Quiet the Debbie Doubters

Supercharge series: Part 1

Building trust and buy-in when introducing new methods

In one of my first asks at a past role, I needed to identify key feature capabilities to boost adoption, retention, and conversion for a new pricing model we wanted to roll out.

The challenge wasn’t just identifying what customers valued—it was getting buy-in for a new approach that some were skeptical about.

There’s always that one person—Debbie Doubter—questioning everything and hesitating to jump on board.

But Debbie doesn’t always ask the right questions—they fixate on every potential problem, magnify minor issues into major roadblocks, and stall decisions with endless skepticism.

Instead of moving forward, discussions spiral into over-analysis, until momentum grinds to a halt.

I’ve encountered a Debbie at every place I’ve worked. The key isn’t just convincing them—it’s building trust and collaboration across the board so no one person can stall progress indefinitely.

No soft skills

At Foundry, the company I co-create, we developed No Soft Skills to name something we’ve known all along: the work of alignment, communication, and trust-building isn’t extra—it’s essential.

They’re critical capabilities that connect direction and implementation, transforming leadership and collaboration into sustained growth and measurable outcomes.

This post? It’s a chapter in that philosophy.

Everything in here—from translating technical concepts into real-world language to shifting mindsets through collaboration—is about turning abstract strategy into concrete, shared progress.

Because making good work matter requires more than evidence. It takes engagement, trust, and clarity at every step.

Overcoming skeptics yourself

The key to moving forward wasn’t just proving the value of these methods—it was making the value undeniable. Skepticism came in many forms: some doubted the approach, others clung to traditional methods, and some simply feared venturing into the unfamiliar.

Building trust and collaboration wasn’t optional—it was the only way through.

At first, I saw the pushback as resistance, maybe even a critique of my own expertise.

But then I reframed it.

The skepticism wasn’t about me—it was about uncertainty.

I started thinking differently about how to quiet the Debbie-Doubters—the voices in the room questioning whether this level of rigor was worth the effort, pushing for quick answers, and retreating to the comfort of familiar methods.

It wasn’t resistance for the sake of it.

Debbie wasn’t difficult; they were invested. They cared deeply about making the right decisions—but without the right information, uncertainty took hold. My job wasn’t just to push forward. It was to shift my approach, meet them where they were, and equip them with the confidence to move forward with me.

Create buy-in early

Integrating new methods like MaxDiff and TURF isn’t just about introducing new tools—it’'s about shifting mindsets and reshaping how teams work together. From the outset, I knew that rolling out these methods in isolation wouldn’t work. I needed the right people in the room, the ones who understood the system inside and out. I understood the methods, but they knew the workflows, constraints, and history. Their expertise was essential.

By involving key stakeholders early, I don’t just secure buy-in—I make them part of the process.

When people feel like they own a piece of the puzzle, they’re far more invested in finding the right solution.

An unexpected cross-over

Breaking down silos and getting everyone to think beyond their immediate priorities isn’t easy. Each team was so deeply entrenched in their own product space that collaboration often felt like an afterthought. They were experts—brilliant in their respective domains—but without a clear understanding of how their work fit into the larger ecosystem. Conversations kept circling back to individual goals rather than collective success.

I needed a way to get everyone talking, but more importantly, listening.

That’s when I had a full-circle moment, thinking back to my early days studying psychology, convinced I’d become a clinician.

Somewhere along the way, that path shifted—from studying individual behaviors to uncovering patterns in how people make decisions, interact with systems, and navigate complex environments.

But the more I worked in product and research, the more I realized that the same principles of psychology applied—not just to users, but to the teams building for them.

Create understanding: The role reversal roundtable

Inspired by twentieth-century psychiatrist Jacob L. Moreno, who pioneered role reversal to foster empathy, I saw an opportunity to bring that mindset into product development. That’s how the Role Reversal Roundtable came to life.

For one meeting, everyone swapped roles and represented their new perspective.

This exercise was not only hilarious but also enlightening. It gave us all a better understanding of each other's challenges and expertise, creating true understanding and a strong sense of shared responsibility.

Communicate clearly (and often)

One of the biggest challenges I have when introducing new methods is making sure people actually understand and engage with them.

Earlier in my career, I leaned on jargon and technical language to prove I knew what I was doing.

It was my way of borrowing credibility. But I quickly realized that this only created distance. If people had to decode what I was saying, they weren’t going to build with me—they’d tune out.

With time I shifted my approach.

My goal became building shared understanding, not just showing expertise.

I started translating complex concepts into plain language, making my work accessible to everyone—regardless of how deep their technical background ran.

