into the cake mix.  It wasn’t because they needed it. They found a way to do this without an egg where you just add water, but that wasn’t enough for people to feel like they were actually contributing, doing something meaningful for the people that they care about.  And that was through research– understanding people at that deep level and that there’s an emotional pull to doing something.  It’s not just about getting that cake made. It’s about showing that you care about someone and putting effort in.  

So, same thing here where I mentioned Ethically where, yes, there’s the things like spelling and grammar that get tedious and folks are like, if AI can help with that, please do.  But when it comes to pulling your thoughts out– your original thoughts– helping you put them out there in a way that you can share them with other people, that’s rewarding work.  That warrants a moment to slow down, to reflect, to create more interaction between people so you can have that dialogue and help pull those ideas out.  And so that’s… that’s… A moment where maybe I do want more friction. I don’t want it to be so seamless.  I don’t want this tool to do the work for someone. How do I create the right conditions for that reflection, for that slowing down, for that thought that needs to happen to really create amazing writing that goes out into the world? 

Jordyn: Exactly. And with Ethically, maintaining that meaningfulness with the implementation of AI. In comparison, there are a lot of companies that may, as I understand, use AI to make the work more efficient.  And I wonder how companies can do so in a way that supports the agency of those that work for them, instead of replacing that agency, especially when efficiency is the goal.  Because in a lot of cases, efficiency will always be that one thing that they’re going for. 

Michelle: Yeah, I think that’s a good point. Efficiency is key, and we don’t want to slow everything down, because I know progress is important.  But I love that you used the word ‘agency’ in your question, too. I think that’s key. Agency is a big part of play, too.  It’s what makes you feel good about your work. I think there is a real question to pose about efficiency when we’re saving time and effort, being really careful about what we’re losing.  What is that trade-off in saving time? Are we losing pride in our work? Are we losing a sense of ownership?  Also, I think AI as it is right now is pulling on existing knowledge. So– especially if you’re in a field of design like I am, where innovation is in the name of how we describe IDEO– you can’t really get to innovation if you’re pulling on what already exists. Especially, if the knowledge base it’s pulling on is not perfect. It doesn’t even include all these different perspectives that we started this conversation with. Getting all these different voices and perspectives are so key for inspiration and for feeding new ideas. 

AI can give you a start. It might give you a few places that you can think about and jump off of, but you do need to jump from there and be like, what else needs to be considered?  What else do need to bring into this picture? Doing that also gives you that rewarding feeling of contribution. It’s not just a machine that will take over at some point. It needs my input.   

And we’re not trying to shun AI. So much of my team experiments with AI, and I love that. The game that I introduced during my talk, Wait, Wait, Wait– Tekashi designed that with live coding. He has a software background, but he’s not deep in software. Using AI got him into something that he could put out into the world and share with people sooner – and AI is great at that. It’s great at manifesting ideas faster and putting them into a tangible form. But if it gives us time there, what do we do with the time that it affords? The time it gives back to us. I think that part is exciting, because if we do have more time, in that way, can we put that more towards a creative process?  Does that give us more time to come up with ideas, to iterate upon what AI is giving us?  

In design, we know that the more iterations we can get in the better.  So, the faster we can get something into a form that is more tangible, it can be shared. We can see it and see what’s working or what’s not.  Then, we can take more time to be like, ‘Okay, well, let’s get more feedback on that. Let’s figure out how we change that when it’s being improved.’  I also think AI is an interesting co-designer. Sometimes it’s fun to work with AI because it doesn’t always get things right.  And there are interesting things that we learn when things don’t work out right that allow us to pivot and try new things.  I mean, don’t think AI realizes that it screwed up or that it did something different, but we can see that.  And that gives us yet another jumping off point to diverge in our thoughts and look at even other possible ways of approaching a solution.  But it takes a human right now to figure out ‘What is that? How do we move things in new directions?’ I don’t think designers or humans should feel threatened at this point, but we do need to figure out what our relationship is with technology.  We can’t fall into the trap where we start using whatever comes out of AI as a final product because it’s not going to be good enough.  We need to show that there’s more we can add to it that makes it work better. In doing so, we’ll prove our value alongside the technology. 

Jordyn: I think Dr. Gannon (How to Be a Robot Whisperer, Config) would completely agree with what you’re saying right now.  We really need to figure that relationship between us and technology. I mean, that’s pretty much the next step. She’s already at that point, but it’s something that we need to figure out. Like you said, not being afraid of AI and embracing it– and as I guess she would say, making a choice in how we apply [AI] to our lives.   

Another question that I have– two more. Has there been a time when adding friction to the design process has led to a surprising outcome. And if at all, what was your takeaway from that experience? 

Michelle: I mentioned that in school, I felt the need to be very perfect. I had the pleasure of going back and teaching some classes at Stanford at one point, and I taught an undergraduate class.  It was an introduction to human-centered design, and a lot of Stanford students got to Stanford because they followed a similar path as I did, where it’s like, ‘What do I need to do?  How do I do that? How do I do it perfectly?’  

