What User-Centered Design is Good For

  • Published on

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


Brief talk given at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 2010 meeting.


<ul><li> What User-Centered Design is Good For Dan Saffer, Kicker Studio @odannyboy @kickerstudio </li> <li> Dilemma: Most of the products we use, including many we love, werent made using UCD techniques. </li> <li> There are five major approaches to designing products. </li> <li> Approaches = Ways to Answer Questions When we have to make a design decision in the middle of a project (or even when rst deciding the product strategy), how do we go about making that decision? </li> <li> User-Centered Design Focus on User Needs and GOALS. Designer is translator of user needs and goals. Users guide the product decisions. </li> <li> User-Centered Design Activity-Centered Design Focus is on the tasks and activities that need to be accomplished. Users are the performers of activities. Role of the designer is to provide tools to accomplish actions. </li> <li> Data-Driven Design User-Centered Design Activity-Centered Design Focus is on watching which provided option is preferred. Users are sources of behavioral data. Designers are creators of options. </li> <li> Data-Driven Design User-Centered Design Systems Design Activity-Centered Design Focus is on the components of the system: sensor, comparator, actuator. Users set the goals of the system. Designers make sure all the parts are in place. </li> <li> Data-Driven Design User-Centered Design Systems Design Activity-Centered Design Genius Design Focus is on the skill and wisdom of the designer. Users are a source of validation (often via usability testing). Designer is the source of inspiration. </li> <li> Data-Driven Design User-Centered Design Systems Design Activity-Centered Design Where Genius Design Most Design Happens Of course, in practice, were constantly weaving between the different approaches. </li> <li> The Dirty Little Secret All of these methods rely on the skill of the designer in one way or another. </li> <li> No matter how many users you talk to, no matter how much data you collect, at the end of the day, a human has to decide. </li> <li> User Input + Designer = Design Input can come AFTER the product is out, of course. And that input can be disastrous. </li> <li> No amount of data analysis can make up for a lack of talent. Jeffrey Zeldman Takes the talent of the designer to determine what the results of a UCD process should be. </li> <li> Users (and their data) should be there to inform designers, not substitute for them. The purpose of UCD should be to bolster, enlighten, or conrm designers judgement. </li> <li> Many people suggest that "you guys should optimize the UI to match the feature usage data." ...The only problem? We've already designed that product, and it's called Office 2003. Jensen Harris on Office 2007 </li> <li> Research can be wrong. The conclusions you can draw from research can be wrong. </li> <li> Just as one example, with small sample sizes (which is usually what youre working with with UCD), you can prove just about anything. Blue cars get hit by rocks more often than other cars, therefore we should never paint our cars blue. </li> <li> Some design approaches work better for different problems than for others. </li> <li> Activity-centered Design Good for intense, focused, complex activities Rening task ows Making actions more efcient Not good for big picture rethinking Can de-skill users </li> <li> Data-driven Design Good for existing designs Incremental improvements Fine tuning of a design Not good at all for big picture rethinking Mind numbingly tedious Can end up with a real dogs breakfast </li> <li> Systems Design Good for large-scale designs Systems of Systems Models for large teams Not good for small projects Very analytical </li> <li> Genius Design Good for rapid projects Possible to get a purer vision and more radical jumps in products Flexible Not good for inexperienced designers Need domain knowledge Can be very, very wrong </li> <li> User-centered Design Understand unfamiliar domains Empathy with usersfocus on people Can catch problems (and opportunities) up front Hard for people to evaluate (and generate) new product ideasFords Faster Horse analogy Are you focused on the RIGHT users? User goals can be slippery Does it scale? </li> <li> The trick is to determine what approach works best for the project youre on...even for just part of the project. Honest appraisal of your own skills, whats the problem is (do you understand the users for instance?) </li> <li> Theory: UCD is best for evolutionary design within an established market/category. </li> <li> Great ideas cant be tested. Only mediocre ideas can be tested. George Lois </li> <li> Thanks. dan@kickerstudio.com @odannyboy on Twitter http://kickerstudio.com @kickerstudio on Twitter </li> </ul>


View more >