Get the free Core Drives in the Wild guide, behavioral design applied to real products: professorgame.com/WildCD
Episode Summary
Rob explains subtraction neglect, the tendency of teams to fix problems by adding features, programs and pilots while rarely considering what to remove, using his own decision to stop publishing Professor Game on video as the case study. He walks through the 2021 Nature study by Adams, Converse, Hales and Klotz, including a Lego experiment where people paid to add bricks and a university call for ideas where 89% of suggestions were additions. Listeners learn the questions that expose things nobody decided to keep, and how to present a removal to leadership as a trade-off with a number attached.
About the Host
Rob Alvarez is Head of Engagement Strategy, Europe at The Octalysis Group (TOG), a leading gamification and behavioral design consultancy. A globally recognized gamification strategist and TEDx speaker, he founded and hosts Professor Game, the #1 gamification podcast, and has interviewed hundreds of global experts. He designs evidence-based engagement systems that drive motivation, loyalty, and results, and teaches LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® and gamification at top institutions including IE Business School, EFMD, and EBS University across Europe, the Americas, and Asia.
Key Takeaways
- In the 2021 Nature study by Adams, Converse, Hales and Klotz, people paid 10 cents per added Lego brick to stabilize a platform, yet only 41% found the better fix: removing a single block for free.
- When an incoming university president asked the community for ideas, 89% of the suggestions added something to the university and only 11% proposed removing anything.
- Shown an additive and a subtractive solution side by side, more than eight in ten people choose removal. Subtraction gets overlooked far more often than it gets rejected.
- Professor Game's full video episodes began as a way to feed social clips. When the clipping stopped, the video ran for about two years with modest views, because nobody ever decided to keep it.
- Removal tends to come to mind only when something looks visibly bloated or odd, like a 15-ingredient soup. Things that look normal, such as video on a podcast, get a free pass.
- Present a removal as a trade-off with a number: what it would cost to make the thing work, how uncertain the return is, and where that money and effort will go instead.
Topics Covered
- 0:00 - The last video episode of Professor Game
- 0:26 - Why the show started audio-only
- 1:27 - How video crept in, one sensible step at a time
- 3:06 - The reason left, the video stayed
- 3:54 - Dashboards, pilots and features nobody decided to keep
- 4:59 - The Nature study on why we overlook removal
- 5:40 - Paying for Lego bricks instead of removing one
- 6:31 - Why removal never comes to mind
- 7:48 - Could I make video work? The wrong question
- 9:11 - How to report a removal without spin
- 10:55 - Questions to ask about any feature
- 12:00 - The first move of the relaunch
Mentioned in This Episode
Free Resources and Get in Touch
