Humans Have System Prompts Too.

Anyone who has experimented with a chat-based Large Language Model (LLM) may have come across the term: System Prompt. My superficial understanding of this prompt is that it sets the scene for the LLM and encourages the model to get into character. For example, “Today GPT, you’re a wizard, all communication going forwards will be via owl. Life will be an absolute hoot.” If configured correctly within a model, this prompt is injected in advance of each subsequent prompt. So, if I was to ask the same model why Vernon Dursley loves the weekend, the response would hopefully be: “no post on Sundays!”. You get the idea.

The point is that a system prompt defines the character, role, or mindset that the model should adopt. Exactly how this works under the hood is beyond me (and thankfully, the scope of the article). We have grown accustomed to these prompts being effective ways to steer our LLMs to be more or less creative, humorous and precise. In stark contrast, we seem to consider our own human system prompts to be rigidly-defined: we consider our personalities and mindsets to be unchangeable. Of course, the ability to shift our mindset has been rigorously and effectively documented by Carol Dweck.

What I would like to highlight is that we, as humans, can mimic the System Prompt whenever we like. ‘Improv’ actors do this all the time. They adopt a character and change their behaviour, attitude and mindset to suit. Film actors often do the same, going so far as to research their target character group before playing the role to ensure authenticity.

An example: let’s say that this morning you go to work and decide that your role is technically-focussed Structural Engineering. There’s a good chance that you will bury your head in technical drawings, calculations and BIM models, and reject most other distractions beyond your ‘role’. Now, later that same day you are asked to develop a new carbon calculation spreadsheet for your team to improve your team’s whole-life carbon analysis. If you continue to assume the mindset of a technically-focussed Structural Engineer, your focus will be on the deep technicalities of carbon calculation. This will likely result in a technically-sound spreadsheet (certainly a solid starting point) but potentially one that fails to be remotely desirable to use. In fact, trying to consider the more creative and aesthetic aspect of the spreadsheet may even feel mentally hard, like you’re pushing up against your own internal framework of who you are. In a sense, that’s because you are fighting against the person you’ve presumed yourself to be. “I’m not creative, I’m a technically-minded Engineer” you may say. Well, as an exercise, instead decide to update your personal system prompt and consider yourself a designer. Presume that’s your role instead. Adopting this identify and pivoting your mindset will unlock an entire region of your brain because you are no longer fighting against your identity, nor are you constraining both your thinking and your responsibilities. It’s the typical example of “that’s not my job” and therefore I won’t even consider it.

I know this to be true of myself. As a Structural Engineer, Software Engineer and UX Designer I frequently jump from technical documentation about Reinforced Concrete speaking this domain in depth with peers, then jump into tools like Figma, Adobe XD etc. to produce compelling user experiences and interfaces, before finally jumping into my Integrated Development Environment (IDE) to implement my designed solution in code. Three fundamentally different roles, mindsets and almost personalities. Whenever I consider my role to be just a single one of these three, I find that I struggle to engage with the other pieces of the jigsaw. If I’m a programmer, then thinking of UX and Structural Engineering is not my concern. I can feel myself cocooning into my identity as a programmer and shunning the responsibilities associated with the other roles. Fortunately for me, I do have a varied job and these other roles do fall within my remit. Consequently, I’ve had to adopt a shifting mindset where I change my System Prompt daily, or even hourly, depending on the kind of work I need to. If I also have associated Project Management responsibilities then this is another hat to wear (and mindset to shift to).

It’s not always easy. Each of these roles also requires significant underpinning knowledge that I’ve had to learn and amass over the years. I’m not suggesting that someone who has never programmed can suddenly do the job of a programmer simply by saying they are one (although, convincing yourself that you could be is an effective way to help you learn the role in the first place - it’s all about self-belief and faking it until you make it after all). What I am suggesting is that for someone who has multiple distinct responsibilities, it can be effective if you mentally compartmentalise each role, and manually shift gear to play the character as and when required. You will feel yourself flowing with the river rather than fighting against it.

In many ways, this is just the logical advancement of the growth mindset that Carol Dweck so beautifully describes. A belief that you can do whatever it is you must do. By figuratively changing character, you can encourage your brain to think in an entirely different way and motivate yourself to accomplish tasks that are otherwise considered beyond your remit.

Try it yourself, today decide to adopt the mindset of an entrepreneur, or a mentor, or a designer. See how it feels, notice how your mindset changes, your creativity opens up, your empathy changes. It’s a powerful technique that can help you to explore avenues that you otherwise wouldn’t feel comfortable with or engaged by.

I should note that this is purely based on personal experience. There may be research supporting or entirely negating my view, but I thought that it was worth sharing my thoughts with the world in case someone else finds it effective.