March 19, 2025 • 56 mins
Graham McAllister reflects on his various career pivots, starting with a PhD in computer graphics in Belfast, transitioning through roles in academia and industry and then forming and later selling his games usability start-up. In the process Graham provides a masterclass on how to navigate and negotiate career pivots, how to articulate clear problems and solutions. The conversation highlights the value of bridging practical and theoretical domains, the role of luck and other people, and the need for continuous learning, reflection and adaptation in your career journey while being very clear about the strengths and passions that underpin this.
Overview:
00:00 Episode Introduction
03:01 Welcoming Graham
03:43 Early Career and PhD Journey
04:49 Transition to Industry
06:01 Straddling Academia and Industry
07:54 Return to Academia and Music Technology
13:34 Influence of Gary Marsden
17:41 Joining University of Sussex
21:18 Starting a Spin-Out Company
21:52 Balancing Academia and Startup
25:24 Challenges and Reflections
31:37 Academic vs. Industry Conferences
32:32 Critical Thinking in Video Game Development
33:28 Startup Challenges and Team Building
34:32 Marketing Through Education
40:56 Leadership Reflections and Authenticity
48:35 Selling the Company and Moving Forward
56:20 End
Related Links:
Graham’s Home page
and LinkedIn page
People he mentions: Ricardo Climent and Gary Marsden
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Geri (00:05):
Welcome to Changing Academic Life.
I'm Geraldine Fitzpatrick, and this isa podcast series where academics and
others share their stories, provideideas, and provoke discussions about what
we can do individually and collectivelyto change academic life for the better.
(00:29):
My guest, Graham McAllister, hashad a fascinating career trajectory
with many pivots, starting with aPhD in computer graphics in Belfast.
And transitioning throughroles in industry and academia.
Eventually focusing on the videogame industry where he founded and
later sold a successful company thataddressed usability issues in games.
(00:55):
He's now exploring his next careerpivot, and we'll continue with that
story in part two, but for part one here.
You don't have to be in the games industryto get something out of this conversation.
Graham is an engaging storytellerand he is also really thoughtful.
(01:18):
He will likely have you reflecting onwhat you are doing and where you are
going in your career as you listento how he reflects on the when and
why of his different career Pivots.
And he's so clear about the value heoffers to people and what he cares about.
(01:40):
It's a masterclass in how toidentify and communicate a problem
that other people have and thatyou have the solution to help them.
This is relevant, not just forselling services into industry.
But I think for any of usresearchers defining focused research
(02:02):
agendas and writing proposals,
what's the problem?
Why is it important andwhat's our solution?
This is a wide ranging conversationand we also touch on lots of other
issues including around leadershipand the role of luck that we've heard
many times before, and the importanceof others who help shape our careers.
(02:28):
There's a lovely story here aboutthe pivotal impact of the late Gary
Marsden that really opened Graham'seyes to the human computer interaction
perspective that became his career focus.
This is such a rich conversationand so interesting that we kept
on talking much longer thanis reasonable for one episode.
(02:52):
So I look forward to bringing youpart two where he discusses what
happens next on that Spanish Island.
Graham McAllister, thank you forjoining me today on the podcast.
Graham (03:06):
Geraldine, hello, it's been a while.
Geri (03:08):
And it's been a while because, for full disclosure, Graham and
I worked together briefly back,um, I think it was 2007 to 2009.
There was a two, two year windowthere when we were both at
University of Sussex together.
And Graham, apart from just the excuseto catch up, I thought it would be
(03:30):
really interesting to talk to youbecause you've had an interesting career.
And before we pressed record,you were joking about being on
career, what, four or five, you'restill trying to decide which.
So you started off doing a PhD at inBelfast in music technology, was it?
(03:53):
Or some music related computing area?
Graham (03:57):
It was computer graphics, originally, and already you can
see the problem here where mycareers are, you know, because it
looks like it was a music path.
But it was actually very low levelcomputer graphics, like image
compression, like JPEG or MPEG.
So there was those algorithmsthat squash, squash video.
It was that type of stuff.
(04:17):
So back then, as a 18, what ageare you when you do your PhD?
21 year old, whatever it is.
I was very much, you know, Uh, verydismissive of human computer interaction.
So, when we talk about that,the idea of backtracking on your
own thinking, do a complete 180.
I've done that a few times inmy career, which is interesting.
I thought, who would studyhuman computer interaction?
(04:38):
What a preposterous idea, where it endedup being my career for over 20 years.
But anyway, so I was not that guy.
I was very much low levelcomputer programming.
That was my PhD, yeah.
Geri (04:49):
And then you went and worked in industry for a little bit.
Graham (04:53):
I did because we were, I say we, I mean the group of PhD students
among us, we were quite, um, we lookedat the lecturers who taught us and
we decided we would not be like that.
I probably alienated all thelecturers who taught me, by the way.
But what we meant was, if we were goingto teach building software, we wanted
to understand not just Theoreticalside of building software, but the
(05:16):
commercial side, which what's it like tobuild it under certain conditions and a
company setting on a commercial setting.
So we decided that the path I wason back then was I would go and get
some industry experience for a fewyears, but we would always come back.
To academia, and then then whenwe taught students would say, but
an industry, here's how you mightmodify this theory or modify this
(05:36):
framework, blah, blah, blah, you know,
Geri (05:39):
I, I actually did the same thing now that you say it.
One of the reasons why I was happy towork in industry, not that I had a clear
plan to, that I was definitely comingback to research, but I was interested
in how relevant was the stuff we weredoing within a research context when
you took it into an industry context.
And that was, that was interesting.
Graham (06:00):
very much.
I think one theme from my careers thatI've had, I guess, is when we talked
about this earlier, but in the deep inthe brief beforehand, but straddling
this division, if it is a divisionbetween academia and industry, and
do they have to be separate and howclosely related they feel separate.
In fact, one of the.
(06:21):
When we talk about some of the criticismsI've experienced with academia, so
when I moved to industry, the, um, theperception of people in the industry
of academia is not always positive.
In fact, it's rarelypositive in my industry.
So trying to shed that skin of,I'm not an academic anymore.
This is actually, this is real.
You know, it's like you're playingaround in academia, but industry is
(06:42):
perceived as the real world, let's say.
Um, so you're right that it wasthis, uh, academia does some
great, great things, obviously.
But it comes with an image attached, andit can impact on students perception,
even us as students being taught.
We were, we were querying, is this real?
Because we could see what was goingon in the industry even, this is pre
internet days, 92 I started my degree.
(07:04):
And we knew, you're teaching uslanguages we will never use in
the real world, even back then.
So why are we, we were alwaysquerying and pushing the academics.
Um, so again, that pushed out,in a way, pushed us into the,
pushed us out of academia to say,we're not going to be like that.
If we're going to teach something,it has to be, has to have a
greater degree of reality to it.
It can't just be theoretical.
(07:25):
It's not enough.
It's not enough to teach the principles.
That's what we thought.
I would probably still say that.
I would still probably have that.
Geri (07:33):
Yeah,
Graham (07:34):
mindset, I think
Geri (07:34):
if that industry academia link bridging straddling, as you
said, is, is, um, a key theme.
So what, what was, you know, in part ofthe straddling, what was the thinking
then to straddle back into academia,having been working in industry?
Graham (07:54):
it's back to what you originally thought I was doing music, and I can,
I can see why you said, I know we're onaudio here, but there's guitars behind me,
and there's usually a piano beside me andstuff I want to something more creative.
So my job that I got wastelecoms programming.
So telecoms is the 2000s telecomsboom the internet's becoming popular.
So as a programmer doing.
(08:15):
Uh, that type of work, youknow, telecommunications work,
basically, and it was fine.
Solving puzzles is always interesting.
You've been a programmer.
You've done a compute CS degree.
So, you know, no matter if you'rewriting a computer program, no
matter what it's for, it's probablygoing to be interesting because the
puzzle is stimulating intellectually.
However, the output of that puzzle.
(08:35):
Was dreadfully boring.
No one cares about telecoms equipment.
Well, certainly I didn't as a 24year old, 25 year old back then.
Um, so I thought, well, I likeprogramming, but I wonder,
could I take that and applyit to something more creative?
And a friend said, why don't youcome and apply for a job at my video
game company he was working for.
(08:56):
And they were a very famous videogame company in England at the
time, I was still in Belfast.
And by chance at the same time,a job posting come up in academia
at Queen's University Belfastfor music technology lecture.
And I thought, well, that'sa bridge between computer
science and music technology.
And that would fulfill my.
creative output, but I wouldn't have tomove to England because I'd have to move
(09:19):
country, even though it's a very small hopacross the bit of water, but it's still a
move away from things you know, I'd say.
Friends and family.
So that's where I ended up.
I ended up joining Queen's University backin academia, um, but create, you know,
keeping both my technical interests, butalso having a creative, a creative output.
Um, but that would, that would change too.
(09:41):
Uh, and that introduced me to HCI.
I was there as a CS lecturer.
So I was officially belonged to thecomputer science department, but I
was on loan to the music department.
That was the official structuring ofthe contract, you know, the academic
Geri (09:55):
Mm hmm.
Graham (09:57):
but I did not know what I was doing.
I was doing there really in termsof what my research would be.
I knew I was back in and teachingstudents computer science, but
from a research angle, like Iwas, I was a blank slate again.
I was not building on my PhD.
It was not building onmy computer graphics.
They weren't interestedin image compression.
Um, nor was I anymore?
And I wasn't doing telecoms.
(10:19):
this is blank slate number three, it'slike computer graphics to telecoms, now
music technology, but I'm not reallyusing anything directly in terms of,
there's only the transferable knowledgeof computer programming languages, but
nothing, nothing was transferring, yeah,
Geri (10:35):
How did you convince them that you were going to be a music
technology lecturer when you'rejust saying you, you know, computer
graphics, telecoms, programming?
Graham (10:47):
I don't know, I think, I think we'll have to ask them, and I think
one thing we should talk about is luckin life, because I feel I have had a
lot of luck, including you, meetingyou, because I would ask you the
same question, why did you hire me?
Because I was not, I, I shouldn'thave got the job really.
You know, I think there wasalways an element of luck and
(11:10):
I've had it quite a, quite a lot.
Uh, even ending up at Sussex, itwas another academic at Queen's
University who said to me, when wasthe last time you had a job interview?
And I said, well, five years agowhen I got the Queen's job, and he
said, okay, I'm skipping a few bitsbecause I've moved to HCI or my
Geri (11:29):
Mm.
Graham (11:30):
was to move into human computer interaction more.
And he said, okay, if you won't dothat, the next job, academic job
that comes up in the field of humancomputer interaction in any UK
university, you go for an interviewto find out what people think of you.
That's what you should do.
He's now a professor atManchester in Ricardo and he's a
Geri (11:48):
Mm hmm.
Graham (11:49):
So thanks to him, I said, okay, I will do that.
The next job that came up was theone that you posted or someone in
your department saying University ofSussex is looking for a human computer
interaction lecturer, blah, blah, blah.
And I said, well, I should goand find out what people think,
Geri (12:06):
And, and I'm thinking back then, I mean, we had some great
people applying for that position
there were two of you rightat the end that I remember we
were really tossing up with.
One of them was very much like me.
in the interest in that and thethinking in the end was that
(12:28):
you brought something different.
So it was about, I don't know,like opening up to more challenging
perspectives or differentpossibilities for different points
of view and the fact that you werefocusing in more of the music space.
Um, and you, you had started to moveinto games a bit by then, hadn't you?
(12:49):
Um, you know, so it felt like thatadded rather than, uh, deepened, you
know, it added breadth and also, youknow, that diversity of thinking rather
than sort of digging us more into what,how, you know, what we already were.
I don't know.
Yeah.
Yeah.
(13:09):
But we certainly, we certainlyinterpreted you as an HCI person
and I think you had had a paper,if I remember correctly, published
one of our key conferences as well.
Graham (13:24):
Could have done.
So I had.
I had five PhD students, I think,at that stage or something, and
we obviously had moved into HCI.
It was accessibility back then.
So that was the, my angle in, andtalking about luck, if I was to pinpoint
someone who maybe was influentialin, I don't want to say changing
(13:46):
my career, it was Gary Marsden.
Gary Marsden gave a guest lecture.
At the, exactly, at the, at theresearch center, I was in the music
research center at the university.
And I was, I don't think I was in HCI atthe time, but I was looking to change.