There was an exercise where we had them come up with new ideas, and then we want them to draw them, sketch them on paper.  I was out shopping for the materials for this class, and I came across these really big crayons, and I was like, ‘Oh my gosh, these are so…  To. To. To. Fun. I’m just going to get these.’ And I brought them into the class. Unintentionally, I added friction to the exercise.   

If you’ve ever tried to draw with a really, chunky crayon, you can’t be precise. Like, you can’t get your lines just so.  You can’t figure out where one line ended so you can pick up the next line and get it right.  They always overlap. It’s weird. And it was amazing just seeing how that changed the dynamic. Because suddenly, you couldn’t make the most perfect picture. So, my process shifted to ‘How do I actually spend my time thinking about the idea? How do I just be creative and not be held back by that pressure of having to draw perfectly?’ I think it’s the beauty of Pictionary, too, which is another favorite game of mine. Where you just draw something fast.  Introduce another constraint there. But it makes it so fun. Because it’s just like, how do I get this idea out?  How do I communicate with other people? It’s not about making the perfect drawing. 

Even in design, when we’re working with clients.  You don’t have to be an artist. Like, I don’t want you to be an artist. Just get your ideas on paper as fast as you can and communicate them. So, that’s one of my favorite examples where these big, fat crayons came in and the students couldn’t make perfect drawings. Suddenly, it changed how they related. There was so much more laughter, so much more creativity. It was like returning to being in kindergarten and just getting your ideas out there. If you see kindergarteners, they aren’t afraid, right?  They just put their ideas out there.  

I think that’s a huge part of a playful mindset and something we need to embrace.  Remembering that this world isn’t always about perfection. Perfection can sometimes kill progress and kill creativity. So, yeah, I think that’s just another side benefit of imperfection.  It allows you permission to not be perfect. 

Jordyn: I’m learning that you absolutely love your chunky crayons! I’m going to have to try that, though, because I was the kid that would try their best to stay within the black lines when drawing in coloring books. The pressure to be perfect really is antagonistic to the creative process.  Like you said, there’s so much time spent on making sure that you’re in alignment with whatever, I suppose, psychological rules that you have going on in your head.  That you’re not giving yourself permission or the freedom to really explore beyond the bounds that you put yourself in.  Or maybe, the bounds someone else put you in. 

I’m going to try that. I’m going to try the big chunky crayons. I’m probably not going to like it at first. But I think once I get through it, I think I’ll be where I need to be psychologically. I’m going to give it a shot. 

Michelle: I think we’re the same person. I got an award at some point in grade school for coloring. 

It’s such a metaphor. Coloring inside the lines, working inside the box. You get rewarded for that over and over again.  But the innovation comes when you break past that, when you challenge the assumptions, when you can go past those boundaries and try something new.  More chunky crayons, because it’s really hard to color inside the lines with chunky crayons. 

Jordyn: Chunky crayons, 100%. I know we’re at time, but I just wanted to ask you what was your favorite part of Config this year?  Did you have a chance to enjoy it? 

Michelle: Yes, I did. And this was my very first Config– I loved it. It was really the people.  I think everyone from the Figma group was great. They ushered us through the whole process. They made sure we got slides done early, so that was really helpful. They were lovely throughout. Then, we had cohorts of speakers.  I got to know the speakers, especially the ones that preceded me directly on the stage. That whole group was amazing.  Very inspired hearing from them, hearing from all the other speakers there and their talks. Then, people who I met in the hallways, people I’d known before. A lot of IDEO alums who were in the house, but brand new people too.  

Everyone was so energized. Everyone was excited about design. This group was so optimistic about bringing new possibilities into the world.  And I think especially now where it feels like there’s so many forces that are coming down on us that are outside of our control, that optimism and that feeling like we have agency– coming back to your word– to do something different and that we’re not alone in that and that our messages are resonating.  And that was really… uplifting and what I’m carrying away and continuing to enjoy. Even this conversation on the heels of Config, it’s really wonderful to know that this is a discussion everyone’s excited to have. That we want to be intentional about how we keep bringing design into this world to serve people in the best way possible. 

Jordyn: Thank you so much, Michelle. Your talk, as many others, have been very motivating for a lot of people, including myself.  I feel ready to tackle the rest of my year career with this new mindset and fresh perspective on how to not just design but think in ways that were once limited to the boxes that either I’ve been put in or boxes that I’ve put myself in. Like one of those nesting dolls. I’ve had a chance to revisit who I am as a designer, the type of designer that I want to be. It’s a designer that incorporates a lot more play into their work, but also in their personal life. Especially in collaboration, because it’s the best type of play to have, honestly.  Better to play with others than yourself. 

Michelle: I mean, Jordyn, just you saying that, I love that, because I think you’re adding friction to your life in all the best ways. The easy route is to do what people expect of you, right? And follow the paths that have been laid before.  Taking that time to reflect on like, what do you want? How do you do things differently? You’re making your road a little more bumpy and a little bit more frictionful, but I think the outcome will be so much better, right? You’ll figure out what you enjoy doing and maybe also what you don’t enjoy doing, and then how to take that forward in a way that you can show up in the world in the best way possible.  So, I love that. Yeah, that’s friction just at a mega level. 

Dig into all things Config 2025: config.udig.com