The Customer Experience Lab

Simplicity is harder to build than complexity. So why does almost every business drift towards the complicated version by default?
We know that the average person makes tens of thousands of decisions a day. What to eat, what to wear, which email to open, and which to bin without reading (probably quite a lot nowadays!). By the time someone reaches your communication or brand, there's a good chance their brain is already overloaded and running low.
This episode explores what that means for the communications and experiences we design, and why "just make it simple" turns out to be one of the hardest (but greatest) instructions in business to actually follow.
Because complexity is rarely a choice the customer makes or yearns for. It's the accidental by-product of an organisation adding one more (often reasonable) thing at a time. Three departments each bolt a requirement onto a form. A pricing table grows another tier because nobody wanted to be the one to cut their option. A website gets built around the logical product catalogue instead of the customer's journey. From the inside, every addition looks sensible. But from the outside, it just feels like effort.
And in a world where everyone's cognitive load is already maxed out, effort is an expensive thing to ask for.
There's decades of behavioural science explaining exactly why complexity costs you. We dig into two studies that I think should change how businesses design their experiences.
The first has nothing to do with marketing at all, it's about judges. Shai Danziger and Jonathan Levav studied over a thousand parole decisions made by experienced judges in Israel. The findings were really eye opening! Early in a session, or right after a break, approval rates ran high. As the session wore on, it steadily fell, in some cases close to zero, then jumped straight back up the moment the judges stopped for food or rest. The facts of the cases did not get weaker as the day went on. What drained away was the capacity to make an effortful decision. It would seem denying is the easier default. Kahneman picked the study up in Thinking, Fast and Slow for exactly that reason.
Yes, our customers are not judges, but the mechanism is identical. They arrive at our brand having already spent much of their decision-making capacity, and when your process asks for one more effortful choice, they do what the judges did. They fall back on the default. For a customer, the default is usually to walk away and do nothing.
The second is the famous jam study (always good when an experiment includes food!). Sheena Iyengar and Mark Lepper put out a tasting table, sometimes with six jams, sometimes with twenty-four. The bigger display pulled far more people in, but shoppers were roughly ten times more likely to actually buy when there were only six options. More choice attracted attention, then paralysed people at the exact moment they needed to commit.
We look at who gets this right, and it's telling that the brands most praised for experience rarely have the widest range or the loudest marketing. Monzo. First Direct. Aldi. The simplicity you feel as a customer is not a lack of effort on their part. It's the opposite. It's a huge amount of work spent deciding what to leave out.
We explore:
Paradox of Choice: why more options pull people in, then stop them choosing anything at all, and why cutting choice at your key decision points can lift completion rather than hurt it
Status Quo Bias: why a depleted customer defaults to doing nothing, and why "do nothing" is the competitor you're really up against
Pain of Payment: why a confusing checkout or a form that asks for the same thing twice adds psychological cost on top of the actual price
The Curse of Knowledge: why internal language leaks into customer-facing copy, and why making people translate your terminology spends their goodwill before they've done anything
The episode closes on the paradox worth considering. Simplicity takes opinion, discipline, and a willingness to say no to internal requests that would make life easier for a department but harder for a customer. Most of your competitors won't be willing to do that work. And that's exactly why it's worth doing.
So how much of what you ask your customers to do is genuinely for them, and how much is just your organisation's complexity, passed on?
Thanks for listening.
Si's book, Customer Experience Thinking, is out now in hardback and digital: https://mybook.to/CXThinking
Connect with us!Instagram: @fabricxlabsInstagram: @si.elliottLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagencyLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