I knew computer science wasnot my, pure computer science
was not my final destination.
I was looking for this other outletand I was becoming more interested in
(14:08):
how people used what I was creating.
And I'd never heard of Gary Marsdenthat was not interested in HCI.
And I went, somehow Iwent to his lecture and.
I think he changed my life, because he wastalking, uh, I was just listening to his
research and the stories he was telling,and I was like, no, that is something that
(14:30):
resonated with me, not his exact area,because I was interested in video games,
but the problems he was talking about itwith saying, well, look, as technologists,
we can create this, these things, but ifpeople are frustrated by the way they're
not being utilized in the most efficientor effective way, then what's the point?
And me listening to that, I was thinkingas a video gamer, I'm playing these games
(14:53):
and thinking, yeah, but there was probablygood intentions and they can build it.
My goodness, they couldhave been so much better.
So I was thinking I could takewhat he's talking about, but
apply it to my area of interest.
Is that a thing?
And that, that was a pivotal moment in mylife was Gary Marsden, you know, Talking
about what interested him, but me hearing,me filtering it and saying, I've got
(15:17):
the same problem in a different domain.
Geri (15:21):
It's fascinating, isn't it, how we never know how something
that we say or some random chanceinteraction may impact someone's life.
And whether it's your lecturercolleague who said, when was the
last time you went for an interview?
Like, just go on and have a go.
(15:42):
Yeah.
To Gary, just happening tosay yes to a lecture there and
not know, he wouldn't know.
And sadly, very sadly, hepassed away a few years ago.
Um, he wouldn't have known that there wassomeone in the audience who was sparking
with possibilities from what he said.
(16:03):
Yeah.
Graham (16:04):
Yeah, that's the thing.
Geri (16:05):
it?
Graham (16:06):
I should have sent him an email.
I know he passed away in quite along time, nearly a decade ago.
I think it's quite a long time ago.
Um, and I should have said to him, do yourealize what you said changed my life?
Um, and then impact probably hundredsof millions of gamers as well,
because we'll get to the company side.
The impact.
And so the impact that thatrandom lecture on the impact,
(16:30):
like, yeah, a lot of people, I
Geri (16:33):
Yeah.
Like not, as you said, I hadn't,yeah, I hadn't even made that
connection, but yeah, but notjust you, but what has happened.
And I mean, I I'm immediately thinkingof individuals that I know who've
been involved as well as, you know,the, as you said, the companies and
then the, the players of the games
Graham (16:51):
players, exactly.
Geri (16:53):
So that's a really nice point as well about just the importance of.
stopping for whatever minuteor two it might take you to
ping a quick email to someone.
So if you're listening now and there'ssomeone who did impact your life, stop now
and just send that email and say thanks.
Yeah.
Graham (17:13):
Definitely recommend it, because I, that moment with Gary is gone.
And he wouldn't, he wouldn't know me,I just would have been this random
email saying, Hey, I was, I was alecturer, I was sitting in your audience.
But just letting him know thathe changed my life, you know, and
Geri (17:27):
Yeah.
Graham (17:28):
so thanks, Gary.
Geri (17:30):
These are the things that matter in life, isn't it?
So, not the, not the paper that yougot that you can't even remember,
was there a paper in that conference?
So, you, so that's when our paths metthen, when you, you came to Sussex.
Um, and I do remember you beingvery good negotiator as well, you
(17:52):
know, which was really, I learneda lot actually from watching.
And, so, You, by then, um, when you came,you were bringing much more of a Games
HCI sort of research identity with you.
Graham (18:09):
yeah, they, I, um, like most technical minded people,
you know, um, at the time I madea nice chart of pros and cons.
Should I move university?
And should I move fromBelfast to Brighton?
Um, and Belfast won on this littleorganized neat chart, you know, all the
pros and cons, but it didn't feel right.
(18:30):
Which I
Geri (18:31):
interesting.
Like,
Graham (18:32):
didn't feel right.
There was more ticks in the Belfast.
Geri (18:36):
So keep redoing the, keep redoing the scores.
Graham (18:40):
So, so I, I find that interesting.
Well, why doesn't it feel right?
Obviously not all informationwas on the chart, you know.
Anyway, um, and the reason is that Youknow, there's a couple of questions
I always ask whenever I'm pivotingjobs, because I've done it a few times,
and this question keeps coming back.
And the question I askmyself is, am I done yet?
Am I done here?
And so it's like, have I donewhatever I had to do in this
(19:02):
domain that I'm currently in?
But the other question that goes withit is, is there something to do if I go?
Like, is there something, is theresomething to do here, or something
to do there, sort of thing.
But why, What didn't sit in the chart,I guess it would have been opportunity,
I should have had a column that saidif I wanted to be in the game industry
and bring human computer interactionto the games industry, there was no
(19:23):
industry in Belfast whatsoever in 2007.
But Brighton was thriving and itstill is, you know, there was like
30, 30 or 40 game studios in onecity or something like that, so.
Really
Different sizes, some are large andsome are mid sized, some are small,
but there's probably more actuallynow, including the small ones.
So I decided, well, if I wantto do this, then you have to go.
(19:43):
You know, so that was the final, I don'tknow if you remember this, but the very
first meeting I ever had at the universitywas not with anyone in the university
really, it was with a games company, andit was me, you, and another academic.
We went to visit a game studio, uh,to try and bring, you know, usability
testing into their game making, andthat's the first meeting I remember.
I don't remember meeting anyone,like, in the university itself, but
Geri (20:07):
I can't, I'm remembering it.
I think we.
As part of trying to help yournetwork in and we, I think we,
I don't know what we did to setup that as a, as a introduction.
Graham (20:22):
I can't remember either, but that was, that was wonderful knowing here I am
as an academic and already, We're talkingto the biggest studio in Brighton at
the time, they were a very large studio.
And so this, this is exactly why I came.
So you could say, back to my, I'mgoing to link together what I do
now with what, with then is vision.
I had a strong vision.
If I'm doing it, this is the clear andsingular reason I'm going to Sussex, is
(20:45):
to bring HCI into the games industry.
I did not know at the time, however,that I would have a company.
I thought it would be consulting.
So I remember looking at mycontract, my academic contract.
I remember grilling someone about howmany days consulting could I do per
month or per year or something like that.
And my intention was I'm goingto max that out because I want, I
need to bring this knowledge in.
(21:07):
The game industry is a problem,academia has the solution, and there's
very little company, if there was nocompany, really bridging that gap.
So I thought I would do itin my days of consulting.
Um, and here's luck.
The second area of luck we're going totalk about at least is someone at the
university said, hang on a second, bychance, whenever I joined 2007, 2008,
the university was about to give afund To give academics to have these
(21:30):
little small startups, and they said,we're gonna have a small pot of money.
And I was one of the first fouracademics to get that little pot
of money to start a spin out.
So originally, so now the idea was going,not just my consulting days, but I could
do this in a little, little spin out.
Um, so that, that, thatended up happening.
I was one of the first four toget that little pot of money.
(21:50):
So we're, we're moving.
Yeah.
Geri (21:52):
Yeah, I remember you moving up the hill, I was setting up the, the spin
out and do you want to just reflect onthen navigating, I don't know, because I
imagine there are tensions between this isthe role of a lecturer and yes, there are
consulting days, but you know, and this iswhat's expected here and this is what you
wanted to do in the startup and how younavigated between the teaching, research,
(22:20):
tick box commitments, From the lecturer'sside and the, and the, also the, what
would be a significant commitment froma startup side if you're going to take
a startup seriously, because yeah.
Graham (22:34):
I, going in, I did not know how messy that would become in terms
of time management and just divisionof resources, my resources, you know,
um, I think, I think in the beginningit was meant to be quite clear.
I would teach so many days per week.
I love teaching, by the way.
That's another thread that I love.
Education in general.
Something I'd really, really enjoy.
(22:54):
Um, But the, but what happened is I think,um, the research side, uh, I didn't do
so much, not because I didn't necessarilywant to, but I, my feeling at the time
was the level of research that HCI is thatwas good enough to bring the industry.
In other words, I did not have toadvance it because it was already at
a sufficient standard to bring it andsolve the problems that needed solving.
(23:18):
So the problem I was solving was.
The commercial side, there's nobusiness model really to, or it
could be a psychology problem.
The mindset of the game developerswas such that, you know, get off
my lawn, I know what I'm doing.
We do not need your psychologynonsense, you know, here, sort of thing.
Um, so the problems needed fixed were notresearch problems, they were changing a
(23:38):
shift in mindset at a commercial level,which is you think you don't need this,
but all the evidence says you need this.
So my job was giving talks to try andpersuade them and show them with evidence
that actually you will do better.
You will get what you want.
You're more likely to get what you want ifyou use this tool rather than just dismiss
it and let it go away sort of thing.
(24:00):
So I ended up doing some teaching, verylittle research, but again, the research
was more me trying to commercializethat and bring that into the,
So, that lasted for a few years andI realized that I couldn't do both.
The time commitment, as you say, fora startup is immense and I was, you
can wear yourself down quite quickly.
(24:20):
It's quite tiring.
You know, um, so I decided Ineeded to make a choice really,
um, and that came from both angles.
University wanted me to make a choiceand I realized I had to make a choice.
And I decided,
Geri (24:31):
they were, cause I, I had moved on by then.
So they were pressuring you, like,where are your research papers or
you're not doing enough teaching?
Like what was, what was theirpoint of pressure for you?
I
Graham (24:43):
I think they wanted a commitment really, is this, you know, are you going
to take us into a company, uh, or areyou going to come back as an academic?
Like I needed to choose a path, really.
I think they wanted a clear cut decision.
That's my memory.
It's going back over a decade, but Ithink they wanted a clear decision.
Are you an academic or are you afounder of a company sort of thing?
Um, and it ended up, Iresigned from both positions.
(25:06):
So the spin out and the academic job.
And I said, well, I think thisneeds my time all the time.
I think there's something here.
So I quit both.
And then I, I just didthe commercial thing.
I started a new entityaway from the university.
Back to the perception problemof, I think we said earlier.
I think one of the things holding meback was perception of academia, and I
(25:30):
know that I was trying to get contractsdone when I was in the startup, and
there's real time and there's academictime, and academic time runs at about,
well it's much slower, that's it.
Geri (25:40):
It's a little slower, a
Graham (25:42):
a little slower.
Geri (25:44):
time.
Graham (25:45):
And I think, uh, I'd certainly had clients at the time who felt
the frustrations of academic time.
Uh, it wasn't going towork for them effectively.
So, and the image as well,academia is seen as slow and
expensive and not real world.
Those are
Geri (25:59):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Graham (26:02):
Um, perception that I needed to change.
I remember telling someone,well, we're now in the center
of Brighton or something.
I'm away from the university,we're in the center of Brighton,
and they were just overjoyed.
They were like, oh, thank, youknow, thank goodness sort of thing.
It's not a commercial, it's a company.
You work on company time, youknow, real time, real world time.
And I didn't expect that.
I didn't know that was a thingthat I would have to negotiate.
(26:22):
To navigate, um, being partof a university the time.
So that was, that was interesting.
And then
Geri (26:32):
So can I just, um, so you've just talked quite, so it's one thing
transitioning topic areas from computergraphics and software engineering to.
music technology to games to, to start up.
So there's, um, there's the topicsort of shifting, but it feels like
(26:54):
there are very different skill setsneeded between, I don't know, more
of a standard lecturer in your firstlecturing job to doing a startup.
And you talked about, you know,talking to industry and that would
be very different talking thangiving an academic presentation.
(27:16):
Can you reflect on what were the keyskills you needed to develop in order
to shift from that more academicmindset, you know, including what we
just said about the time, to somethingthat's more relevant to industry?
Graham (27:32):
I think there's, so I've mentioned, not necessarily a mental model,
but some of the questions I ask myself ifI'm ready to pivot, like, am I done here?
Geri (27:41):
Mm.
Graham (27:42):
The other, there's another question, which tries to tell me
the type of problem that I work on.
And I would relate this back in some way.
Maybe my PhD, but it's how importantis the problem that you work on
and so whenever I think about theproblem I'm working on, I try and
put it into a hierarchy of all theproblems I know about in that domain.
(28:03):
So let's talk aboutvideo games for a second.
My domain, let's say, was video games.
That's where I was trying to apply myacademic knowledge and whenever we,
like some of my students even did thisas master's projects, but whenever you
critique or analyze the reasons why videogames get a high score or low score,
like what are the problems with them?
