The final component of defining the (user) experience design framework is Usability. To some it is a de facto standard of good design, but so much of what is produced fails in this area, and not just in digital design. It feels consistently that products, buildings, vehicles and urban planning lack a sufficient consideration of the human being.
Usability has become the easy bat to wield in the boardroom – primarily to help gain sponsorship. It is the element of UX that is easy to understand and very transparent to see. So much so, that usability and research consultancies have become widespread and are thriving – serving up endless recommendations and expert reviews to companies that feel they need to improve their user’s experience.
The challenge to those who actually design is to accept that this part of the job is a necessity, something that is unavoidable, that must be learnt and always considered. To not have a sound appreciation of usability leaves a proposed solution open to attack from any source. Many times design aspirations are shot down because of the ‘it’s not best practice’ statement. This is why usability has a bad name in design circles, and to some extent rubs off onto other areas of UX.
But usability is the starting point, and when placed alongside context, it becomes a design constraint that is a good thing. Played right, and quality design can be achieved that serves many people easily and can still be beautiful, show elegance and simplicity. The designer embracing usability will reward the person every time they use the product. That is the goal of any designer, to produce a meaningful experience by allowing a person to use a tool, service or product with the minimum of friction.
People’s interaction with computers must rely on increased usability because it is an abstract experience. The designer must assume that the user can only go from personal experience to navigate, interact with and control a device without any other human’s help. As UX designers this makes usability core to our design practice.
The following principles explore areas of usability that have direct impact on the quality of a person’s experience.
The proposed map of the London tube network
The reinstated Thames features on the map
|Finding your way through a website to their sign up page or making your way through a city to get to your hotel – the principles of way finding are the same. Four phases are present; orientation, route decision, route monitoring and destination recognition.
Transport for London felt the Mayor of London’s very public frustration when he demanded that a redesigned tube map – without the Thames displayed, should be scrapped and the old one reinstated.
To remove a physical attribute on this wholly abstract, geographically inaccurate map, was enough to cause public outrage.
It illustrates how we need a reference point – even in an abstract representation to give clarity and meaning. But the story also represents that the object, be it map or sign, takes on an emotional significance to the person who uses it.
There is an attachment to it because the object helps in attaining our goals, and these goals carry a personal value. A map or sign that is established can not be changed dramatically without disturbance to the user. The same applies to established navigation elements in websites or applications.
Flexibility Usability Trade-off
The more flexible a system becomes the less usable it tends to be. This trade-off can be seen in mobile phones and cameras that are feature rich. The difficulty of use tends to increase with the added ‘flexibility’ of the product. Over time the flexible nature becomes more specialised as the user needs become more defined in customer segments. Their experience of the product is optimised and so niche products or services become more prevalent. When research defines those needs, a product is produced that may seem a mistake to those customers outside the target market.
|Sony’s recent publicised work with Google has resulted in this creation. It is a fine example of how when flexibility is pushed to the limit (in this case a QWERTY keyboard attached to a tv remote control) usability is so diminished that it potentially renders the object useless. Ergonomically it appears to be uncomfortable, and by looking at the thumbs in the photo not unlike typing into a pocket calculator.|
Garbage in garbage out
Complexity is an unavoidable element when involved in the process of designing a solution. As computers become increasingly pervasive in society the amount of data that will be managed and transmitted will give an increasing pressure on the user to filter, rationalise and act upon information communicated to them. This principle can be divided into cognitive and kinetic load.
Cognitive load refers to the amount of thought required to achieve a goal. With screen based systems this largely depends on reading and understanding written text. The form above has a high degree of cognitive load and is often why it is prudent to keep emails short, as people tend not to read due to the cognitive stress of digesting large amounts of information.
Kinetic load is the physical effort required to complete a task. With touch technology, even pushing keys has been replaced by a tap on glass. Dimmer switches are not even dials to turn anymore – kinetic load is something product designers are extremely aware of. Software systems should also replicate this attention to detail, ensure minimal scrolling, and the least number of clicks to get a job done.
Indicating a system’s status to a user, the possible interactions and the results of their inputs is described as visibility. Revealing information at the relevant moment, is key to a user responding and acting on information in the quickest time. Too much information or too many options will create confusion and delay. Context sensitivity of a system allows this to happen, influencing the interface to respond depending on the situation.