The most valuable skill in a world of AI isn't technical. Have we noticed?
There's a version of the AI conversation that focuses entirely on what it can do. This episode asks a different question. What can it not do? And do we actually know which moments in a customer relationship require a human to be there?
Because the data tells an interesting story. Businesses are accelerating toward AI at pace. 83% say it's a top priority. 92% plan to invest in generative AI over the next three years. And yet, 64% of customers say they'd prefer companies not to use AI in customer service at all. 53% would consider switching brands if they found out AI was handling their interactions.
That gap is where this episode explores.
We ponder on the value of a robotic surgeon vs a human nurse. Because it captures something important about the difference between efficiency and connection, and about the moments where only a human will do.
Then take a look at two businesses that made opposite bets. Klarna, who replaced hundreds of customer service agents with AI and then reversed the decision when they found it wasn't building the relationships that kept customers. And Zappos, who built an entire business model on the opposite philosophy. No scripts. No time limits. A $2,000 offer to quit after training, just to make sure the people who stayed actually wanted to be there.
This leads to the bigger question the episode is really about. Are we investing in the human skills that AI cannot replicate? Or are we quietly letting them atrophy at exactly the moment they're becoming more valuable, not less?
We explore:
Social Proof – why when everyone around us is head-down and screen-first, breaking that pattern is itself a differentiator
Mere Exposure Effect – why relationships built through consistent human interaction are stickier than transactional ones, and what we lose when we automate them away
Reciprocity – why genuine attention creates an obligation to return it, and why that dynamic requires a human to start it
Effort Heuristic – why interactions that cost something feel more meaningful, and what we signal when we remove the effort entirely
The episode also draws on experience lecturing at universities around the globe, and the consistent theme irrelevant of geography. The behaviours observed in lecture theatres. How that compares to what employers look for when hiring. And why the graduates who stand out are almost always the ones who've invested in the skills that are hardest to automate.
What can AI not replicate in a customer relationship, and does your business know which moments need a human?
Thanks for listening.
Si's book, Customer Experience Thinking, is out now in hardback and digital: https://mybook.to/CXThinking
Connect with us!Instagram: @fabricxlabsInstagram: @si.elliottLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagencyLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

To persona, or not to persona. That is the question…
Have you ever inherited a customer persona deck, and wondered if anyone actually uses it?
It would seem you’re not alone.
This episode takes an honest look at customer personas. A marketing staple for decades, but one that’s increasingly dividing the room.
On one side, the people who see personas as foundational. But on the other side, those who argue they’ve become one of the laziest, and most unhelpful, tools in our kit.
Yes, both camps have a point. But who’s right?
We start by steelmanning the case for personas. The genuine benefits they deliver when they’re built and used properly. Giving alignment across teams, a clearer vision and empathy for the customer, a shared language for briefing work, and a sanity check against our own biases and assumptions.
Then we flip the script. Because most personas, in most modern businesses, aren’t delivering. They’re built once and then frozen in time, gathering dust. They focus too heavily on who customers are, rather than how they decide. They flatter the assumptions of the people who built them. And they create a false sense of finished work, a totem the business points to as proof of customer-centricity.
 
This leads to the crux of the issue:  Are we designing personas that help us genuinely understand our customers… or ones that simply describe them and stop there?
The answer, hopefully, is more useful than picking one side or the other. Because, to ensure we don’t use a LinkedIn click bait statement “Personas aren’t dead”. But they do need to evolve, from demographic portraits into behavioural profiles. Layered with the biases most likely to be in play, the emotional arc of the journey, and the context the customer is actually in when they’re making decisions.
 
We explore:
Status Quo Bias – why personas tend to stay frozen even when the customer has moved on
Confirmation Bias – how unresearched personas end up flattering the team that built them
Peak-End Rule – why mapping the emotional high and the final moment matters
Loss Aversion – why understanding what customers fear losing is often more powerful than understanding what they want to gain
 
This episode also explores why context matters as much as demographics, why a behavioural lens makes personas genuinely actionable again, and three practical things you can do this week to audit the personas already sitting in your business.
 