(28:23):
Usability issues were a major problem.
Like they were coming up in gamereviews or user experience problems.
So this was a significant problem.
So I knew that If I'm talking to, if I'min an academic talk, sometimes academics
talk about things which are, you know, the400th most important thing of all yet, but
there's an interesting problem for them.
Why not?
If you've got funding to do it, knockyourself out, go and work on it.
(28:45):
But in industry, if it's the400th most important problem,
no one's coming to your talk.
Usability, however, directlyrelated, it's going to be one of
the highest related problems, whichis especially in free to play.
Talk about luck again.
The business model changedwhen I started my company, the
business model of video games.
So I'm going to lose track ofwhat I'm talking about here,
but it's very important because.
(29:07):
Pre 2010, let's say, if you spent50 dollars on a video game and it
was terrible, well, tough luck.
You know, the company's got your 50.
2010 ish onwards, it was free.
So if you, if the user experience orusability was not top tier, you made
no money because that player had left.
And what's worse is you'd maybespent 1, 2, 5, 10 dollars to acquire
(29:30):
that person, because it costs moneyto bring people into your game.
So you make no money up front, andyour impact is worse, it's negative.
You're spending money to bring people in.
And you only get money if the userexperience of your game is sufficient
that they spend money, let's say.
I'm generalizing, I'm cuttinga few details out, but
that's generally the model.
That was luck.
If I'd have started my company 10years before, it may not have worked.
(29:51):
So again, back to the business sideis, when you're lecturing or giving a
talk at a games conference, I'm talkingabout a problem that they are seeing.
And their KPIs on a daily basis,which is, hey, we paid for 100,
000 players to come into our game,and there's only 10, 000 left.
Where did they go?
Well, a lot of them could have left forusability UX problems, and that was the
(30:14):
problem my company was solving, and Ispelt that out clearly by showing that,
um, I give one talk a month for nearly10 years in a row on this type of topic,
probably more, um, about that sort ofnumber, so I give a lot of talks saying,
if you want to know what's wrong, thisis probably one of the major factors
Impacting your bottom line and why you'renot getting the reviews that you want.
(30:38):
That,
Geri (30:38):
yeah,
Graham (30:39):
to me, was a common sense.
You know, you've got a problem,and of course, if I'm starting a
company, I'm doing it for a reason.
I think, I think you've got the problem,and I think I've got the solution.
That's what businesses do.
That's what they do, right?
Geri (30:51):
yes,
Graham (30:52):
So, if you don't think you've got the problem, there
must be a miscommunication.
Why aren't you seeing the problem?
By the way, a lot of themare not seeing the problem.
They wanted to say something else.
Like it was oversaturation of the markeror somebody else's psychological problem.
Well, it couldn't be me.
Couldn't be our gamebecause we're experts.
So obviously the problemis somewhere else.
And my job is to stand up and say,no, the problem's not somewhere else.
(31:14):
The problem's actually.
View.
In fact, that problem continueswhen we get to my current career.
That problem has got worse.
I would say the problem is not elsewhere.
The problems with the team, youknow, but so anyway, that's an
academic versus commercial talking.
I think academics sometimes talk aboutproblems they're interested in, but
sometimes they're not that critical to.
(31:35):
There's a small group ofresearchers worldwide who do that.
You know, you've got these researchdisciplines that are very small
niche groups and that's fine.
That's okay.
But if you're talking at a conference, um,usually people want problems solved and
addressed and you have to figure out, am Ipresenting my problem in a way that, that
the people in the audience care about?
You know, and that's,that's, it's just common.
(31:58):
I thought it was commonsense, but maybe not.
I don't know.
What were you thinking by the way?
Cause What do you see the differencebetween, like, academic conferences
and, let's say, industry conferences?
Do you see a difference between the two?
Geri (32:12):
yeah, I think there are, I haven't been to that many industry
conferences, main ones would havebeen in the healthcare space.
It is also the case of what aretheir immediate pain points,
um, what are their immediateproblems and what can you help with?
Graham (32:30):
Yeah.
It's the evidence behind that.
I would say that, especially in videogames, I think a lot of teams don't, um,
look towards the science of the problem.
They tend to just have a, I, I, yeah,exactly, gut feel or, well, I saw this,
so, you know, it must be true, right?
I will do A lot of guesswork intuition.
And it's nearly always wrong.
(32:52):
Like, there's a lot of bad.
Decisions being made because they shoulddo what academics would do and say,
well, what do we know about this field?
Do we do a literature review?
Do we apply critical thinking?
There's very little critical thinking.
They don't know the limitsof their own knowledge.
They say, well, I know this,but they don't know what's
the counter argument to that.
What do we, where do we know where thatapplies and where that doesn't apply?
Or what's the three otherarguments that could apply
(33:13):
here or three other frameworks?
They don't do, at least what I see, very,very little of that type of thinking.
It's just, here's a problem.
Geri (33:21):
A lot of our cognitive biases playing out
Graham (33:25):
Yeah.
Geri (33:26):
in that context.
So in, in doing the startupproper, like starting your own
company in the center of town,
, there's also lots of other aspectsthat are more mundane, like budgets
and projections and marketing andmulti faceted, you know, not just the
(33:52):
core work that you get excited about.
Did you employ people to do thatstuff or were you doing it all?
Can you talk about assembling the teamthat you, you built up in that company
Graham (34:04):
There were teams of researchers, so everyone was a researcher,
including myself in the beginning.
Um, anything mundane, like, Idon't like accounting that much,
but I love business models.
I'm quite familiar.
I'm quite, don't say mathematical, butI'm comfortable in that world, let's say.
So the company ran on a very simplespreadsheet, for example, but in
terms of doing the accounts that wasimmediately outsourced to someone else
(34:26):
because it was not my area of expertise.
It's not an area of expertisethat I wanted to get good
in or anything like that.
Marketing's an interesting one, though,because I never called it marketing.
I called it education.
Geri (34:37):
Oh interesting,
Graham (34:37):
told you, for example, um, I give one, roughly, I'm going
to average it out here, one talkper month at a games conference.
Um, and every, nearly every talkI would give, we would get work.
So some people would say, Oh, you weredoing marketing then, but it wasn't, I
was explaining why you had this problem.
It just happened that if I explainedthe problem well and showed them they
had the problem, they wanted to hireus to fix it, to fix the problem.
(35:01):
So we never had any, uh, I don'tremember, I don't remember spending
one pound on an advert ever.
During the whole course ofthe startup, there was none.
We didn't have a website for thefirst three years from memory.
Maybe two or three years.
That's only because someonesaid, are you a legit company?
I'm like, yeah, we're, we're flat out.
We're busy.
And they said, I can'tfind you on the web.
And I'm like, well, no, we'retoo busy to have a website.
(35:21):
So I eventually put a website up
Geri (35:23):
Mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm,
Graham (35:24):
to say we're here, but we were, we were completely booked
out, you know, um, so it's back tothis thing that I, I love education.
I love explaining to people.
I'm an introvert.
I do not like, if there's, if there'san event or a space at the back
of the room where I can hide, thatwould be, that would be me, you
know, but I also give a lot of talkspublicly, which is complete opposite.
People must think, Oh,you love giving talks.
(35:45):
That's not true.
But what I love doing is explainingto people the problem that
they're facing, and if you do thisthing, your problem will go away.
It's helping people.
You call it education, you call ithelp, you call it what you want.
That I find fascinating.
And of course the book goes along withthat, The Researcher Brain, which is my
(36:05):
current journey around team psychologyand shared mental models and things.
It's the going deep into, whyaren't you seeing this problem.
And then the other question, whyisn't there a solution to that
problem, which I had to go anddesign for the last five years.
So doing all that, and then, and thengetting to tell people about it, like,
by the way, the reason you're havingthis problem is not what you think it is.
(36:25):
It's something else.
And the good news is we can fix that.
And that bridges, again, I had to goand do research and go back to school
again, to be a student, to bringthat back into industry and to a very
practical, we're jumping around alittle bit here, but I think all these
things are connected in terms of.
Yeah.
I don't really call it startup marketing.
It was just, I don't think you'reseeing the problem that you have.
(36:45):
You're attributing theproblem to something else.
You're not seeing it correctly.
There's a great quote I found outonly a few weeks ago by Einstein.
I'm going to butcher it, but it's likethe quality of what you see depends
on the quality of your mental model.
Like the model you use to see theworld completely dictates what you see.
And my research, the results would show isthe reason you're not seeing the problem
is the quality of your mental modeldoesn't allow you to see the problem.
(37:08):
So you're attributing it to somethingelse and you keep trying to fix the
problem and the problem keeps happening.
The problem is you can'tsee it for what it is.
You don't see the problem.
So again, it's bringing it back tomental models and things like that.
Um, but that's the joy is now I getto teach that and educate people and
say, Hey, you thought it was this, but.
What if I told you it was something else?
(37:28):
Would you be interested?
Wow, there's a discussion.
That's, that's where we're at in 2025.
I'm about to bring thatto the games industry.
And I think, well, I know a lot ofthem will not want to hear the answer.
It's going to be, some people willlove it, but I think some people
will say that can't be true.
That can't be the reason.
It can't be me.
(37:49):
That's an identity problem.
I'm an expert.
I'm an expert in game development.
Are you telling me I don't know?
Yeah, I think that'swhat's going to happen.
Geri (38:00):
It's a skill to have that sort of discussion.
I love, you know, apart from the specificsof what you said, I love it as an
example of tapping into your strengths.
Like you've said, one of your strengths,one of your passions is education.
And it plays out, that this educationcan play out in lots of ways, like
(38:24):
it was probably part of the reasonwhy you went back to lecturing,
I imagine, in the first place.
And that There are still ways to do it.
And I love that mental reframing.
You know, if you talk about mentalmodels and that as well, you're
standing up and giving a talk isn'tabout putting yourself up there and,
you know, like in front of all thesepeople and isn't it nerve wracking?
(38:46):
It's about this is a great opportunityto do that thing I care about,
which is educating on a topicthat I'm really passionate about.
And this is a way to connect to people.
Graham (38:57):
Yeah.
I always thought of talking as educating.
I never thought I'm giving a talk.
I thought I'm going to go andeducate, reveal something that
is new to what's in the audienceand their life will get better.
You know, if I explain this thingand if I do a good job explaining
the thing, they're going to go awaythinking, wow, that problem I have,
there's, there's a solution to itand I understand more about it.
(39:18):
That's a great thing.
That's why we're in education, right?
It's like, why do we do education?
Let's go back to the fundamentals.
Why do this job?
It's not for money.
If you're in education, there's areason, why do I want to spend my time
discovering something, researchingsomething, finding an answer or going
deeper into the problem and then writingabout it and telling people about it?
(39:39):
Why do I do that?
What's interesting about that?
Because that's universal.
That's not just the little disciplineyou're doing your PhD in or your
postdoc or whatever, you know, itcould be, it could be anywhere.
You know, it could becomputer graphics, telecoms.
It's the same type of thing, which is,do we understand, but And if that's
what drives you, the uncovering ofgoing deeper and understanding why
(40:02):
and But it's also helping, right?
Because if you share the knowledge,sharing is a large part of it.
It's not just, I did it for meand I, I kept all knowledge to
myself and that was the end.
It's like, no, well, you wentand give a hundred talks or
wrote a book or did something atworkshops or whatever it may be.
That's elevating a groupor a team or a society or.
You know, that's, that's a bigger missionthan just, well, I do research like,
(40:26):
well, really is that what's going on here?
I think it's bigger than that.
You're not just doing research.
Geri (40:31):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Reminding us to connect to that, that sortof drive and that passion underneath it.
You mentioned team then, we're goingto move on to sort of a next transition
pivot that you did, but, um, just in thestartup company, you, you built up a team.
So that put you also in somesort of leadership position.
(40:56):
Again, can I just get you to reflect onleadership skills that you had to develop
or what you think was most important,or, uh, you know, you may even have a
story of things that didn't go well thatyou, there were big learning points.
Graham (41:10):
I would say I'm very, I'm very different now than what I was then.
I think I would do it differently.
Not surprisingly since going back andstudying organizational psychology,
which we'll get to and studyingthe science of team performance.
The word I would use, what I know now isthat was probably authentic leadership.
In other words, I was just me.
There was no thought putinto leadership whatsoever.
