People-centered Design

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 …

WHO DID YOU GET FEEDBACK FROM?

Frequently the data and feedback has come from today’s users, or from preferred customers and rarely has it come from the users that the product is intended for, or where the commercial imperative is coming from.

HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU GET FEEDBACK FROM?

Frequently the data and feedback that is informing design decisions this month comes from the user feedback obtained this month, which may well have involved only a small fraction of the users being consulted across the whole development lifecycle.

Of course, this month’s feedback may be the only feedback directly addressing a particular feature or user need – but that still leaves one basing decisions on a very small amount of input

HOW DIFFERENT (OR CHALLENGING) IS YOUR DESIGN VISION?

Is the vision for the experience with this new release or product rooted in today’s workflows, habits and activities, or are you trying to bring about some innovation in the way tasks are done and reasoned about? If the latter, then user feedback is always liable to pull you back into the non-innovative frame of mind

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.

Maps are Selective

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

The importance of empathy

Who needs to understand who? But with whom? Most work focuses on our empathy with our customers or users, but it may often be the case that we need empathy with our colleagues even more.

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?

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?

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?).

Experience is infinite

Writing a good conversation guide

ROLM: The digital PBX

UE Roll unexpected usage

UE Boom design awards

Medical Equipment