Sure! “Lensing” is just analyzing the effects of a design decision from the viewpoint of each identified type/archetype/persona. You can do it informally throug

Sure! “Lensing” is just analyzing the effects of a design decision from the viewpoint of each identified type/archetype/persona. You can do it informally through think-aloud protocols, or through more formal tools like interaction tables or multifocal journey maps (which get hard to manage!). For example, if you’re designing a healthcare experience, you might stop at a critical journey point and fan out a set of archetypes —- say, physician, patient, nurse, and back-office employee. You walk through how this decision affects them functionally, then dive into the personas to explore emotional and PoV effects, using standard tools like affinity diagrams, roleplaying, emotion mapping, and so on. Once you’ve made a choice, or deadlocked on a set of choices, you can formalize the effects with an interaction table or narrative descriptions, and now you have an artifact that you can refer to elsewhere in the define/design phases, and that forms a basis for user stories during delivery. All of this is basically to help create a kind of virtual roundtable that represents different users’ POVs when it’s not practical to involve them face to face. It also, I’ve found, sometimes lets us intercept usability and design problems that the users themselves might not be able to articulate or, for personal or political reasons, be unwilling to —- which is where your point about “living with the users in your body” is so critical! I completely agree that if you can’t embody a persona, it’s just a useless (or even harmful!) poster on the wall.