Ditch the jargon with “Real Talk”

This got me thinking—if I had to work this hard to make my methods understandable, how often were we unintentionally miscommunicating with our customers?

We’re so deeply entrenched in our own expertise that we default to shorthand, acronyms, and technical jargon without even realizing it. But if our own teams struggle to align, what are the chances our customers truly understand our products the way we do?

So, for one meeting, I issued a challenge: ditch the company speak. No acronyms, no insider language—just plain, human conversation.

We called it Real Talk.

Our lead engineer, who typically spoke fluent code, had to describe a backend update like he was explaining it to a brand-new customer.

It was harder than expected—and honestly, a bit of a reality check. Stepping outside of what we live and breathe every day isn’t easy.

Translating something second nature into something instantly clear to a customer isn’t just about simplifying—it took back-and-forth discussion, multiple perspectives, and a willingness to completely rethink how we frame our own expertise.

It requires effort, empathy, and a mindset shift we don’t often make unless we’re pushed to. But when we do? We don’t just build great products—we make them understandable, usable, and valuable to the people who need them most.

Real Talk with MaxDiff and TURF

When introducing concepts from MaxDiff and TURF—like utilities, preference shares, and ratio scaling—I knew I couldn’t just throw around terms and expect everyone to nod along. These concepts sound technical because they are—but they’re also powerful when explained in a way that sticks.

So, I built the narrative around a familiar scenario: shopping for snacks.

Explaining utilities

Picture this: You’re staring down a lineup of snacks—chips, popcorn, chocolate, pretzels. You can only pick one to satisfy that 3 p.m. craving.

You grab the pretzels. Next time, it’s between trail mix, popcorn, and pretzels again—and you go pretzels. Another round, and pretzels win out once more.

Over time, based on the choices you keep making, we start to see a pattern.

That’s what MaxDiff does—it captures those repeated tradeoffs to calculate utilities: scores that reflect the relative value assigned to each option.

“Think of utilities like invisible points each snack earns every time it wins out in a decision. The more often you reach for pretzels, the higher their utility.”

These utility scores don’t mean much on their own. What matters is how they compare to each other. If pretzels have a higher utility than chips, it means you’ve consistently preferred them.

Explaining re-scaled preference scores

While utilities tell us how much each snack is valued in relative terms, they can feel ambiguous. So to make them easier to interpret, we convert those scores into preference shares—a way of estimating how likely each option is to be chosen in a typical decision-making scenario.

“It’s like taking those invisible points and asking, ‘Okay, if I had to choose from all the options right now, how likely is it I’d pick this one?”

This translation turns the utility scores into a probability distribution that reflects realistic choice behavior. Now it’s not just about which snack you like best—it’s about how often that preference shows up when you’re faced with a choice.

That’s where the magic is for product teams: it helps prioritize based on what’s most likely to resonate, not just what looks good on paper.

Explaining ratio-scaling

This isn’t just about ranking options—it’s about understanding the magnitude of difference between them. That difference matters.

Instead of saying, “Customers like pretzels more than chips,” ratio scaling says, “Customers are four times more likely to choose pretzels.”

That’s a dramatically different implication when you’re deciding what to feature, fund, or fix.

Ratio scaling gives weight to decisions. It helps teams prioritize not based on gut feel or small margins—but on quantified preference strength that maps directly to behavior.

No Soft Skills in practice

Turning utilities, preference shares, and ratio scaling into something the whole team could understand wasn’t just about simplifying technical terms—it was No Soft Skills in action.

Clear communication. Practical translation. Collaborative understanding.

These aren’t “nice to haves”—they’re the work. This is what it means to bring rigor into the room in a way that’s usable, trustworthy, and shared.

Because when insights are understood, not just delivered, they drive action. And when people feel confident in the data, they stop hesitating and start building—together.

Making innovation a collective achievement

Trust and credibility aren’t just nice to have—they’re essential. If your partners and stakeholders don’t trust you, even the best research won’t drive action.

That’s why principles like “collaborate early,” and “communicate clearly” matter.

They ensure alignment, break down barriers, and create space for real collaboration.

By making complex ideas accessible, we don’t just educate—we empower.

When the entire team understands and engages with new approaches, innovation stops being a solo effort and becomes a shared success.

Effective communication bridges the gap between technical know-how and practical application, making innovation a collective achievement.

How to effectively introduce new methods

Here are five techniques that I use to introduce new methods:

Up next in the Supercharge Series

In part two of the Supercharge Series, we’ll focus on how to apply MaxDiff and TURF with methodological rigor—designing it well, interpreting it thoughtfully, and using it to inform product decisions that actually move the needle.

‘Til next time, I’m Bianca