Photo courtesy of cgull
Photo courtesy of ogilvyprworldwide
|Dashboards were originally examples of efficient design. The basic mechanics of a car meant only a certain amount of information would ever be displayed. Cars made in the last century had a clarity that modern manufacturers find hard to emulate.
With the added complexity of hybrid motoring there appears to be a trend to emulate a smart phone interface on the dashboard. The consciousness of the design team towards the technological advancement of the car pervades into the dashboard’s design. Note the warning lights are separate entities above the electronic display here. Is it because the visibility of these essential items could be diluted by the electronic dash?
When conveying relationships between groups of information the layering approach allows a build of complex information groups around an object. Think of the weather map as a simple illustration of this. The object being the physical satellite view of the geographical location. The images describe the layers of air pressure, temperature and cloud cover placed over it. Not only does layering help manage complexity by breaking down complex data into stages, but by grouping information together it can also reinforce the relationship between the information types.
Two-dimensional layering can be sequential (linear), and can be used to manage complexity by introducing the content in stages with context changing easily. It can also be non-liner, for example hierarchical (site structure diagram), parallel (swim lanes) or web-like. Three-dimensional layering uses transparent layers to introduce conceptual ideas around a particular context that does not change.
Of all the principles in the experience design framework, arguably the most important one, has been left until last. Without this principle being acknowledged and adhered to, the world would be a much more frustrating, and potentially dangerous place to live in. Four elements define if a solution is accessible or not, and if barriers are present to users that inhibits their usage of a product. Addressing accessibility goes some way in producing naturally usable products.
Can the design be perceived irrespective of sensory capabilities? Common ways to address this is to make sensory alerts (visual and auditory) when an action is performed. From the doors of a train to the alert box of a computer system, sound and visual alerts are used. Physical objects can be made more perceptive to touch by using size and texture. Online elements can use the ALT tag and code structure of the page can ensure screen readers focus on content and not superfluous graphic items.
Operability and Simplicity
This Paris Metro ticket machine has a large spinning roller that controls the screen above and two very large buttons either side to cancel or accept cues on screen. The machine also talks to the user, is positioned so a sitting person can still operate it and is highly sensitive – so the roller can move with the minimum of physical effort. The design is marred by the credit card area being positioned up and away from the focus area, but generally it is operable to multiple user types. It also manages to achieve simplicity as the control inputs are simple, and the choices can be understood with the use of pictorial elements, text and audio. Even without knowledge of French, the machine can still be used to produce a ticket, revealing relevant steps to ensure the user continues through the sales flow and achieves their goal.
When designs minimise the occurrence and consequence of errors the design exhibits forgiveness. Reversible actions (undo), controls that can only be used in the correct way and the use of confirmations and consistent messaging all ensure that safety nets are available for the user (and the ability to not be punished for making errors). E-payment systems consistently ensure that their payment system is forgiving and gives ample opportunity to allow a user to decline or leave the process.
Ending this six-part series on forgiveness seems apt. Perhaps as designers who cater for experiences in the UX or service design fields, the levels of understanding that we need to acquire will only increase as technology will allow us to do more, with more speed and with more societal ramifications. Forgiveness would be a good place to start in this increasingly turbulent time of technological flux.
There is a pressing need on us to do things better, make things smarter and more efficiently. The six themes within the framework started in a sequence that seemed to have no order but on reflection I have decided that persuasion sits on the periphery of experience. It affects our behaviour, often tacitly from experiences we have had in our past only held within our memory but still affecting how we interact with the world.
The third theme is visual design. The first tangible layer that we see, and come into contact with. As human beings it is how we are hard-wired to make decisions. It is a part of our genetic and biological make up and beneath that lies usability. This is the enabler for meaningful interaction, without usability the interactions that we have with the object will be without merit and will produce a negative effect – a bad experience.
Interaction is the doorway to the content. The ability to feel, touch and gain feedback to the ‘thing’ you wanted to get to in the first place. Content in this series has been described as the textual material we find within websites. But of course content can be anything to anybody. Music, art, film, an object or a product could sit at the core of the other five themes within the framework.
I am compiling the six themes with a foreword into an e-book available as a download on userpathways.com and an accompanying visualisation of the Experience Design Framework. If you are interested let me know on twitter: @userpathways