(41:33):
That was probably the truth.
I started a company to solve aproblem and I was just purely
focused on solving the problem.
And I hired people to solve the problem.
I didn't, I don't think I putany effort really into team
building or anything like that.
But I did try to hire the people I thoughtwere the best and fit for the team.
I mean, I know there's problemswith culture fit as well.
So I just want to, it's notnecessarily culture fit, but, um,
(41:55):
So I think it was more authentic.
In other words, I was just being me.
And that That took the company to acertain stage, uh, not, not, maybe it
was okay, but, um, I think, you know, youdon't need the same person for all stages
of a company's growth that you're probablybetter off not doing that in some ways.
Um, so, yeah, I think, I think I wasvery much focused on the technical
(42:16):
side as a leader, even as verymuch focused on my two main tasks
were, can we do the job very well?
Uh, and then this education piecegiving talks, telling the industry
that, you know, um, what do we,how are we solving your problems?
Because there was a certain degreeof, the company started by only
offering one single service, theeasiest one, usability testing.
(42:37):
Like an MVP, you start small,we offer this one thing, and
Geri (42:40):
MVP being.
Graham (42:42):
minimum viable product, which is, you know, like I think every company.
Every video game company has problemswith usability, like tutorials,
feedback, controls, although there'sno one who does it really well
or they could certainly improve.
So I've been to find going into here'sanother mental model or mindset.
If I go into a conference, mymindset was everybody in this room
(43:05):
is a potential customer for mebecause I think, or I can prove that
they all have usability problems.
So depending on your product oryour research area, you may go into
a room and think, I think maybe3 percent of the people here are
the people I would connect with.
We have similar interests or similar,you know, or I could solve their problem.
In my case, it wasalways a hundred percent.
If you're making a game, we can help you.
(43:26):
There's no exceptions here.
So that was my, my, I knew my MVP,my, my, my little tiny service,
service number one was applicable toa hundred percent of the market, which
is interesting for a business, right?
But eventually we ended up like 10services or something or whatever it was.
Um, cause we developed more and more.
Whenever you get to see a studio, yourealize, Oh, you've got that problem.
Well, you know, giving computerinteraction can solve that problem too.
(43:50):
So we ended up, so part of my brainwas developing or seeing new services,
going and visiting clients, listening tothem, seeing their pain points, and then
figuring out What I like getting thisbridge between academia and industry.
I'm always looking for, isthere a method I'm aware of?
That I could modify to fix that problem.
It's very rare you would take itcompletely as is and just, you
(44:10):
know, apply it and it would work.
So you're always thinking,I recognize that problem.
And if I modify this method, I thinkI could do that or do it good enough.
So we ended up with like, I say, sevenor 10 different services, a current
member, depending on how you countand then giving talks and educating.
Um, but for leadership, um, no, Ithink I was just being me at the
(44:32):
time in terms of focusing on the.
I think that's very product oriented.
Is the product good?
And I don't, I think I thoughtif I hired good people, the
team would take care of itself.
I wouldn't do that now, I don'tthink, knowing what I know.
I'd probably build the team differently.
But back then, I think that's what I did.
Geri (44:48):
So, let's come back to that, um, later, just to step it through, because
I think it'll make, your reflectionson that will make more sense then.
And I'm just sharing that the pictureI have in my head is You've got this
drive, this passion, this vision tomake this difference and you've hired
people who stand with you like you'relinking arms and you're marching together
(45:10):
and able to deliver this service.
So it's leadership in thatyou're bringing people with you,
they're contributing to youdelivering on that passion.
Yeah.
Graham (45:21):
I think, I think as well, if you join a small company, there's a
certain mission based element to it.
Like you're not joining MegaGamescompany X or Y, you know,
you're I'm not doing that.
I'm joining this, this small one.
So I think you're attracting peoplewho are maybe more open to trying new
things, which is the reason I don'twork for Megacorp X is because if I have
(45:44):
a new idea, which I have a lot of, Ihave a lot of ideas, but if I have an
idea, I'm probably going to try it out.
And if I feel like I can'tdo that in Megacorp X.
I don't want to work for you.
And I've asked those questions by joboffers from certain people at the time.
And I said, how do you work?
How do you do your researchin your, in the megacorp?
And I said, I specifically asked if I havean idea, can I try that out that morning?
(46:05):
And I said, definitely not, you know,you will not get the chance to do that.
This is our method.
This is our way of working.
And I said, well, I'm probably notthe guy for you because I'm probably
going to try it because I think it's abetter idea, but I may fail sometimes
and that's okay, but I will learn.
That means there must besomething worth exploring.
Otherwise it wouldn't do it for fun.
I'm doing it because I think there'sa problem with the current method.
(46:27):
I also think that if we try in asystematic way, we'll probably get
to a better solution at some point.
Geri (46:33):
Yeah.
So that creativity again, comingthrough again as a strong thing
and obviously the, the freedom andindependence to just play that out.
Graham (46:47):
I've never really had a boss, and you're making me
say, think things through here.
I've never really worked for a company,apart from the telecoms one, but really
you're worth working for yourself.
Um, I think I've alwaysbeen wanted to try.
Why don't you try?
You know, are you doing somethingbecause you're told to do it, or
are you doing something becauseyou cannot stop thinking about it?
(47:08):
And I definitely fallinto the latter category.
Like, like for the company, I rememberwhere in the road I was standing
when I realized I was going to quitmy academic job and start a company.
I know exactly the bend in theroad because I, I stopped walking.
My memory of that eventis I stopped walking.
I stood still and went, I'm done.
I'm going to start a company.
(47:29):
I've only had that twice.
That's strong.
That was one.
I knew I was going to start a companydoing, bringing HCI to the game industry.
And the second one was my currentone on game vision, where I realized
the last, the end of my career, I'mat the last chapter, I would say,
chapter of my career is game vision.
And it's a team psychologyproblem, not a player psychology
problem, but a team problem.
And that's going deeper into the problem.
(47:50):
Why do we have a playerpsychology problem?
Why is HCI needed on the product?
Because the team are the problem, sothere is a, that's the through thread
here is that yes, you can put a band aidover and say, we'll measure the product,
we'll do user research and put a littlesticky plaster over the top of it and,
you know, patch it up, but it's not reallyaddressing the problem fundamentally.
It's more, well, why don't theteam know what they're making?
(48:12):
And that's a shared mental model problem.
Geri (48:15):
You're reminding me of the five whys, um, technique, isn't it?
You're like, and why is that?
And why is that?
Why is that?
To get to the real issue underneath.
So you, you've mentioned going and doingan organizational psychology masters, um,
now did you still own your company at thisstage or what happened to the company?
Graham (48:35):
I sold the company.
We were acquired.
I never thought I woulddo that by the way.
We, after about year three frommemory, end of year three, we
had an offer to be acquired.
And I said, no, for different reasons.
I said, no, uh, maybe it was year four.
I can't remember.
No, year
Geri (48:51):
weren't done.
Graham (48:52):
Yeah, I wasn't done.
That's true.
I wasn't done, which ismy fundamental reason.
There was still more to do.
But by year four, um,they come back again.
It was partly I wasn't done andpartly their offer didn't fit with
me, my creativity, let's say, therewas an element of that at risk.
Um, by year four they came backagain and a few of the things
(49:14):
had changed and I could see theadvantages in doing it this time.
So it wasn't just 'am I done', but ifwe do go down that path, is there an
advantage that I could not do on my own?
And there was, and that, that wasmoving to a different country.
That was becoming more of a need,which is, you could call it.
You know, cultural UX in terms of,but we understand gamers in the UK.
(49:34):
Could we do that in America or Asia orAustralia or wherever else it might be?
You know, is there any difference?
What are the differences?
Who's exploring that?
And I thought that's interesting.
Clients are now asking for theAmerican market in particular, because
that's the biggest video game market.
And we couldn't really do it, you know?
So that was the, that was a main driver.
So I sold the company in 2016, I think.
(49:58):
And then I left in 2018.
Um, so I stayed for two years.
Geri (50:02):
working in a changeover period.
Graham (50:05):
Yeah, for two years, two years.
Geri (50:07):
was that?
Graham (50:09):
Well, well, I left.
I think back to that question, I was done.
There's no one singular reason.
I would say there was multiplereasons in this particular case.
Uh, quite a few actually.
Um, but I think the main one was Iwas done the journey I started out.
I want to bring.
(50:30):
I want to apply human computerinteraction to the video game industry
in an affordable, quick way, not justthe richest people who could afford it,
but also the very small game studios.
Being fair is very importantto me, for example.
And so it was meant to be, um,I wanted to build a studio that
any game studio could afford us.
And that ended up being true, atleast back then, it ended up being
(50:51):
true in terms of if you were,you know, two people in a shed in
Brighton, you could afford to hire us.
Or if you were Megacorp X,you could afford to hire us.
And we work for all thosetypes of people worldwide.
So the pricing model was verymuch, I thought we could.
Be fair to the whole industry.
Um, and still have a verygood business doing that.
We didn't need to just work for the 10richest, which was some of the advice.
(51:13):
I've got.
I got lots of advice overthe years as you can.
Some of it interesting.
Um, as you can imagine.
Um, but that was notwhat I wanted to build.
It wasn't just, we'll take the.
We'll build a list of the 100 richeststudios and we'll go and sell to them.
It was, no, if you're anybodymaking a game, you should have
it in your budget to afford us.
And there was no difference inpricing between the cheapest
(51:35):
and the most expensive.
So Megacorp X paid the same pricefor usability test as, you know,
a couple of people at a shed inBrighton, for example, same price.
So no difference whatsoeverin quality or time or pricing.
And it was designed like thatfrom the beginning, you know,
so that was important to me.
That was one of the.
principles that it was built on iswhy would you just build a company,
and I'm not criticizing that, tojust go for the richest people.
(51:58):
Um, if you want to do that, that'scompletely fine, but it just
wasn't what I wanted to build.
You
Geri (52:02):
Didn't fit your values.
Graham (52:04):
it didn't fit.
It wasn't the point, you know,um, it was meant to be part
of the process for everybody.
Back to your five why's question, Iwould say what drives that is I wanted
to change how video games were made.
In other words, people are spendingfive years building a product that
comes out that is, uh, reduced.
It's a reduced form of what it could be.
(52:24):
And the players are, they'replaying it and thinking, oh, it'd be
better if they had have fixed that.
I said, well, we could do that.
We can actually make those.
We can do it as part of the process.
And so that's part of, I wantedto change how video games 2025,
but it's just switched from playerpsychology to team psychology.
This is the lowest level of the five whys.
(52:46):
At the end of my career, I've eventuallygot to the bottom of the, bottom of
the question, why are games like this?
Why are they made this way?
It's back to your question aroundleadership or culture, which is, well,
partly it's an education problem.
My research from LSE would say the qualityof your mental model is not sufficient
for you to build it in a better way.
That's one problem.
(53:07):
But we also have to tackle leadershipand culture questions, which is, well,
why aren't we looking for better answers?
What's stopping us building it?
Why aren't we exploring?
You know, why, why did Ihave to go back to LSE?
Why aren't they doingthis research themselves?
Or why don't we carve out aresearch division on, you know?
So yeah, eventually at the end of mycareer, I got to the bottom of my pyramid
of whys, which is it's, it's mental modelscombined with vision and culture are the
(53:32):
two things I ultimately come back with.
Geri (53:38):
So why did you think you had to go back and do an MSc
Graham (53:46):
I didn't know.
I'd, so here's, when I left mycompany, I did not know for the
first time what I wanted to do.
But I did know that I was done there.
Geri (53:59):
hmmm
Graham (54:00):
I've never had that before.
I've always known what the next leapwas, like, you always join these dots up.
My dot is here, the next dot's over there.
I see, you kind of form a path.
But there was no other dot in this case.
But I went on holiday to a Spanishisland, and in the morning I went for
a long run, and in the afternoon I satwith my iPad and started writing a book.
Geri (54:20):
And that's where we'll leave this for part one, and I really look forward
to bringing you part two where Grahamgoes on to discuss his next career moves.
As usual, he does it in this incrediblyengaging and also very thoughtful way.
So in the process you'll get to hearmuch more than just about his moves.
(54:42):
But he shares so much that can betaken as relevant to running research
groups and developing a group cultureand developing a shared vision.
