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.
Showing posts with label user experience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label user experience. Show all posts
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thursday, February 28, 2008
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?
- 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?
Monday, December 3, 2007
Magazines & Passwords (Provoking the Opposite)
Last month (November) I received renewal notices for two magazines I enjoy and to which I intend to keep my subscriptions. What drives me nuts is that the subscription are good until May in one case and July in the other!
Why do they do that? Do they think we won't notice that the renewal offer is 6-8 months early? Do they think we'll just say "yes" to every notice that arrives, and with any luck they'll have us signed up for 5 or 6 years before we notice anything?
Well, guess what? Being a person of discernment and taste (and who else would subscribe to such fine rags), I do notice! And I think it's pretty silly to renew in November for a subscription that's good until next July! So, behaving as a rational person, I ignore the renewal offer. When the next one comes, I ignore that one, too. In fact, I'll probably keep ignoring renewal offers until it finally dawns that the magazine has stopped coming! That's when I'll renew, maybe after missing 2 or 3 issues. This seems a perfectly rational way to deal with problem. I imagine the magazine would rather have me as a continuous and uninterrupted subscriber, yet my "reminding" too often and too early, they provoke the opposite outcome.
This reminds me of the problem with changing passwords. Online companies let you set a user name and password and leave it unchanged for years, but the IT departments of most companies insist that employees change their passwords every 2 or 3 months, ostensibly in the interest of better security.
Changing your password every 3 months sounds good in theory -- if you have only one account in world. But what if you live in the real world? In that case, you probably have 50-100 accounts, each with its own password and user name. You can make this plenitude of accounts less onerous by using the same name and password for multiple accounts. But if your IT department insists that you change passwords every 3 months, how do you keep track of them? Most people write them down -- in a file on the computer or PDA, on a white board, or on post-it notes displayed prominently on the monitor for any and all too see.
With so many passwords to remember, this is a perfectly rationale way of coping with the changing-password demand. Of course, it must also be admitted that it has the opposite effect of the intended purpose. Rather than improving security, forcing users to change passwords makes security weaker, since everyone has to find some coping mechanism for dealing with the short expiration. Under the flag of strengthening security, this practice actually weakens it.
Why do they do that? Do they think we won't notice that the renewal offer is 6-8 months early? Do they think we'll just say "yes" to every notice that arrives, and with any luck they'll have us signed up for 5 or 6 years before we notice anything?
Well, guess what? Being a person of discernment and taste (and who else would subscribe to such fine rags), I do notice! And I think it's pretty silly to renew in November for a subscription that's good until next July! So, behaving as a rational person, I ignore the renewal offer. When the next one comes, I ignore that one, too. In fact, I'll probably keep ignoring renewal offers until it finally dawns that the magazine has stopped coming! That's when I'll renew, maybe after missing 2 or 3 issues. This seems a perfectly rational way to deal with problem. I imagine the magazine would rather have me as a continuous and uninterrupted subscriber, yet my "reminding" too often and too early, they provoke the opposite outcome.
This reminds me of the problem with changing passwords. Online companies let you set a user name and password and leave it unchanged for years, but the IT departments of most companies insist that employees change their passwords every 2 or 3 months, ostensibly in the interest of better security.
Changing your password every 3 months sounds good in theory -- if you have only one account in world. But what if you live in the real world? In that case, you probably have 50-100 accounts, each with its own password and user name. You can make this plenitude of accounts less onerous by using the same name and password for multiple accounts. But if your IT department insists that you change passwords every 3 months, how do you keep track of them? Most people write them down -- in a file on the computer or PDA, on a white board, or on post-it notes displayed prominently on the monitor for any and all too see.
With so many passwords to remember, this is a perfectly rationale way of coping with the changing-password demand. Of course, it must also be admitted that it has the opposite effect of the intended purpose. Rather than improving security, forcing users to change passwords makes security weaker, since everyone has to find some coping mechanism for dealing with the short expiration. Under the flag of strengthening security, this practice actually weakens it.
Friday, October 26, 2007
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
