The interview is at the end. The text below covers personal tones Rachel hit and which deeply resonated with me. Initially, I noted them only for me, but then decided it would not be ok to share those, so here they are:
#WardleyMapping can be helpful in understanding how your emotions get in the way of your decision making process. When you do a map, with all the associated conversations and dialogues, you will inevitably expose your assumptions and reveal what is really driving you towards a particular decision. I am not saying emotions are bad or unhelpful, what I want to convey is just that sometimes you may want to optimise for other values, and taking a structured approach can help in that.
Being aware of who you are, what are your strengths and weaknesses is a skill I would love to acquire one day. In the interview, Rachel mentioned she is too impulsive for chess, and I find it inspiring how she used mapping to balance that. This interview triggered a number of questions about which tools are good for me.
Mapping gets more complex over time. The more you do it, the more nuances you discover, and the more associated knowledge and patterns becomes important. What I would like to achieve some day, is a process of introducing people to #wardleymapping in which internal consistency is maintained - you learn a bit first, you use it instantly, but no 'next' bit invalidates your previous conclussions.