And as a last thing, I want to encourageyou, if you haven't already done
it, to take up our challenge to stopnow and thank someone who's really
(55:05):
had an impact on you, this smallbut genuine gesture on your part.
Can really make a bigdifference for them and for you.
And it goes towards creating that cultureof care and support and collegiality
that recognizes we are in this together.
(55:29):
You can find the summary notes, atranscript and related links for this
podcast on www.changingacademiclife.com.
You can also subscribe to ChangingAcademic Life on iTunes, and Stitcher
and I'm really hoping that we canwiden the conversation about how
we can do academia differently.
(55:49):
And you can contribute to this by ratingthe podcast and also giving feedback.
And if something connected withyou, please consider sharing this
podcast with your colleagues.
Together we can make change happen.
Welcome to Changing Academic Life.
I'm Geraldine Fitzpatrick, and this isa podcast series where academics and
others share their stories, provideideas, and provoke discussions about what
we can do individually and collectivelyto change academic life for the better.
(00:29):
My guest, Graham McAllister, hashad a fascinating career trajectory
with many pivots, starting with aPhD in computer graphics in Belfast.
And transitioning throughroles in industry and academia.
Eventually focusing on the videogame industry where he founded and
later sold a successful company thataddressed usability issues in games.
(00:55):
He's now exploring his next careerpivot, and we'll continue with that
story in part two, but for part one here.
You don't have to be in the games industryto get something out of this conversation.
Graham is an engaging storytellerand he is also really thoughtful.
(01:18):
He will likely have you reflecting onwhat you are doing and where you are
going in your career as you listento how he reflects on the when and
why of his different career Pivots.
And he's so clear about the value heoffers to people and what he cares about.
(01:40):
It's a masterclass in how toidentify and communicate a problem
that other people have and thatyou have the solution to help them.
This is relevant, not just forselling services into industry.
But I think for any of usresearchers defining focused research
(02:02):
agendas and writing proposals,
what's the problem?
Why is it important andwhat's our solution?
This is a wide ranging conversationand we also touch on lots of other
issues including around leadershipand the role of luck that we've heard
many times before, and the importanceof others who help shape our careers.
(02:28):
There's a lovely story here aboutthe pivotal impact of the late Gary
Marsden that really opened Graham'seyes to the human computer interaction
perspective that became his career focus.
This is such a rich conversationand so interesting that we kept
on talking much longer thanis reasonable for one episode.
(02:52):
So I look forward to bringing youpart two where he discusses what
happens next on that Spanish Island.
Graham McAllister, thank you forjoining me today on the podcast.
Graham (03:06):
Geraldine, hello, it's been a while.
Geri (03:08):
And it's been a while because, for full disclosure, Graham and
I worked together briefly back,um, I think it was 2007 to 2009.
There was a two, two year windowthere when we were both at
University of Sussex together.
And Graham, apart from just the excuseto catch up, I thought it would be
(03:30):
really interesting to talk to youbecause you've had an interesting career.
And before we pressed record,you were joking about being on
career, what, four or five, you'restill trying to decide which.
So you started off doing a PhD at inBelfast in music technology, was it?
(03:53):
Or some music related computing area?
Graham (03:57):
It was computer graphics, originally, and already you can
see the problem here where mycareers are, you know, because it
looks like it was a music path.
But it was actually very low levelcomputer graphics, like image
compression, like JPEG or MPEG.
So there was those algorithmsthat squash, squash video.
It was that type of stuff.
(04:17):
So back then, as a 18, what ageare you when you do your PhD?
21 year old, whatever it is.
I was very much, you know, Uh, verydismissive of human computer interaction.
So, when we talk about that,the idea of backtracking on your
own thinking, do a complete 180.
I've done that a few times inmy career, which is interesting.
I thought, who would studyhuman computer interaction?
(04:38):
What a preposterous idea, where it endedup being my career for over 20 years.
But anyway, so I was not that guy.
I was very much low levelcomputer programming.
That was my PhD, yeah.
Geri (04:49):
And then you went and worked in industry for a little bit.
Graham (04:53):
I did because we were, I say we, I mean the group of PhD students
among us, we were quite, um, we lookedat the lecturers who taught us and
we decided we would not be like that.
I probably alienated all thelecturers who taught me, by the way.
But what we meant was, if we were goingto teach building software, we wanted
to understand not just Theoreticalside of building software, but the
(05:16):
commercial side, which what's it like tobuild it under certain conditions and a
company setting on a commercial setting.
So we decided that the path I wason back then was I would go and get
some industry experience for a fewyears, but we would always come back.
To academia, and then then whenwe taught students would say, but
an industry, here's how you mightmodify this theory or modify this
(05:36):
framework, blah, blah, blah, you know,
Geri (05:39):
I, I actually did the same thing now that you say it.
One of the reasons why I was happy towork in industry, not that I had a clear
plan to, that I was definitely comingback to research, but I was interested
in how relevant was the stuff we weredoing within a research context when
you took it into an industry context.
And that was, that was interesting.
Graham (06:00):
very much.
I think one theme from my careers thatI've had, I guess, is when we talked
about this earlier, but in the deep inthe brief beforehand, but straddling
this division, if it is a divisionbetween academia and industry, and
do they have to be separate and howclosely related they feel separate.
In fact, one of the.
(06:21):
When we talk about some of the criticismsI've experienced with academia, so
when I moved to industry, the, um, theperception of people in the industry
of academia is not always positive.
In fact, it's rarelypositive in my industry.
So trying to shed that skin of,I'm not an academic anymore.
This is actually, this is real.
You know, it's like you're playingaround in academia, but industry is
(06:42):
perceived as the real world, let's say.
Um, so you're right that it wasthis, uh, academia does some
great, great things, obviously.
But it comes with an image attached, andit can impact on students perception,
even us as students being taught.
We were, we were querying, is this real?
Because we could see what was goingon in the industry even, this is pre
internet days, 92 I started my degree.
(07:04):
And we knew, you're teaching uslanguages we will never use in
the real world, even back then.
So why are we, we were alwaysquerying and pushing the academics.
Um, so again, that pushed out,in a way, pushed us into the,
pushed us out of academia to say,we're not going to be like that.
If we're going to teach something,it has to be, has to have a
greater degree of reality to it.
It can't just be theoretical.
(07:25):
It's not enough.
It's not enough to teach the principles.
That's what we thought.
I would probably still say that.
I would still probably have that.
Geri (07:33):
Yeah,
Graham (07:34):
mindset, I think
Geri (07:34):
if that industry academia link bridging straddling, as you
said, is, is, um, a key theme.
So what, what was, you know, in part ofthe straddling, what was the thinking
then to straddle back into academia,having been working in industry?
Graham (07:54):
it's back to what you originally thought I was doing music, and I can,
I can see why you said, I know we're onaudio here, but there's guitars behind me,
and there's usually a piano beside me andstuff I want to something more creative.
So my job that I got wastelecoms programming.
So telecoms is the 2000s telecomsboom the internet's becoming popular.
So as a programmer doing.
(08:15):
Uh, that type of work, youknow, telecommunications work,
basically, and it was fine.
Solving puzzles is always interesting.
You've been a programmer.
You've done a compute CS degree.
So, you know, no matter if you'rewriting a computer program, no
matter what it's for, it's probablygoing to be interesting because the
puzzle is stimulating intellectually.
However, the output of that puzzle.
(08:35):
Was dreadfully boring.
No one cares about telecoms equipment.
Well, certainly I didn't as a 24year old, 25 year old back then.
Um, so I thought, well, I likeprogramming, but I wonder,
could I take that and applyit to something more creative?
And a friend said, why don't youcome and apply for a job at my video
game company he was working for.
(08:56):
And they were a very famous videogame company in England at the
time, I was still in Belfast.
And by chance at the same time,a job posting come up in academia
at Queen's University Belfastfor music technology lecture.
And I thought, well, that'sa bridge between computer
science and music technology.
And that would fulfill my.
creative output, but I wouldn't have tomove to England because I'd have to move
(09:19):
country, even though it's a very small hopacross the bit of water, but it's still a
move away from things you know, I'd say.
Friends and family.
So that's where I ended up.
I ended up joining Queen's University backin academia, um, but create, you know,
keeping both my technical interests, butalso having a creative, a creative output.
Um, but that would, that would change too.
(09:41):
Uh, and that introduced me to HCI.
I was there as a CS lecturer.
So I was officially belonged to thecomputer science department, but I
was on loan to the music department.
That was the official structuring ofthe contract, you know, the academic
Geri (09:55):
Mm hmm.
Graham (09:57):
but I did not know what I was doing.
I was doing there really in termsof what my research would be.
I knew I was back in and teachingstudents computer science, but
from a research angle, like Iwas, I was a blank slate again.
I was not building on my PhD.
It was not building onmy computer graphics.
They weren't interestedin image compression.
Um, nor was I anymore?
And I wasn't doing telecoms.
(10:19):
this is blank slate number three, it'slike computer graphics to telecoms, now
music technology, but I'm not reallyusing anything directly in terms of,
there's only the transferable knowledgeof computer programming languages, but
nothing, nothing was transferring, yeah,
Geri (10:35):
How did you convince them that you were going to be a music
technology lecturer when you'rejust saying you, you know, computer
graphics, telecoms, programming?
Graham (10:47):
I don't know, I think, I think we'll have to ask them, and I think
one thing we should talk about is luckin life, because I feel I have had a
lot of luck, including you, meetingyou, because I would ask you the
same question, why did you hire me?
Because I was not, I, I shouldn'thave got the job really.
You know, I think there wasalways an element of luck and
(11:10):
I've had it quite a, quite a lot.
Uh, even ending up at Sussex, itwas another academic at Queen's
University who said to me, when wasthe last time you had a job interview?
And I said, well, five years agowhen I got the Queen's job, and he
said, okay, I'm skipping a few bitsbecause I've moved to HCI or my
Geri (11:29):
Mm.
Graham (11:30):
was to move into human computer interaction more.
And he said, okay, if you won't dothat, the next job, academic job
that comes up in the field of humancomputer interaction in any UK
university, you go for an interviewto find out what people think of you.
That's what you should do.
He's now a professor atManchester in Ricardo and he's a
Geri (11:48):
Mm hmm.
Graham (11:49):
So thanks to him, I said, okay, I will do that.
The next job that came up was theone that you posted or someone in
your department saying University ofSussex is looking for a human computer
interaction lecturer, blah, blah, blah.
And I said, well, I should goand find out what people think,
Geri (12:06):
And, and I'm thinking back then, I mean, we had some great
people applying for that position
there were two of you rightat the end that I remember we
were really tossing up with.
One of them was very much like me.
in the interest in that and thethinking in the end was that
(12:28):
you brought something different.
So it was about, I don't know,like opening up to more challenging
perspectives or differentpossibilities for different points
of view and the fact that you werefocusing in more of the music space.
Um, and you, you had started to moveinto games a bit by then, hadn't you?
(12:49):
Um, you know, so it felt like thatadded rather than, uh, deepened, you
know, it added breadth and also, youknow, that diversity of thinking rather
than sort of digging us more into what,how, you know, what we already were.
I don't know.
Yeah.
Yeah.
(13:09):
But we certainly, we certainlyinterpreted you as an HCI person
and I think you had had a paper,if I remember correctly, published
one of our key conferences as well.
Graham (13:24):
Could have done.
So I had.
I had five PhD students, I think,at that stage or something, and
we obviously had moved into HCI.
It was accessibility back then.
So that was the, my angle in, andtalking about luck, if I was to pinpoint
someone who maybe was influentialin, I don't want to say changing
(13:46):
my career, it was Gary Marsden.
Gary Marsden gave a guest lecture.
At the, exactly, at the, at theresearch center, I was in the music
research center at the university.
And I was, I don't think I was in HCI atthe time, but I was looking to change.
I knew computer science wasnot my, pure computer science
was not my final destination.
I was looking for this other outletand I was becoming more interested in
(14:08):
how people used what I was creating.
And I'd never heard of Gary Marsdenthat was not interested in HCI.
And I went, somehow Iwent to his lecture and.
I think he changed my life, because he wastalking, uh, I was just listening to his
research and the stories he was telling,and I was like, no, that is something that
(14:30):
resonated with me, not his exact area,because I was interested in video games,
but the problems he was talking about itwith saying, well, look, as technologists,
we can create this, these things, but ifpeople are frustrated by the way they're
not being utilized in the most efficientor effective way, then what's the point?
