People-centered Design

Maps are Selective

Maps are always inaccurate

Journey maps, user mapping, and many other methods all aim to produce a map of some facet of the user experience.

Arguably all user research aims to find out truths about user needs, customer insights, etc etc. But these are usually based on quite limited data (usually broad, but shallow, or narrow but deep) and can in fact be thought of as maps (simplifications) of a complex space.

In this context it is useful to reflect on the fact that 2D representations of a 3D world are always inaccurate – even while being phenomenally useful.

Producing a good map requires a clear understanding of the purpose that the map will be used for. Making choices about what to represent and what not to represent must be based on that purpose.

The London Underground map is a great example of this fact, as is the ‘normal’ Mercator projection of a globe into two dimensions (which keeps latitude and longitude orthogonal to each other at the expense of an accurate presentation of land mass (size and shape).

UX strategy or Design Strategy?

Brand strategy and design strategy seem to be well understood terms, but the idea of an experience strategy seems to be a step too far for many (is it not just the same as one these other two?).

A map of whose journey?

Journey maps, experience roadmaps, customer experience journeys are all common tools nowadays, but a key question that needs to be asked is "whose journey are we mapping?" and is that the right person?

THE HAZARDS OF USER DATA AND FEEDBACK …

It seems almost sacrilegious to say it, but I think it is really important to maintain significant caution around data obtained from user feedback, testing or group discussions. Too often I hear people proudly say that all their design decisions are based on feedback from users, or one hears leadership asking that all the design decisions be based on documented data from user feedback. These attitudes are, of course, well-founded, but at the same time they are seriously misguided – and for a number of different reasons …

Can we judge design from a single concept?

In the real world of commercial product design it is not uncommon for (UX) designers to spend most of their time working on the nuts and bolts (pixels and screens) of a single concept. But in order to identify the best approach to meeting the constraints of user needs, commerce and technology it is unlikely that the first concept is the optimal one. There is a reason many designers like to have a sketch books.

Usability considered harmful …?

Not necessarily the same as gathering input from users, ‘usability’ often implies a rigorous testing of a product or interface (in A-B testing or similar). But such rigorous, data-driven processes can arguably be quite detrimental to successful product or service design.

Don’t write interview guides

If you are going to meet with users and do some qualitative research then I expect (hope, even) that you have had it drilled in to you to carefully construct an interview guide. Now, I ask you to remember that lesson, but throw away the interview guide! The very reason we take the time to go and meet with our users is to learn from them and to discover new insights about their behaviours, needs and desires. The very concept of an interview guide implies that you are taking the lead and guiding them. Which, in turn, implies that you know what needs to be talked about ... so what is the real chance of uncovering new discoveries here?

Business and technology

GE Activepoint

Evenflo Stroller

Buying headphones

The seven tenets of human-centred design

Fallen Leaves