Who I Am

Research and design are often treated as sequential: one informs the other, then steps back. I work with them as a continuing dialogue. The better work comes from that.

My path ran from visual communication and design management into HCI research. Visual communication is about behavior: how people read, respond, interpret. The move toward research was less a pivot than a deepening. Design always has room for intuition, but it can only go so far. Moving into research forced a different kind of analytical discipline into my process, which made the final output impossible to ignore. That range allows me to move between research and design without either one being a concession to the other.

The work I'm most drawn to involves domains where the human side is complex and the cost of getting it wrong is real. A clinical decision support system for lung physicians, where the challenge is translating high-stakes medical data into something physicians can actually trust and act on. A communication framework for autonomous delivery robots, built from first principles because the field was too new to have established ones. Research into how a robot's physical presence affects human compliance, with direct implications for how these systems get designed. These are problems that need research depth and design clarity working together. Not in turns.

I've been teaching alongside practice for most of my career. What it gave me is the ability to hold complexity without flattening it, and to explain research findings or design decisions to people who don't share your starting assumptions. It makes cross-functional work easier than it usually is.

I'm looking for teams that have hard questions about their users and want the answers to actually shape the product. That's where I do my most useful work.