And me listening to that, I was thinkingas a video gamer, I'm playing these games
(14:53):
and thinking, yeah, but there was probablygood intentions and they can build it.
My goodness, they couldhave been so much better.
So I was thinking I could takewhat he's talking about, but
apply it to my area of interest.
Is that a thing?
And that, that was a pivotal moment in mylife was Gary Marsden, you know, Talking
about what interested him, but me hearing,me filtering it and saying, I've got
(15:17):
the same problem in a different domain.
Geri (15:21):
It's fascinating, isn't it, how we never know how something
that we say or some random chanceinteraction may impact someone's life.
And whether it's your lecturercolleague who said, when was the
last time you went for an interview?
Like, just go on and have a go.
(15:42):
Yeah.
To Gary, just happening tosay yes to a lecture there and
not know, he wouldn't know.
And sadly, very sadly, hepassed away a few years ago.
Um, he wouldn't have known that there wassomeone in the audience who was sparking
with possibilities from what he said.
(16:03):
Yeah.
Graham (16:04):
Yeah, that's the thing.
Geri (16:05):
it?
Graham (16:06):
I should have sent him an email.
I know he passed away in quite along time, nearly a decade ago.
I think it's quite a long time ago.
Um, and I should have said to him, do yourealize what you said changed my life?
Um, and then impact probably hundredsof millions of gamers as well,
because we'll get to the company side.
The impact.
And so the impact that thatrandom lecture on the impact,
(16:30):
like, yeah, a lot of people, I
Geri (16:33):
Yeah.
Like not, as you said, I hadn't,yeah, I hadn't even made that
connection, but yeah, but notjust you, but what has happened.
And I mean, I I'm immediately thinkingof individuals that I know who've
been involved as well as, you know,the, as you said, the companies and
then the, the players of the games
Graham (16:51):
players, exactly.
Geri (16:53):
So that's a really nice point as well about just the importance of.
stopping for whatever minuteor two it might take you to
ping a quick email to someone.
So if you're listening now and there'ssomeone who did impact your life, stop now
and just send that email and say thanks.
Yeah.
Graham (17:13):
Definitely recommend it, because I, that moment with Gary is gone.
And he wouldn't, he wouldn't know me,I just would have been this random
email saying, Hey, I was, I was alecturer, I was sitting in your audience.
But just letting him know thathe changed my life, you know, and
Geri (17:27):
Yeah.
Graham (17:28):
so thanks, Gary.
Geri (17:30):
These are the things that matter in life, isn't it?
So, not the, not the paper that yougot that you can't even remember,
was there a paper in that conference?
So, you, so that's when our paths metthen, when you, you came to Sussex.
Um, and I do remember you beingvery good negotiator as well, you
(17:52):
know, which was really, I learneda lot actually from watching.
And, so, You, by then, um, when you came,you were bringing much more of a Games
HCI sort of research identity with you.
Graham (18:09):
yeah, they, I, um, like most technical minded people,
you know, um, at the time I madea nice chart of pros and cons.
Should I move university?
And should I move fromBelfast to Brighton?
Um, and Belfast won on this littleorganized neat chart, you know, all the
pros and cons, but it didn't feel right.
(18:30):
Which I
Geri (18:31):
interesting.
Like,
Graham (18:32):
didn't feel right.
There was more ticks in the Belfast.
Geri (18:36):
So keep redoing the, keep redoing the scores.
Graham (18:40):
So, so I, I find that interesting.
Well, why doesn't it feel right?
Obviously not all informationwas on the chart, you know.
Anyway, um, and the reason is that Youknow, there's a couple of questions
I always ask whenever I'm pivotingjobs, because I've done it a few times,
and this question keeps coming back.
And the question I askmyself is, am I done yet?
Am I done here?
And so it's like, have I donewhatever I had to do in this
(19:02):
domain that I'm currently in?
But the other question that goes withit is, is there something to do if I go?
Like, is there something, is theresomething to do here, or something
to do there, sort of thing.
But why, What didn't sit in the chart,I guess it would have been opportunity,
I should have had a column that saidif I wanted to be in the game industry
and bring human computer interactionto the games industry, there was no
(19:23):
industry in Belfast whatsoever in 2007.
But Brighton was thriving and itstill is, you know, there was like
30, 30 or 40 game studios in onecity or something like that, so.
Really
Different sizes, some are large andsome are mid sized, some are small,
but there's probably more actuallynow, including the small ones.
So I decided, well, if I wantto do this, then you have to go.
(19:43):
You know, so that was the final, I don'tknow if you remember this, but the very
first meeting I ever had at the universitywas not with anyone in the university
really, it was with a games company, andit was me, you, and another academic.
We went to visit a game studio, uh,to try and bring, you know, usability
testing into their game making, andthat's the first meeting I remember.
I don't remember meeting anyone,like, in the university itself, but
Geri (20:07):
I can't, I'm remembering it.
I think we.
As part of trying to help yournetwork in and we, I think we,
I don't know what we did to setup that as a, as a introduction.
Graham (20:22):
I can't remember either, but that was, that was wonderful knowing here I am
as an academic and already, We're talkingto the biggest studio in Brighton at
the time, they were a very large studio.
And so this, this is exactly why I came.
So you could say, back to my, I'mgoing to link together what I do
now with what, with then is vision.
I had a strong vision.
If I'm doing it, this is the clear andsingular reason I'm going to Sussex, is
(20:45):
to bring HCI into the games industry.
I did not know at the time, however,that I would have a company.
I thought it would be consulting.
So I remember looking at mycontract, my academic contract.
I remember grilling someone about howmany days consulting could I do per
month or per year or something like that.
And my intention was I'm goingto max that out because I want, I
need to bring this knowledge in.
(21:07):
The game industry is a problem,academia has the solution, and there's
very little company, if there was nocompany, really bridging that gap.
So I thought I would do itin my days of consulting.
Um, and here's luck.
The second area of luck we're going totalk about at least is someone at the
university said, hang on a second, bychance, whenever I joined 2007, 2008,
the university was about to give afund To give academics to have these
(21:30):
little small startups, and they said,we're gonna have a small pot of money.
And I was one of the first fouracademics to get that little pot
of money to start a spin out.
So originally, so now the idea was going,not just my consulting days, but I could
do this in a little, little spin out.
Um, so that, that, thatended up happening.
I was one of the first four toget that little pot of money.
(21:50):
So we're, we're moving.
Yeah.
Geri (21:52):
Yeah, I remember you moving up the hill, I was setting up the, the spin
out and do you want to just reflect onthen navigating, I don't know, because I
imagine there are tensions between this isthe role of a lecturer and yes, there are
consulting days, but you know, and this iswhat's expected here and this is what you
wanted to do in the startup and how younavigated between the teaching, research,
(22:20):
tick box commitments, From the lecturer'sside and the, and the, also the, what
would be a significant commitment froma startup side if you're going to take
a startup seriously, because yeah.
Graham (22:34):
I, going in, I did not know how messy that would become in terms
of time management and just divisionof resources, my resources, you know,
um, I think, I think in the beginningit was meant to be quite clear.
I would teach so many days per week.
I love teaching, by the way.
That's another thread that I love.
Education in general.
Something I'd really, really enjoy.
(22:54):
Um, But the, but what happened is I think,um, the research side, uh, I didn't do
so much, not because I didn't necessarilywant to, but I, my feeling at the time
was the level of research that HCI is thatwas good enough to bring the industry.
In other words, I did not have toadvance it because it was already at
a sufficient standard to bring it andsolve the problems that needed solving.
(23:18):
So the problem I was solving was.
The commercial side, there's nobusiness model really to, or it
could be a psychology problem.
The mindset of the game developerswas such that, you know, get off
my lawn, I know what I'm doing.
We do not need your psychologynonsense, you know, here, sort of thing.
Um, so the problems needed fixed were notresearch problems, they were changing a
(23:38):
shift in mindset at a commercial level,which is you think you don't need this,
but all the evidence says you need this.
So my job was giving talks to try andpersuade them and show them with evidence
that actually you will do better.
You will get what you want.
You're more likely to get what you want ifyou use this tool rather than just dismiss
it and let it go away sort of thing.
(24:00):
So I ended up doing some teaching, verylittle research, but again, the research
was more me trying to commercializethat and bring that into the,
So, that lasted for a few years andI realized that I couldn't do both.
The time commitment, as you say, fora startup is immense and I was, you
can wear yourself down quite quickly.
(24:20):
It's quite tiring.
You know, um, so I decided Ineeded to make a choice really,
um, and that came from both angles.
University wanted me to make a choiceand I realized I had to make a choice.
And I decided,
Geri (24:31):
they were, cause I, I had moved on by then.
So they were pressuring you, like,where are your research papers or
you're not doing enough teaching?
Like what was, what was theirpoint of pressure for you?
I
Graham (24:43):
I think they wanted a commitment really, is this, you know, are you going
to take us into a company, uh, or areyou going to come back as an academic?
Like I needed to choose a path, really.
I think they wanted a clear cut decision.
That's my memory.
It's going back over a decade, but Ithink they wanted a clear decision.
Are you an academic or are you afounder of a company sort of thing?
Um, and it ended up, Iresigned from both positions.
(25:06):
So the spin out and the academic job.
And I said, well, I think thisneeds my time all the time.
I think there's something here.
So I quit both.
And then I, I just didthe commercial thing.
I started a new entityaway from the university.
Back to the perception problemof, I think we said earlier.
I think one of the things holding meback was perception of academia, and I
(25:30):
know that I was trying to get contractsdone when I was in the startup, and
there's real time and there's academictime, and academic time runs at about,
well it's much slower, that's it.
Geri (25:40):
It's a little slower, a
Graham (25:42):
a little slower.
Geri (25:44):
time.
Graham (25:45):
And I think, uh, I'd certainly had clients at the time who felt
the frustrations of academic time.
Uh, it wasn't going towork for them effectively.
So, and the image as well,academia is seen as slow and
expensive and not real world.
Those are
Geri (25:59):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Graham (26:02):
Um, perception that I needed to change.
I remember telling someone,well, we're now in the center
of Brighton or something.
I'm away from the university,we're in the center of Brighton,
and they were just overjoyed.
They were like, oh, thank, youknow, thank goodness sort of thing.
It's not a commercial, it's a company.
You work on company time, youknow, real time, real world time.
And I didn't expect that.
I didn't know that was a thingthat I would have to negotiate.
(26:22):
To navigate, um, being partof a university the time.
So that was, that was interesting.
And then
Geri (26:32):
So can I just, um, so you've just talked quite, so it's one thing
transitioning topic areas from computergraphics and software engineering to.
music technology to games to, to start up.
So there's, um, there's the topicsort of shifting, but it feels like
(26:54):
there are very different skill setsneeded between, I don't know, more
of a standard lecturer in your firstlecturing job to doing a startup.
And you talked about, you know,talking to industry and that would
be very different talking thangiving an academic presentation.
(27:16):
Can you reflect on what were the keyskills you needed to develop in order
to shift from that more academicmindset, you know, including what we
just said about the time, to somethingthat's more relevant to industry?
Graham (27:32):
I think there's, so I've mentioned, not necessarily a mental model,
but some of the questions I ask myself ifI'm ready to pivot, like, am I done here?
Geri (27:41):
Mm.
Graham (27:42):
The other, there's another question, which tries to tell me
the type of problem that I work on.
And I would relate this back in some way.
Maybe my PhD, but it's how importantis the problem that you work on
and so whenever I think about theproblem I'm working on, I try and
put it into a hierarchy of all theproblems I know about in that domain.
(28:03):
So let's talk aboutvideo games for a second.
My domain, let's say, was video games.
That's where I was trying to apply myacademic knowledge and whenever we,
like some of my students even did thisas master's projects, but whenever you
critique or analyze the reasons why videogames get a high score or low score,
like what are the problems with them?
(28:23):
Usability issues were a major problem.
Like they were coming up in gamereviews or user experience problems.
So this was a significant problem.
So I knew that If I'm talking to, if I'min an academic talk, sometimes academics
talk about things which are, you know, the400th most important thing of all yet, but
there's an interesting problem for them.
Why not?
If you've got funding to do it, knockyourself out, go and work on it.
(28:45):
But in industry, if it's the400th most important problem,
no one's coming to your talk.
Usability, however, directlyrelated, it's going to be one of
the highest related problems, whichis especially in free to play.
Talk about luck again.