Thanks for listening.
Si’s new book, Customer Experience Thinking, is out on 21st May and you can pre-order your copy now: https://https://mybook.to/CXThinking 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
Instagram: @si.elliott
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

Ever tried to cancel a subscription… and found it far harder than signing up?
You’re not alone.
This episode explores the UK’s new legislation targeting subscription traps, estimated to cost consumers around £400 million every year.
But this isn’t just about regulation, it’s about friction.
And more importantly… the fact that much of that friction has been deliberately designed in.
We explore how concepts like nudges and sludge, introduced in Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, play out in the real world. And how, over time, many digital experiences have shifted from helping customers make better decisions. To quietly making those decisions harder.
From subscriptions to everyday digital journeys, we unpack how dark patterns have emerged. Design choices that increase cognitive load, create confusion, and ultimately rely on customers doing nothing.
We explore:
Cognitive Load – how added effort reduces action
Status Quo Bias – why we stick with the current situation, even when it’s not always the best decision
Loss Aversion – why losing feels more emotionally powerful than an equivalent gain
Hyperbolic Discounting – how we prioritise short-term ease over long-term benefit
 
Which leads to a more uncomfortable question for us:  Are we designing journeys that genuinely help customers make the best decisions for themselves… or journeys that rely on them getting stuck?
 
This episode also explores the rise of dark patterns in digital, where behavioural science moves from guiding decisions to subtly manipulating them. And importantly, what ethical behavioural design should look like instead.
Because the opportunity here isn’t just to remove friction. It’s to challenge ourselves and rethink how we use behavioural science to serve people better.
 
 
Studies & further reading:
Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness – Thaler & Sunstein
Thinking, Fast and Slow – Daniel Kahneman
Sunstein, C. – Sludge: What Stops Us Getting Things Done
Customer Experience Thinking - Si Elliott 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
Instagram: @si.elliott
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

Ever told yourself, “I’ll get that done by next week”… and then watched it drift?
This episode explores a very human tendency we all experience, whether we’re building a business, writing a book, or just trying to clear the inbox.
After what was meant to be a one-year book project turned into three, this episode unpacks the psychology behind why we consistently underestimate time, effort, and complexity. 
And more importantly, how we can design better ways of working around it.
 
We explore:
The Planning Fallacy - our tendency to underestimate how long something will take, even when past experience tells us otherwise.
The Inside View - how we focus on the task itself, rather than learning from similar past experiences.
Optimism Bias - that we’re wired to believe the future will go better than the past.
Reference Class Forecasting - how using real-world data from similar projects helps us make better predictions.
 
So perhaps armed with this we can make better predictions moving forwards. And hopefully the new book, Customer Experience Thinking (out 21st May) will have been worth the wait!
 
Studies & further reading:
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. – Prospect Theory
Kahneman, D. – Thinking, Fast and Slow
Buehler, Griffin & Ross – The Planning Fallacy
Sharot, T. – The Optimism Bias
 
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

We all love a good deal, but at what expense?
Flash sales, countdown timers, “only 3 seats left”. They’re everywhere, ever present, promotions urging us to act. Mostly because in the moment they work. But while these promotional tactics tap deep into our instincts, they can come with a cost to your business and brand. 
And it's not just to margins and profitability, but to meaning and perception people have of your brand. 
 
In this episode, we dig into the psychology behind sales promotions. Why they work. What they trigger. And what brands might be giving up in return.
 
We examine:
Scarcity, urgency and anchoring. How short-term offers hijack decision-making
Brand erosion and shifting reference points. Why overusing sales can cheapen your brand
The psychology of value, and why perception matters more than price
How to balance promotion with purpose. Practical tips for brands who want to drive action without damaging trust
 
We regularly think about hyperbolic discounting and the hidden cost to individuals, but this turns that on it's head and looks at brand hyperbolic discounting. What's the impact of brands making decisions for the immediacy, without the consideration of the longer term? 
 
Rethink your relationship with discount culture, and keep building brands with enduring value in the minds of consumers.  
 
Studies & further reading:
Worchel, Stephen & Lee, Jerry & Adewole, Akanbi. (1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value.
Hodgkinson (2016): ‘Fear of Missing Out’ (FOMO) marketing appeals: A conceptual model
Ariely, Loewenstein, Prelec (2003): Coherent arbitrariness, stable demand curves without stable preferences
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

We all say we want to change. To grow. To improve.
But when it comes to behaviour, from our New Year’s resolutions to customers’ adoption of new products and services, most change fails to stick.
In this episode, we explore the psychology of resistance. The very real friction that stops people doing what they say they want to do. And how understanding the hidden forces of human behaviour can help brands, leaders and individuals support meaningful, sustainable change.
We consider:
Why Status Quo Bias makes us default to comfort, even when it’s no longer serving us
What loss aversion and risk perception mean for customer loyalty and switching
How thinking small can win big. The power of small, incremental changes
Simple ways to reduce friction and build trust in moments of change
 
It’s the perfect time of year to discuss change and works well alongside a previous episode ‘Fresh Start Effect Incoming…’ which dissects our desire for change at certain points in time. 
 
