A title as loaded as Usability is Dead needs some sort of explanation that a presentation can’t really convey.
 |
KForum – a Danish site serving all those involved in communication, gave me an opportunity and asked for a write up. You can read it here (in English).Hopefully the article goes some way in describing how as a UX community we need to start collaborating more and moving away from formulaic thinking. Creativity is back in a big way, fuelled by context and relevance… |
On Wednesday (17 June), I attended the SIGCHI Interaction Design Day at Copenhagen’s ITU. It’s an impressive building and apt to host an event about technology and our interaction with it.
I also did a talk about Usability and user centred design and how user experience is always key in what we make.
You can see the presentation on SlideShare here and I will be writing an article about it published next week. I have placed the notes here
‘Everyware will call itself by different names, appear differently from one context to another and will almost always wear the appealing masks of safety and convenience.’ – Adam Greenfield
Adam Greenfield’s book is a thorough examination of ubiquitous computing. As a user experience professional, he writes with the insights of a practitioner. This gives us a book that will be invaluable, as the UX community grapples with the challenges of this concept.
 |
What Greenfield is eager to make us aware of is the lack of a design language, or agreed design standards to build interfaces that will allow users to interact with ‘everyware’ (his term for inexpensive devices that have been integrated into everyday objects and activities).Managing information in the environment of ubicomp is challenging. Building interfaces that relate to physical objects involves designing systems that relate the mechanics of the device to the user through an illustrative user interface. |
‘As everywhere matures …there will be a greater demand for consistency, reliability and accountability, and this will mandate the creation of deliverable formats to account for all the relevant variables.’ – Adam Greenfield
When building these systems we have to think beyond just laying out the choices, we have to think about the way the systems work in the real world and show this on screen. We must be aware of the technology in use and what is next in terms of future applications.
The future of UX
It is seldom you read a book about this profession which isn’t a regurgitation of accepted practice or an examination of the minutia of web design. The difference is that this book is focused on the present and the future of UX.Something that all web design and development people accept, as part of their work, is you can’t stand still in this job. If you stop learning you stop growing. If you don’t grow you can’t adapt to change and create the best solutions.This book asks designers of these systems to get organized. To come up with documentation that means something to those who build complex systems. The strength of Greenfield’s argument is compounded when you see there are so many bad choices in design and not only in the digital world.
Collaboration and facing the challenge
I recently worked on a project where there were no established design patterns for a solution to the problem I was faced with. To be confronted by such a brief is an immense challenge and tasks like this will become increasingly common place.We will no longer be designing just a website interface but the interactive elements will reveal the mechanics of complex systems to the user.When you think about the use of good technology it is enabling human beings to become better at being human. We should aim to enable that to happen through our work but do so in a way that is shared and publicly available.Only through transparent collaborative practices will we grow as a collective of professionals. Anything else and we only add to the noise and confusion around already complex systems.
Verdict: This book should be a clarion call to those in the UX profession to act, collaborate and define the future of how people interact with complex devices and applications when they are presented to them.
I read a post recently that illustrated how concept models are rarely used in the right way and are often misunderstood. Are they really worth doing at all?
Now seems a good time to expand on the tool that Dan Brown has popularised through his book Communicating Design. Not as simply a stand alone tool but one that can provide a blueprint for giving solid ROI on design, analytics and testing.
This sketch shows the tools we use at Hello in our UX team. Not every project warrants it but the one item that binds so many tools together is the Concept Model (CM), sitting between Analysis and the Information Structure phases. It describes the big picture, the unique proposition of the site that separates it from its competitors.
Add the users into this and you have a solid core of basics mirrored in the principles of IA. Essentially it places the user at its centre (user needs), the business interfacing with the user and its own objectives (the context) and the actual content that will be produced often in the form of a product (content).
Add reality
You should also blend in real world statistics to give credence to your thinking. Many business owners like to be shown a few figures and it will back up your argument and it also makes for a more in-depth read.
By giving a layered concept model it becomes a document born through the emergence of factors evidenced through research.
A site map’s foundation
By using the model as a basis for site structure, the site map can be spun out fairly rapidly and its presence ensures the user needs, the business goals and content types are never missed in the design process. (A quick comment about site maps:- some people no longer use them but the client requires it in my experience, and helps them gain understanding.)
I find that the CM is the most important of the deliverables set, as it crystallizes the thought processes of a team and defines how a project will be tackled and what the likely outcomes will be. All with the user at the centre of the design process, based from good qualitative and quantitative research data.
Does the content fit the concept?
Once the initial concept has been built by aligning research findings with the business goals and the context of what the product will provide the user with, we can move on to more detailed aspects of the model.
As we define strategy quite clearly from the model the next thing to do is define where there are gaps in the proposition. Is what you are intending to supply or offer as a service meeting the requirements of the customer/user? Does the experience that they wish to have from using you, satisfied by your offering?
Drill down to each area or node and see what is missing, by using multiple layers or pages you can place different elements on the same map to give a visual overlay that allows the viewer to see the gaps or the areas of strength. It becomes a visual gap analysis/SWOT snapshot.
Some things may be intangible or not even content types but are emotions you wish the user to have, or interactions that they need to engage in.
Prove it works
This iterative way of revisiting the original concept from a content angle can enforce changes to the initial vision. But this is a good thing as it is making the model work harder and enables it to prove that it is a winning concept.
It’s a good idea to show and communicate this diagram with as many stakeholders as possible. Their views will be a test for the model; it will either change or stand up by itself. Testing rigorously at this stage ensures that when the physical build occurs, certain assumptions or hypotheses have already been checked.