The business model changedwhen I started my company, the
business model of video games.
So I'm going to lose track ofwhat I'm talking about here,
but it's very important because.
(29:07):
Pre 2010, let's say, if you spent50 dollars on a video game and it
was terrible, well, tough luck.
You know, the company's got your 50.
2010 ish onwards, it was free.
So if you, if the user experience orusability was not top tier, you made
no money because that player had left.
And what's worse is you'd maybespent 1, 2, 5, 10 dollars to acquire
(29:30):
that person, because it costs moneyto bring people into your game.
So you make no money up front, andyour impact is worse, it's negative.
You're spending money to bring people in.
And you only get money if the userexperience of your game is sufficient
that they spend money, let's say.
I'm generalizing, I'm cuttinga few details out, but
that's generally the model.
That was luck.
If I'd have started my company 10years before, it may not have worked.
(29:51):
So again, back to the business sideis, when you're lecturing or giving a
talk at a games conference, I'm talkingabout a problem that they are seeing.
And their KPIs on a daily basis,which is, hey, we paid for 100,
000 players to come into our game,and there's only 10, 000 left.
Where did they go?
Well, a lot of them could have left forusability UX problems, and that was the
(30:14):
problem my company was solving, and Ispelt that out clearly by showing that,
um, I give one talk a month for nearly10 years in a row on this type of topic,
probably more, um, about that sort ofnumber, so I give a lot of talks saying,
if you want to know what's wrong, thisis probably one of the major factors
Impacting your bottom line and why you'renot getting the reviews that you want.
(30:38):
That,
Geri (30:38):
yeah,
Graham (30:39):
to me, was a common sense.
You know, you've got a problem,and of course, if I'm starting a
company, I'm doing it for a reason.
I think, I think you've got the problem,and I think I've got the solution.
That's what businesses do.
That's what they do, right?
Geri (30:51):
yes,
Graham (30:52):
So, if you don't think you've got the problem, there
must be a miscommunication.
Why aren't you seeing the problem?
By the way, a lot of themare not seeing the problem.
They wanted to say something else.
Like it was oversaturation of the markeror somebody else's psychological problem.
Well, it couldn't be me.
Couldn't be our gamebecause we're experts.
So obviously the problemis somewhere else.
And my job is to stand up and say,no, the problem's not somewhere else.
(31:14):
The problem's actually.
View.
In fact, that problem continueswhen we get to my current career.
That problem has got worse.
I would say the problem is not elsewhere.
The problems with the team, youknow, but so anyway, that's an
academic versus commercial talking.
I think academics sometimes talk aboutproblems they're interested in, but
sometimes they're not that critical to.
(31:35):
There's a small group ofresearchers worldwide who do that.
You know, you've got these researchdisciplines that are very small
niche groups and that's fine.
That's okay.
But if you're talking at a conference, um,usually people want problems solved and
addressed and you have to figure out, am Ipresenting my problem in a way that, that
the people in the audience care about?
You know, and that's,that's, it's just common.
(31:58):
I thought it was commonsense, but maybe not.
I don't know.
What were you thinking by the way?
Cause What do you see the differencebetween, like, academic conferences
and, let's say, industry conferences?
Do you see a difference between the two?
Geri (32:12):
yeah, I think there are, I haven't been to that many industry
conferences, main ones would havebeen in the healthcare space.
It is also the case of what aretheir immediate pain points,
um, what are their immediateproblems and what can you help with?
Graham (32:30):
Yeah.
It's the evidence behind that.
I would say that, especially in videogames, I think a lot of teams don't, um,
look towards the science of the problem.
They tend to just have a, I, I, yeah,exactly, gut feel or, well, I saw this,
so, you know, it must be true, right?
I will do A lot of guesswork intuition.
And it's nearly always wrong.
(32:52):
Like, there's a lot of bad.
Decisions being made because they shoulddo what academics would do and say,
well, what do we know about this field?
Do we do a literature review?
Do we apply critical thinking?
There's very little critical thinking.
They don't know the limitsof their own knowledge.
They say, well, I know this,but they don't know what's
the counter argument to that.
What do we, where do we know where thatapplies and where that doesn't apply?
Or what's the three otherarguments that could apply
(33:13):
here or three other frameworks?
They don't do, at least what I see, very,very little of that type of thinking.
It's just, here's a problem.
Geri (33:21):
A lot of our cognitive biases playing out
Graham (33:25):
Yeah.
Geri (33:26):
in that context.
So in, in doing the startupproper, like starting your own
company in the center of town,
, there's also lots of other aspectsthat are more mundane, like budgets
and projections and marketing andmulti faceted, you know, not just the
(33:52):
core work that you get excited about.
Did you employ people to do thatstuff or were you doing it all?
Can you talk about assembling the teamthat you, you built up in that company
Graham (34:04):
There were teams of researchers, so everyone was a researcher,
including myself in the beginning.
Um, anything mundane, like, Idon't like accounting that much,
but I love business models.
I'm quite familiar.
I'm quite, don't say mathematical, butI'm comfortable in that world, let's say.
So the company ran on a very simplespreadsheet, for example, but in
terms of doing the accounts that wasimmediately outsourced to someone else
(34:26):
because it was not my area of expertise.
It's not an area of expertisethat I wanted to get good
in or anything like that.
Marketing's an interesting one, though,because I never called it marketing.
I called it education.
Geri (34:37):
Oh interesting,
Graham (34:37):
told you, for example, um, I give one, roughly, I'm going
to average it out here, one talkper month at a games conference.
Um, and every, nearly every talkI would give, we would get work.
So some people would say, Oh, you weredoing marketing then, but it wasn't, I
was explaining why you had this problem.
It just happened that if I explainedthe problem well and showed them they
had the problem, they wanted to hireus to fix it, to fix the problem.
(35:01):
So we never had any, uh, I don'tremember, I don't remember spending
one pound on an advert ever.
During the whole course ofthe startup, there was none.
We didn't have a website for thefirst three years from memory.
Maybe two or three years.
That's only because someonesaid, are you a legit company?
I'm like, yeah, we're, we're flat out.
We're busy.
And they said, I can'tfind you on the web.
And I'm like, well, no, we'retoo busy to have a website.
(35:21):
So I eventually put a website up
Geri (35:23):
Mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm, mm,
Graham (35:24):
to say we're here, but we were, we were completely booked
out, you know, um, so it's back tothis thing that I, I love education.
I love explaining to people.
I'm an introvert.
I do not like, if there's, if there'san event or a space at the back
of the room where I can hide, thatwould be, that would be me, you
know, but I also give a lot of talkspublicly, which is complete opposite.
People must think, Oh,you love giving talks.
(35:45):
That's not true.
But what I love doing is explainingto people the problem that
they're facing, and if you do thisthing, your problem will go away.
It's helping people.
You call it education, you call ithelp, you call it what you want.
That I find fascinating.
And of course the book goes along withthat, The Researcher Brain, which is my
(36:05):
current journey around team psychologyand shared mental models and things.
It's the going deep into, whyaren't you seeing this problem.
And then the other question, whyisn't there a solution to that
problem, which I had to go anddesign for the last five years.
So doing all that, and then, and thengetting to tell people about it, like,
by the way, the reason you're havingthis problem is not what you think it is.
(36:25):
It's something else.
And the good news is we can fix that.
And that bridges, again, I had to goand do research and go back to school
again, to be a student, to bringthat back into industry and to a very
practical, we're jumping around alittle bit here, but I think all these
things are connected in terms of.
Yeah.
I don't really call it startup marketing.
It was just, I don't think you'reseeing the problem that you have.
(36:45):
You're attributing theproblem to something else.
You're not seeing it correctly.
There's a great quote I found outonly a few weeks ago by Einstein.
I'm going to butcher it, but it's likethe quality of what you see depends
on the quality of your mental model.
Like the model you use to see theworld completely dictates what you see.
And my research, the results would show isthe reason you're not seeing the problem
is the quality of your mental modeldoesn't allow you to see the problem.
(37:08):
So you're attributing it to somethingelse and you keep trying to fix the
problem and the problem keeps happening.
The problem is you can'tsee it for what it is.
You don't see the problem.
So again, it's bringing it back tomental models and things like that.
Um, but that's the joy is now I getto teach that and educate people and
say, Hey, you thought it was this, but.
What if I told you it was something else?
(37:28):
Would you be interested?
Wow, there's a discussion.
That's, that's where we're at in 2025.
I'm about to bring thatto the games industry.
And I think, well, I know a lot ofthem will not want to hear the answer.
It's going to be, some people willlove it, but I think some people
will say that can't be true.
That can't be the reason.
It can't be me.
(37:49):
That's an identity problem.
I'm an expert.
I'm an expert in game development.
Are you telling me I don't know?
Yeah, I think that'swhat's going to happen.
Geri (38:00):
It's a skill to have that sort of discussion.
I love, you know, apart from the specificsof what you said, I love it as an
example of tapping into your strengths.
Like you've said, one of your strengths,one of your passions is education.
And it plays out, that this educationcan play out in lots of ways, like
(38:24):
it was probably part of the reasonwhy you went back to lecturing,
I imagine, in the first place.
And that There are still ways to do it.
And I love that mental reframing.
You know, if you talk about mentalmodels and that as well, you're
standing up and giving a talk isn'tabout putting yourself up there and,
you know, like in front of all thesepeople and isn't it nerve wracking?
(38:46):
It's about this is a great opportunityto do that thing I care about,
which is educating on a topicthat I'm really passionate about.
And this is a way to connect to people.
Graham (38:57):
Yeah.
I always thought of talking as educating.
I never thought I'm giving a talk.
I thought I'm going to go andeducate, reveal something that
is new to what's in the audienceand their life will get better.
You know, if I explain this thingand if I do a good job explaining
the thing, they're going to go awaythinking, wow, that problem I have,
there's, there's a solution to itand I understand more about it.
(39:18):
That's a great thing.
That's why we're in education, right?
It's like, why do we do education?
Let's go back to the fundamentals.
Why do this job?
It's not for money.
If you're in education, there's areason, why do I want to spend my time
discovering something, researchingsomething, finding an answer or going
deeper into the problem and then writingabout it and telling people about it?
(39:39):
Why do I do that?
What's interesting about that?
Because that's universal.
That's not just the little disciplineyou're doing your PhD in or your
postdoc or whatever, you know, itcould be, it could be anywhere.
You know, it could becomputer graphics, telecoms.
It's the same type of thing, which is,do we understand, but And if that's
what drives you, the uncovering ofgoing deeper and understanding why
(40:02):
and But it's also helping, right?
Because if you share the knowledge,sharing is a large part of it.
It's not just, I did it for meand I, I kept all knowledge to
myself and that was the end.
It's like, no, well, you wentand give a hundred talks or
wrote a book or did something atworkshops or whatever it may be.
That's elevating a groupor a team or a society or.
You know, that's, that's a bigger missionthan just, well, I do research like,
(40:26):
well, really is that what's going on here?
I think it's bigger than that.
You're not just doing research.
Geri (40:31):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Reminding us to connect to that, that sortof drive and that passion underneath it.
You mentioned team then, we're goingto move on to sort of a next transition
pivot that you did, but, um, just in thestartup company, you, you built up a team.
So that put you also in somesort of leadership position.
(40:56):
Again, can I just get you to reflect onleadership skills that you had to develop
or what you think was most important,or, uh, you know, you may even have a
story of things that didn't go well thatyou, there were big learning points.
Graham (41:10):
I would say I'm very, I'm very different now than what I was then.
I think I would do it differently.
Not surprisingly since going back andstudying organizational psychology,
which we'll get to and studyingthe science of team performance.
The word I would use, what I know now isthat was probably authentic leadership.
In other words, I was just me.
There was no thought putinto leadership whatsoever.
(41:33):
That was probably the truth.
I started a company to solve aproblem and I was just purely
focused on solving the problem.
And I hired people to solve the problem.
I didn't, I don't think I putany effort really into team
building or anything like that.
But I did try to hire the people I thoughtwere the best and fit for the team.
I mean, I know there's problemswith culture fit as well.
So I just want to, it's notnecessarily culture fit, but, um,
(41:55):
So I think it was more authentic.
In other words, I was just being me.
And that That took the company to acertain stage, uh, not, not, maybe it
was okay, but, um, I think, you know, youdon't need the same person for all stages
of a company's growth that you're probablybetter off not doing that in some ways.