Whether you’re looking to inspire habitual or behaviour change over the coming months, or just keen to understand why you find it difficult to stick to resolutions. This brings together behavioural science, psychology and practical strategy, to help make more sense of the challenge of moving the status quo.
 
Studies & further reading:
Samuelson & Zeckhauser (1988) Status quo bias in decision making 
Norcross et al. (2002) New Year’s resolution success rates
Kahneman & Tversky (1979) Loss aversion and Prospect Theory
Wikipedia: Status Quo Bias explained
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

So why do we trust imperfect human stories more than flawless AI creations?In this episode, we explore the psychology behind why people prefer real, messy, and human-made work over machine-made perfection. And why that emotional connection might be the ultimate competitive advantage in the age of AI.
We consider:
Why authenticity beats perfection every time
The science behind the Pratfall Effect, how small mistakes make us more likeable
Why we trust content that shows a human fingerprint
How AI’s 'uncanny perfection' triggers discomfort
What studies say about our bias for human-created stories, voices, and visuals
Why trust, empathy and accountability can’t be automated
Taking insights from psychology, behavioural science, and academic studies to uncover how audiences perceive AI vs. human creativity. And most crucially, what this means for marketers, creators, and brands in 2025 and beyond.
 
Studies & further reading:
Zhang & Gosline (2023) Human favoritism, not AI aversion: People’s perceptions (and bias) toward generative AI, human experts, and human–GAI collaboration in persuasive content generation 
Kirk & Givi (2024) The AI-authorship effect: Understanding authenticity, moral disgust, and consumer responses to AI-generated marketing communications 
Piercy et al. (2025) Credibility and organizational reputation perceptions of news releases produced by artificial intelligence
Velásquez-Salamanca et al. (2025) Interpretation of AI-Generated vs. Human-Made Images
Omeish et al. (2025) Between human and AI influencers: parasocial relationships, credibility, and social capital formation in a collectivist market: a study of TikTok users in the Middle East
Aronson, E. (1966) The Pratfall Effect: The Effect of a Perceived Blunder on Interpersonal Attractiveness
Schilke & Reimann (2025) The Transparency Dilemma: How Disclosing AI Use Impacts Trust
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

What if customer service wasn’t a cost centre, but the heartbeat of your business?That’s the bet Zappos made, and it built them into a billion-dollar brand.
In this episode, we explore how Zappos created a culture of WOW service that redefined customer experience worldwide.
We discuss:
Why Zappos answers calls in 20 seconds and never tracks call times
How a 10-hour customer call became company legend
Why every new hire is offered money to quit
The 10 core values that shape culture and service
Why Zappos believes relationships > transactions
 
With insights from Si's time with Zappos in Las Vegas, where he learned they doubled down on customer experience, and won big! 
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/

Why we trade the future for a quick win. And what it’s costing us?
We explore how the behavioural bias of hyperbolic discounting is fuelling short-termism in modern marketing, and our own actions.  from to slashed brand budgets.
Why Buy-Now-Pay-Later schemes are so powerful
How to lay golden-eggs
Why Netflix continues to beat the gym
How behavioural design revolutionised pensions
If you're trying to get the right balance between brand and performance, then this should give you some food for thought. Further reading from the show includes:
Binet & Field - The Long and the Short of it 
Laibson - Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting
 
Thanks for listening. Don’t miss out on your copy of Fabricx’s Behavioural Bias Framework https://fabricx.agency/ 
Connect with us!
Instagram: @fabricxlabs
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fabricxagency
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/si-elliott/