The next stage is to employ methods that could be termed as action research. It is seen as;
‘…beyond reflective knowledge, created by outside experts sampling variables to an active moment-to-moment theorizing, data collecting, and inquiring occurring in the midst of emergent structure.’ (Wikipedia)
We can do this most effectively using web traffic stats and a skilled web analyst. With informed analysis (using personas) and clear measurements of user engagement we can build a true picture of visitor behaviour. Omniture and Future Now (Bryan Eisenberg) have a great white paper on this technique here
On an e-commerce site an analysis of the funnel is clear. However on sites where content is consumed but no transactions occur we must use a different set of metrics to gather if our visitors are consuming pages or interacting with our content.
The context of these statistics must always be carefully gauged as it needs to appear as a balanced view of the user population. By determining bounce rates, page views per person, returning visitors and those who subscribe to services or purchase items we can build a picture of different user behaviours.
We will always see a different behaviour from SERPs than from RSS visitors for instance. There are different qualities too if they have stumbled upon an article to those who have a need to be informed. It is important to conduct the test in a live environment that the information gathered has the ability to change the concept. The model needs to be fluid and adaptable, and not be bounded by prejudged stereotypes.
Personas can help here to give us an idea of what the background of the users are but an extra facet is that the metrics inform of how those actual users behave. This is an ‘emergent structure’ mentioned above, the unknowns of the audience become clear from this phase of analysis. We do not know what the users will do next, only what they have done and what is emerging.
Testing the model in an iterative process
Once the diagram has been interrogated by stakeholders and live statistics are also placed alongside the content propositions we know what we have is a concrete strategy. From here we roll out the production of the wireframes, based on the sitemap and taxonomies and other deliverables.
Here the model can clarify interactions. By looking at the purpose of the functional elements of the design alongside the strategic goals of what the product will offer the user, the CM defines how a user wishes to interact with the product.
As soon as we have our prototype we can then test the designs in the live environment using A/B or multivariate tests. Measuring how the users engage with the site at this stage allows for optimal designs that can be designed and refined iteratively as each test result is analysed.
This way of developing pages fits well within the agile method of development. By using an iterative testing model aligned with the sprint cycle of development, changes can be made to designs quickly. Testing incrementally and doing it often is a great way to measure how engaging the pages are.
At this stage, look at the prototype and see if anything has drifted away from the concept model in terms of what the site delivers. You should be able to look at the site and the model and see parity there. Key elements of the concept should have been translated on screen and the interaction, stated on the model, flows from wire frame to the html prototype.
Maintaining the vision
This way of sense checking is an easy task with a model that is circulated and pinned up on the walls of the project team. At all levels this deliverable is relevant. The nearer the project gets to release the more important it is that the CM is referred to. It is a keystone and a point of reference. Too many times the build of a site overtakes the overall vision, here it should help to ground the team and provide a common focus to the overall goal.
Concept models as a conversational tool
CMs detail the big idea that needs to be followed, beyond intricately detailed site maps or the interactions of a wireframe. They are beyond taxonomy and personas and yet they encompass all these things in their make up.
At their core is the reason, the business case, for their existence. It is this fact that enables all stakeholders, CEO’s to web developers, to understand why they are so important and communicate the ideas that they portray.
The real strength of these diagrams is their ability to cope with the emergence of user characteristics during analysis, and that they have the flexibility to show this.
So before you design or re-design perhaps the best thing to do is draw up a concept model, grab as much existing research as possible and get friendly with a web analyst. It will be the most powerful deliverable you will have in your toolbox and provides real ROI for your client.
I was asked what UX people did recently. I came up with the usual descriptions that you can read anywhere – we do interaction design, information architecture and usability. But that means little to most people and that’s a problem that has an impact in business.
Maybe we can look at this again in simplest terms. What are our aims? We strive to make digital products better to use, more enjoyable to experience and, at best, memorable.
We should also strive to be transparent in our methods and be great communicators. Getting our audience to understand our message is really important. I think many great designers would argue that UX is fundamental to their designs being a success, regardless of what they produce.
After all what makes a great design? It needs to fulfil the objective but also give something more. It’s often intangible but has a feeling of quality that can not be denied. In digital design this can sometimes feel like a complex issue but it should be as simple as possible.
Our job as UX people is to make the complex simple. It is to aggregate our learning, rationalize and synthesise our thoughts and then design with empathy.
If we do this with clarity and are aware that others see the same message, or experience the same scenario, we can rest easy.
Successful products are defined by a user’s good experience. UX finds those user needs and desires and creates characteristics that surface in a product’s design and eventual production.
These steps to a better product are rarely seen beyond an organisation’s internal processes. But by being aware of UX in all areas of a business helps build the ’staircase’, the different stages to a complete solution. The list below explains how in more detail.
Clarity – Be aware that the majority of people have little knowledge of the UX terms used or the tools employed. Clarity is key in getting the message understood
Engage stakeholders with story-telling to highlight complex interactions. Deliver relevant information in the right context.
Visualize data to enable understanding. The amount we use to formulate solutions must be quickly understood.
Logic - Sense check all deliverables. Does it stand up to being interpreted by a layman?
Language - Be aware of your own immersion in a subject. Geek speak is an occupational hazard, avoid it by getting immediate feedback
Fun – Use humour if possible. What we do should be fun and make the client/team/stakeholder feel engaged by working with those who show enthusiasm and motivation
Participate - Try and embed yourself on the project as it kicks off. Getting a UX person on board is invaluable for planning and strategy.
UX is arguably design thinking that good web designers (and all designers) do tacitly but with an added important aspect. As the quality of interfaces dictate the success of products it is essential for design decisions to be documented.
When expenditure needs to be measured and return on investment calculated, UX provides the rationale to business owners and designers alike.
|
