Research vs Design

I responded the other day to a post on the Interaction Design Association message board (ixda.org), entitled "Say No to Genius Design."

Referring a perfectly cogent interview with Dan Saffer in 2006 the poster noted that "some newbie designers take it as the secret path to grand design success, which is not a good thing from my understanding."

This reminds me of a debate I used to have about instructional design. My friend liked to contrast the "scientific" approach, based on research, with the "intuitive" approach, based on... well, he would said nothing but instinct. I would say that while the scientific approach breaks everything down into individually verifiable tidbits, the intuitive approach makes a many - just as rational - decisions at once.

Of course, the catch is that the results are good only when the person making the intuitive design decisions is really smart, understands technology constraints, and has a great instinct for users as well. When Steve Jobs does it, it usually comes out pretty well (ipod) but not always (Newton - or was he gone then?)! Anyway, good designers do have - or develop - a reliable intuitive sense of what works and what doesn't.

BTW another factor in the Jobs/iPod success is that the designer was the CEO! He had the power to see the concept through to complete expression in all aspects and at all levels; many great product concepts get compromised or destroyed through bureaucratic compromise, turf wars, etc.

Sure, some testing is better than no testing, and before release is better than after, but keep in mind some critical limitations of testing:

- Testing is not design. Testing reveals problems, but simply reversing the condition you tested is seldom the best design solution. Usually there are clusters of related issues. To address them all well takes creative design, which always involves some degree of "intuition" or "genius."

- You can't test everything. During development, you can test the bit you're unsure about and improve them, but some aspect you thought was a no-brainer could turn out to be the most problematic for users (or buyers).

- Don't forget the factor of fashion! Sometimes the market likes something that doesn't make a lot of sense but just seems new and fresh. These market hits seldom come out of research!

In short, a bit of research never hurts, but it's no substitute for creative design.

Architects and Real People

Has it ever struck you that architects continually design features into buildings that people who use their buildings continually ignore? For example:

- Architects continue to make men's and women's bathrooms the same size. It makes for a nice symmetry in plan, but women take longer, so you always find long lines of women outside their bathroom, while men zip in and out. This has been going on for a long time! Come on, architects, wake up!

- Architects always seem to think their interior spaces will remain as immaculate as they are on the day the last coat of paint is applied. But virtually every interior space occupied by humans -- especially office and work spaces -- are covered with pieces of paper, affixed to painted walls with tacks or tape. Why don't architects design shared spaces with some kind of surface treatment designed to accept attached documents?

- Architects generally put double doors as the main entrance to any public space. But have you noticed how often the occupants of that space open only one door and leave the other on locked? OK, I would have to fault the users in this case, but why do they do that? Do they think they are saving "wear and tear" on the bolted door? Do they enjoy watching people yank at one door, feel the frustration, and then open the other one? If people are going to behave like this, maybe there is some design approach that would make this practice seem normal or expected.

Anyone else out there have any architectural pet peeves?

More Wacky E-Z Pass Adventures

I ruminated previously about the oddities of E-Z Pass and their conceptions of customer service as expressed in their computer systems.

Recently I had to make changes in my E-Z Pass account, and once again I was struck by their strange view of the world as revealed in their technology.

I had a simply need. Having recently changed jobs, I no longer needed the "commuter special" for crossing a Hudson River bridge every day, but now I needed to sign up for a discount program for daily travel on the New York State Thruway. All I had to do was cancel the bridge discount and sign up for the Thruway discount. Should be simple, right? Should be able to do both online, right?

Nope, wrong on both counts.

E-Z Pass comes close to offering an efficient and user-friendly means for canceling a bridge commuter plan, but they couldn't bring themselves to go all the way. There is nothing on the website, but on the phone system, you can "suspend" a bridge discount. Not cancel, mind you, but suspend until a specified date. OK, I thought, I can deal with that. I'll just pick a date after I'm dead -- say, January 1, 2082. The system, fussy enough to reject a Start date of yesterday, had no problem committing to resume service 75 years in the future. OK, I thought, if that's the way around it, fine -- at least I accomplished my goal. But as I was thinking this, I suddenly heard the E-Z Pass voice system explaining that my plan would suspended until the date requested OR until the next time I went across the bridge, at which time it would start up again! So, even if you suspend it for 75 years, the system knows better and will undo your instructions if you ever set foot on the bridge again!

On the phone finally with a real person, the E-Z Pass customer service associate found my 75-year suspension amusing but admitted that it was rather odd that you couldn't simply cancel it in the automated system. That required a personal conversation, and she agreed to take care of it.

When it comes to a Thruway discount, however, a mere phone call is not enough. It turns out the only way to sign up for that program is by sending them a letter in the U.S. Mail! E-Z Pass needs no additional information -- they already have my credit card number for replenishing the account whenever their comfort demands it. I can only imagine their rationale: "It's just that, we don't know, with a Thruway, it's so big and everything, somehow a letter seems better." If anyone has a more coherent theory, let me know!