Um, so, yeah, I think, I think I wasvery much focused on the technical
(42:16):
side as a leader, even as verymuch focused on my two main tasks
were, can we do the job very well?
Uh, and then this education piecegiving talks, telling the industry
that, you know, um, what do we,how are we solving your problems?
Because there was a certain degreeof, the company started by only
offering one single service, theeasiest one, usability testing.
(42:37):
Like an MVP, you start small,we offer this one thing, and
Geri (42:40):
MVP being.
Graham (42:42):
minimum viable product, which is, you know, like I think every company.
Every video game company has problemswith usability, like tutorials,
feedback, controls, although there'sno one who does it really well
or they could certainly improve.
So I've been to find going into here'sanother mental model or mindset.
If I go into a conference, mymindset was everybody in this room
(43:05):
is a potential customer for mebecause I think, or I can prove that
they all have usability problems.
So depending on your product oryour research area, you may go into
a room and think, I think maybe3 percent of the people here are
the people I would connect with.
We have similar interests or similar,you know, or I could solve their problem.
In my case, it wasalways a hundred percent.
If you're making a game, we can help you.
(43:26):
There's no exceptions here.
So that was my, my, I knew my MVP,my, my, my little tiny service,
service number one was applicable toa hundred percent of the market, which
is interesting for a business, right?
But eventually we ended up like 10services or something or whatever it was.
Um, cause we developed more and more.
Whenever you get to see a studio, yourealize, Oh, you've got that problem.
Well, you know, giving computerinteraction can solve that problem too.
(43:50):
So we ended up, so part of my brainwas developing or seeing new services,
going and visiting clients, listening tothem, seeing their pain points, and then
figuring out What I like getting thisbridge between academia and industry.
I'm always looking for, isthere a method I'm aware of?
That I could modify to fix that problem.
It's very rare you would take itcompletely as is and just, you
(44:10):
know, apply it and it would work.
So you're always thinking,I recognize that problem.
And if I modify this method, I thinkI could do that or do it good enough.
So we ended up with like, I say, sevenor 10 different services, a current
member, depending on how you countand then giving talks and educating.
Um, but for leadership, um, no, Ithink I was just being me at the
(44:32):
time in terms of focusing on the.
I think that's very product oriented.
Is the product good?
And I don't, I think I thoughtif I hired good people, the
team would take care of itself.
I wouldn't do that now, I don'tthink, knowing what I know.
I'd probably build the team differently.
But back then, I think that's what I did.
Geri (44:48):
So, let's come back to that, um, later, just to step it through, because
I think it'll make, your reflectionson that will make more sense then.
And I'm just sharing that the pictureI have in my head is You've got this
drive, this passion, this vision tomake this difference and you've hired
people who stand with you like you'relinking arms and you're marching together
(45:10):
and able to deliver this service.
So it's leadership in thatyou're bringing people with you,
they're contributing to youdelivering on that passion.
Yeah.
Graham (45:21):
I think, I think as well, if you join a small company, there's a
certain mission based element to it.
Like you're not joining MegaGamescompany X or Y, you know,
you're I'm not doing that.
I'm joining this, this small one.
So I think you're attracting peoplewho are maybe more open to trying new
things, which is the reason I don'twork for Megacorp X is because if I have
(45:44):
a new idea, which I have a lot of, Ihave a lot of ideas, but if I have an
idea, I'm probably going to try it out.
And if I feel like I can'tdo that in Megacorp X.
I don't want to work for you.
And I've asked those questions by joboffers from certain people at the time.
And I said, how do you work?
How do you do your researchin your, in the megacorp?
And I said, I specifically asked if I havean idea, can I try that out that morning?
(46:05):
And I said, definitely not, you know,you will not get the chance to do that.
This is our method.
This is our way of working.
And I said, well, I'm probably notthe guy for you because I'm probably
going to try it because I think it's abetter idea, but I may fail sometimes
and that's okay, but I will learn.
That means there must besomething worth exploring.
Otherwise it wouldn't do it for fun.
I'm doing it because I think there'sa problem with the current method.
(46:27):
I also think that if we try in asystematic way, we'll probably get
to a better solution at some point.
Geri (46:33):
Yeah.
So that creativity again, comingthrough again as a strong thing
and obviously the, the freedom andindependence to just play that out.
Graham (46:47):
I've never really had a boss, and you're making me
say, think things through here.
I've never really worked for a company,apart from the telecoms one, but really
you're worth working for yourself.
Um, I think I've alwaysbeen wanted to try.
Why don't you try?
You know, are you doing somethingbecause you're told to do it, or
are you doing something becauseyou cannot stop thinking about it?
(47:08):
And I definitely fallinto the latter category.
Like, like for the company, I rememberwhere in the road I was standing
when I realized I was going to quitmy academic job and start a company.
I know exactly the bend in theroad because I, I stopped walking.
My memory of that eventis I stopped walking.
I stood still and went, I'm done.
I'm going to start a company.
(47:29):
I've only had that twice.
That's strong.
That was one.
I knew I was going to start a companydoing, bringing HCI to the game industry.
And the second one was my currentone on game vision, where I realized
the last, the end of my career, I'mat the last chapter, I would say,
chapter of my career is game vision.
And it's a team psychologyproblem, not a player psychology
problem, but a team problem.
And that's going deeper into the problem.
(47:50):
Why do we have a playerpsychology problem?
Why is HCI needed on the product?
Because the team are the problem, sothere is a, that's the through thread
here is that yes, you can put a band aidover and say, we'll measure the product,
we'll do user research and put a littlesticky plaster over the top of it and,
you know, patch it up, but it's not reallyaddressing the problem fundamentally.
It's more, well, why don't theteam know what they're making?
(48:12):
And that's a shared mental model problem.
Geri (48:15):
You're reminding me of the five whys, um, technique, isn't it?
You're like, and why is that?
And why is that?
Why is that?
To get to the real issue underneath.
So you, you've mentioned going and doingan organizational psychology masters, um,
now did you still own your company at thisstage or what happened to the company?
Graham (48:35):
I sold the company.
We were acquired.
I never thought I woulddo that by the way.
We, after about year three frommemory, end of year three, we
had an offer to be acquired.
And I said, no, for different reasons.
I said, no, uh, maybe it was year four.
I can't remember.
No, year
Geri (48:51):
weren't done.
Graham (48:52):
Yeah, I wasn't done.
That's true.
I wasn't done, which ismy fundamental reason.
There was still more to do.
But by year four, um,they come back again.
It was partly I wasn't done andpartly their offer didn't fit with
me, my creativity, let's say, therewas an element of that at risk.
Um, by year four they came backagain and a few of the things
(49:14):
had changed and I could see theadvantages in doing it this time.
So it wasn't just 'am I done', but ifwe do go down that path, is there an
advantage that I could not do on my own?
And there was, and that, that wasmoving to a different country.
That was becoming more of a need,which is, you could call it.
You know, cultural UX in terms of,but we understand gamers in the UK.
(49:34):
Could we do that in America or Asia orAustralia or wherever else it might be?
You know, is there any difference?
What are the differences?
Who's exploring that?
And I thought that's interesting.
Clients are now asking for theAmerican market in particular, because
that's the biggest video game market.
And we couldn't really do it, you know?
So that was the, that was a main driver.
So I sold the company in 2016, I think.
(49:58):
And then I left in 2018.
Um, so I stayed for two years.
Geri (50:02):
working in a changeover period.
Graham (50:05):
Yeah, for two years, two years.
Geri (50:07):
was that?
Graham (50:09):
Well, well, I left.
I think back to that question, I was done.
There's no one singular reason.
I would say there was multiplereasons in this particular case.
Uh, quite a few actually.
Um, but I think the main one was Iwas done the journey I started out.
I want to bring.
(50:30):
I want to apply human computerinteraction to the video game industry
in an affordable, quick way, not justthe richest people who could afford it,
but also the very small game studios.
Being fair is very importantto me, for example.
And so it was meant to be, um,I wanted to build a studio that
any game studio could afford us.
And that ended up being true, atleast back then, it ended up being
(50:51):
true in terms of if you were,you know, two people in a shed in
Brighton, you could afford to hire us.
Or if you were Megacorp X,you could afford to hire us.
And we work for all thosetypes of people worldwide.
So the pricing model was verymuch, I thought we could.
Be fair to the whole industry.
Um, and still have a verygood business doing that.
We didn't need to just work for the 10richest, which was some of the advice.
(51:13):
I've got.
I got lots of advice overthe years as you can.
Some of it interesting.
Um, as you can imagine.
Um, but that was notwhat I wanted to build.
It wasn't just, we'll take the.
We'll build a list of the 100 richeststudios and we'll go and sell to them.
It was, no, if you're anybodymaking a game, you should have
it in your budget to afford us.
And there was no difference inpricing between the cheapest
(51:35):
and the most expensive.
So Megacorp X paid the same pricefor usability test as, you know,
a couple of people at a shed inBrighton, for example, same price.
So no difference whatsoeverin quality or time or pricing.
And it was designed like thatfrom the beginning, you know,
so that was important to me.
That was one of the.
principles that it was built on iswhy would you just build a company,
and I'm not criticizing that, tojust go for the richest people.
(51:58):
Um, if you want to do that, that'scompletely fine, but it just
wasn't what I wanted to build.
You
Geri (52:02):
Didn't fit your values.
Graham (52:04):
it didn't fit.
It wasn't the point, you know,um, it was meant to be part
of the process for everybody.
Back to your five why's question, Iwould say what drives that is I wanted
to change how video games were made.
In other words, people are spendingfive years building a product that
comes out that is, uh, reduced.
It's a reduced form of what it could be.
(52:24):
And the players are, they'replaying it and thinking, oh, it'd be
better if they had have fixed that.
I said, well, we could do that.
We can actually make those.
We can do it as part of the process.
And so that's part of, I wantedto change how video games 2025,
but it's just switched from playerpsychology to team psychology.
This is the lowest level of the five whys.
(52:46):
At the end of my career, I've eventuallygot to the bottom of the, bottom of
the question, why are games like this?
Why are they made this way?
It's back to your question aroundleadership or culture, which is, well,
partly it's an education problem.
My research from LSE would say the qualityof your mental model is not sufficient
for you to build it in a better way.
That's one problem.
(53:07):
But we also have to tackle leadershipand culture questions, which is, well,
why aren't we looking for better answers?
What's stopping us building it?
Why aren't we exploring?
You know, why, why did Ihave to go back to LSE?
Why aren't they doingthis research themselves?
Or why don't we carve out aresearch division on, you know?
So yeah, eventually at the end of mycareer, I got to the bottom of my pyramid
of whys, which is it's, it's mental modelscombined with vision and culture are the
(53:32):
two things I ultimately come back with.
Geri (53:38):
So why did you think you had to go back and do an MSc
Graham (53:46):
I didn't know.
I'd, so here's, when I left mycompany, I did not know for the
first time what I wanted to do.
But I did know that I was done there.
Geri (53:59):
hmmm
Graham (54:00):
I've never had that before.
I've always known what the next leapwas, like, you always join these dots up.
My dot is here, the next dot's over there.
I see, you kind of form a path.
But there was no other dot in this case.
But I went on holiday to a Spanishisland, and in the morning I went for
a long run, and in the afternoon I satwith my iPad and started writing a book.
Geri (54:20):
And that's where we'll leave this for part one, and I really look forward
to bringing you part two where Grahamgoes on to discuss his next career moves.
As usual, he does it in this incrediblyengaging and also very thoughtful way.
So in the process you'll get to hearmuch more than just about his moves.
(54:42):
But he shares so much that can betaken as relevant to running research
groups and developing a group cultureand developing a shared vision.
And as a last thing, I want to encourageyou, if you haven't already done
it, to take up our challenge to stopnow and thank someone who's really
(55:05):
had an impact on you, this smallbut genuine gesture on your part.
Can really make a bigdifference for them and for you.
And it goes towards creating that cultureof care and support and collegiality
that recognizes we are in this together.
(55:29):
You can find the summary notes, atranscript and related links for this
podcast on www.changingacademiclife.com.
You can also subscribe to ChangingAcademic Life on iTunes, and Stitcher
and I'm really hoping that we canwiden the conversation about how
we can do academia differently.
(55:49):
And you can contribute to this by ratingthe podcast and also giving feedback.
And if something connected withyou, please consider sharing this
podcast with your colleagues.
Together we can make change happen.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.